Schumacher vs Senna

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

The arguments for Senna are largely the intangible ones. Strength of opposition for example. The problem with intangibles is that they are very subjective. Senna competed against Prost, Piquet and Mansell, champions all. The question is, how do these guys compare to Hill, Hakkinen, Villeneuve and Alonso? I'd say it's a slight edge to Senna because of Prost but I think Hakkinen and Alonso compare to Piquet and Mansell favourably.

.....I don't feel that Senna having the edge in terms of who he competed with and against outweighs Schumacher's strike rate. Schumacher won with metronomic consistency that made his competitors look worse than they actually were, rather than them making him look better than he was.

---

One explanation for Schumi's superior strike rate is because he was number 1 driver. Senna had to contend with Prost in a more equal environment in the late 80s, whereas Schumi had the benefit of team orders.

I'd say Senna would be the better driver over one lap. Using Hakkinen as a yardstick, the Flying Finn is regarded as one of the quickest drivers over one lap. Hakkinen would lay down the gauntlet and set an unbelievable benchmark on his first few laps, Schumi would struggle a bit and usually try to steal pole under the dying seconds of qualy.

Over a race? Hard to say, both display superior pace and enjoy driving on the edge, both superior in the wet, and both are very clever behind the cockpit.

There is something about a driver wha has done well, and drove with some fire that makes him very special when he dies in a race car. Clark, Gilles, Rindt, Senna, Peterson--names spoken with a hushed reverence

Stewart was as special as Clark, but did not die and lived to be called a half wit by a true half wit. Same for Prost. And will be the same for MS.

If those drivers had lived, perhaps they would now be treated no different than Stewart and Prost are now....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

One explanation for Schumi's superior strike rate is because he was number 1 driver. Senna had to contend with Prost in a more equal environment in the late 80s, whereas Schumi had the benefit of team orders.

---

Senna and Prost were only teammates for two seasons, 1988 and 1989. The balance of his career was spent against the likes of Pierluigi Martini, Johnny Ceccotto, Stefan Johansson, Elio De Angelis, Satoru Nakajima, Gerhard Berger, Michael Andretti, Mika Hakkinen and Damon Hill.

This list of teammates is no better than Schumachers'. With the exception of Prost. Prost is the only Senna teammate who is clearly better than anybody Schumacher raced with. That's why I give Senna a slight edge in this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

Senna and Prost were only teammates for two seasons, 1988 and 1989. The balance of his career was spent against the likes of Pierluigi Martini, Johnny Ceccotto, Stefan Johansson, Elio De Angelis, Satoru Nakajima, Gerhard Berger, Michael Andretti, Mika Hakkinen and Damon Hill.

This list of teammates is no better than Schumachers'. With the exception of Prost. Prost is the only Senna teammate who is clearly better than anybody Schumacher raced with. That's why I give Senna a slight edge in this one.

---

Hakkinen and Hill were no slouches though, as shown by their eventual titles.
I'd say Berger is around par with Irvine and Barrichello.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by F1boat

Well, Michael, I think. He achieved much more.

---

Probably because he is still alive perhaps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

... Schumi would struggle a bit and usually try to steal pole under the dying seconds of qualy.

---

You forgot the "" before and after a certain word there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Probably because he is still alive perhaps?

---

Right, on top of being very fast and successful he also managed to stay alive while taking the risks. :p :


I believe that if Senna wouldn't have died in that tragic accident fewer people would regard him as high as that. After all Prost had the better of him and because he's alive very few people do start threads to compare him with the all time greatest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

I believe that if Senna wouldn't have died in that tragic accident fewer people would regard him as high as that. After all Prost had the better of him and because he's alive very few people do start threads to compare him with the all time greatest.

---

Prost didn't have the better of Senna at all.
In their 2 seasons together:

Senna had 26 poles, Prost had 4.
Senna had 14 wins, Prost had 11
They had one title apiece.

That's barely one sided towards Prost.

The reason why this comparison is being made, I suppose, is that Prost was at retirement age when he retired. Senna still had at least 3 years of competitive driving left in him (based on Schumacher's retirement age), when he unfortunately passed away. Another reason for this thread is that Senna's and Schumacher's competitive careers were just crossing over when he died, hence the speculation.

A lot of these comparisons are made based on driver popularity, and Senna was more popular than Prost even then, that's a fact. Likewise, nowadays Hamilton is more popular than Alonso, and is being compared with the best ever, despite the two titles his team-mate has.

Although just because a driver is killed whilst racing doesn't make him an all time great either. Juan Manuel Fangio lived to the ripe old age of 84, yet in life and death he was still considered one of the best ever. Likewise with Schumacher.

Just because threads are not made as commonly about Prost doesn't mean he isn't regarded as one of the greats, at least not with me.

Good topic, this. :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malllen

The reason why this comparison is being made, I suppose, is that Prost was at retirement age when he retired. Senna still had at least 3 years of competitive driving left in him (based on Schumacher's retirement age), when he unfortunately passed away.

---

This is just speculation, as you say, thus any comparison should be made based on facts.

Saying that Senna had another 3 years of competitive racing left, based on MS's retirement age, is really pushing the speculation too far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malllen

Another reason for this thread is that Senna's and Schumacher's competitive careers were just crossing over when he died, hence the speculation.

---

And MS was slowly getting the better of him, in a pretty constant manner, thus if you allow me to do some speculation, AS wouldn't have continued for another 3 years just to be upstaged by the young German, he's ego was to big for that, IMO.

Achievementwise it has to be MS..
row speed wise it has to be AS..

overall I think Senna is a better driver, given he had to fight with tough opponents wheel to wheel for wins, and MS relatively just drove to his wins much of the time than fighting tough opponents to overcome wins/record, if he didnt die He would have set the best ever record in F1.