Not to be picky but i think you meant Barcelona 96 and Estoril 85, right?
If so, as i said in Barcelona 1996 Michael had full wet set up, wich means a huge, enormous, car advantadge and had as his oponents a rookie JV, the very same HH Frentzen Senna destroyed, Alesi, Damon Hill - who spun in lap one, and few others. If i remeber correctly, even Pedro Paulo Diniz (!) driving a Ligier (!) finished 6th... Also Ferrari, altough was an unreliable car, was a very very fast car. A very fast car with a huge set up advantadge in wet track.
On the other hand, Senna in 1993 was not the only driver with TC and had one of the greatest drivers ever, Alain Prost, driving what was called the most technologically sophisticated Formula One car of all time, incorporating anti-lock brakes, traction control and active suspension.
All this considered (car advantadge and competition) , if Donington 1993 is a bit overhyped , wich we agree, Spain 1996 should not be written in the same sentence of Estoril 1985 or Monaco 1984 or Canada 81 (but i think it had more to do with bravery than anything).
Spain 96, that was a super ultra overhyped win!
Anyway back to Vettel´s the new Senna performance, i must confess that despite beeing an Alonso fan, Lewis Hamilton is the one i think we should praise when talking about great drives.
Vettel / Webber batlle was too close in every aspect (race pace, number of mistakes under pressure, even qualifying times, etc) and i have a strong beleif Webber is not in the same league as Alain.
Just my 2 c
It is not the first time that I see someone using that same excuse to play down Michael's drive that day.
The weather, for both Friday free practice and Saturday qualifying sessions, was fine, with clear skies and warm temperatures.
In the afternoon after qualifying it started to rain. Sunday the rain had set in with a constant downpour all morning. The warm up session was wet - very wet. It was clear for anyone to see that the race would be wet. There were even talks that the race could start behind the safety car.
I simply cannot believe that, seeing those conditions, when there were no signs of the rain stopping anytime soon, anyone would go for a setup that wasn't full wet.
“It was not a race. It was a demonstration of brilliance,”[/b] - Sir Sterling Moss on Schumacher’s mesmeric drive in a rain-soaked Spanish Grand Prix.
There were races in which he clearly benefited from better "conditions" - be it tyres or a better setup for the conditions in hand.
And in those situations the difference to the other drivers was even bigger like in Spa 1997:
"As his brother Michael arrived on the grid he splashed though a huge puddle in the Bus Stop chicane. There were hurried consultations on the grid and then the Ferrari mechanics were ripping off the rear wing and putting on a little more downforce. But Michael decided that the rain was going to stop and that the right choice would be to run with intermediate tires. This was a gamble."
When the Safety Car pulled off there was still enough water lying about to allow Jacques Villeneuve to stay ahead for the first lap but then the intermediates began to look like the right choice. Schumacher passed Jean Alesi at La Source at the start of lap 2 and then tiptoed past Villeneuve in Rivage.
"With Jean it was fairly tight," Schumacher admitted later. "I decided I was going to take the line and he saw the situation and just moved over. Jacques knew that he didn't have a chance to keep me back with the kind of tires he was using and he was quite fair and stayed on his line."
"As soon as he was ahead Michael lit the afterburners on his Ferrari and disappeared into the distance. The gap went from 5.8secs on the first lap ahead to 16.9s on the second, 22s on the third and 28s on the fourth. By the time he had completed nine racing laps he was a minute ahead and could have stopped to let a busload of nuns across the road and still have been ahead by the time he reached the pits."http://www.grandprix.../gpe/rr609.html