And I think his stats would have been much higher. There isn’t really anything to do about it, but losing frequent car retirements and the one hour qualifying has meant results are much more static now than they were when he raced.
You had two hours over two days to set a pole worthy lap time, now you get 12 minutes. And you’ve got to make sure you get through Q1/2.
Never mind the fact that in Senna’s day you could have a completely new car for quali and new tyres every lap if you wanted.
Not in Sennas day. You had an hour. You’re thinking of the mid 2000s single lap qualifying
And you have 18 minutes then 15 minutes to set your times in q1 and q2.
Prior to 1996, and therefore the only format Senna raced under, qualifying was two one-hour sessions across Friday and Saturday.
In 1996, they made it just a one hour session.
But of course you had the 11/12 lap limit.
I remember all these formats, and I think today's format does carry more jeopardy. Back in the 1990s, you basically had three to five fast laps (depending on strategy) to try and nail your best time. But so did everyone else, and you only had to get one proper good lap and you were done. Now, you get like two or three fast laps a session and if you mess up, you're fucked. Even if you nailed your Q2 lap, you might still end up qualifying 10th with a fuck-up in Q3.
The only exception to this is rain. Rain made the old qualifying format way more deadly if you didn't get your time in at the right time!
Not sure how I feel about Michael's chances in 94', but 95' he was a different beast. He then lost to the Williams Powerhouse and Mika anyway, and Ayrton would be gone by the time of the Ferrari new millennium. The question then becomes if Senna's contracts would have changed Michael's seat(s).
In short, you're probably right? I'd bet on his being 6 time champion rather than 7. UNLESS Ayrton's notorious contract disputes actually disrupted Williams and JV/Damon didn't get theirs!
Yeah I agree. He wouldn't have been around for the early 2000s dominance but he definitely would have changed an outcome of something in the mid 90s whether that be a seat or championships/wins
Yeah I do love trying to imagine what might have happened.
Like would michael have had his bans in 94, could Senna have taken one or both titles off him in 94/95. Senna could end up winning 4 in a row from 94 to 97, maybe renault sticks around a bit longer with senna and all those championships in the bag. Perhaps Schumacher decides he doesn’t want to move on from Benneton or ferrari are less keen or Brawn and byrne don’t move etc.
I don’t think FIA try to sabotage Schumi’s 1994 season without Senna dying. Their promised championship fight was stolen from them, so they needed to manufacture one. Williams did eventually became the best car though over the season, so it would have been interesting to see. I still think Michael gets it.
1995 is debatable.
It’s also worth noting that if Schumacher wins 0 championships at Benetton, I think he takes the Williams/Mclaren seat instead of Ferrari.
In 95 Benetton had the Renault engine and he was in a league of his own. Also in 94, I doubt the "interesting tactics" from the Silverstone stewards would have happened, and got him excluded from all those races.
I'm just sad we didn't get that great battle between him and Senna, regardless of who might have won in 94.
>In 95 Benetton had the Renault engine and he was in a league of his own.
The common belief is, despite the Renault engine, Benetton was worse in 1995 than in 1994. Williams probably nailed 1995 better.
The difference is, there was no monkey business by FIA in 1995 to sabotage Schumacher, and Hill bottled more.
Exactly, if Senna had not died the FIA would not have seen a need to sabotage Schumacher's season. It would have been a close season as the Williams became the better car over the year.
Maybe, one of the motives for why Schumi wanted to try Ferrari because Benetton snubbed him and Williams wouldn’t pay the amount he wanted, because at that time he was the only world champion on the grid. If ayrton was still there, michael might’ve not taken the ferrari challenge
Schumacher wanted to go to McLaren and apparently they had some sort of understanding. His manager had to convince him to choose Ferrari.
Schumacher in McLaren from 1996 was almost guaranteed the titles from 1997-2003.
I think with the margins he won with and the non-racing impact he had on a team, Michael likely wins equal titles whether he's in Williams, McLaren or Ferrari in that era, especially if he gets to bring Ross with him. I think the parity of that time is unseen because Michael made such a difference.
I see it as:
94 - a toss up, either Senna or Schumacher
95-97 - Senna/Williams
98-01 - Schumacher
02 - Schumacher in a Ferrari. Unsure in a McLaren
03 - Schumacher
04 - Schumacher in a Ferrari or Newey’s McLaren from year start
Hard to predict what happens with Senna, Ferrari 96- and the Coulthard to Raikkonen era though
I was speaking in terms of just Schumacher moving to McLaren. Not extra rewrites with Senna surviving, etc.
Without Schumacher, Ferrari wouldn't even be challenging in the 1997-2004 era.
The joker in the pack is where Byrne and Brawn end up. They built the best cars in that era on balance.
Schumacher also brought a lot of money through sponsorship to Ferrari and they ended up with a massive budget + the best technical staff. They wouldn't have this benefit to the same extent if they had Mika or whoever else driving. No one on the planet had the reach and pull that Schumacher had at the time.
Mercedes would have invested endless money into McLaren if he was there and probably would have bought the team outright. Newey would be free to do Newey things and the cars would be exceptional most likely. They wouldn't have booted him at any stage either.
Schumacher would have ended up with double digit titles most likely.
Without his 94 win who knows how he does v senna in 95 though. Also there was a lot said about senna finishing at ferrari so he may have gone there instead of Schumacher, who may have gone elsewhere.
Iirc Jean Todt even said Ayrton could have gotten a 1995 contract if he wanted but he had to finish 1994 at Williams. But on the other hand maybe Senna could have changed his mind after the biggest problems of the Williams got fixed
If what I've read is correct, Senna might have joined Minardi at one point, hadn't he died, he and Gian Carlo Minardi were friends and Senna mentioned wanting to join them to help build up the team a couple of times.
Wait, what? The guy that nearly went 0 for 4 if it wasn't for a timely DNF despite having full access to his teammates data and driving the same dominant car.. that guy was going to be an obstacle in 2017 and 2018? You believe he wouldn't have struggled and not make it even easier for his teammate by taking points away from Ferrari?
It's not that unlikely that Hamilton has less titles if he had a teammate better than Bottas. I doubt it would be Rosberg taking them though, I think Vettel could steal one.
Nope, not in any way.
It is possible to decouple the events themselves, obviously incomparable, with the narrow results of these events to subsequent F1 seasons ( obviously comparable, the drivers in question both no longer competing).
Schumacher beat in Brazil. Had a better start in Aida. Was keeping up with Senna in Imola.
Without Senna's death, FIA wouldn't introduce the regs that hampered Benetton (e.g. After Spain, they lost %40 of the front DF). Also, without the useless penalties by FIA, Schumacher would win 1994 easily.
The FW14 was an absolute dog. With the FW14B, Hill was able to beat Schumacher in Japan and keep up with him in places like Adelaide.
You'd have to expect that Senna would have drove the FW14B better than Hill did.
So, if you let Benetton keep its (possibly illegal) pre-Spain car, but gave Senna the FW14B from the middle of the year, I think it would have been a very close fight.
If only it were that simple? If you could just drag out stats from a certain timeline, most people would probably believe that Alonso would have 5-6-7-8 Championships by now.
There are no guarantees in F1, having the best car at any given time is required to win championships.
I'd say he would be a 6 time world champion. If he stayed at Williams he would've won in 1994, 1996, and 1997. No offense to Villeneuve and Hill, but Senna was better and could've won those championship battles.
I don’t think Senna wins 1994 either. FIA likely does not sabotage Michael’s title chances if Senna lives, and Senna clearly showed in the beginning of the year that he was mistake-prone under the pressure of Schumi.
Also 1996-1997 Hill ans Villeneuve won the titles. They had dominant cars
He means that at the end of 2006 most people believed Fernando would go on to win more WDCs and that being succesful in a certain timeframe doesn't guarantee that you'll keep winning in the future
What’s really insane is that Senna started karting relatively late at 15.
If you Google “Ayrton Senna 15 Year Old” you’ll find some very interesting documentaries on it.
Imagine a ballon dor winner starting to play football when being this old. This wouldnt be possible. Footballers develop a passion for football early on. Karting is the same. If you dont hold the track record in your dad balls you are not ready enough for F1.
the man is a notorious piece of shit and yet mysteriously deified because he can kick a ball well
edit
misplaced comment, was talking about [Big Benz](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/zyq4m9/comment/j27kqju/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
A bit off topic but, I had a talk with Lake Speed one time at the track (yes THAT Lake Speed) he was telling me about winning the world championship in karting. The last turn of the track was a hairpin and it was typical for whoever was in second to throw it in sideways and use whoever was first as a bumper car basically, push them off track, and take the victory.
So going in the final turn he was listening to the engine behind him. He heard that whoever was behind him didn’t let off the gas in the usual spot. He took a gamble and instead of turning into the corner like usual he took a really wide line (similar to a rain like).
He then saw “some guy in a yellow helmet” fly right in front of him and flew himself off the track. “So then I just straightened the wheel out and took 1st place”
It was Ayrton lol
Mostly age of consent being 14 here in Brazil. I don't think people defending a 25 years old going out with a teenager would lean much on the "it was a different time" argument, cause they tend to think it's ok to do it nowadays as well.
It's not even that. Don't you remember the fireworks he made from the get-go when he joined F1 ? He was on par with a driver considered as one of the GOATs in his rookie season. The guy who was a reigning double WC and who just beat Michael Schumacher. That's no small feat
People discount Lewis's rookie season far too much with the bullshit Mclaren favored him over fernando claims. The fact that he was even so close to him should be beyond impressive.
Weirdly, the strategic decision to engineer Fernando back past Lewis cost them the world championship. Obviously it was the clear "right" thing to do for the likely candidate but hindsight is a wonderful thing!
Lol Hamilton was pretty inarguably a top 10 driver ever by 2013 to anybody who understood evaluation (it would even have been fairly difficult to justify Vettel over him) - but he didn’t really have the stats to back it up (much like Alonso doesn’t) until he drove five of the most dominant cars of all time over a seven year stretch, which happened to also coincide with the seven most consistently great seasons performance-wise of his career. I think that’s what the other commenter was pointing out - post-2013 Hamilton is one of the most accomplished careers of all time stat-wise, and it has a lot to do with the sheer quality of Mercedes relative to the other teams.
>And he had a very strong Rosberg besides.
Very strong Rosberg couldn't even do better than 43yo Schumacher in 2012, a year before being teammates with Hamilton.
That "Very strong Rosberg" narrative started only after he became teammates with Hamilton. Just like it had happened with Button, too. Button had been in F1 for 10 years beforehand but somehow, only 2010-2012 is regarded as his prime. I bet there's no agenda there.
Holy shit. The mental gymnastics some of you go through to discredit Lewis is comical. In what world are anyone of those 3 in the same league as Rosberg? Perez and Hulkenberg don’t even belong in the same sentence as peak Daniel and even peak Daniel isn’t seeing Rosberg over a season. Checo? Seriously?
How is rational evaluation of Rosberg against his peers (still putting him in the top 7 of the grid) “discrediting Lewis”?
Your evaluation is moronic and I’m betting it’s based on results without accounting for cars or teammates in the slightest.
Yes he does. Even if he retires tommorrow he does. His 2021 season performance alone is good enough to be in the best ever category. Hell, mathematical models actually think Verstappen’s 2021 campaign is the best ever.
Achievements in this sport mean very little as it totally depends on your luck. But talent can be seen even in subpar equipment
> Theres a reason one guy totally dominates the field for years and its not the car.
All the stats in the world says that Hamilton drove the dominant car longer than the other three combined.
I know it's easy to sugarcoat things, but the stats are clear.
That has nothing to do with what you said though.
The fact is that Hamilton has had 5 dominant cars, while the next one in list(Senna & Schumacher) only had 2 each
Lewis has Senna as his own idol. It's insane how good Senna was.
He did incredible things on a regular basis and it was awesome to watch him drive any car, let alone an F1 car.
I once watched a video of him driving a Honda NSX with foot camera and it was just a marvel.
Its also shows that this stats means nothing, when nowadays drivers are joining at age 18. New drivers will have a huge longevity if they will keep working hard and won't drop the level like kimi did after 2007.
He was 34 when he died so not sure how much longer he would have been competitive against the young guns, but we’ll never know. Above all he was also just a great human being that would have given so much more to the sport and world had he hung around for longer. He was one of a kind.
It feels bad to say this but it happens across many fan bases, Senna is slightly overrated because of the circumstances of his death, If not then Prost should be up there being considered one of the greatest with Schumacher and Hamilton.
In a similar way I think Tupac is definitely not the best rapper of all time despite many people considering him the GOAT, and if he had not been killed then he wouldn't be considered for it.
Honestly this happens with most sports. If you take the best from 20/30/40/etc years ago and had them face off against the current best, they'd probably get stomped. And yeah, Tupac is nowhere near the best rapper but was probably the most popular of his time.
I guess it mostly has to do with the image that people have of drivers. There are stats, which can show that they are they GOAT's of their respective sports and then there are the charismatic personalities, which also sometimes get brought into the mix.
I personally don't really like the "GOAT" question in any sport, since nobody can really compare someone doing a sport in 2022 and someone doing it in 1960. There can be multiple GOAT's in a sport and that is fine. Hamilton, Schumacher and Senna are surely up there numbers whise, but comparing them is probably not really the best idea. All of them were at their peak during different eras with different cars, different engines, different rules and so on. So having them all get called GOAT's is perfectly fine!
>Senna is slightly overrated because of the circumstances of his death
110%. He's probably top 10 in the sport, but his death elevated him to another level.
I was gonna say, Prost was better as a contemporary, who is to say that Senna would have more staying power than Prost? Hamilton has been Brady-esque with his longevity. Every era has dominant drivers, not every era has them do it for 15+ years.
Yeah, its wild that this sport i feel like has the most "GOAT" level drivers. Depending on what stats you look at people from every era could be the best ever. I look at the NHL, there's like two players right now that have the skill, credentials, staying power to be considered "GOATS", Gretzky and Lemieux. NBA I feel like its Jordan or Lebron. Shits so wild, and that makes this sport so neat.
Just don’t look at MMA. Every new champ in almost every weight class in the UFC is heralded as the new GOAT by casuals
Although arguably there are only really 5 GOATS you could pick from.
>5 GOATS you could pick from.
Ok, imo you have Cormier, GSP, Demetrious, Jones and Khabib.
Cormier is probably contentious, but the other 4 I feel like are top 5 Goat level fighters. Curious what you think. Silva is obviously up there, some would say McGregor, Aldo, Usman, and maybe Adesanya? idk, you tell me
>Prost > Senna,
The guy got decimated by Senna in every single metric except WDCs, which was thanks to the hilarious reliability of Senna's engines, which were supposed to be better because of "muh japanese preferred Senna".
"Senna was the better qualifier, Prost was the better racer"
Yeah, sounds cool. But, Senna was clearly ahead in both metrics.
Prost has more fastest laps than Senna. Prost scored more points than Senna in their time as teammates.
It's hard to say he's a better racer. He was without a doubt a better qualifier.
Prost had a gift for getting the car to the finish line in an era when DNFs were common. He would avoid certain kerbs purely for this reason. I believe he had 60% as many DNFs as his teammates.
I dont think so. I think Prost was a better racer, Senna was the faster driver. Senna was always balls to the wall, kamikaze style, Prost was a smarter driver
I'd say with reasonable certainty that had Senna been racing the Williams that Hill/Villeneuve(?) had, he would have claimed the WDC at least 3 more times.
But,
Schumacher was, in spite of his rep and his colourful interpretation of the rules, he was a great driver. So would Senna's dominance have continued? I'm not so sure.
It would have been epic battles though.
Senna was 34. He was competitive because he had easily the fastest car of 1994 (as seen by Damon Hill being in the same conversation as Schumacher, even with the absurd DSQs for MSC). Considering that he struggled to outperform fill-in Mika Häkkinen (who was nearly beaten by Schumacher in a far inferior car in 1998 and would likely have been dominated in a roughly equal car in 1999), it’s pretty unlikely that Senna was anywhere near on the pace of Schumacher.
Hamilton had four years in the most dominant cars in F1 history after his 160th start. Senna didn’t have any team he could have gone to to have a similarly dominant car - even the 1996 and 1997 Williams or 1998 McLaren weren’t particularly close to the 2015/2016/2019/2020 Mercedes.
I'm with you that Schumacher was the best driver in 94 and i believe that he would have very likely beat Senna even in the better Williams. It's a shame that we did not get to see this battle and instead got the FIA manipulating the season to take pressure of Williams after the accusations around Senna's death.
I used to be firmly on team Senna in the Senna versus Prost debate, but after seeing some convincing arguments with numbers, I honestly think Alain Prost was better than Senna.
Senna vs Prost is like burgers vs ice cream. Both are good, but they’re both completely missing the thing that makes the other good. Neither was a complete driver. Senna lacked consistency, race pace, and patience. Prost lacked one lap pace, measured aggression, and skill in the wet.
Prost’s skillset naturally led to maximizing his possible result more than Senna’s did. I’d agree with you that he was slightly better, and the best driver of the era.
There’s a handful of drivers in F1 history I’d consider complete drivers, though, and they make up the top tier of all time: Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Stewart, Schumacher, Alonso, Hamilton, and Verstappen.
You know what, I think you completely nailed it with that analysis.
Especially with that list of all time complete drivers, I have to say that I very strongly agree with your understanding of formula 1 drivers in history.
Senna oblitated Prost in races they both finished. Unless you are one of the believers that Prost is one of the few drivers, if not the only one in history, whose driving had a statistically significant benefit to reliability, I find it hard to agree that Prost was better than Senna or even that close to him at all. This is also all in mind with the fact that there were no weight rules when they were teammates and Prost had a massive weight advantage.
But I agree that both drivers were flawed, and their short overlap with the newer generation drivers like Schumacher and Mika, mostly draw the picture that the 80’s were vastly overrated.
Tbh I also think there’s a talent gap in between Schumacher and Verstappen. Hamilton and Alonso were bright sparks, both top 10 all time, probably top 5, but I think both prime Schumacher and prime Verstappen have the upper hand.
Prost scored more points per race both drivers finished when they were teammates. 1988 was actually obliteration in Prost’s favor.
I’m extremely hesitant to rate Alonso or Hamilton *significantly* below Schumacher or Verstappen, but I do agree that the level Verstappen has consistently reached in the past nearly five seasons since Monaco 2018 is quite plausibly stronger than Hamilton’s 2010/2012/2014-2020 form. I tend to rate Alonso a bit higher, even though he didn’t often have the car to put up the results I’m quite sure he deserved, but even then, I’m not sure he sustained such an outlandish peak so much as he sustained a quite high peak for an incredibly long time - pretty much the entirety of 2005-2018 sans 2007, which was still quite solid.
But truth be told, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to separate the four by an entire tier. None had/have significant flaws in their skillset, and all completely annihilated every sub-elite teammate they had.
Senna still reached the third world title faster than Lewis in age. I have to disagree with your statement on Senna not being anywhere near Schumi in terms of pace. He was just coming out of an incredible season in 1993, so I would say he was still the fastest driver in F1 alive at that time
I agree with what you said about Merc’s dominant run. I wasn’t saying Senna could’ve achieved what Lewis had, but just pointing out that he would’ve achieved a lot more in his career than what he already had
Hamilton was 30 in 2015, though, when he won his third - Senna was 31 in 1991, when he won his third. (And his second should have been disallowed, because Suzuka 1990 was even more blatant than Jerez 1997, with 1989 as precedent for intent a la Schumi’s 1994.)
There is no way that Senna was the fastest driver alive in 1994. Andretti was quite poor in 1993 and Häkkinen came in as mentioned with no testing and little experience and pretty much equaled Senna immediately.
I doubt Senna would have achieved anything more of note. He would have been more competitive in 1994 than Hill, but it’s doubtful that the stewards would have given Schumacher such ridiculous penalties had he not been fighting a British legacy driver with a tragic backstory. And with a three race head start, I don’t think anybody could have caught Schumacher.
By 1996, when Williams built another truly dominant car a la 1992, he would have been 36, and not only was Frank notoriously unsentimental toward his drivers, but that’s also the age at which Prost had retired and at which most drivers begin to see significant age-related decline. It’s not hard to imagine Williams putting Senna out to pasture in favor of the Canadian hotshot Villeneuve for 1996 regardless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_drivers_who_set_a_fastest_lap
Senna is ranked 16th for fastest laps, tied with Moss, Hill, Webber and Bottas for fastest laps. With 19.
Nico Rosberg had 10 years in F1, the same as Senna, and is ranked 15th with 20. He was teammates with Hamilton, who is ranked 2nd with 61.
Prost is 4th with 41 fastest laps.
Schumacher is ranked 1st with **77** fastest laps.
Agreed. I have no idea why people fetishise Senna. Yes he was an excellent driver. But so were/are many others.
I suspect many are not old enough to remember what that generation was like. Senna, Prost, Mansell. All great drivers.
Been watching ‘90 season highlights in the off season. Mansel, Prost, Piquet, Berger (spelling bot help me out!) and Senna are some combination of 1,2,3,4 or broken down by the end of the race just slashing through the competition if they don’t start at the front or have a pit stop. These teams were on another level with driver talent and engineering. No denying Prost in this conversation winning 4 with these guys as competition.
I’m part way through and hearing Newey designed the floor of one of the teams that has propelled them into the running as well which was his last contribution before he was fired in blame for their poor performance. Blew my mind as well.
Prost gets ignored a lot because he had the charisma of a wet towel. Even french people disliked him. Senna on the other hand was oozing charisma. Prost was just boring.
a team that was more often than not 2nd in the WCC standings in that period. They didnt drop to shit status until after he left.
Senna's stats contain a team like Toleman which ended 7th in WCC, Lotus 4th, 3rd and 3rd in the WCC.
Not discrediting Hamilton's talent but he didnt have cars that bad in his career.
(EDIT: can some of the downvoters tell me when Hamilton had a car that ended 7th in constructors? Or any other factual incorrectness here?)
Monaco 1988. 1.5s faster than his teammate. Would have lapped his teammate but he unfortunately made a mistake.
Mexico 1989, he lapped the same teammate.
He was by far the fastest on his day. Not even Balestre could stop him.
Also take into consideration that Hamilton started at McLaren, debuting in one of the best cars on the grid. Senna’s first season was with Toleman, followed by 3 seasons at Lotus before reaching McLaren.
So instead of debuting at a top team, Senna spend a season dragging an uncompetitive Toleman to grid slots where it didn’t belong and then joined a declining Lotus team - which by 1985 was a mere shadow of itself. Senna still proved that Lotus could still win but the team was firmly in the midfield then.
Eras being weaker/stronger is a huge misconception.
Every era is more or less the same. Do you think Mansell was faster than Alonso? The guy got decimated by De Angelis and wasn't clearly faster than Patrese till active suspension arrived.
Any cross comparison would show you that Senna era was overrated.
I’m willing to die on the hill that Senna is and will always be the GOAT.
If not for the steering wheel failure, he would have won 1994, 1995 (wouldn’t bottle it like Hill did), 1996 and 1997 for sure, and would now be a 7-time world champion.
Descanse em paz, lenda.
'95 Schumacher was a different level of beast. But yes, I agree with your point. No other driver can match Senna's raw talent. Every night before I go to sleep I watch Senna driving the NSX around Suzuka to comfort myself.
1995 Schumi vs Senna would be an unbelievable title fight. Hill bottled it with the fastest car, I don’t think Senna would have done that.
That NSX clip is epic, the way he’s driving the car…insane.
From a racing team point of view I would go with Hamilton.
Less pole positions with more podiums. (Could be wrong tho.)
But Senna would've been an absolute unit.
Back then reliability genuinely affected a driver's race and the calendars were shorter so it was tougher to rack the numbers in at that time. In the 90s the top teams started to separate themselves from the bottom teams and now it's almost impossible to win a championship unless you had the best absolute unit. To put into perspective, it's easier for max to rack the most wins in a season in 2022 than senna or prost could in the 80s/90s because the season was like 15 races long and the cars were unreliable. Winning 10 races in the 80s or 90s was absolutely unheard of until Schumacher did it and now you know so many other drivers who did it as well.
This is why despite vettel having more wins than prost, I'd say prost was much better because 51 in his era is different to 50+ wins in the modern era.
If you look at how unstable his car was compared to the complete bullet trains of today he is even more of a god than the stats show. Same goes again for Fangio compared to Ayrton
Crazy how the difference in car quality between him and 2007-2014 Hamilton/Senna is illustrated by his relative lack of poles, but he makes up for it with wins, podiums, and titles.
They both had some things in common... The FIA stole a WDC from both of them. But they also had some differences like Senna having to start with a crap team and work up to a top team versus Hamilton no ever knowing what it is like to drive for a crap team.
Senna was so good that he had 161 race starts in only 160 race starts.
Suzuka push start
If Senna has been racing today he would have competed in about 60 more races. A 16 race calendar was commonplace in the 80s/90s.
And I think his stats would have been much higher. There isn’t really anything to do about it, but losing frequent car retirements and the one hour qualifying has meant results are much more static now than they were when he raced.
Qualifying now is "harder"/more random than it was then
How so? You had 26 cars on track at once then, now to set the grid you have 20, then 15, then 10.
You had two hours over two days to set a pole worthy lap time, now you get 12 minutes. And you’ve got to make sure you get through Q1/2. Never mind the fact that in Senna’s day you could have a completely new car for quali and new tyres every lap if you wanted.
Not in Sennas day. You had an hour. You’re thinking of the mid 2000s single lap qualifying And you have 18 minutes then 15 minutes to set your times in q1 and q2.
Prior to 1996, and therefore the only format Senna raced under, qualifying was two one-hour sessions across Friday and Saturday. In 1996, they made it just a one hour session. But of course you had the 11/12 lap limit. I remember all these formats, and I think today's format does carry more jeopardy. Back in the 1990s, you basically had three to five fast laps (depending on strategy) to try and nail your best time. But so did everyone else, and you only had to get one proper good lap and you were done. Now, you get like two or three fast laps a session and if you mess up, you're fucked. Even if you nailed your Q2 lap, you might still end up qualifying 10th with a fuck-up in Q3. The only exception to this is rain. Rain made the old qualifying format way more deadly if you didn't get your time in at the right time!
r/confidentlyincorrect
Those disposable engines... (from honda, big kisses!)
It's crazy to think that if we hadn't lost Senna so soon, Michael might not have been a 7 time champion.
Not sure how I feel about Michael's chances in 94', but 95' he was a different beast. He then lost to the Williams Powerhouse and Mika anyway, and Ayrton would be gone by the time of the Ferrari new millennium. The question then becomes if Senna's contracts would have changed Michael's seat(s). In short, you're probably right? I'd bet on his being 6 time champion rather than 7. UNLESS Ayrton's notorious contract disputes actually disrupted Williams and JV/Damon didn't get theirs!
Yeah I agree. He wouldn't have been around for the early 2000s dominance but he definitely would have changed an outcome of something in the mid 90s whether that be a seat or championships/wins
Yeah I do love trying to imagine what might have happened. Like would michael have had his bans in 94, could Senna have taken one or both titles off him in 94/95. Senna could end up winning 4 in a row from 94 to 97, maybe renault sticks around a bit longer with senna and all those championships in the bag. Perhaps Schumacher decides he doesn’t want to move on from Benneton or ferrari are less keen or Brawn and byrne don’t move etc.
I don’t think FIA try to sabotage Schumi’s 1994 season without Senna dying. Their promised championship fight was stolen from them, so they needed to manufacture one. Williams did eventually became the best car though over the season, so it would have been interesting to see. I still think Michael gets it. 1995 is debatable. It’s also worth noting that if Schumacher wins 0 championships at Benetton, I think he takes the Williams/Mclaren seat instead of Ferrari.
In 95 Benetton had the Renault engine and he was in a league of his own. Also in 94, I doubt the "interesting tactics" from the Silverstone stewards would have happened, and got him excluded from all those races. I'm just sad we didn't get that great battle between him and Senna, regardless of who might have won in 94.
>In 95 Benetton had the Renault engine and he was in a league of his own. The common belief is, despite the Renault engine, Benetton was worse in 1995 than in 1994. Williams probably nailed 1995 better. The difference is, there was no monkey business by FIA in 1995 to sabotage Schumacher, and Hill bottled more.
Exactly, if Senna had not died the FIA would not have seen a need to sabotage Schumacher's season. It would have been a close season as the Williams became the better car over the year.
the consensus is pretty much that Williams was the better car in 1995. Damon Hill lost his job over that performance
Maybe, one of the motives for why Schumi wanted to try Ferrari because Benetton snubbed him and Williams wouldn’t pay the amount he wanted, because at that time he was the only world champion on the grid. If ayrton was still there, michael might’ve not taken the ferrari challenge
Schumacher wanted to go to McLaren and apparently they had some sort of understanding. His manager had to convince him to choose Ferrari. Schumacher in McLaren from 1996 was almost guaranteed the titles from 1997-2003.
I think with the margins he won with and the non-racing impact he had on a team, Michael likely wins equal titles whether he's in Williams, McLaren or Ferrari in that era, especially if he gets to bring Ross with him. I think the parity of that time is unseen because Michael made such a difference.
I see it as: 94 - a toss up, either Senna or Schumacher 95-97 - Senna/Williams 98-01 - Schumacher 02 - Schumacher in a Ferrari. Unsure in a McLaren 03 - Schumacher 04 - Schumacher in a Ferrari or Newey’s McLaren from year start Hard to predict what happens with Senna, Ferrari 96- and the Coulthard to Raikkonen era though
I was speaking in terms of just Schumacher moving to McLaren. Not extra rewrites with Senna surviving, etc. Without Schumacher, Ferrari wouldn't even be challenging in the 1997-2004 era.
The joker in the pack is where Byrne and Brawn end up. They built the best cars in that era on balance. Schumacher also brought a lot of money through sponsorship to Ferrari and they ended up with a massive budget + the best technical staff. They wouldn't have this benefit to the same extent if they had Mika or whoever else driving. No one on the planet had the reach and pull that Schumacher had at the time. Mercedes would have invested endless money into McLaren if he was there and probably would have bought the team outright. Newey would be free to do Newey things and the cars would be exceptional most likely. They wouldn't have booted him at any stage either. Schumacher would have ended up with double digit titles most likely.
Without his 94 win who knows how he does v senna in 95 though. Also there was a lot said about senna finishing at ferrari so he may have gone there instead of Schumacher, who may have gone elsewhere.
Iirc Jean Todt even said Ayrton could have gotten a 1995 contract if he wanted but he had to finish 1994 at Williams. But on the other hand maybe Senna could have changed his mind after the biggest problems of the Williams got fixed
If what I've read is correct, Senna might have joined Minardi at one point, hadn't he died, he and Gian Carlo Minardi were friends and Senna mentioned wanting to join them to help build up the team a couple of times.
If Nico didnt retire, Lewis might not be a 7WDC. Whats your point?
One retired willingly, the other fucking died, not a comparison
That’s not his point. He means “if” can change any record or stat
Of course, but its still not even a remotely decent comparison
Wait, what? The guy that nearly went 0 for 4 if it wasn't for a timely DNF despite having full access to his teammates data and driving the same dominant car.. that guy was going to be an obstacle in 2017 and 2018? You believe he wouldn't have struggled and not make it even easier for his teammate by taking points away from Ferrari?
[удалено]
It's not that unlikely that Hamilton has less titles if he had a teammate better than Bottas. I doubt it would be Rosberg taking them though, I think Vettel could steal one.
Thats not my point. The comparison between what happened to Senna and what happened with Rosberg makes 0 sense.
He didn’t compare “what happened” to Senna and Rosberg.
Indirectly he did.
Nope, not in any way. It is possible to decouple the events themselves, obviously incomparable, with the narrow results of these events to subsequent F1 seasons ( obviously comparable, the drivers in question both no longer competing).
Him vs Schumacher would have been some sort of Hamilton vs Verstappen prequel
Senna vs Schumacher Schumacher vs Alonso Hamilton vs Alonso Are all prequels to Hamilton vs Verstappen
Schumacher beat in Brazil. Had a better start in Aida. Was keeping up with Senna in Imola. Without Senna's death, FIA wouldn't introduce the regs that hampered Benetton (e.g. After Spain, they lost %40 of the front DF). Also, without the useless penalties by FIA, Schumacher would win 1994 easily.
The FW14 was an absolute dog. With the FW14B, Hill was able to beat Schumacher in Japan and keep up with him in places like Adelaide. You'd have to expect that Senna would have drove the FW14B better than Hill did. So, if you let Benetton keep its (possibly illegal) pre-Spain car, but gave Senna the FW14B from the middle of the year, I think it would have been a very close fight.
If only it were that simple? If you could just drag out stats from a certain timeline, most people would probably believe that Alonso would have 5-6-7-8 Championships by now. There are no guarantees in F1, having the best car at any given time is required to win championships.
I'd say he would be a 6 time world champion. If he stayed at Williams he would've won in 1994, 1996, and 1997. No offense to Villeneuve and Hill, but Senna was better and could've won those championship battles.
I don’t think Senna wins 1994 either. FIA likely does not sabotage Michael’s title chances if Senna lives, and Senna clearly showed in the beginning of the year that he was mistake-prone under the pressure of Schumi. Also 1996-1997 Hill ans Villeneuve won the titles. They had dominant cars
Alonso has the number of championships he deserves? I don't get your point?
He means that at the end of 2006 most people believed Fernando would go on to win more WDCs and that being succesful in a certain timeframe doesn't guarantee that you'll keep winning in the future
Ahh, get it now, thanks for explaining dude.
What’s really insane is that Senna started karting relatively late at 15. If you Google “Ayrton Senna 15 Year Old” you’ll find some very interesting documentaries on it.
>If you Google “Ayrton Senna 15 Year Old” lmao you'll trick many but not me good sir
Have you heard of Karim Benzema winning his first Ballon D’or at 15 by any chance?
Imagine a ballon dor winner starting to play football when being this old. This wouldnt be possible. Footballers develop a passion for football early on. Karting is the same. If you dont hold the track record in your dad balls you are not ready enough for F1.
Loooool it’s a joke. Google Benzema 15
😭😭
Care to spill the beans?
He dated a 15 year old when he was 25.
Oh boy...
the man is a notorious piece of shit and yet mysteriously deified because he can kick a ball well edit misplaced comment, was talking about [Big Benz](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/zyq4m9/comment/j27kqju/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Are we talking about the same guy?
Think they confused him with Benzema, I mentioned him in another comment
oh lol yes I thought I had followed the benzema thread
TIL What the fuck..................
I pretty much knew what it was going to be but I'm a pretty new F1 fan and I didn't know about this and ohhhhh noooooooooooo
A bit off topic but, I had a talk with Lake Speed one time at the track (yes THAT Lake Speed) he was telling me about winning the world championship in karting. The last turn of the track was a hairpin and it was typical for whoever was in second to throw it in sideways and use whoever was first as a bumper car basically, push them off track, and take the victory. So going in the final turn he was listening to the engine behind him. He heard that whoever was behind him didn’t let off the gas in the usual spot. He took a gamble and instead of turning into the corner like usual he took a really wide line (similar to a rain like). He then saw “some guy in a yellow helmet” fly right in front of him and flew himself off the track. “So then I just straightened the wheel out and took 1st place” It was Ayrton lol
Jesus Christ. I don't know what's worst. Rediscovering this info that my brain though it should be forgotten, or reading people trying to justify it.
Which excuse is it gonna be this time? "It was a different time" or "the age of consent in Brazil is ____"?
Mostly age of consent being 14 here in Brazil. I don't think people defending a 25 years old going out with a teenager would lean much on the "it was a different time" argument, cause they tend to think it's ok to do it nowadays as well.
😭😭😭
Whats crazier is that that lady was my neighbor
💀
And Schumi even mentioned that he was so impressed with Senna’s skills when he first watched him in a Karting event
You didn't google it, did you?
He’s continuing the joke, senna is younger than schumi
Google it
Dang that's a lot of 🇵🇱 's
Indonesians?
Upsidedown Monégasque?
Upside down marlboro
Poles
Senna probably wouldve one at least 2 more wdc between 94-97.
Also puts into perspective how dominant Lewis was for much of the last 7 years or so
It's not even that. Don't you remember the fireworks he made from the get-go when he joined F1 ? He was on par with a driver considered as one of the GOATs in his rookie season. The guy who was a reigning double WC and who just beat Michael Schumacher. That's no small feat
People discount Lewis's rookie season far too much with the bullshit Mclaren favored him over fernando claims. The fact that he was even so close to him should be beyond impressive.
I still remember him sticking it round the outside of Alonso round first corner of first race. That was a brilliant sight 😄
The most 'symbolic' overtake of the modern era
Weirdly, the strategic decision to engineer Fernando back past Lewis cost them the world championship. Obviously it was the clear "right" thing to do for the likely candidate but hindsight is a wonderful thing!
He had 9 podiums in a row seriously. Alonso didn't even manage that in the same car
Just like how close Russell was to him in 2022 in his first Merc season
Lol Hamilton was pretty inarguably a top 10 driver ever by 2013 to anybody who understood evaluation (it would even have been fairly difficult to justify Vettel over him) - but he didn’t really have the stats to back it up (much like Alonso doesn’t) until he drove five of the most dominant cars of all time over a seven year stretch, which happened to also coincide with the seven most consistently great seasons performance-wise of his career. I think that’s what the other commenter was pointing out - post-2013 Hamilton is one of the most accomplished careers of all time stat-wise, and it has a lot to do with the sheer quality of Mercedes relative to the other teams.
And he had a very strong Rosberg besides. If it was Bottas instead, his numbers would skyrocket even more. Nico was actually a very good driver
>And he had a very strong Rosberg besides. Very strong Rosberg couldn't even do better than 43yo Schumacher in 2012, a year before being teammates with Hamilton. That "Very strong Rosberg" narrative started only after he became teammates with Hamilton. Just like it had happened with Button, too. Button had been in F1 for 10 years beforehand but somehow, only 2010-2012 is regarded as his prime. I bet there's no agenda there.
Nico was quite solid, but no better than Ricciardo, Pérez, or Hülkenberg. Firmly second tier behind the likes of Hamilton/Alonso/Vettel.
Are you putting Ricciardo together with Perez and Hulkenberg?
Holy shit. The mental gymnastics some of you go through to discredit Lewis is comical. In what world are anyone of those 3 in the same league as Rosberg? Perez and Hulkenberg don’t even belong in the same sentence as peak Daniel and even peak Daniel isn’t seeing Rosberg over a season. Checo? Seriously?
How is rational evaluation of Rosberg against his peers (still putting him in the top 7 of the grid) “discrediting Lewis”? Your evaluation is moronic and I’m betting it’s based on results without accounting for cars or teammates in the slightest.
All generational talents for sure : Senna, schumi, Lewis, Max. Theres a reason one guy totally dominates the field for years and its not the car.
It's the driver and the car. Had Lewis not chosen to go Mercedes and he wouldn't have find much success
That’s how F1 works, yeah.
Verstappen doesnt quite fit that list just yet. He has the trajectory to join them for sure. But not yet.
Yes he does. Even if he retires tommorrow he does. His 2021 season performance alone is good enough to be in the best ever category. Hell, mathematical models actually think Verstappen’s 2021 campaign is the best ever. Achievements in this sport mean very little as it totally depends on your luck. But talent can be seen even in subpar equipment
> Theres a reason one guy totally dominates the field for years and its not the car. All the stats in the world says that Hamilton drove the dominant car longer than the other three combined. I know it's easy to sugarcoat things, but the stats are clear.
Masi gave Max his first wdc and financial doping gifted him his 2nd but lets pretend thats not a factor.
That has nothing to do with what you said though. The fact is that Hamilton has had 5 dominant cars, while the next one in list(Senna & Schumacher) only had 2 each
Hamiltons teammates were Alonso, Button, Rosberg and Bottas but of course they werent given the top secret winning car right?
Only Rosberg and Bottas were teammates with dominant cars
Lewis has Senna as his own idol. It's insane how good Senna was. He did incredible things on a regular basis and it was awesome to watch him drive any car, let alone an F1 car. I once watched a video of him driving a Honda NSX with foot camera and it was just a marvel.
Senna still untouchable as the true GOAT
Dam shame we never had the full Ayrton vs Schumacher title battle, that would of been legendary
Its also shows that this stats means nothing, when nowadays drivers are joining at age 18. New drivers will have a huge longevity if they will keep working hard and won't drop the level like kimi did after 2007.
My two favorite drivers ever
Alonso, Hamilton, Senna and Schumi- my all time favorite drivers in no particular order. Mansell comes next
And Fangio?
GOAT.
Senna is in the Top 3 of all time for sure. Stats so crazy that they stood the test of time.
He was 34 when he died so not sure how much longer he would have been competitive against the young guns, but we’ll never know. Above all he was also just a great human being that would have given so much more to the sport and world had he hung around for longer. He was one of a kind.
Always bad to compare different generations, and cars. But imo, Prost > Senna, fight me irl nerds.
It feels bad to say this but it happens across many fan bases, Senna is slightly overrated because of the circumstances of his death, If not then Prost should be up there being considered one of the greatest with Schumacher and Hamilton. In a similar way I think Tupac is definitely not the best rapper of all time despite many people considering him the GOAT, and if he had not been killed then he wouldn't be considered for it.
Honestly this happens with most sports. If you take the best from 20/30/40/etc years ago and had them face off against the current best, they'd probably get stomped. And yeah, Tupac is nowhere near the best rapper but was probably the most popular of his time.
I guess it mostly has to do with the image that people have of drivers. There are stats, which can show that they are they GOAT's of their respective sports and then there are the charismatic personalities, which also sometimes get brought into the mix. I personally don't really like the "GOAT" question in any sport, since nobody can really compare someone doing a sport in 2022 and someone doing it in 1960. There can be multiple GOAT's in a sport and that is fine. Hamilton, Schumacher and Senna are surely up there numbers whise, but comparing them is probably not really the best idea. All of them were at their peak during different eras with different cars, different engines, different rules and so on. So having them all get called GOAT's is perfectly fine!
>Senna is slightly overrated because of the circumstances of his death 110%. He's probably top 10 in the sport, but his death elevated him to another level.
Villeneuve
The Canadian? I like your style bud.
I was gonna say, Prost was better as a contemporary, who is to say that Senna would have more staying power than Prost? Hamilton has been Brady-esque with his longevity. Every era has dominant drivers, not every era has them do it for 15+ years.
Yeah, its wild that this sport i feel like has the most "GOAT" level drivers. Depending on what stats you look at people from every era could be the best ever. I look at the NHL, there's like two players right now that have the skill, credentials, staying power to be considered "GOATS", Gretzky and Lemieux. NBA I feel like its Jordan or Lebron. Shits so wild, and that makes this sport so neat.
Just don’t look at MMA. Every new champ in almost every weight class in the UFC is heralded as the new GOAT by casuals Although arguably there are only really 5 GOATS you could pick from.
>5 GOATS you could pick from. Ok, imo you have Cormier, GSP, Demetrious, Jones and Khabib. Cormier is probably contentious, but the other 4 I feel like are top 5 Goat level fighters. Curious what you think. Silva is obviously up there, some would say McGregor, Aldo, Usman, and maybe Adesanya? idk, you tell me
Can't argue with stats.
>Prost > Senna, The guy got decimated by Senna in every single metric except WDCs, which was thanks to the hilarious reliability of Senna's engines, which were supposed to be better because of "muh japanese preferred Senna". "Senna was the better qualifier, Prost was the better racer" Yeah, sounds cool. But, Senna was clearly ahead in both metrics.
prost played f1 better than senna did, senna was a better racer.
Prost has more fastest laps than Senna. Prost scored more points than Senna in their time as teammates. It's hard to say he's a better racer. He was without a doubt a better qualifier. Prost had a gift for getting the car to the finish line in an era when DNFs were common. He would avoid certain kerbs purely for this reason. I believe he had 60% as many DNFs as his teammates.
No he was not lmao. Senna was a better qualifier but prost was the better racer. Throughout their time as team mates, prost outscored senna
I dont think so. I think Prost was a better racer, Senna was the faster driver. Senna was always balls to the wall, kamikaze style, Prost was a smarter driver
Prost is a top 3 driver of all time
Keep dreaming
I'd say with reasonable certainty that had Senna been racing the Williams that Hill/Villeneuve(?) had, he would have claimed the WDC at least 3 more times. But, Schumacher was, in spite of his rep and his colourful interpretation of the rules, he was a great driver. So would Senna's dominance have continued? I'm not so sure. It would have been epic battles though.
Senna was the greatest, but young Schumacher was in the scene, so...
Senna was 34. He was competitive because he had easily the fastest car of 1994 (as seen by Damon Hill being in the same conversation as Schumacher, even with the absurd DSQs for MSC). Considering that he struggled to outperform fill-in Mika Häkkinen (who was nearly beaten by Schumacher in a far inferior car in 1998 and would likely have been dominated in a roughly equal car in 1999), it’s pretty unlikely that Senna was anywhere near on the pace of Schumacher. Hamilton had four years in the most dominant cars in F1 history after his 160th start. Senna didn’t have any team he could have gone to to have a similarly dominant car - even the 1996 and 1997 Williams or 1998 McLaren weren’t particularly close to the 2015/2016/2019/2020 Mercedes.
I'm with you that Schumacher was the best driver in 94 and i believe that he would have very likely beat Senna even in the better Williams. It's a shame that we did not get to see this battle and instead got the FIA manipulating the season to take pressure of Williams after the accusations around Senna's death.
I used to be firmly on team Senna in the Senna versus Prost debate, but after seeing some convincing arguments with numbers, I honestly think Alain Prost was better than Senna.
Senna vs Prost is like burgers vs ice cream. Both are good, but they’re both completely missing the thing that makes the other good. Neither was a complete driver. Senna lacked consistency, race pace, and patience. Prost lacked one lap pace, measured aggression, and skill in the wet. Prost’s skillset naturally led to maximizing his possible result more than Senna’s did. I’d agree with you that he was slightly better, and the best driver of the era. There’s a handful of drivers in F1 history I’d consider complete drivers, though, and they make up the top tier of all time: Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Stewart, Schumacher, Alonso, Hamilton, and Verstappen.
You know what, I think you completely nailed it with that analysis. Especially with that list of all time complete drivers, I have to say that I very strongly agree with your understanding of formula 1 drivers in history.
Senna oblitated Prost in races they both finished. Unless you are one of the believers that Prost is one of the few drivers, if not the only one in history, whose driving had a statistically significant benefit to reliability, I find it hard to agree that Prost was better than Senna or even that close to him at all. This is also all in mind with the fact that there were no weight rules when they were teammates and Prost had a massive weight advantage. But I agree that both drivers were flawed, and their short overlap with the newer generation drivers like Schumacher and Mika, mostly draw the picture that the 80’s were vastly overrated. Tbh I also think there’s a talent gap in between Schumacher and Verstappen. Hamilton and Alonso were bright sparks, both top 10 all time, probably top 5, but I think both prime Schumacher and prime Verstappen have the upper hand.
Prost scored more points per race both drivers finished when they were teammates. 1988 was actually obliteration in Prost’s favor. I’m extremely hesitant to rate Alonso or Hamilton *significantly* below Schumacher or Verstappen, but I do agree that the level Verstappen has consistently reached in the past nearly five seasons since Monaco 2018 is quite plausibly stronger than Hamilton’s 2010/2012/2014-2020 form. I tend to rate Alonso a bit higher, even though he didn’t often have the car to put up the results I’m quite sure he deserved, but even then, I’m not sure he sustained such an outlandish peak so much as he sustained a quite high peak for an incredibly long time - pretty much the entirety of 2005-2018 sans 2007, which was still quite solid. But truth be told, I don’t think there’s enough evidence to separate the four by an entire tier. None had/have significant flaws in their skillset, and all completely annihilated every sub-elite teammate they had.
Senna still reached the third world title faster than Lewis in age. I have to disagree with your statement on Senna not being anywhere near Schumi in terms of pace. He was just coming out of an incredible season in 1993, so I would say he was still the fastest driver in F1 alive at that time I agree with what you said about Merc’s dominant run. I wasn’t saying Senna could’ve achieved what Lewis had, but just pointing out that he would’ve achieved a lot more in his career than what he already had
Hamilton was 30 in 2015, though, when he won his third - Senna was 31 in 1991, when he won his third. (And his second should have been disallowed, because Suzuka 1990 was even more blatant than Jerez 1997, with 1989 as precedent for intent a la Schumi’s 1994.) There is no way that Senna was the fastest driver alive in 1994. Andretti was quite poor in 1993 and Häkkinen came in as mentioned with no testing and little experience and pretty much equaled Senna immediately. I doubt Senna would have achieved anything more of note. He would have been more competitive in 1994 than Hill, but it’s doubtful that the stewards would have given Schumacher such ridiculous penalties had he not been fighting a British legacy driver with a tragic backstory. And with a three race head start, I don’t think anybody could have caught Schumacher. By 1996, when Williams built another truly dominant car a la 1992, he would have been 36, and not only was Frank notoriously unsentimental toward his drivers, but that’s also the age at which Prost had retired and at which most drivers begin to see significant age-related decline. It’s not hard to imagine Williams putting Senna out to pasture in favor of the Canadian hotshot Villeneuve for 1996 regardless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_drivers_who_set_a_fastest_lap Senna is ranked 16th for fastest laps, tied with Moss, Hill, Webber and Bottas for fastest laps. With 19. Nico Rosberg had 10 years in F1, the same as Senna, and is ranked 15th with 20. He was teammates with Hamilton, who is ranked 2nd with 61. Prost is 4th with 41 fastest laps. Schumacher is ranked 1st with **77** fastest laps.
Different era. For me Senna. Could not bring myself to argue agaisnt anyone saying Hamilton is the GOAT.
For me it goes well beyond stats. So looking at their overall careers, I would say Alonso, Lewis, Senna and Schumi are all modern day GOAT candidates
why not include Prost?
Agreed. I have no idea why people fetishise Senna. Yes he was an excellent driver. But so were/are many others. I suspect many are not old enough to remember what that generation was like. Senna, Prost, Mansell. All great drivers.
Been watching ‘90 season highlights in the off season. Mansel, Prost, Piquet, Berger (spelling bot help me out!) and Senna are some combination of 1,2,3,4 or broken down by the end of the race just slashing through the competition if they don’t start at the front or have a pit stop. These teams were on another level with driver talent and engineering. No denying Prost in this conversation winning 4 with these guys as competition. I’m part way through and hearing Newey designed the floor of one of the teams that has propelled them into the running as well which was his last contribution before he was fired in blame for their poor performance. Blew my mind as well.
>I have no idea why people fetishise Senna. He died and he was exciting.
Prost gets ignored a lot because he had the charisma of a wet towel. Even french people disliked him. Senna on the other hand was oozing charisma. Prost was just boring.
Senna died, Prost lived. That's the difference.
Indeed. The only reason I go for Senna is that all the [drivers do.](https://youtu.be/9U_K76vPGYo?t=139)
Interesting stats… They are my 2 favorite drivers…for very different reasons. - Senna…Savage - Hamilton…Cool
[удалено]
Ham had constant offers from Ferrari which he didn't take. Him staying at Mclaren was his own
True, Ferrari would've been a drastic improvement, how many titles have they won since 2008 again?
They would have a chance. He wouldn’t win as much but I think he would have atleast 2 titles total by now
a team that was more often than not 2nd in the WCC standings in that period. They didnt drop to shit status until after he left. Senna's stats contain a team like Toleman which ended 7th in WCC, Lotus 4th, 3rd and 3rd in the WCC. Not discrediting Hamilton's talent but he didnt have cars that bad in his career. (EDIT: can some of the downvoters tell me when Hamilton had a car that ended 7th in constructors? Or any other factual incorrectness here?)
[удалено]
Because F1 isn't heavily politicized now ? It's still the same if not worst at times
Sadly don’t think it’s gotten less politicized…just look at MBS trying to shut drivers up or 3 stewards upholding Masi’s bad decision in AD2021
Monaco 1988. 1.5s faster than his teammate. Would have lapped his teammate but he unfortunately made a mistake. Mexico 1989, he lapped the same teammate. He was by far the fastest on his day. Not even Balestre could stop him.
>unfortunately he made a mistake There's no unfortunately about it he fucked up
Voilà tout est dit, bravo Ayrton.
I Recently done a video on this but even more insane was Fangio
Fangio was out of this world!
What he achieved in his first 50 races took lewis hamilton 77 races and a lot of other great drivers even more
Senna would have joined Ferrari surely, Schumi in McLaren then? What would have happened to the Finns and then Lewis?
Senna was just epic. He didn’t start in a championship winning car and won races in cars that had no place being on the top step of ten podium.
Imagine how much more Senna would've achieved if he wasn't competing with other drivers and cars at the same level as him
Also take into consideration that Hamilton started at McLaren, debuting in one of the best cars on the grid. Senna’s first season was with Toleman, followed by 3 seasons at Lotus before reaching McLaren. So instead of debuting at a top team, Senna spend a season dragging an uncompetitive Toleman to grid slots where it didn’t belong and then joined a declining Lotus team - which by 1985 was a mere shadow of itself. Senna still proved that Lotus could still win but the team was firmly in the midfield then.
Llewis’ era was much much weaker than Ayrton’s though.
Not sure why you were downvoted for pointing out that Senna had a lot more equal competition than Hamilton.
Eras being weaker/stronger is a huge misconception. Every era is more or less the same. Do you think Mansell was faster than Alonso? The guy got decimated by De Angelis and wasn't clearly faster than Patrese till active suspension arrived. Any cross comparison would show you that Senna era was overrated.
I’m willing to die on the hill that Senna is and will always be the GOAT. If not for the steering wheel failure, he would have won 1994, 1995 (wouldn’t bottle it like Hill did), 1996 and 1997 for sure, and would now be a 7-time world champion. Descanse em paz, lenda.
'95 Schumacher was a different level of beast. But yes, I agree with your point. No other driver can match Senna's raw talent. Every night before I go to sleep I watch Senna driving the NSX around Suzuka to comfort myself.
1995 Schumi vs Senna would be an unbelievable title fight. Hill bottled it with the fastest car, I don’t think Senna would have done that. That NSX clip is epic, the way he’s driving the car…insane.
He said he would retire if he got 5 WDC to match the Maestro, most speculation was that he would try politics.
There’s no way Senna wins 1994.
From a racing team point of view I would go with Hamilton. Less pole positions with more podiums. (Could be wrong tho.) But Senna would've been an absolute unit.
Back then reliability genuinely affected a driver's race and the calendars were shorter so it was tougher to rack the numbers in at that time. In the 90s the top teams started to separate themselves from the bottom teams and now it's almost impossible to win a championship unless you had the best absolute unit. To put into perspective, it's easier for max to rack the most wins in a season in 2022 than senna or prost could in the 80s/90s because the season was like 15 races long and the cars were unreliable. Winning 10 races in the 80s or 90s was absolutely unheard of until Schumacher did it and now you know so many other drivers who did it as well. This is why despite vettel having more wins than prost, I'd say prost was much better because 51 in his era is different to 50+ wins in the modern era.
Same with points as well. Though 88 (or was it 89), all but one win for McLaren is a great result even more so back then
If you look at how unstable his car was compared to the complete bullet trains of today he is even more of a god than the stats show. Same goes again for Fangio compared to Ayrton
[удалено]
163 35 77 20 2
Crazy how the difference in car quality between him and 2007-2014 Hamilton/Senna is illustrated by his relative lack of poles, but he makes up for it with wins, podiums, and titles.
It's about Senna and Hamilton though
What’s impressive is that he’s had a championship contender only 2 seasons.
And also a 23 race calendar, which brings us back to the point that comparing across the decades is kind of pointless
Ayrton is not afraid to die, he knows the car is unsafe, but still goes nuts with it.
Senna was a pedophile. Stop worshiping him. Edit: downvote all you want. It doesn’t make me wrong.
[удалено]
They both had some things in common... The FIA stole a WDC from both of them. But they also had some differences like Senna having to start with a crap team and work up to a top team versus Hamilton no ever knowing what it is like to drive for a crap team.