F1 - who's better, Senna or MS?
03-13-2005, 10:07 PM
#1
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F1 - who's better, Senna or MS?
This discussion has spun off another thread in the TSX area, I feel better moving it to here... below are some of the recent correspondences.
Quote 3 of 3
Quote 2 of 3
Quote 1 of 3
Quote 3 of 3
Originally Posted by colin
I'm still blown away with what Senna accomplished in his time span. If he was still around, Schumacher might not have won his first 2-3 titles so easily. However, by the time Shumacher was working on #3-4, I think Senna would have been past his competative prime. He would have still taken wins and poles but I think titles would have gone to Schumacher.
I view Sennas poles like I view MS' wins. Huge mechanical advantage! Remember for most of those poles, he had a Honda Qualifying engine behind him. Just as MS benefits from Ferrari's reliability. Senna benefited from Honda Power.
I view Sennas poles like I view MS' wins. Huge mechanical advantage! Remember for most of those poles, he had a Honda Qualifying engine behind him. Just as MS benefits from Ferrari's reliability. Senna benefited from Honda Power.
Originally Posted by 05_TSX_GP
Good analysis there Colin. Almost better than your own "Honda started the HP war" post. Yup, Prost didn't get his "Professor" nickname for no reason 
So based on your analysis, had Senna been still around, MS would definitely have had a much much harder time in winning so many driver championship titles. Don't forget too that Senna was always very very quick in qualifying. He had 65 pole positions in his shortened career. To this date, MS has notched up 63. So I would still say Senna was the best racer on sheer speed and passing ability.
So based on your analysis, had Senna been still around, MS would definitely have had a much much harder time in winning so many driver championship titles. Don't forget too that Senna was always very very quick in qualifying. He had 65 pole positions in his shortened career. To this date, MS has notched up 63. So I would still say Senna was the best racer on sheer speed and passing ability.
Originally Posted by colin
Since we're running two topics here, I'd like to add my thoughts the Senna vs. schumacher topic. It we had Senna without Prost or visa versa, either one of them could have run off 7 titles. Both were good enough in their time to duplicate what Shumacher has done. Schumacher has the advantage of not having someone to fight with. His past opponants have all had their problems either personally (Haakinin sp.) or with their teams (Villeneuve/Williams, Hill/Williams)
Given recent F1 rules (refueling, tire changes) I feel Schumacher has an advantage. I don't feel he's an especially good overtaker, but agree he's blindingly fast on a clear track and in qualiffying.
In the Senna/Prost era, you had to take car of your tires in the early stages since you ere heavy with fuel. Without refueling, you had to make your passes on the track, and IMO Senna excelled here. IMO, Senna (and Prost) were better racers than Schumacher, but he's probably a faster driver. Another point to consider Schumacher brings the team together around him and focuses them in one direction. Senna was divisive. My favorite in Prost. He has a reputation for being a "thinking driver' but don't forget how shockingly quick he was when he joind McLaren. Just Ask Nikki Lauda, the champion the year before.
Given recent F1 rules (refueling, tire changes) I feel Schumacher has an advantage. I don't feel he's an especially good overtaker, but agree he's blindingly fast on a clear track and in qualiffying.
In the Senna/Prost era, you had to take car of your tires in the early stages since you ere heavy with fuel. Without refueling, you had to make your passes on the track, and IMO Senna excelled here. IMO, Senna (and Prost) were better racers than Schumacher, but he's probably a faster driver. Another point to consider Schumacher brings the team together around him and focuses them in one direction. Senna was divisive. My favorite in Prost. He has a reputation for being a "thinking driver' but don't forget how shockingly quick he was when he joind McLaren. Just Ask Nikki Lauda, the champion the year before.
03-13-2005, 10:10 PM
#2
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by colin
I'm still blown away with what Senna accomplished in his time span. If he was still around, Schumacher might not have won his first 2-3 titles so easily. However, by the time Shumacher was working on #3-4, I think Senna would have been past his competative prime. He would have still taken wins and poles but I think titles would have gone to Schumacher.
I view Sennas poles like I view MS' wins. Huge mechanical advantage! Remember for most of those poles, he had a Honda Qualifying engine behind him. Just as MS benefits from Ferrari's reliability. Senna benefited from Honda Power.
I view Sennas poles like I view MS' wins. Huge mechanical advantage! Remember for most of those poles, he had a Honda Qualifying engine behind him. Just as MS benefits from Ferrari's reliability. Senna benefited from Honda Power.
Curious, didn't Prost have the same Honda Qualifying engine during the time they were both with McLaren?
Either way, I doubt there are many other F1 drivers (of any era) who could have handled the awesome power from that Honda Qualifying engine and consistenly put the car on the pole.
03-14-2005, 03:32 AM
#3
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senna was no doubt the best qualifier ever, with over 70 races where he beat his team-mate in qualy by over 1 second... which rules out the fact he usually had excellent equipment argument. However, it is interesting to look at the number of poles he turned into wins, not as many as I would think. In the end Michael is a better "team captain" and more of a thinker. The further fact is that 40 years from now Schumacher will be considered the better F1 pilot, how many of us rememeber watching Ascari, Hill, Moss and JM Fangio, in those cases it comes down to stats. Had it not been for Senna's overwhelming desire to stay ahead of MS at Imola, 94 may have been a very interesting season, though it is clear Michael had the superior chariot in the Benneton B194, designed by Ross Brawn.
03-14-2005, 09:27 PM
#4
Originally Posted by 05_TSX_GP
And now my reply to Colin's latest
Curious, didn't Prost have the same Honda Qualifying engine during the time they were both with McLaren?
Either way, I doubt there are many other F1 drivers (of any era) who could have handled the awesome power from that Honda Qualifying engine and consistenly put the car on the pole.
Curious, didn't Prost have the same Honda Qualifying engine during the time they were both with McLaren?
Either way, I doubt there are many other F1 drivers (of any era) who could have handled the awesome power from that Honda Qualifying engine and consistenly put the car on the pole.
On one hand, I suggest that MS can't pass on track, and has showen that he'd rather wait till pit stops. Thus the contention that Senna was a better racer. (Of course it could be argued that with todays rules, it make good sense to pass in the pits.)
On the other hand, as ilitig8 pointed out, Senna did not convert as many of his poles into wins, bringing the "better racer" theory into question. SO are we going to say that Senna was a better racer AND quilifier and the only thing that stopped him from racking up 7 titles was this death? ARE we going to belittle MS' 7 world driving titles?
Tough questions! I contend that it was not Senna's death that stopped him! The only thing that kept Senna from 7 titles was Prost. AND The only thing that kept Prost from 7 titles was Senna. From this perspective, it is easier to dismiss MS titles as having nobody to fight with, not even a teammate!
Last edited by Colin; 03-14-2005 at 09:30 PM.
03-15-2005, 12:01 AM
#5
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North America
Age: 48
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gilles Villeneuve 
Seriously, GV may not have been the best driver ever but he would be a blast to look at...
Back to the question, Schumi plays very safe... Is this a quality of the best driver.. I don't know but he's not as exciting as Senna was.
Seriously, GV may not have been the best driver ever but he would be a blast to look at...
Back to the question, Schumi plays very safe... Is this a quality of the best driver.. I don't know but he's not as exciting as Senna was.
03-15-2005, 10:36 AM
#6
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All very good points guys, all well taken here
First off, I am not exactly a MS-hater
but his style of F1 racing (though very smart for today's rules, and probably it's the style required to win these days) has been driving me nuts, boring me to tears! 
I wouldn't go as far as to label MS as not able to pass on track, but he certainly doesn't go for it like JV or JPM (IMO those are examples of passionate racers in the current era). Having said that, I will just say I'll always remember how he couldn't out race JV in the end of the '97 season and decided to turn right into JV's car in mid-turn!
As for MS's teammate, the second he arrived at Ferrari, there is no competing teammate in the game. That's something we all know too well. I would just put it like this: MS would never dare to drive for a team like McLaren or Williams for those teams always allow fair and non-colliding competition between teammates. In this regard, Ferrari has as much to blaim as MS himself for establishing the "MS-first, the other driver-who cares" team philosophy.
First off, I am not exactly a MS-hater
but his style of F1 racing (though very smart for today's rules, and probably it's the style required to win these days) has been driving me nuts, boring me to tears! I wouldn't go as far as to label MS as not able to pass on track, but he certainly doesn't go for it like JV or JPM (IMO those are examples of passionate racers in the current era). Having said that, I will just say I'll always remember how he couldn't out race JV in the end of the '97 season and decided to turn right into JV's car in mid-turn!
As for MS's teammate, the second he arrived at Ferrari, there is no competing teammate in the game. That's something we all know too well. I would just put it like this: MS would never dare to drive for a team like McLaren or Williams for those teams always allow fair and non-colliding competition between teammates. In this regard, Ferrari has as much to blaim as MS himself for establishing the "MS-first, the other driver-who cares" team philosophy.
03-15-2005, 10:45 AM
#7
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by 05_TSX_GP
I will just say I'll always remember how he couldn't out race JV in the end of the '97 season and decided to turn right into JV's car in mid-turn!
Not fair considering how far apart in performance those car were.
Which is another MS > * argumnet. With an inferior (at the time) Ferrari, he gave Damon Hill, JV and then MH a run for their money 4 straight years.
Trending Topics
03-15-2005, 11:26 AM
#8
Instructor
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Norcross, GA
Age: 56
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very true domn.
MS made his name in the sport driving an inferior car in the Benetton Ford and then the Benetton Renault. Hell I bet Senna was PISSED at how much pressure he was getting early in '94. And I am quite sure the surprising competition was a factor in his death.
A few years later MS was taking an inferior Ferrari against the Williams and McLaren juggernauts. Alot of the hating on MS now is due to Ferrari being on the other end of that gap. I have friends that are new fans of the sport and they dislike MS because they never saw him as an underdog - but that's how long-time followers got to know him.
I think this sums up the MS vs Senna argument:
If you had a car neither Senna nor MS had ever been in and had no involvement developing. You put them at a track neither had ever been to. A truly neutral car and track - who would you bet would be able to put together a faster lap in one hour?
OK now offer the drivers some development time to tweak the car and learn the track. Which one goes faster now?
I was never a huge Senna fan for the same reason people aren't huge MS fans now. I never saw him do anythign amazing in weak cars. He was always in the dominant car.
MS made his name in the sport driving an inferior car in the Benetton Ford and then the Benetton Renault. Hell I bet Senna was PISSED at how much pressure he was getting early in '94. And I am quite sure the surprising competition was a factor in his death.
A few years later MS was taking an inferior Ferrari against the Williams and McLaren juggernauts. Alot of the hating on MS now is due to Ferrari being on the other end of that gap. I have friends that are new fans of the sport and they dislike MS because they never saw him as an underdog - but that's how long-time followers got to know him.
I think this sums up the MS vs Senna argument:
If you had a car neither Senna nor MS had ever been in and had no involvement developing. You put them at a track neither had ever been to. A truly neutral car and track - who would you bet would be able to put together a faster lap in one hour?
OK now offer the drivers some development time to tweak the car and learn the track. Which one goes faster now?
I was never a huge Senna fan for the same reason people aren't huge MS fans now. I never saw him do anythign amazing in weak cars. He was always in the dominant car.
03-15-2005, 11:58 AM
#9
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well put domn and Kighter.
That's why I pre-qualified my comments with this before:
I do mean it even though I put that silly chucke icon on. No way in my mind would I dismiss MS accomplishment.
I can't honestly name who would be faster in the scenarios Kighter wrote, but I can be sure the lap times would be damn close and very exciting to watch! Unfortunately, F1 has lost all that exciting glory at this point. Otherwise, fans like us won't have to be spending time finding fun in discussions like this one.
I remain hopeful that F1 (or even that possible competing series) will bring back what top-class open wheel racing should be... coz right now, F1 is FAR from that
That's why I pre-qualified my comments with this before:
Originally Posted by 05_TSX_GP
First off, I am not exactly a MS-hater
I can't honestly name who would be faster in the scenarios Kighter wrote, but I can be sure the lap times would be damn close and very exciting to watch! Unfortunately, F1 has lost all that exciting glory at this point. Otherwise, fans like us won't have to be spending time finding fun in discussions like this one.
I remain hopeful that F1 (or even that possible competing series) will bring back what top-class open wheel racing should be... coz right now, F1 is FAR from that
03-15-2005, 07:36 PM
#10
In Kighter scenario, it'd go with MS. He seems to be able to do an impressive things on a clear track. To me, this is evidenced by his ability to crank out fast laps at the end of a fuel stint.
Senna spent 4 years in inferior equipment! One season in the Tolman (eventually to become Benneton) and then 3 seasons in Lotus (in decline after C. Chapman's death).
In contrast MS did a race for Jordan, and then went to Benneton. In 4 years, he won two titles so the cars probably weren't too inferior, the Ford engine had a lot of torque and by the time they switched to Renault they had the strongest engine in the paddock.
I hate to keep bringing it up, but Prost could have easily had 5 titles, if it hadn't been for Senna intentionally ramming his Ferrari in the last race in Japan back in 1991.
Senna spent 4 years in inferior equipment! One season in the Tolman (eventually to become Benneton) and then 3 seasons in Lotus (in decline after C. Chapman's death).
In contrast MS did a race for Jordan, and then went to Benneton. In 4 years, he won two titles so the cars probably weren't too inferior, the Ford engine had a lot of torque and by the time they switched to Renault they had the strongest engine in the paddock.
I hate to keep bringing it up, but Prost could have easily had 5 titles, if it hadn't been for Senna intentionally ramming his Ferrari in the last race in Japan back in 1991.
03-16-2005, 10:15 AM
#11
Instructor
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Norcross, GA
Age: 56
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colin's obviously been a serious fan longer than I - I never saw Senna race until he was in a McLaren. I started following the sport right around the time that F1 left America and all TV coverage here went away. When it came back on ESPN2 way back when ('92?'93?) was when I started my Sunday morning rituals.
Yes MS did win 2 titles with Benetton, and that car was inferior to the Williams. Just look at what Alesi did it with it in '96 - nothing. Just like MS teammates in the Benetton years. I still maintain it's not team rules that keep his teammates from competing - it's that he makes them look bad.
As far as Senna being denied by Prost and vice versa - very true. But let's not forget Mansell in there in the Williams too and Piquet one year too. Mansell absolutely dominated in '92, but Senna won like 3 races that year - MS won one also and beat Senna in the championship.
Either way talking about historic stuff is great fun. We could enlarge this thread and put Prost in there (won 4 titles to Senna's 3) and even include Clark and Fangio etc etc.
Did any of you guys read the F1 Racing issue last year about the greatest drivers ever? Good stuff.
Yes MS did win 2 titles with Benetton, and that car was inferior to the Williams. Just look at what Alesi did it with it in '96 - nothing. Just like MS teammates in the Benetton years. I still maintain it's not team rules that keep his teammates from competing - it's that he makes them look bad.
As far as Senna being denied by Prost and vice versa - very true. But let's not forget Mansell in there in the Williams too and Piquet one year too. Mansell absolutely dominated in '92, but Senna won like 3 races that year - MS won one also and beat Senna in the championship.
Either way talking about historic stuff is great fun. We could enlarge this thread and put Prost in there (won 4 titles to Senna's 3) and even include Clark and Fangio etc etc.
Did any of you guys read the F1 Racing issue last year about the greatest drivers ever? Good stuff.
03-16-2005, 11:07 AM
#12
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kighter
Colin's obviously been a serious fan longer than I...<snipped>
Either way talking about historic stuff is great fun. We could enlarge this thread and put Prost in there (won 4 titles to Senna's 3) and even include Clark and Fangio etc etc.
Did any of you guys read the F1 Racing issue last year about the greatest drivers ever? Good stuff.
Either way talking about historic stuff is great fun. We could enlarge this thread and put Prost in there (won 4 titles to Senna's 3) and even include Clark and Fangio etc etc.
Did any of you guys read the F1 Racing issue last year about the greatest drivers ever? Good stuff.
I honestly can't even be certain when I was a serious F1 fan or whether I still am! When the greats like Mansell, Piquet, Alesi, Prost were in their prime (mid 80's?), I was still a kid (around 10 years old) living in Asia. There were only like couple of TV channels and I can't recall watching a full F1 race on TV back then. I just remember watching the Macau F3 races and their touring cars races (I vividly remember the original M3 from that). Though somehow (honestly can't remember) I already knew of those F1 drivers above plus Senna, at least just their names and that they are cool idol like guys racing in awesome machines. Also some images of the 80's F1 cars bottoming out, sparks flying from underneath the cars, two and sometimes even three of them racing down the straights, trying to out brake one another (and that's not a rare thing in F1 back then) ... in my mind, THAT is what F1 racing should be... ok, maybe minus the sparks coz of fire hazard
No, I haven't read much printed stuff for quite some time. Did they dare name who is the greatest of them all?
03-16-2005, 03:41 PM
#13
Instructor
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Norcross, GA
Age: 56
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05_TSX_GP - I'm a smidge older than you, but F1 started to take a serious beating here in the states in the 80s so I wasn't exposed to it very much growing up. I do remember having a toy John Player Special when I was little that I loved. Might've been Mario's or Emerson's?
Anyway - luckily I muddled through and managed to become a fan even with no race coverage. When it came back to TV here in the 90s it was like a breath of fresh air. There was "some" coverage in the late 80's with Mansell. CART was in it's heyday then and between the 2 we had some really great open wheel TV here.
And then came Tony George and the F1 rule changes...
I'm not as down on current F1 as you are, but I agree the rules have forced it in a direction it didn't really need to go. I loved it when there were V8s, 10s and V12s out there. I did not like the active suspensions and stuff, and I hate the grooved tires but I guess they had to do something.
I'll have to dig out that issue of F1 Racing. Yes they did name names - a great read. I'll see if I can find it from my disaster of an office and paraphrase a little of it here.
Anyway - luckily I muddled through and managed to become a fan even with no race coverage. When it came back to TV here in the 90s it was like a breath of fresh air. There was "some" coverage in the late 80's with Mansell. CART was in it's heyday then and between the 2 we had some really great open wheel TV here.
And then came Tony George and the F1 rule changes...
I'm not as down on current F1 as you are, but I agree the rules have forced it in a direction it didn't really need to go. I loved it when there were V8s, 10s and V12s out there. I did not like the active suspensions and stuff, and I hate the grooved tires but I guess they had to do something.
I'll have to dig out that issue of F1 Racing. Yes they did name names - a great read. I'll see if I can find it from my disaster of an office and paraphrase a little of it here.
03-16-2005, 04:10 PM
#14
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kighter
I'm not as down on current F1 as you are, but I agree the rules have forced it in a direction it didn't really need to go. I loved it when there were V8s, 10s and V12s out there. I did not like the active suspensions and stuff, and I hate the grooved tires but I guess they had to do something.
I'll have to dig out that issue of F1 Racing. Yes they did name names - a great read. I'll see if I can find it from my disaster of an office and paraphrase a little of it here.
I'll have to dig out that issue of F1 Racing. Yes they did name names - a great read. I'll see if I can find it from my disaster of an office and paraphrase a little of it here.
yup, I am probably as bitter as can be for a F1 fan... Sure, would like to see what's written in F1 Racing about this "debate"
03-16-2005, 08:29 PM
#15
Originally Posted by Kighter
Colin's obviously been a serious fan longer than I - I never saw Senna race until he was in a McLaren. I started following the sport right around the time that F1 left America and all TV coverage here went away. When it came back on ESPN2 way back when ('92?'93?) was when I started my Sunday morning rituals.
As for Sunday mornings, where I live, it means getting up at 2:00 AM!
It occurs to me that Prost could have easily won 6 titles! He narrowly lost to Lauda in his first year at McLaren, and then the Ferrari fiasco. Now Fangio, I would have loved to have seen him race same with Clark. I was looking at stats, and Fangio had a winning percentage of almost 50%! Thats dominating!
03-17-2005, 09:04 AM
#16
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kighter
Very true domn.
MS made his name in the sport driving an inferior car in the Benetton Ford and then the Benetton Renault. Hell I bet Senna was PISSED at how much pressure he was getting early in '94. And I am quite sure the surprising competition was a factor in his death.
A few years later MS was taking an inferior Ferrari against the Williams and McLaren juggernauts. Alot of the hating on MS now is due to Ferrari being on the other end of that gap. I have friends that are new fans of the sport and they dislike MS because they never saw him as an underdog - but that's how long-time followers got to know him.
I think this sums up the MS vs Senna argument:
If you had a car neither Senna nor MS had ever been in and had no involvement developing. You put them at a track neither had ever been to. A truly neutral car and track - who would you bet would be able to put together a faster lap in one hour?
OK now offer the drivers some development time to tweak the car and learn the track. Which one goes faster now?
I was never a huge Senna fan for the same reason people aren't huge MS fans now. I never saw him do anythign amazing in weak cars. He was always in the dominant car.
MS made his name in the sport driving an inferior car in the Benetton Ford and then the Benetton Renault. Hell I bet Senna was PISSED at how much pressure he was getting early in '94. And I am quite sure the surprising competition was a factor in his death.
A few years later MS was taking an inferior Ferrari against the Williams and McLaren juggernauts. Alot of the hating on MS now is due to Ferrari being on the other end of that gap. I have friends that are new fans of the sport and they dislike MS because they never saw him as an underdog - but that's how long-time followers got to know him.
I think this sums up the MS vs Senna argument:
If you had a car neither Senna nor MS had ever been in and had no involvement developing. You put them at a track neither had ever been to. A truly neutral car and track - who would you bet would be able to put together a faster lap in one hour?
OK now offer the drivers some development time to tweak the car and learn the track. Which one goes faster now?
I was never a huge Senna fan for the same reason people aren't huge MS fans now. I never saw him do anythign amazing in weak cars. He was always in the dominant car.
New car, new track, no test time... Senna by 2 or 3 tenths (if not more) on a normal modern length track, give them some development time where they are the ONLY driver in the cockpit (no Professor for Senna) and the table turns 180 degrees. On a tangent the truely neutral car also sorta struck me, Schumacher might be closer to Senna in that first hour in a excellent car, one that was more ragged would be a bigger advantage for Senna. I personally think that the housr should be in the wet, so we could see exactly who is the king of rain.
Vandy
03-17-2005, 01:34 PM
#17
Senior Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Western New York
Age: 64
Posts: 25,248
Received 7,220 Likes
on
3,668 Posts
Consider their competition: Senna/Prost; Mansell/Piquet; Senna/Prost/Mansell; Michael/JV? Michael/Mika? That's it, Hill? One year and that was it. Ditto for JV. MS has benefitted greatly from 2 factors in my opinion, the lack of real competition and having the best prepared team/car combo on the grid.
03-17-2005, 02:40 PM
#18
Top notch 6MT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chief F1 Fan
Consider their competition: Senna/Prost; Mansell/Piquet; Senna/Prost/Mansell; Michael/JV? Michael/Mika? That's it, Hill? One year and that was it. Ditto for JV. MS has benefitted greatly from 2 factors in my opinion, the lack of real competition and having the best prepared team/car combo on the grid.
Though didn't JV come very very close to winning the champion in '96 - his rookie year? I think he had some mechanical problem on the last race to foil that feat (please correct if I am wrong). Had he pulled that one off, it would probably have been a completely different JV career.
Either way, JV is IMHO not the greatest driver, but he is one of my most favorite because he has character; and I agree with him that F1 lacks character guys.
03-17-2005, 04:57 PM
#19
Instructor
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Norcross, GA
Age: 56
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you about JV. Always liked him - especially when he beat the field at Indy by 2.5 MILES. Yes that's right, Villeneuve is the only driver to ever win the Indy 502.5.
Anyway, here's the '96 season. JV finished 2nd by 19 pts.
Australia - Hill, JV, Irvine
Brazil - Hill, Alesi, MS - JV spun
Argentina - Hill, JV, Alesi
Europe - JV, MS, DC
San Marino - Hill, MS, Berger - JV ret. suspension
Monaco - Panis, DC, Herbert - JV ret. collision - that crazy rain race
Spain - MS, Alesi, JV
Canada - Hill, JV, Alesi
France - Hill, JV, Alesi
Britain - JV, Berger, Hakk
Germany - Hill, Alesi, JV
Hungary - JV, Hill, Alesi
Belgium - MS, JV, Hakk
Italy - MS, Alesi, Hakk - JV 1 lap down 1 spot out of points
Portugal - JV, Hill, MS
Japan - Hill, MS, Hakk - JV ret. wheel
He had a string there of 7 straight podiums. That was the year he supposedly used the video games to learn the tracks.
Chief F1 Fan: I hear what you're saying about MS vs the competition, but I really wonder sometimes. Just pretend for a minute that MS was not in the sport. Would we be debating Hill vs Hakk vs JV vs Alesi? Is it that MS is in the company of those men, or is it that he is that much better than the drivers he's raced against and we therefore end up comparing him to others who were clearly better in their time (Prost, Senna, Clark, Stewart).
I don't think you could say MS has *always* had the benefit of superior equipment. When he was Benetton it was clearly an inferior car - maybe equal in some respects but not superior. Hell he came 3rd in the championship with that dog of a Ferrari in '96. This is with Alesi driving the car MS won the championship with the year before. Remember - the brain trust didn't follow MS to Ferrari until a year later. That was the same team and designers that gave MS 2 titles. And MS took the Ferrari and beat them.
Here's is MS career:
'91 - Jordan-Ford (1 retirement) Benetton-Ford (2 retirement) - mid-season replacement
'92 - (3rd) Benetton-Ford (4 ret.) 8 podiums
'93 - (4th) Benetton-Ford (7 ret.) 9 podiums
'94 - (1st) Benetton-Ford (2 ret., 2 DQ) 10 podiums
'95 - (1st) Benetton-Renault (5 ret.) 11 podiums
'96 - (3rd) Ferrari (6 ret.) 8 podiums
'97 - (2nd*) Ferrari (4 ret.) 8 podiums *DQ from championship
'98 - (2nd) Ferrari (3 ret.) 11 podiums
'99 - (5th*) Ferrari (3 ret.) 6 podiums *missed 3 months due to injury
'00 - (1st) Ferrari
'01 - (1st) Ferrari
'02 - (1st) Ferrari
'03 - (1st) Ferrari
'04 - (1st) Ferrari
There's a trend very clearly illustrated in there - he builds teams.
Anyway, here's the '96 season. JV finished 2nd by 19 pts.
Australia - Hill, JV, Irvine
Brazil - Hill, Alesi, MS - JV spun
Argentina - Hill, JV, Alesi
Europe - JV, MS, DC
San Marino - Hill, MS, Berger - JV ret. suspension
Monaco - Panis, DC, Herbert - JV ret. collision - that crazy rain race
Spain - MS, Alesi, JV
Canada - Hill, JV, Alesi
France - Hill, JV, Alesi
Britain - JV, Berger, Hakk
Germany - Hill, Alesi, JV
Hungary - JV, Hill, Alesi
Belgium - MS, JV, Hakk
Italy - MS, Alesi, Hakk - JV 1 lap down 1 spot out of points
Portugal - JV, Hill, MS
Japan - Hill, MS, Hakk - JV ret. wheel
He had a string there of 7 straight podiums. That was the year he supposedly used the video games to learn the tracks.
Chief F1 Fan: I hear what you're saying about MS vs the competition, but I really wonder sometimes. Just pretend for a minute that MS was not in the sport. Would we be debating Hill vs Hakk vs JV vs Alesi? Is it that MS is in the company of those men, or is it that he is that much better than the drivers he's raced against and we therefore end up comparing him to others who were clearly better in their time (Prost, Senna, Clark, Stewart).
I don't think you could say MS has *always* had the benefit of superior equipment. When he was Benetton it was clearly an inferior car - maybe equal in some respects but not superior. Hell he came 3rd in the championship with that dog of a Ferrari in '96. This is with Alesi driving the car MS won the championship with the year before. Remember - the brain trust didn't follow MS to Ferrari until a year later. That was the same team and designers that gave MS 2 titles. And MS took the Ferrari and beat them.
Here's is MS career:
'91 - Jordan-Ford (1 retirement) Benetton-Ford (2 retirement) - mid-season replacement
'92 - (3rd) Benetton-Ford (4 ret.) 8 podiums
'93 - (4th) Benetton-Ford (7 ret.) 9 podiums
'94 - (1st) Benetton-Ford (2 ret., 2 DQ) 10 podiums
'95 - (1st) Benetton-Renault (5 ret.) 11 podiums
'96 - (3rd) Ferrari (6 ret.) 8 podiums
'97 - (2nd*) Ferrari (4 ret.) 8 podiums *DQ from championship
'98 - (2nd) Ferrari (3 ret.) 11 podiums
'99 - (5th*) Ferrari (3 ret.) 6 podiums *missed 3 months due to injury
'00 - (1st) Ferrari
'01 - (1st) Ferrari
'02 - (1st) Ferrari
'03 - (1st) Ferrari
'04 - (1st) Ferrari
There's a trend very clearly illustrated in there - he builds teams.
03-21-2005, 05:11 PM
#21
Community Architect
robb m.
robb m.
I HATE M.S. but i will say that unfortunately he is the best driver we've seen.
Senna was as good at winning races, but I really have to give Schumacher the hand at set up, and team building.
Senna was as good at winning races, but I really have to give Schumacher the hand at set up, and team building.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Yumcha
Motorsports News
1
05-01-2014 08:54 PM
gavriil
Automotive News
20
01-03-2004 02:55 PM
