57 replies to this topic

[brabhamBT19]

The discrepancy between his poles(65), wins(41) and Fastest laps(19) is more than obvious.

Can it be that certain AS that is considered by some the greatest of all times, wasnt really that fast?

How come that he drove FL each 8.47 races, its virtually less than twice per season. hmmm.

Edited by brabhamBT19, 29 July 2009 - 07:28.

[derstatic]

Senna was known to gun for pole positions, which shows in his statistics. From there he would have an easier ride and no need to set fastest laps to win. Alternatively that his car wasn't 100% optimised for longer stints being setup more biased on Q. But he was fast allright, find some onboards on youtube and let yourself be impressed.

[kenny]

hrvoje

[krapmeister]

He only went as fast as he had to?

[DarthWillie]

If leading by a big margin Senna would not need to do fast laps, just save the car. Since there are no points for fastest laps, they probably weren't that important for him.

The amount of wins and poles speak more about his speed.

[Craven Morehead]

He only went as fast as he had to?

He didn't need to set fastest laps as he started from the front, set the pace & was already away in the distance when other guys were setting those FL's.

[ivanalesi]

Saving tyres, as simple as that. Back then it wasn't unusual some mid-grid runner to post fastest lap and then his times would drop and drop and drop ;) I remember Aguri Suzuki posting fastest lap at Suzuka during one race!
Basically fastest laps are... I don't know, not much meaning in them. If you check the top 10 fastest laps of some races, you see the guy with the best lap just once, and someone else has banged 5-6 almost as fast laps:)

[P123]

Fastest laps is one of the most meaningless stats. Look at the most recent race for proof of that.

[Red 5]

Tsk Tsk trying to suggest Senna wasn't that fast! Everybody else was playing catch up with him.

If only there was a bitch slap smiley......

[pRy]

Yeah.. having seen some fastest laps set by drivers who have had horrible races and for some reason wake up and set a fastest lap at the end, I'm not sure how important race fastest laps are. They certainly aren't always an indication of success in the race. Success over oen lap? yes.. success over an entire race, no.

Edited by pRy, 29 July 2009 - 07:46.

[Calorus]

Yeah.. having seen some fastest laps set by drivers who have had horrible races and for some reason wake up and set a fastest lap at the end, I'm not sure how important race fastest laps are. They certainly aren't always an indication of success in the race. Success over oen lap? yes.. success over an entire race, no.

That's a very Raikkonen trait, in particular - but look at Hamilton's race in Hungary. He turned his engine down at the start of the third stint when everyone else was setting personal bests. If you've got the lead by 15 seconds after your last stop, a fastest lap is just a better chance to throw it all away.

[ViMaMo]

The discrepancy between his poles(65), wins(41) and Fastest laps(19) is more than obvious.

Can it be that certain AS that is considered by some the greatest of all times, wasnt really that fast?

How come that he drove FL each 8.47 races, its virtually less than twice per season. hmmm.

Take a particular stint.......

Driver A:
1:20.95
1:20.85
1:20.94
1:20.78
1:20.52 (Fastest lap of the race)

Driver B:
1:20.88
1:20.95
1:20.62
1:20.65
1:20.72


Guess who is the faster one over these 5 laps? The times are played out over larger variations, longer times, in-laps, out-laps, pit stops etc.

Fastest lap dont matter. Consistently fast laps wins races, not just one fastest lap.

Edited by vivian, 29 July 2009 - 08:25.

[Jimisgod]

Kimi Raikkonen had the majority of fastest laps last year and he was absolutely the fastest driver. Oh wait.

[ViMaMo]

..... he was absolutely......

and positively?

[Jimisgod]

and positively?

and definitely!

[fanboy]

Fastest laps generally tell a tail but not always. In some cases where a driver is often dominant in a race he will not set fastest lap because he is cruising in the last part of the race when track conditions are fastest, especially in Senna's era of no refueling. It has more value today though and Kimi getting 10 fastest laps last year was not irrelevant. It was a strong evidence of the ferrari being the fastest car on race day in 2008.

[TinyJim]

Fastest laps generally tell a tail but not always. In some cases where a driver is often dominant in a race he will not set fastest lap because he is cruising in the last part of the race when track conditions are fastest, especially in Senna's era of no refueling. It has more value today though and Kimi getting 10 fastest laps last year was not irrelevant. It was a strong evidence of the ferrari being the fastest car on race day in 2008.

I would say even less relevance today as we have to consider fuel loads, tyre compound, engine usage, gearbox usage etc...

I'll echo what everyone else say

Fastest Lap is Vanity, Stint Time is Sanity

Edited by TinyJim, 29 July 2009 - 10:24.

[fanboy]

I would say even less relevance today as we have to consider fuel loads, tyre compound, engine usage, gearbox usage etc...

At some point in each race every driver will have driven on low fuel and the same tyres, unless they dnf early so fastest lap has value as its basically an extended qualifying session.

[Zippel]

Senna drove most of his career in an era when there was no refuelling and therefore a less of a need (or even opportunity) to grab the fastest lap.

[holiday]

hrvoje

No. Nostalgia Forum.

[Clatter]

Isnt it obvious that this is just a flamebait topic? Don't take the bait, don't let the OP get his kicks.

[Celloman]

Fernando Alonso: wins 21, podiums 52, poles 18, fastest laps 12

How come that he drove FL each 11.08 races, its virtually less than twice per season. hmmm.

Edited by Celloman, 29 July 2009 - 11:03.

[BuzzingHornet]

Prost has far more fastest laps, and drove in the same era.

[WDC]

Prost has far more fastest laps, and drove in the same era.

thats what i was thinking too

you forgot to add AP has more WINS too

Edited by WDC, 29 July 2009 - 11:23.

[TinyJim]

At some point in each race every driver will have driven on low fuel and the same tyres, unless they dnf early so fastest lap has value as its basically an extended qualifying session.

No not really. Different cars have different wear rates, engine mapping etc... Also the track evolved constantly through the Grand Prix.

Fastest laps really don't mean an awful lot. If you look at the Nurb GP we see Alonso was significantly quicker than anyone, and I am about 99% sure that isn't a true representation of Renault/Alonso's pace.

[the9th]

Prost has far more fastest laps, and drove in the same era.

Of course he has. Refueling was not allowed. By the time the fuel tanks were almost empty (towards the end of the race...) Senna was already, generally, half a minute ahead. Senna would usually open up a big gap in the early stages when the cars were heavy. I hope this helps the bright guy that started this thread understand why Senna hasn't as many FL... I recommend downloading the entire 88/89 seasons and stop talking nonsense.

Edited by the9th, 29 July 2009 - 11:45.

[the9th]

...and by the way, in Senna's era everyone qualified on fumes; so don't fuel-correct , tire-correct, engine-correct, track-correct or do any of those strange things you do nowadays. Just fan-correct...;)

Edited by the9th, 29 July 2009 - 12:01.

[brabhamBT19]

Prost has far more fastest laps, and drove in the same era.

and more wins, if I may add

[brabhamBT19]

Fernando Alonso: wins 21, podiums 52, poles 18, fastest laps 12

How come that he drove FL each 11.08 races, its virtually less than twice per season. hmmm.

win/fl ratio

21/12 = 1.75

41/19 = 2.15

pole/ fl ratio

18:12 = 1.5

65:19 = 3.42

Edited by brabhamBT19, 29 July 2009 - 12:34.

[JensonF1]

Maybe Senna drove to win, not to get fastest lap. The stats reflect that.

[dabrasco]

in the last two races, Alonso had fastest lap in Germany.... Red Bull was class of the field
Webber had fastest lap in Hungary....Hamilton's Mclaren was class of the field

and so on


Fastest lap doesnt mean anything....

[Flyhigh]

Maybe you have to take in consideration the fact that Prost had a career duration of 13 full seasons. While Senna only raced 9 full seasons and 3 races. He was cut short when he was on his prime and in the best team. Imagine what Senna stats may look like, had he retire in 1997 still relatively young at (37) for Williams, remembering that they had very competitive cars these years and were champions with Hill and Villenueve.

I think is quite reasonable to say that Senna would have stats similar to Shumacher, had he had a regular F1 career duration of 13-14 years. Which the drivers of his generation peers had such as Lauda, Piquet, Prost Berger... But I do agree that the FL stats doesn`t bond well with the rest of his record, I think mostly is due to the no refueling period at his time. And no real need for sprint laps before pit sort of thing and the fact that he had many races under total control from the front, therefore no real need of pushing hard all the time.

Edited by Flyhigh, 29 July 2009 - 13:36.

[brabhamBT19]

Maybe you have to take in consideration the fact that Prost had a career duration of 13 full seasons. While Senna only raced 9 full seasons and 3 races.

learn to count

it is 10 seasons plus 3 races FCS

[fanboy]

Fernando Alonso: wins 21, podiums 52, poles 18, fastest laps 12

How come that he drove FL each 11.08 races, its virtually less than twice per season. hmmm.

Alonso has one of the lowest ratios of fastest laps to race wins in history even taking into account this era of refueling which boots fastest laps. I looked over the data a while back and saw that its very rare to have less fastest laps than race wins let alone Alonso's ratio, which indicates hes rarely had the out right fastest car in his career.

Kimi for example driving in the same era, has 35 fastest laps for 17 wins. Basically opposite Alonso's.

[BMW_F1]

Senna was most of the time in lead ..

[fanboy]

No not really. Different cars have different wear rates, engine mapping etc... Also the track evolved constantly through the Grand Prix.

Fastest laps really don't mean an awful lot. If you look at the Nurb GP we see Alonso was significantly quicker than anyone, and I am about 99% sure that isn't a true representation of Renault/Alonso's pace.

If they dont mean an awful lot then why does the fastest car usually get the fastest lap of the race? and why does the faster driver in a team usually dominate race fastest laps over his team mate? I see a pattern. Alonso's fastest lap was one of the rare exceptions.

[fanboy]

in the last two races, Alonso had fastest lap in Germany.... Red Bull was class of the field
Webber had fastest lap in Hungary....Hamilton's Mclaren was class of the field

and so on


Fastest lap doesnt mean anything....

You are picking exceptions. There is an exception to every rule.

[Calorus]

Alonso has one of the lowest ratios of fastest laps to race wins in history even taking into account this era of refueling which boots fastest laps. I looked over the data a while back and saw that its very rare to have less fastest laps than race wins let alone Alonso's ratio, which indicates hes rarely had the out right fastest car in his career.

Kimi for example driving in the same era, has 35 fastest laps for 17 wins. Basically opposite Alonso's.

With half as many championships and 20% fewer wins, despite being far more consistently in a race winning car...

[cheapracer]

Maybe you have to take in consideration the fact that Prost had a career duration of 13 full seasons. While Senna only raced 9 full seasons and 3 races. He was cut short when he was on his prime and in the best team. Imagine what Senna stats may look like, had he retire in 1997 still relatively young at (37) for Williams, remembering that they had very competitive cars these years and were champions with Hill and Villenueve.

Imagine if Alboretto had died in F1 at the start of 1986 what would have been said about his career
"if".

It's all bullshit, the records stand as they stand and you have no idea whatsoever what Senna would or would not have done later in his career. It should also be said that JV had quite a radical car setup that made the Williams work well in the dry and there wasn't many rain races in 97 where the Williams was quite terrible to drive. Senna's generally preference may not have allowed the Williams to work as well - there is so many variations to the whole picture that it's all just nonsense to speculate.

[Ricardo F1]

I'd say his lack of fastest laps ADDS to his record when taken alongside his results - it doesn't detract in the slightest. How the living **** can "someone not that fast" have the pole position record he did??? Nonsensical.

Edited by Ricardo F1, 29 July 2009 - 14:56.

[Ivan]

and more wins, if I may add

Kinda hard to keep winning when your dead!

[RodrigoL]

With half as many championships and 20% fewer wins, despite being far more consistently in a race winning car...

Both of Alonso's championships came when he was allowed to build up a lead early on, while other teams got their sh*t together.

Kimi (05) and MS (06) both had to push their cars to the maximum while the spaniard simply cruised and collected. That is a strong reason why he has less FLs than them.

Alonso was exposed in 2007. He wasn't the same driver without that early lead....or a rubbish teammate

[grunge]

With half as many championships and 20% fewer wins, despite being far more consistently in a race winning car...

BS personified
..yes kimi did drive in fast but ''unreliable''cars...i am sure one mustve lost count of how many times his cars broke when he was in a commanding position in 05 alone..he wouldve won atleast two world titles before moving on to ferrari had his cars held up more..infact ron dennis apologiized to him publically atleast twice in 05 alone

concerning fastest laps..yes they are an indicator of the car speed but also the drivers speed..look at the record for most no. of fastest laps in a season ...its tied with kimi and MS..for me unarguably the two fastest drivers in recent times...l

and concerning the BS about kimi posting those lap times at the end of the races...get yer facts straight..except for one lap,all his others were posted during the start or middle stints last year..he had huge issues concerning front tire warming in his understeery ferraris and managed to post those lap times during the brief periods(invariably the end of his 1st or 2nd stints) of the race where his tires did start working..there was a detailed article about this is autosport last year by mark hughes..

and to the thread starter..havent we had this discussed a gazillion times before???..u could type senna vs prost in the RC search threads tab at the bottom of the page and read all u want.

Edited by grunge, 29 July 2009 - 15:15.

[as65p]

Both of Alonso's championships came when he was allowed to build up a lead early on, while other teams got their sh*t together.

Kimi (05) and MS (06) both had to push their cars to the maximum while the spaniard simply cruised and collected. That is a strong reason why he has less FLs than them.

Alonso was exposed in 2007. He wasn't the same driver without that early lead....or a rubbish teammate ;)

Please make a separate Alonso bash thread, this is the Senna bash thread, show some respect!

[teejay]

What is the greatest number of FL's without a win or WDC?

Be interesting to see what curveball that throws to the gene poll of great drivers.

What a nonsense thread anyhow.

[Jimisgod]

...and by the way, in Senna's era everyone qualified on fumes; so don't fuel-correct , tire-correct, engine-correct, track-correct or do any of those strange things you do nowadays.

As it should be

[KWSN - DSM]

Senna was known to gun for pole positions, which shows in his statistics. From there he would have an easier ride and no need to set fastest laps to win. Alternatively that his car wasn't 100% optimised for longer stints being setup more biased on Q. But he was fast allright, find some onboards on youtube and let yourself be impressed.

Hmm most wins also have most Poles, and most fastest laps.

Senna was one of the greatest drivers ever in F1, he was however not perfect. On a qualifying lap, he was arguably the best ever however he did achieve that to the detriment of his race pace. Alain Prost had less Poles, but spend his practice sessions to optimize the race setup while Senna spend his optimizing his qualifying setup.

The argument about the easier ride does not really hold, and revisionism to glorify and make a driver better than he was makes little sense. I am not saying that Senna was not great, he was indeed a great driver at most I think the world have seen 5 other drivers as talented as him.

But he put too much into getting Pole, and not enough in having the best possible car for racing on Sunday.

[stevewf1]

Senna was most of the time in lead ..

"Win the race at the slowest possible speed"... Someone was famous for that (Clark, Stewart?)

Japanese driver Masahiro Hasemi, driving a Japanese-built Kojima, in the 1976 Japanese GP set the fastest lap* and that was the only F1 race he ever ran. He finished 11th and last, 7 laps behind the winner.

* I believe there is some "dispute" about this, but that's what has been recorded for history.

[Arion]

I guess he's not interested in the DHL fastest lap award

[Ricardo F1]

Hmm most wins also have most Poles, and most fastest laps.

Senna was one of the greatest drivers ever in F1, he was however not perfect. On a qualifying lap, he was arguably the best ever however he did achieve that to the detriment of his race pace. Alain Prost had less Poles, but spend his practice sessions to optimize the race setup while Senna spend his optimizing his qualifying setup.

The argument about the easier ride does not really hold, and revisionism to glorify and make a driver better than he was makes little sense. I am not saying that Senna was not great, he was indeed a great driver at most I think the world have seen 5 other drivers as talented as him.

But he put too much into getting Pole, and not enough in having the best possible car for racing on Sunday.

He seemed to beat Prost an awful lot (and Prost was a GREAT driver) for someone who didn't put much emphasis on Sunday.