Schumacher vs Senna

To compare Michael and Senna is just pure ignorance to the facts. There is not one area of F1 where Senna is in the top three of the modern era!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DezinerPaul

To compare Michael and Senna is just pure ignorance to the facts. There is not one area of F1 where Senna is in the top three of the modern era!

---

You're talking about facts? Not one area? Well, what about qualifying facts - he's easily in Top3. And that is at least one area! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

You're talking about facts? Not one area? Well, what about qualifying facts - he's easily in Top3. And that is at least one area! :D

---

Not so, even in getting pole, he is not in the top three, that honor goes to Ascari, Fangio and Clark (not in order). So, here we are the myth grows, tell me one area, where he is in the top three. Tell me one real reason why he should be even considered in the same breath as Michael Schumacher.

Schumacher is compared to Senna most simply because they were the last two greatest champions of the modern era. One could argue that Hill, Villeneuve or Häkkinen were great racers, but not legends in the mould of Schumacher or Senna.

To put it simply, Senna fought giants & was the first among equals, Schumacher had no equals & realistically his rivals came & went. No body (or group of people) put up a sustained challenge to Schumacher. Had Prost or Mansel or Piquet not existed, Senna would have probably won 3-5 more world championships.

Whatever way you look at it if the greatest was measured by statistics, Schumacher is by far the greatest of all time. If the greatest is measured by persona or charisma, I think everybody will have their own opinion on the matter & that's really a 'favourite' choice.

Schumacher has a more caluculated driving style while Senna extracted all his talents while he's driving, that's all I can say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DezinerPaul

Not so, even in getting pole, he is not in the top three, that honor goes to Ascari, Fangio and Clark (not in order). So, here we are the myth grows, tell me one area, where he is in the top three. Tell me one real reason why he should be even considered in the same breath as Michael Schumacher.

---

6 Monaco victories, Donington 1993, 65 pole positions in 9 years, including the 3 at the start of 1994 which given advantages of the opposition are enough. Finishing ahead of a Bennetton with a superior engine in 1993....& on & on

There are simply too many question marks over Schumachers results, large question marks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE_LIBERATOR

including the 3 at the start of 1994 which given advantages of the opposition are enough.

---

What advantage had the opposition over the Williams in 1994? Could you be more explicit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

What advantage had the opposition over the Williams in 1994? Could you be more explicit?

---

Do I really need to be? I think you know very well, or you may be in denial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE_LIBERATOR

Do I really need to be? I think you know very well, or you may be in denial.

---

So, you got nothing to prove your previous allegations. Thought so! :rolleyes:

You could post votes in this thread.

http://www.motorsportforums.com/foru...d.php?t=128684

That will show the general concensus of the forum on this one.