42 replies to this topic

[Nustang70]

Senna called him a coward for it, but it must've been more complicated than that. If Prost was afraid to partner with Senna, why would he have stuck around in 1989 after losing the Championship to him in 1988? And Prost beat Senna in 1989, so that must have restored his confidence? I don't know, I didn't watch back then so I don't really have much insight into the matter...

[D-Type]

There was Estoril in 1988 when Senna tried to force Prost into the pit wall and was surprised to find that he couldn't intimidate Prost.
Senna's interpretation of their agreement at Imola in 1989 not applying to the restart
Suzuka 1989 where Senna again found that he couldn't intimidate prost
Then there was Suzuka 1990 when Senna won the championship by deliberately driving into Prost taking them both out of the race.

After that would you want to be in the same team?

[Nustang70]

There was Estoril in 1988 when Senna tried to force Prost into the pit wall and was surprised to find that he couldn't intimidate Prost.
Senna's interpretation of their agreement at Imola in 1989 not applying to the restart
Suzuka 1989 where Senna again found that he couldn't intimidate prost
Then there was Suzuka 1990 when Senna won the championship by deliberately driving into Prost taking them both out of the race.

After that would you want to be in the same team?

but couldn't Senna have crashed into Prost just as easily from another team?

[Lee Nicolle]

As D type said would you want to be in the same team as Senna, you have to work together as a team and one would doubt those 2 ever would.Senna was a driven man and to my mind dangerous and most people would let him go instead of contest him.
Personally I always thought that Senna would be killed in a racecar but by coming unstuck banging wheels, not the tragic way that it happened. He had actually calmed down and was a better driver when that happened as he was using his brain more and achieving more by not intimidating most other competitors.

[buckaluck]

There was Estoril in 1988 when Senna tried to force Prost into the pit wall and was surprised to find that he couldn't intimidate Prost.
Senna's interpretation of their agreement at Imola in 1989 not applying to the restart
Suzuka 1989 where Senna again found that he couldn't intimidate prost
Then there was Suzuka 1990 when Senna won the championship by deliberately driving into Prost taking them both out of the race.

After that would you want to be in the same team?

I say the last one was the last straw since all Senna had to do was take Prost out and he was champion but if Prost beat Senna Prost would be champion so Senna took him out on the first turn no less and at their home track since they were Honda powered. Senna was not as good as Prost plain and simple. I have a dvd of the in car video of Senna and Prost in their McLarens and Senna's hands are chopping back and forth like some hack and Prost is smooth as can be and just as fast and that is why he is called the Professor. I don't care for Michael all that much for some of the same reasons but he could take a so so car and do great things with it, Senna had to have a good car to start with.

Buck

[Tim Murray]

... but if Prost beat Senna Prost would be champion ...

Not quite. Going into Japan Senna had 78 points from 11 scoring finishes, and Prost had 69 from 11. The best 11 scores counted, so to add to their scores both drivers would have to drop earlier low scores. This meant that to win the championship Prost had to win both the last two races (Japan and Australia), or take a first and a second with Senna failing to add to his score. Thus the advantage clearly lay with Senna, which makes his conduct in Japan even more unpalatable. He really didn't need to do what he did.

[RA Historian]

I say the last one was the last straw since all Senna had to do was take Prost out and he was champion but if Prost beat Senna Prost would be champion so Senna took him out on the first turn no less and at their home track since they were Honda powered.

Both Honda powered? Ferrari must have done a very quiet back door deal to have a Honda engine in Prost's 641 in 1990...........

Be advised that in 1990 Prost drove for Ferrari, not McLaren.

Tom

Edited by RA Historian, 18 September 2009 - 20:25.

[taran]

Both Honda powered? Ferrari must have done a very quiet back door deal to have a Honda engine in Prost's 641 in 1990...........
Tom

Didn't Osamu Goto, Honda's former engine guru, get hired by Ferrari to produce their atmo engines?.....

[taran]

I believe Prost simply didn't want the hassle. I don't think Prost actually feared him as a competitor (although he certainly respected him) but he had seen how driven Senna was, how he had schemed to get McLaren to support him more than Prost in '88-'89 and how he willingly broke team agreements if they benefited Prost, so he simply didn't want to deal with Senna as a team mate again.

[uffen]

I agree with Taran.
Prost had shown he could beat Senna and why go through it all again when he probably knew 1993 was to be his last season.

[Tim Murray]

I'm also quite sure - thinking back to the 1986 Lotus/Warwick episode - that if Senna had been the driver already at Williams he would have vetoed Prost as a team-mate.

[Paolo]

Didn't Osamu Goto, Honda's former engine guru, get hired by Ferrari to produce their atmo engines?.....

He got hired, and THEN Ferrari discovered the "guru" was actually just a commercial executive, with no particular technical skills.

[taran]

I'm also quite sure - thinking back to the 1986 Lotus/Warwick episode - that if Senna had been the driver already at Williams he would have vetoed Prost as a team-mate.

Actually, I am not so sure of that. The Lotus thing was because Senna firmly believed Lotus was incapable of running two #1 drivers, based on his experiences of 1985. Something which was probably true as the last time both Lotus cars did well was 1978 and that was because they were massively superior.

After joining McLaren, he had no problem accepting Gerhard Berger who was still seen as a potential superstar at the time rather than the excellent journeyman he ultimately proved to be. Senna just made sure he got the best engineers, mechanics, cars and strategies.

Senna believed he was the best and liked being challenged. He just made sure the deck was stacked in his favour.

[George Costanza]

Senna would have won the WDC over Prost....

1993? Senna nearly matched his wins in a poor McLaren Ford..

[COUGAR508]

I believe Prost simply didn't want the hassle. I don't think Prost actually feared him as a competitor (although he certainly respected him) but he had seen how driven Senna was, how he had schemed to get McLaren to support him more than Prost in '88-'89 and how he willingly broke team agreements if they benefited Prost, so he simply didn't want to deal with Senna as a team mate again.

That is how I read the situation too. Prost just wanted to have a straightforward season, with the team right behind him, and with no internal distractions.

[canon1753]

Last Season.

French Driver

French powered car

Championship team of the previous year.

McLaren with a customer engine.

If you were Prost would you want to deal with Senna or Damon Hill in his first full season?

[jsummers502]

I agree, I think Prost was, understandably, looking to avoid the hassles of having Senna as a team mate again. I remember seeing an interview, I think during '88, where Prost candidly admits that Senna is prepared to do things and take chances which he won't. The drift of what he was saying was if he wants to win that badly, he can go ahead, I don't play the game that way.

At the time, as a teenager, Senna was the most compelling thing to watch in F1 by some margin, and I loved the fact he would do things and take chances others wouldn't in his sheer ruthlessness to win.

Now when I watch Mark Webber's first F1 win being sullied by his lunging accross the track and ramming Barichello in the run from the grid down to turn 1, I feel a good deal of regret that those tactics of Senna's have become standard practice.

At the time, I recognized Prost was the more well rounded driver, but Senna brought such a level of commitment, you could see the Will To Win through the TV, through all the money/technology/BS of F1. IMO, by the points, Prost could beat Senna. But when it came to pure speed, to getting out on track and being faster than anyone else, Senna had no equals.

[COUGAR508]

Also, Prost probably felt that he had earned the right to have a happy and contented season, after his trials and tribulations with both Senna and Mansell...

[Chezrome]

Don't forget that Prost asked Dennis to hire Senna at McLaren... because he was the best there was in the market. It kinda softens the fact he did not want Senna as his teammate later.

[RA Historian]

Regardless, if another driver purposely and maliciously rammed you off course, would you want to work under the same roof? I think not.
Tom

[Zippel]

I agree with Taran.
Prost had shown he could beat Senna and why go through it all again when he probably knew 1993 was to be his last season.

Prost had actually signed a 2 year deal with Williams, however the 'No Senna' clause only applied to his first year so when Senna was confirmed for 94 he jumped ship.

Edited by Zippel, 19 September 2009 - 23:58.

[COUGAR508]

Prost had actually signed a 2 year deal with Williams, however the 'No Senna' clause only applied to his first year so when Senna was confirmed for 94 he jumped ship.

Yes, I always felt it was slightly curious that Prost suddenly decided to retire. There were suggestions that as he looked like winning the title, he thought to himself "job done" and announced his retirement. Perhaps at that stage he had become aware that Senna was likely to join the team for 1994?

I seem to recall that Prost clinched the title at Estoril (?). I can't remember without referring to my books when Senna's deal was confirmed.

[canon1753]

Yes, I always felt it was slightly curious that Prost suddenly decided to retire. There were suggestions that as he looked like winning the title, he thought to himself "job done" and announced his retirement. Perhaps at that stage he had become aware that Senna was likely to join the team for 1994?

I seem to recall that Prost clinched the title at Estoril (?). I can't remember without referring to my books when Senna's deal was confirmed.

I think Prost and Senna sat down at one point and Alain said it just wasn't a good idea. In a sense, Alain set up a sweetheart situation for Ayrton. It was going to be Senna's team. Damon was getting good, but was clearly a number 2 at that point. Senna, just as Prost in 1993, wouldn't need to fight hammer and tongs against his own teammate, which is how it would have been with Prost and Senna on the same team....

[Aloisioitaly]

About 1994 season, Prost had the chance to veto Senna: he signed a 2 years contract with a 2 years veto. This is confirmed by both Prost and Williams.
He retired cuz he was fed up with F1, end of speculations.

Edited by Aloisioitaly, 05 November 2009 - 11:22.

[D-Type]

Prost had actually signed a 2 year deal with Williams, however the 'No Senna' clause only applied to his first year so when Senna was confirmed for 94 he jumped ship.

About 1994 season, Prost had the chance to veto Senna: he signed a 2 years contract with a 2 years veto. This is confirmed by both Prost and Williams.
He retired cuz he was fed up with F1, end of speculations.

Which is true? Was the veto only for 1993 or was it 1993 and 1994?

My take - events suggest the veto was only applicable for 1993

[philippe charuest]

Regardless, if another driver purposely and maliciously rammed you off course, would you want to work under the same roof? I think not.
Tom

exact the obvious .theres nothing to add to that

[philippe charuest]

exact the obvious .theres nothing to add to that

just a small thing to add, for Prost 93 was a comeback with renault not williams . the very near miss title of 83 with the brabham fuel affair was still stuck in there throat , and the plan from the beginning and he said it many time in french papers and mags was to win a last title for Renault and to quit for good ,to enjoy life and play golf

Edited by philippe charuest, 05 November 2009 - 15:00.

[Aloisioitaly]

"Quando Prost ci ha annunciato il suo ritiro dalle corse ci siamo trovati davanti a un dilemma: come fare per conservare il titolo di campione del mondo. Alain Prost è un grande talento che ha dato molto alla nostra scuderia, non solo quando è al volante ma anche dietro le quinte. Ci è sembrato che Senna fosse il solo pilota in grado di rimpiazzarlo".

"When Prost told us he will retire, we faced a dilemma: what could we do to mantain the world title. Alain Prost is a great talent that did great things in our team, not only while driving, but also behind the curtain. It seemd to us that Senna was the only driver that could replace him".
(Frank Williams) October 12, 1993

http://ricerca.repub...-ora-siamo.html

[Aloisioitaly]

C'est-à-dire? Que s'est-il passé?
Dans ce sport-là, il y a énormément de joies mais il y a quand même beaucoup de frustrations. Et cette année, il s'est passé pas mal de trucs, il y a eu des moments où j'en ai vraiment pris plein la tête, alors que je ne me sens pas responsable! Tout a commencé au mois d'août de l'année dernière quand on a présenté mon arrivée chez Williams-Renault comme un cadeau royal que faisait Renault, contre l'avis de Frank Williams, etc. Pour certains d'ailleurs, c'était grâce à Renault, pour d'autres c'était grâce à Elf... C'était faux, totalement faux puisque moi, j'ai eu des contacts avec Frank chaque année depuis 1982, quelquefois même plusieurs fois dans l'année. J'ai failli conduire pour lui deux ou trois fois. Nous avons même eu des contacts le jour même où j'ai été licencié de chez Ferrari!

Quand même, votre arrivée faisait plaisir à Renault et à Elf!
C'est évident! Mais c'était prévu que j'aille chez Williams-Renault avec Mansell. Et quand il est parti, on a dit que c'était de ma faute, il y a eu des cabales dans la presse, on m'a fait passer pour un Machiavel alors que je n'ai absolument rien fait! Mon seul tort: avoir signé un contrat! J'ai dit: "J'accepte Mansell." Et honnêtement, j'ai dit aussi: "Le seul avec lequel je ne peux pas reconduire, c'est Senna. Parce que je veux avoir du plaisir." Cette phrase-là, ne l'oubliez pas, c'est celle qui conditionne tout: "Je veux avoir du plaisir. J'en ai marre des salades , je veux simplement conduire."

Quelle était la position de Frank Williams?
J'ai dit à Frank: "Ne t'en fais pas, je vais très bien physiquement, je vais me reposer, je vais faire des essais à partir de septembre, octobre, tu mets n'importe qui à côté de moi, je m'en fous, sauf Senna."

Pourquoi?
Parce que je sais que je suis mort d'avance, que je n'aurais pas de plaisir, parce que sur le plan médiatique, ce sera injouable. "Donc, tu prends Senna si tu veux, mais alors tu me laisses tranquille, je vais ailleurs..." De toute façon, c'était Mansell. Mais tout a commencé là. Apres, il y a eu l'histoire de la super-licence, l'interview qu'on m'a reprochée, l'engagement de Williams un peu tardif...
...
Senna s'est plaint très tôt en saison de sa voiture de son moteur de McLaren... Forcement, on pouvait imaginer qu'il rejoindrait Williams-Renault. Est-ce que cette possibilité, ou cette probabilité, a joué dans votre départ?
Disons que le problème ne se pose pas comme cela. Si j'avais voulu rester chez Williams, j'aurais eu la priorité.

Sans Senna?
Oui. Tout le monde le sait. Contractuellement...


What do you mean? What happened?
In this sport, there is a lot of fun but there are still many frustrations. And this year it happened a lot of stuff, there were times when I really took blame for things I do not feel responsible! It all started in August last year when my arrival at Williams-Renault was presented as a royal gift from Renault, against the advice of Frank Williams, etc.. For some, moreover, it was thanks to Renault, for others it was thanks to Elf ... It was false, totally false because I have had contact with Frank every year since 1982, sometimes even several times a year. I almost drove for him two or three times. We even had contacts on the same day that I was dismissed with Ferrari!

Still, the arrival was pleased to Renault and Elf!
Obviously! But it was expected that I'll be at Williams-Renault with Mansell. And when he left, it was said that it was my fault, there were cabales in the press, they made me look like a Machiavelli, yet I have done absolutely nothing! My only crime: having signed a contract! I said: "I accept Mansell." And honestly, I also said: "The one with which I can not renew is Senna. Because I want to have fun." This sentence was, remember, this is the one that determines everything: "I want to have fun. I'm tired of having a mess, I just want to drive."

What was the position of Frank Williams?
I said to Frank: "Do not worry, I'm very well physically, I'm going to rest, I will do tests from September, October, you put anyone next to me, I do not care, except Senna. "

Why?
Because I know I am dead ahead, I would not have fun, because on the media, it will be unplayable. "So you take Senna if you want, but then you let me quiet, I'm going elsewhere ..." Anyway, it was Mansell. But it all started here. After, there was the history of the super-license, the interview I was charged for, the too late Williams entry ...
...
Senna had complained early in the season about his car, about his engine at McLaren... Inevitably, we imagine that he could join Williams-Renault. Does this possibility, or probability, has played into your departure?
Let's say the problem does not arise like that. If I wanted to stay at Williams, I would have given priority.

Without Senna?
Yes. Everybody knows that. Contractually...

(Alain Prost, L'equipe, october 16, 1993)

[Jonathan]

...Thus the advantage clearly lay with Senna, which makes his conduct in Japan even more unpalatable. He really didn't need to do what he did.

No. He certainly didn't need to do what he did. I think he would have much preferred to have beaten Prost fairly. Senna was clearly pissed that having set the fast pole position qualification time, he was awarded an inferior starting position.

His running Prost off in Japan was as much a move against the corrupt French F1 politics of that era as it was against Prost personally.

[philippe charuest]

OK . its illegal and of course criminally dangerous . but i have the right to do it cause i believe in a wacko theory . that kind of thinking generally end in jail or in "special hospital"

[Jonathan]

...Senna was not as good as Prost plain and simple.

I have a dvd of the in car video of Senna and Prost in their McLarens and Senna's hands are chopping back and forth like some hack and Prost is smooth as can be and just as fast and that is why he is called the Professor. I don't care for Michael all that much for some of the same reasons but he could take a so so car and do great things with it, Senna had to have a good car to start with.

I can't let these statements slide.

Prost like many other highly successful drivers spent a great deal of time and effort into car setup.. making the car easy to drive.

Senna, on the other hand, could take a "bad" car and extract phenomenal performance from it.

I, for one, would rather watch Senna driving a "bad" car at the limit of its performance potential in second place than watch Prost or Schumacher blissfully parading around unchallenged in the lead. Ayrton Senna could work magic.

Prost, while an excellent driver, focused more on consistent point scoring then on race wins. Both were certainly excellent drivers who could deliver the goods and worth very much what they were paid to do. IMHO Senna's driving was far more exciting to watch.

[Aloisioitaly]

No. He certainly didn't need to do what he did. I think he would have much preferred to have beaten Prost fairly. Senna was clearly pissed that having set the fast pole position qualification time, he was awarded an inferior starting position.

His running Prost off in Japan was as much a move against the corrupt French F1 politics of that era as it was against Prost personally.

He was awarded same position polemen were awarded previous years at Suzuka. Stop messing up, no excuses for such a horrible manouver.

[ovfi]

I can't let these statements slide.

Prost like many other highly successful drivers spent a great deal of time and effort into car setup.. making the car easy to drive.

Senna, on the other hand, could take a "bad" car and extract phenomenal performance from it.

I, for one, would rather watch Senna driving a "bad" car at the limit of its performance potential in second place than watch Prost or Schumacher blissfully parading around unchallenged in the lead. Ayrton Senna could work magic.

Prost, while an excellent driver, focused more on consistent point scoring then on race wins. Both were certainly excellent drivers who could deliver the goods and worth very much what they were paid to do. IMHO Senna's driving was far more exciting to watch.

This post remembered me of that:

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

In my life, I saw only one driver with the same skill: Jim Clark

Edited by ovfi, 05 November 2009 - 20:22.

[kayemod]

He was awarded same position polemen were awarded previous years at Suzuka. Stop messing up, no excuses for such a horrible manouver.

Well said, nothing I can add to that, except Aloisioitaly, please fill in your profile.

[AndreasF1]

No matter what some Prost fanboys want to believe. Senna would have walked the 1989 championship if his car hadn't failed him 40% of the time that year while leading Prost in the races. There were only a few races that year that Prost won by meritt. Prost was smart enough to know that Senna in a reliable Williams was unbeatable. No need to argue, just watch the races or read race reviews of 1989.

[stuartbrs]

No matter what some Prost fanboys want to believe. Senna would have walked the 1989 championship if his car hadn't failed him 40% of the time that year while leading Prost in the races. There were only a few races that year that Prost won by meritt. Prost was smart enough to know that Senna in a reliable Williams was unbeatable. No need to argue, just watch the races or read race reviews of 1989.

Did Senna`s car fail in 1989 so much because it wasnt setup as well as Prosts...

[KWSN - DSM]

Did Senna`s car fail in 1989 so much because it wasnt setup as well as Prosts...

Or because Senna'a cars always broke down more than Prost's? So possible that Senna was the reason for at least some of the breakdowns?

Senna and Prost were exceptional talents, who stand alone with a very select few in the history of F1. Senna was ultimately faster than Prost when racing, and Prost was ultimately smarter than Senna when racing.

No driver is alike, they feed of their strengths and minimize their weakness.

Prost simply saw no reason to live with the hazzle and melodrama which being teamed with Senna would bring, so he said 'non'.

[Henri Greuter]

QUOTE (buckaluck @ Sep 17 2009, 18:03)
...Senna was not as good as Prost plain and simple.

I have a dvd of the in car video of Senna and Prost in their McLarens and Senna's hands are chopping back and forth like some hack and Prost is smooth as can be and just as fast and that is why he is called the Professor. I don't care for Michael all that much for some of the same reasons but he could take a so so car and do great things with it, Senna had to have a good car to start with.

I can't let these statements slide.

Prost like many other highly successful drivers spent a great deal of time and effort into car setup.. making the car easy to drive.

Senna, on the other hand, could take a "bad" car and extract phenomenal performance from it.

I, for one, would rather watch Senna driving a "bad" car at the limit of its performance potential in second place than watch Prost or Schumacher blissfully parading around unchallenged in the lead. Ayrton Senna could work magic.

Prost, while an excellent driver, focused more on consistent point scoring then on race wins. Both were certainly excellent drivers who could deliver the goods and worth very much what they were paid to do. IMHO Senna's driving was far more exciting to watch.

Isn't it then very curious that in the two races of 1988 that the MP4/4 wasn't allmighty in race trim, it was the inferior driver Prost who managed to win those two events while "the better driver" Senna ended up only 4th and 6th?


Henri

[SEdward]

Discussions of Prost and Senna will never end...

They were both mercurial talents, different, but better than the rest. Can't we just leave it at that?

What will always stick in my mind is Senna's "Hello Alain. I miss you" broadcast on French TV on the morning of his death.

Edward

[crashgate]

but couldn't Senna have crashed into Prost just as easily from another team?

it is not the matter of crashing it is the matter of trust

[Seebar]

Well said, nothing I can add to that, except Aloisioitaly, please fill in your profile.

Not saying his manoeuvre was excusable, though the stewards had promised him that the pole would be on the cleaner, left side of the track. Come raceday, Balestre decided to overrule that decision. Therefore I don't think there is nothing to add to the positioning of the pole.


As for Senna's McLarens breaking down more often than Prost's in 1989, I'm very curious about why that is. Lauda once said something along the lines of "at a certain point, too much bad luck is no longer bad luck. You can undeservedly lose once or twice. More often than that, and you're doing something wrong." So maybe Senna did overdrive his cars in 1989. But I'm not too sure. What did Prost do right in 1988 and 1989 that he did wrong in say 1984 or 1987? Or what did Lauda do wrong in 1985 that he did right in 1984?

[Aloisioitaly]

It happened many times pole was not in the best side, but no driver ever made a mountain of this molehill.

As for breaking down, after driving alongside with Niki Lauda, Prost style became smoother and more conservative, while Senna style was driven and reckless.
At the beginning of 80's Prost was almost as reckless as Senna (even if he was a FAIR driver), he changed steadily his approach to racing between 84 and 85.
As for 87 season there was nothing more to do than wait the season to end, beacuse of Williams overwhelming superiority and reliability.