Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 7 votes

Top 20 Greatest F1 Drivers of all time - BBC list [split]


  • Please log in to reply
1662 replies to this topic

#651 jj2728

jj2728
  • Member

  • 2,774 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 20 September 2012 - 22:26

Ronnie was a rather late addition to the team IRC


After having spent a rather lacklustre year at Tyrrell due in no small part to the fact that the 6 wheeler was on the backfoot for most of '77 season and that due in no small part to the fact that Goodyear ceased development of the tiny 10 inch wheels. Having said that, I've always found it interesting that Depailler was able to score a few podiums, but then again he'd been with Tyrrell in '76 and had a year's experience with the twitchy P34. Patrick was another great talent lost too early.

Advertisement

#652 MightyMoose

MightyMoose
  • RC Forum Host

  • 1,085 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 21 September 2012 - 16:05

We've allowed a certain amount of off-topic musing as they can be linked into performances of team-mates featured here for the most part.

However, as has been regularly stated, predictions of the final drivers order is not acceptable at this time, hence all posts focusing on that aspect have been removed. Come the end of the season you can all debate your views on the complete list to your heart's content.

As a rule of thumb, if they're on the BBC list, talk about them, if not..... wait till they are.



#653 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 21 September 2012 - 19:21

So... will one of the top 6 be revealed this weekend? Because I believe that only Senna, Prost, Moss, Fangio, Schumacher and Clark are left.

#654 ryan86

ryan86
  • Member

  • 1,100 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 21 September 2012 - 23:19

Stewart was this weeks reveal.

One thing that happens with these things as I've once experienced it previously when I wrote something similiar is that in the penultimate edition you also usually reveal who is first, making the final release a bit of a damp squib.

ie. I wonder if Senna is going to be No 1 or perhaps it's going to be Damon Hill.

#655 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 02 October 2012 - 19:19

BBC's Formula 1's Greatest drivers: # 6 - Sir Stirling Moss

No surprise there. Up now are the undisputed, unquestionable top 5. Michael Schumacher, Juan Manuel Fangio, Jim Clark, Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost; in whatever order you'd like.

#656 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,189 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 02 October 2012 - 21:28

BBC's Formula 1's Greatest drivers: # 6 - Sir Stirling Moss

No surprise there. Up now are the undisputed, unquestionable top 5. Michael Schumacher, Juan Manuel Fangio, Jim Clark, Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost; in whatever order you'd like.

I have a lot of respect for Stirling, but as an F1 driver Stewart should be rated above him.

#657 ayali

ayali
  • Member

  • 729 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 02 October 2012 - 23:13

I have a lot of respect for Stirling, but as an F1 driver Stewart should be rated above him.

Perhaps they took personality into account ;-)
but seriously I agree with that, but not really a big deal 6 or 7

#658 MightyMoose

MightyMoose
  • RC Forum Host

  • 1,085 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 03 October 2012 - 00:40

We're down to 5 and the rules set for this thread still apply, if they've been named by the BBC, feel free to discuss..... still to come? Then you wait.

No predictions on the Top 5 will survive a cull. Focus on the driver that is the current selection, once complete the list will be open for any debating angle you choose.

Thanks
MM

#659 ForzaGTR

ForzaGTR
  • Member

  • 2,936 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 03 October 2012 - 11:16

I still cannot believe they placed Vettel above Alonso. Just madness, I'm not saying Seb hasn't earned a place on the list but surely Alonso has proved himself to be the better driver? For crying out loud he's leading the 2012 WDC in the 3rd best car!

Edited by Olly F1, 03 October 2012 - 11:25.


Advertisement

#660 Juggles

Juggles
  • Member

  • 896 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 03 October 2012 - 11:35

I still cannot believe they placed Vettel above Alonso. Just madness, I'm not say Seb hasn't earned a place on the list but surely Alonso has proved himself to be the better driver? For crying out loud he's leading the 2012 WDC in the 3rd best car!


First bold: I believe they selected their choices at the start of the season when that opinion was perfectly sustainable.

Second bold: the Ferrari package has not been third best even if their car is third fastest. That's not to say Alonso hasn't maximised it though, he's leading the championship by more than a race win.

I didn't realise Moss was outqualified so heavily by Fangio. I wonder why Enzo believed Moss was the better driver?

Certainly a true gent though, and I love his mentality of win or bust compared to the cautious, points-led approach of many of the drivers today. A grand prix win is still fantastic for any driver but people like Alonso are so mathematical about it now you feel a race win inspires such elation because of its role as a vessel to the championship as much as its prestige as a stand alone event. Maybe that's what Prost was talking about when he called Gilles "the last great driver?"

Edited by Juggles, 03 October 2012 - 11:38.


#661 ali_M

ali_M
  • Member

  • 1,115 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 03 October 2012 - 11:37

I still cannot believe they placed Vettel above Alonso. Just madness, I'm not saying Seb hasn't earned a place on the list but surely Alonso has proved himself to be the better driver? For crying out loud he's leading the 2012 WDC in the 3rd best car!


This season has been so up and down in performance for teams and drivers within teams, that it's unfair to make statements about Alonso leading the championship in 3rd best car. It's disingenuous.

Vettel's trot of two championships was impressive indeed and one that he won while Alonso himself was favourite on that final race day.

I'd personally give Alonso the nod over Vettel, but it's a close call. I'll not go ballistic if others feel it's the other way around.

#662 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,862 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 03 October 2012 - 12:47

I didn't realise Moss was outqualified so heavily by Fangio. I wonder why Enzo believed Moss was the better driver?

Enzo didn't like Fangio because Fangio was about Fangio and not a mere object to be discarded by Enzo. Hence Enzo's ridiculous memoirs claiming Fangio was not the fastest Ferrari driver in 1956 even though he set every pole time.

No question in 1955 Fangio was faster than Moss. 1957 would have been interesting with them as team-mates. But Fangio was well past his peak and Moss had yet to reach his; indeed arguably Fangio was past his peak by 1950 and Moss never reached his.

#663 Juggles

Juggles
  • Member

  • 896 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 03 October 2012 - 13:00

Enzo didn't like Fangio because Fangio was about Fangio and not a mere object to be discarded by Enzo. Hence Enzo's ridiculous memoirs claiming Fangio was not the fastest Ferrari driver in 1956 even though he set every pole time.

No question in 1955 Fangio was faster than Moss. 1957 would have been interesting with them as team-mates. But Fangio was well past his peak and Moss had yet to reach his; indeed arguably Fangio was past his peak by 1950 and Moss never reached his.


Wow. That's a worrying thought for the other drivers of that era!

So do you think 6th is too high for Moss? Or was Fangio just that good?

#664 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 11,189 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 03 October 2012 - 21:56

Had a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19765439 to look for reasons why Stirling was 6th and ouch, that's embarrassing - for the BBC.

About the 1959 season:
"Driving a BRM against the dominant Cooper-Climax of Jack Brabham, Moss finished only three of the nine races, but won two of them and finished second to the Australian in the other.
Despite his BRM's poor reliability, Moss went into the final round in Sebring, Florida, still in with a chance of the championship. Again he led - from pole position - only for the car to fail once more."


Somebody should have told them that both those wins by Moss and that Sebring pole (and some of those non-finishes!) were in one of those Cooper-Climaxes...... Stirling drove that BRM only on two WDC occasions.

About his 1962 Goodwood accident:
"It was Moss's last full season, for his career came to a shuddering halt at Goodwood on Monday 23 April, 1962.
Racing, as he so often did, outside F1, he crashed into a grass bank and was gravely injured after his Lotus veered out of control for reasons unknown, but which have always been suspected to be some kind of mechanical failure."


It was a (non championship) F1 race and that Lotus was an F1 car. But what do they know :|

Edited by scheivlak, 03 October 2012 - 21:57.


#665 gillesthegenius

gillesthegenius
  • Member

  • 2,534 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 October 2012 - 22:09

This season has been so up and down in performance for teams and drivers within teams, that it's unfair to make statements about Alonso leading the championship in 3rd best car. It's disingenuous.

Vettel's trot of two championships was impressive indeed and one that he won while Alonso himself was favourite on that final race day.

I'd personally give Alonso the nod over Vettel, but it's a close call. I'll not go ballistic if others feel it's the other way around.


+1

#666 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 6,892 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 03 October 2012 - 22:22

Had a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/19765439 to look for reasons why Stirling was 6th and ouch, that's embarrassing - for the BBC.

About the 1959 season:
"Driving a BRM against the dominant Cooper-Climax of Jack Brabham, Moss finished only three of the nine races, but won two of them and finished second to the Australian in the other.
Despite his BRM's poor reliability, Moss went into the final round in Sebring, Florida, still in with a chance of the championship. Again he led - from pole position - only for the car to fail once more."


Somebody should have told them that both those wins by Moss and that Sebring pole (and some of those non-finishes!) were in one of those Cooper-Climaxes...... Stirling drove that BRM only on two WDC occasions.

About his 1962 Goodwood accident:
"It was Moss's last full season, for his career came to a shuddering halt at Goodwood on Monday 23 April, 1962.
Racing, as he so often did, outside F1, he crashed into a grass bank and was gravely injured after his Lotus veered out of control for reasons unknown, but which have always been suspected to be some kind of mechanical failure."


It was a (non championship) F1 race and that Lotus was an F1 car. But what do they know :|



Exactly - what do they know!

That's why their list looks like it does, with Lauda and Alonso being behind Vettel and other funny ideas. I think this BBC team just creates their own version of reality.

#667 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 03 October 2012 - 22:32

Stirling Moss shouldn't be ahead of Stewart, both had careers of similar length but Stewart was much more successful. I never understood the hype around Moss, and to why he's rated above so many drivers who achieved much more than he did in F1. Fangio totally dominated him in 1955 when they drove together at Mercedes, and at that time while Moss was only 25, the Maestro was 44!

If Moss is 6th, than Fangio can't be anywhere lower than third. Having Moss and Fangio separated by only 1-2 or even 3 places would be delusional.

#668 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 6,892 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 09 October 2012 - 07:19

#5: Alain Prost

The place the professor probably deserves. His clinical style was never too exiting, so he stays behind more popular drivers. Also the politics that were haunting F1 in those years found their centrepiece and origin in the tiny Frenchman. Needless to says, he had Jean-Marie Balestre as collaborateur.

#669 Watkins74

Watkins74
  • Member

  • 5,680 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 09 October 2012 - 07:46

#5: Alain Prost

The place the professor probably deserves. His clinical style was never too exiting, so he stays behind more popular drivers. Also the politics that were haunting F1 in those years found their centrepiece and origin in the tiny Frenchman. Needless to says, he had Jean-Marie Balestre as collaborateur.

*facepalm*

#670 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,597 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:12

#5: Alain Prost

The place the professor probably deserves. His clinical style was never too exiting, so he stays behind more popular drivers. Also the politics that were haunting F1 in those years found their centrepiece and origin in the tiny Frenchman. Needless to says, he had Jean-Marie Balestre as collaborateur.


You mean the guy who faced Lauda, Senna, Mansell, Rosberg and Hill as teammates and beat every one of them at some stage? Not to mention he dominated Arnoux.

5 WDC teammates is... 2 more than Senna (who faced Damon and Mika for but 3 races), 4 more than Schumacher (who faced Piquet for 5 races, then zilch).

#671 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,862 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:15

Needless to says, he had Jean-Marie Balestre as collaborateur.

Balestre and Prost could not stand each other. Which is hardly surprising; one would have thought an SS officer and a Jew would perhaps not be bosom buddies.

#672 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,597 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:19

Balestre and Prost could not stand each other. Which is hardly surprising; one would have thought an SS officer and a Jew would perhaps not be bosom buddies.


Thought Prost was of Armenian descent?


#673 DS27

DS27
  • Member

  • 988 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:26

Stirling Moss shouldn't be ahead of Stewart, both had careers of similar length but Stewart was much more successful. I never understood the hype around Moss, and to why he's rated above so many drivers who achieved much more than he did in F1. Fangio totally dominated him in 1955 when they drove together at Mercedes, and at that time while Moss was only 25, the Maestro was 44!

If Moss is 6th, than Fangio can't be anywhere lower than third. Having Moss and Fangio separated by only 1-2 or even 3 places would be delusional.


+1 The hype around Moss has gone on for so long that people take it as read. If he wasn't British, history wouldn't have placed him so high - and i'm British myself.

Prost at 5. Because he never had the fanatical fanbase such as Senna, I feel he is generally under-appreciated for what he achieved, and if things had been slightly different, the stats could have been even more impressive of course. I wasn't a fan, but looking back, his career was immense.

#674 aditya-now

aditya-now
  • Member

  • 6,892 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 09 October 2012 - 08:42

Balestre and Prost could not stand each other. Which is hardly surprising; one would have thought an SS officer and a Jew would perhaps not be bosom buddies.


So the whole political feuds of those days were rather an antipathy Balestre had towards Senna than Prost being a protégé of the Monsieur Le Président?


#675 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,862 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:06

Stirling Moss shouldn't be ahead of Stewart, both had careers of similar length but Stewart was much more successful. I never understood the hype around Moss, and to why he's rated above so many drivers who achieved much more than he did in F1. Fangio totally dominated him in 1955 when they drove together at Mercedes, and at that time while Moss was only 25, the Maestro was 44!

Moss was nowhere near his peak, Fangio probably just past it. Indeed Moss was probably not AT his peak. But Fangio only totally dominated in F1; the purest driving skill of the Mille Miglia saw Moss set an unbeaten record of 99.94mph. Fangio was well beaten.

Had Moss taken the world title seriously he'd've won from 1959 to 1961 at least, cos he'd've got the best drives. Ferrari snubbed him in 1952 so he snubbed them thereafter - without which he might have won the title in '56 as well. Moss' drives at Monaco and the Ring in 1961 show why he is so revered. He was driving an obsolescent Lotus yet beat the Sharknose that was so good even Baghetti won a GP in one - and in the latter the nearest Lotus, Clark's, was over a minute back.

We were robbed of the Clark-Moss duel...

Thought Prost was of Armenian descent?

There used to be an Armenian Jewish community...they mostly emigrated after the war.

So the whole political feuds of those days were rather an antipathy Balestre had towards Senna than Prost being a protégé of the Monsieur Le Président?

Yes. Although I get the feeling Balestre had antipathy to anything that was not Balestre.

#676 Linther

Linther
  • Member

  • 53 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:41

Yeah that's fair.

But if someone told me the same thing, only it's one season of say 13 races where there is a mix of equipment (meaning Race 1, 1959 spec cars, Race 2, 1993 spec cars, Race 3, 1963 spec cars....Race 10 2012 spec cars, etc), and you actually get the driver two years before his prime and the goal is to win the championship in the third season?

I think it's down to either Fangio or Schumacher, right?


Walter Roehrl :p

#677 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,597 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:08

Yeah that's fair.

But if someone told me the same thing, only it's one season of say 13 races where there is a mix of equipment (meaning Race 1, 1959 spec cars, Race 2, 1993 spec cars, Race 3, 1963 spec cars....Race 10 2012 spec cars, etc), and you actually get the driver two years before his prime and the goal is to win the championship in the third season?

I think it's down to either Fangio or Schumacher, right?


Not by any sense of the imagination. I feel Stewart proved his worth in wingless and aero cars, Clark drove in such a way that would be demonically quick in any machinery as he proved at the time (Indy anyone? 1st and two 2nds), and Lauda won in 1984 with cars very different to those he began with. Moss raced successfully with front and rear engined cars also. Prost, too, was a force from the early 80s through to the early 90s in cars that changed greatly.

By what they already did alone, Fangio, Moss, Clark, Stewart, Lauda, Prost and Schumacher would all be in with a shot to win overall.


#678 Collective

Collective
  • Member

  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 09 October 2012 - 19:03

You mean the guy who faced Lauda, Senna, Mansell, Rosberg and Hill as teammates and beat every one of them at some stage? Not to mention he dominated Arnoux.

5 WDC teammates is... 2 more than Senna (who faced Damon and Mika for but 3 races), 4 more than Schumacher (who faced Piquet for 5 races, then zilch).


Exactly (see my signature :p). But what can I say, he lacks charisma, wasn't liked much and isn't British. Anything above 5 was impossible with that combo.

I agree you can change this top 5 in any way you like without it looking unreasonable.

#679 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,630 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 09 October 2012 - 19:34

Moss set an unbeaten record of 99.94mph.


You're confusing him with Don Bradman. I bet he gets that a lot.



Advertisement

#680 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,772 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 09 October 2012 - 19:45

The flat out sprint racing post 93 and natural reliability from 2001 onwards have contributed to make people underestimate Prosts speed and consistency. 15 or 16 finishes from 19 races doesnt impress anyone anymore, and neither is it possible to win by both speed and tyre management.

#681 PinkZepStones

PinkZepStones
  • Member

  • 220 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 09 October 2012 - 19:56

As far as I'm concerned Prost is número UNO.

#682 repcobrabham

repcobrabham
  • Member

  • 9,254 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 09 October 2012 - 22:49

is there a clue as to who will top this poll buried within this profile?

...if Senna was the greatest racing driver of all time, as many believe, Prost got closer to him than any contemporary...

#683 flavio81

flavio81
  • Member

  • 88 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 09 October 2012 - 22:59

As far as I'm concerned Prost is número UNO.


Yep. At least if we consider the drivers of 1980-2012.

Murray Walker wrote a nice article this time, but ranking him #5 (and below Senna, a guy that never had to face a really great teammate except Prost, and then was beaten by Prost twice in points, and who seriously lacked sportsmanship), is not fair at all.

For me the Tier 1 of greatest of all times are (in no order) Clark, Fangio, Stewart, Lauda, and Prost. Those have achieved even more than the other greats. Unbelievable things.

Clark, for his amazing supremacy over competition
Fangio, for winning so many percentages of the races he competed in, with different teams, and even being very old.
Stewart started the "thinking" approach to races, one of the more influential racers
Lauda needs no explanation, perhaps the most intelligent racer ever (and the most silly nowadays when declaring to the press)
Prost almost wins 7 WDCs, all of them beating some of the most respected drivers ever.

After that tier come the others, and i'd say this list would have Senna and Schumacher in #1 followed by Piquet, Jack Brabham, Graham Hill, Emmo Fitipaldi, Mario Andretti and many other greats.

Edited by flavio81, 09 October 2012 - 23:06.


#684 Craven Morehead

Craven Morehead
  • Member

  • 4,486 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 10 October 2012 - 01:19

Balestre and Prost could not stand each other. Which is hardly surprising; one would have thought an SS officer and a Jew would perhaps not be bosom buddies.


Hmmm, I read an interview with Jean Alesi within this past year wherein Jean said the opposite. In fact, iirc, he said that Prost had JMB 'wrapped around his finger'.

#685 Little Leaf

Little Leaf
  • Member

  • 1,072 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:49

As far as I'm concerned Prost is número UNO.


Same here

#686 bourbon

bourbon
  • Member

  • 6,070 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:53

As far as I'm concerned Prost is número UNO.


:up:

#687 Kyo

Kyo
  • Member

  • 785 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:20

As far as I'm concerned Prost is número UNO.

Sure he is. After Senna, Clark, Fangio and Schumacher he is indeed número UNO. :p

#688 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:30

I agree with the opinion that Prost should be higher up in the list, probably a place above Senna (wherever he is ranked). But then you couldn't have expected more from them when you read stuff like this :

Senna went to McLaren with the aim of crushing Prost and while he was unquestionably the better driver in their two years at McLaren, so too there were times when Prost beat him fair and square.


I think this is one of the most heavily biased statements I have ever read about the rivalry between Prost and Senna at Mclaren, and for me, it takes away a lot of the credibility of this list.

Edited by SparkPlug, 10 October 2012 - 05:31.


#689 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:14

This is BS. Prost is so underrated. He beat Senna fair and square during their 2 seasons together. How on earth was Senna the better driver? Such crap. I can't believe Murray would go this low, or perhaps his memory isn't the sharpest tool in the yard. Benson I never really cared about though.

Edited by Kingshark, 10 October 2012 - 07:19.


#690 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,862 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:32

Hmmm, I read an interview with Jean Alesi within this past year wherein Jean said the opposite. In fact, iirc, he said that Prost had JMB 'wrapped around his finger'.

There was a later rapprochement, but not until long after Senna v Prost. Q.v. Monaco 1984, where Balestre claimed Jacky Ickx stopped the race deliberately to let Prost win.

#691 Mr.Wayne

Mr.Wayne
  • Member

  • 572 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:09

Sure he is. After Senna, Clark, Fangio and Schumacher he is indeed número UNO. :p

:rotfl: :clap:

#692 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:20

This is how many points each scored during 1988-89:

1.) Prost – 186
2.) Senna – 154

I rest my case, really.

You also can’t compare their speed, as Senna was the one who got better engines from Honda.

Even in 1990, when Prost was driving an inferior Ferrari, it took a suicidal and murderous move from Senna at Suzuka in order to seal the championship that season. If anyone has any doubt Mclaren was better than Ferrari in 1990, fact is that Berger outscored Mansell by a margin - Nuff' said.

Prost was more consistent and smarter as a driver than Senna was. Yet for whatever reason it may be, whenever these lists are done Ayrton “perfect” Senna is always #1 while Prost is lucky to make the top 5.

Senna’s death made his reputation sainted and immortal.

#693 Aloisioitaly

Aloisioitaly
  • Member

  • 272 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:36

I'm really astonished by Murray Walker taking part in this farce.
For decades he was pretty consistent in being a reliable and accurate journo.
Now he too bowed to "sci-fi f1 history": "Senna was unquestionably the better driver in their two years at McLaren...": WTF are you talking about Murray? It's ludicrous.


#694 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,127 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:38

This is how many points each scored during 1988-89:

1.) Prost – 186
2.) Senna – 154

I rest my case, really.

You also can’t compare their speed, as Senna was the one who got better engines from Honda.

Even in 1990, when Prost was driving an inferior Ferrari, it took a suicidal and murderous move from Senna at Suzuka in order to seal the championship that season. If anyone has any doubt Mclaren was better than Ferrari in 1990, fact is that Berger outscored Mansell by a margin - Nuff' said.

Prost was more consistent and smarter as a driver than Senna was. Yet for whatever reason it may be, whenever these lists are done Ayrton “perfect” Senna is always #1 while Prost is lucky to make the top 5.

Senna’s death made his reputation sainted and immortal.


Your unwavering bitterness brings up really fond memories for me. Those were the days! :clap:



#695 Wander

Wander
  • Member

  • 2,264 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:46

This is how many points each scored during 1988-89:

1.) Prost – 186
2.) Senna – 154

I rest my case, really.


In Senna's defense, he did face more car failures.

I think they were equal.

Edited by Wander, 10 October 2012 - 09:46.


#696 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,772 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:34

In Senna's defense, he did face more car failures.

I think they were equal.



He retired from the lead by mechanical issues at Canada 89, USA 89, Monya 89. His gearbox didnt last a lap at France that same year and then he was DSQed at Japan. Thats a lot of points to lose. Prost also lost his for whatever reasons both seasons.
Both ended their careers with very close percentages and averages to say one was incredibly superior than the other in this or that despite all their differences.
Besides thinking thez were equals, in mz irrelevant list they are both 1 and different sides of the same coin.
And then Schumi is 2.

#697 DukeSpecial

DukeSpecial
  • Member

  • 46 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:01

Senna was my favourite driver of the late 80s and early 90s. Very fast, very exciting to watch and at my then younger and more impressionable age, I believed the hype and Senna's camp's portrayal of Prost as the bad guy. I was delighted when Prost was sacked from Ferrari and took a sabbatical, annoyed when he came back and cruised to the 1993 title (despite some fabulous drives from Senna that year) and pleased when Senna usurped him from Williams.

Twenty-odd years later, I'm a more balanced fan and am able to appreciate drivers in the context of many more years of watching racing. I now have no doubt that Prost was a better driver than Senna. Not as exciting in the swashbuckling sense, but a much more complete package of speed, intelligence and racecraft. As others have stated, he consistently beat numerous other heralded drivers in different and similar cars and but for misfortune, would have won more races and championships. He had his own reasons for not being at his best in wet conditions, which I understand completely. The point that he needed a perfectly set-up car to be blisteringly quick whereas Senna could jump in and be quick in anything is an interesting one. A grand prix weekend is exactly that - a weekend. That Prost spent time and laps on Fridays and Saturdays getting his car set up perfectly is another reason why he was so good. Yes, it's fun and glamorous for the likes of Mansell and Senna to jump in a wrestle a car to pole position thanks to one balls-out lap on sticky tyres, but I recognise the patient work Prost did on those days to ensure he was in the best possible condition for the race. I lost count of the number of physical dramas Mansell and Senna had after races - perhaps they'd left themselves a very quick car over one lap but a dog of a car to wrestle around for two hours?

I can only really judge drivers from my lifetime of F1, which extends from 1980 to today. In that period, I consider Prost to have been the best. Not my favourite to watch, but definitely the best for me.

#698 SparkPlug

SparkPlug
  • Member

  • 491 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:20

I suspect the BBC is just trying to please the majority of its readers. Senna's driving is becoming faster and better as time passes.

A majority of F1 fans these days have never really seen the Prost / Senna rivalry at all, all they know about is a few youtube videos and a highly inaccurate movie about Senna coupled with bad journalism which seeks to glorify him at every turn.

Its a real pity that true greats of Formula 1 like Alain Prost and Nelson Piquet are being sidelined and their reputations tarnished in the race to get more eyeballs by the modern media. At this rate, in a few years time, Prost, who has had such a brilliantly illustrious career, (and with a strong case to be considered the greatest of all time) will become a mere footnote in F1 history due to the crazy hero worship in the media, of his chief rival.

#699 E.B.

E.B.
  • Member

  • 1,630 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 10 October 2012 - 11:49

This is how many points each scored during 1988-89:

1.) Prost – 186
2.) Senna – 154

I rest my case, really.


Er, but Piquet outscored Mansell at Williams, so what does that prove?

Have a look at their win tallies – and before you say WDCs aren’t decided on wins, well the 1988 one certainly was, and was always going to be, given the unrivalled speed and reliability of the McLarens. Even people who thought Senna and Prost pretty evenly matched throughout the year must surely have been swayed by Suzuka? I cheered when Senna messed up his start, and by halfway through the race had given up to the resigned inevitably that the better man was going to win anyway.

As for 1989, I think Senna outdrove Prost by an even bigger margin than in 1988. Indeed, Autosport even ran an article mid season called “Sennaphobia” basically complaining that Senna’s dominance was ruining the sport as a spectacle!

I think Prost at #5 is just right – personally I would rate him ahead of Schumacher in fact. He was an incredible driver who dominated all his rivals in a talent packed era. With one exception.


Advertisement

#700 Aloisioitaly

Aloisioitaly
  • Member

  • 272 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:10

Even people who thought Senna and Prost pretty evenly matched throughout the year must surely have been swayed by Suzuka? I cheered when Senna messed up his start, and by halfway through the race had given up to the resigned inevitably that the better man was going to win anyway.

Prost car suffered gearbox problems at Suzuka 88, the frenchman even struggled to counter Capelli (!) overtaking attempts... by halfway through the race it was pretty clear the best car (Senna car) was going to win.

As for 1989, I think Senna outdrove Prost by an even bigger margin than in 1988.

Actually in 1989 Prost outscored Senna by 16 (21) points... a quite remarkable achievement, since ho drove only 15 races compared to Senna 16. average points per race: senna 3.75, prost 5.07 (5.40)