122 replies to this topic

[Aloisioitaly]

The guy was clearly a hell of a driver, smooth, fair, fast, clever, strong.
And yet, when it comes to talk about F1 legendary men, most people seem to forget about "the professor".
Is it due to his not-flamboyant style? Is it due to the fact he never wanted to please journalists and media?
Whenever i talk about Prost, there's someone else opening is mouth and yelling. "Oh, he was a good driver, but nothing to write home about, compared to Senna".
And yet, Porst's career can't be restricted to his rivalry with Senna (by the way, Prost outscored the brazilan two years in a row when they were teammates), but spans 13 years from 1980 to 1993, filled with 51 wins and 4 world titles, plus 4 unusual 2nd place (1983 brabham's illegal fuel; 1984 0,5 points distance from 1st place; 1988 having scored more points than his opponent; 1990 driving an inferior car, with a noxious teammate and almost killed by his main opponent).

Let's share some thoughts!

[RA Historian]

Part of it may be personality; Prost came across to the world as having none.
Tom

[Giraffe]

He wasn't underrated (by most people). What on earth makes you think that???

[Giraffe]

Part of it may be personality; Prost came across to the world as having none.
Tom

Less than that, Tom. He was French..........

[Aloisioitaly]

He wasn't underrated (by most people). What on earth makes you think that???

If you ask 100 people who they think were F1 legends, they will say, Schumi, Senna, Fangio, Villeneuve, Clark, but hardly one ore two people willa say Prost. It's quite telling in my opinion.

[angst]

If you ask 100 people who they think were F1 legends, they will say, Schumi, Senna, Fangio, Villeneuve, Clark, but hardly one ore two people willa say Prost. It's quite telling in my opinion.

Perhaps because those others stirred the blood, as it were, in ways that Prost never did. If you ask someone who has been a 'legend' then people tend to judge that on a visceral, human level - rather than simply on success.

[Aloisioitaly]

Part of it may be personality; Prost came across to the world as having none.
Tom

What's the meaning of personality? He was a quiet man and a consistent driver. Must we assume that thugs have personality and decent people don't?

[Formula Once]

Ask another 100, and most will include Prost. It just depends who you'd ask, doesn't it. I don't think Alain was under rated, its just that he raced at a time when people like Lauda, Piquet, Mansell and Senna were around and for several reasons (good and bad) they all had a much higher profile. In terms of charisma Alain was the way he drove; unspectacular. Even the French seemed to like the more extrovert drivers such as Laffite and Arnoux more. But I don't think Alain would be too bothered. And he shouldn't. One of the best.

[Aloisioitaly]

Perhaps because those others stirred the blood, as it were, in ways that Prost never did. If you ask someone who has been a 'legend' then people tend to judge that on a visceral, human level - rather than simply on success.

I agree, maybe i don't judhe on a visceral-human level, but on a rational level. And yet reason is peculiar to man!

[angst]

And yet reason is peculiar to man!

Yes...., one could read that two ways, and both, I think, would be correct.

[alansart]

If you ask 100 people who they think were F1 legends, they will say, Schumi, Senna, Fangio, Villeneuve, Clark, but hardly one ore two people willa say Prost. It's quite telling in my opinion.

I was given a few books a couple of years ago to see if they had any value.

One was Ayrton Senna's Principles of Race Driving by Ayrton Senna & Norman Howell and another Competition Driving by Alain Prost & Pierre-Francois Rousselot.

Current prices on Amazon:

Senna £299
Prost £2.77

Not that that proves anything.

[Hamish Robson]

I was given a few books a couple of years ago to see if they had any value.

One was Ayrton Senna's Principles of Race Driving by Ayrton Senna & Norman Howell and another Competition Driving by Alain Prost & Pierre-Francois Rousselot.

Current prices on Amazon:

Senna £299
Prost £2.77

Not that that proves anything.

Unfortunately, as you say, that proves very little about the man. Things related to dead celebrities, especially such a high-profile/well-loved one such as Senna (who was lost in front of a live tv audience), quite often rise in value as, by definition and amongst other reasons, there will be no more from that person.

One of the big differences between these two was that Senna spent a lot more time in front of the camera, Prost let his results do the talking. 4 world championships are hard to argue with.

OT - Didn't realise Norman Howell did that book with Senna - he's now the Editor In Chief of The Red Bulletin. His book "Racing Driver" is a cracking read.

[Giraffe]

I find this thread vaguely ridiculous. On the basis that Prost is underrated, everyone apart from Fangio, Moss, Clark, Stewart, Senna & Schumacher is! Prost was not a self publicist and chose a low personal profile, but surely as a TNFer you could see past that? His record says it all.

Edited by Giraffe, 03 March 2010 - 16:59.

[alansart]

I find this thread vaguely ridiculous. On the basis that Prost is underrated, everyone apart from Fangio, Moss, Clark, Stewart, Senna & Schumacher is! Prost was not a self publicist and chose a low personal profile, but surely as a TNFer you could see past that? His record says it all.

He wasn't called the Professor for nothing. Yes he was a brilliant driver, but a bit boring. All the drivers you quote had a certain "style" that attracted a following and interest.

Now if Prost had got out of his McLaren, or Ferrari for that matter, and taken a certain A Senna to one side and given him a public humiliation, then perhaps things might be a little different. Not that I like this sort of attitude of course

Edited by alansart, 03 March 2010 - 17:23.

[john aston]

Prost was guilty of two things- being searingly quick and not looking like he was. He is a civilised ,smart and by all accounts decent man. He came from an era when there was less of the cult of personality which GP racing now espouses- and if he didn't go out in a blaze of glory like the (in my view overrated) Villeneuve or the iconic Senna that is hardly his fault. Anybody who has followed GP racing of the Prost era cannot be in doubt about how good AP was surely ?

Edited by john aston, 03 March 2010 - 17:36.

[alansart]

Prost was guilty of two things- being searingly quick and not looking like he was. He is a civilised ,smart and by all accounts decent man. He came from an era when there was less of the cult of personality which GP racing now espouses- and if he didn't go out in a blaze of glory like the (in my view overrated) Villeneuve or the iconic Senna that is hardly his fault. Anybody who has followed GP racing of the Prost era cannot be in doubt about how good AP was surely ?

Yes, I totally agree with that. It's basically what I was trying to say in my post above, but I didn't put it very well.

Edited by alansart, 03 March 2010 - 17:38.

[Doug Nye]

I think Prost's biggest crime was his self-harming in the extent to which he let Senna get inside his head. If 'most people' forget to list him as a great racing driver I think that tells us more about 'most people' than about him.

Those who dismiss him just don't understand racing, and have taste buds restricted by ignorance.

I always remember John Barnard telling me how Lauda had been cruising within the McLaren team, absolutely certain he could handle any team-mate with one arm tied behind his back...until he found himself teamed with Prost, and he "suddenly found he had Concorde up his arse".

DCN

[buckaluck]

Well in my opinion Prost was a much better driver then Senna I finally had proof of that when I optained a dvd of in car footage that switched between Prost car and Senna's with Prost McLaren in the lead and Senna's McLaren following. When you see Prost his hands are smooth on the wheel gliding effortlessly when they switch to Senna's he is chopping wood like crazy bouncing over curbs really struggling, that dvd says it all. Funny in all the posts (I may have missed it) nobody mentions Sr. Jackie.

Buck

[pete53]

Alain Prost won 51 Grand Prix. In my books that makes him a great driver. Okay, he may not have been as flamboyant or controversial as some, but he drove with a canny intelligence, which allied to his driving skills, enabled him to accumulate an impressive total of race victories.

Jim Clark is almost universally mentioned when people list their all-time greats. I would have no argument with that, but didn't Jim win a large number of his races in Formula One in a dominant and apparently effortless manner? However, he is not dismissed as dull and uninspiring. On the other hand, if he had raced in more recent era where "personality" and "attitude" figure high, perhaps he too would have been downgraded in people's assessment.

I don't deny that people like Rindt, Peterson, Villeneuve (Gilles), Senna and others of that ilk brought a visceral excitement to racing, but, please, credit where credit is due.

[Ray Bell]

He also did his reputation no good at all when he became a team principal...

That may or may not influence what people remember and think about, but to some it would have helped close the chapter on his career in a negative way.

[RStock]

Prost was guilty of two things- being searingly quick and not looking like he was. He is a civilised ,smart and by all accounts decent man. He came from an era when there was less of the cult of personality which GP racing now espouses- and if he didn't go out in a blaze of glory like the (in my view overrated) Villeneuve or the iconic Senna that is hardly his fault. Anybody who has followed GP racing of the Prost era cannot be in doubt about how good AP was surely ?

Agreed completely . I don't know how anyone could think he was "underrated" . But then , I was always a big Prost fan , so perhaps I'm biased .

[Hank the Deuce]

I always remember John Barnard telling me how Lauda had been cruising within the McLaren team, absolutely certain he could handle any team-mate with one arm tied behind his back...until he found himself teamed with Prost, and he "suddenly found he had Concorde up his arse".

DCN

...something which Lauda pretty much confirmed in "To Hell And Back".

Prost was always a fave of mine through my mid-80's schoolboy years. Some of that was tied up with the way he fought out the 1984 title, some of it was his winning ways through the next couple of years, decisively winning a good number of the races through that period through not only speed, but tact.

When I read his "Life In The Fast Lane", it seemed that he had also built himself an insular world within the F1 circus, seemingly spending any time not in the car either playing cards, or golf, with Lafitte and other members of what appeared from the outside as a tight little Gallic unit. I also noted that he wasn't the most popular of the Frnech drivers during his time with Renault... perhaps the concept of him being underrated stems from his ascencion through an era when there were so many other beloved characters.

The artist's temprament so visible in characters like Senna, or Piquet, or heroes from other eras, just didn't seem to be there in Prost, and I guess the squeaky wheel gets the oil...

In any case, while he mightn't spring to mind immediately when people start think of drivers they rate, a career record such as Prosts makes it impossible to overrate him... perhaps the converse is that he his doomed to be perpetually underrated?

[Kpy]

Prost underrated? Ignore him as one of the all-time greats at your peril.
He was "boring" in the same way that Jim Clark was. They both made it look so easy.
If I may pinch a few words from Nigel Roebuck: I remember watching qualifying with Denis Jenkinson at Monaco in 1983: others were flying round, some looking quite lurid, and in the middle of all this Prost came out, apparently doing two or three ‘bedding in’ laps. Then the times were announced – and Alain was on pole. Jenks was nonplussed: “Amazing little bloke… how does he do it?”

[FenderJaguar]

There was a nice thread about Prost's best race (which you probably have seen, but if someone hasn't) http://forums.autosp...?showtopic=3224 and "Haddock" gave a link to a great read about Prost here: http://www.ddavid.co...la1/ramble5.htm

Edited by FenderJaguar, 03 March 2010 - 22:46.

[Phil Rainford]

Underrated ...not a chance

Not listed as one of people's favourite drivers........ maybe due to his neat and unspectacular driving style. Which more often than not just happened to be the quickest way round the racing circuit


PAR

[Thundersports]

Smooth, very very fast, intelligent and boring......Not underrated though

[PCC]

Not underrated though

And certainly not underrated by his peers, which is possibly the most telling measure of all. Rivals like Lauda, Rosberg, Tambay and even Mansell spoke of him with huge respect. And of course Senna became rather famously obsessed with beating him, as if no one else mattered.

[ianselva]

Alain Prost won 51 Grand Prix. In my books that makes him a great driver. Okay, he may not have been as flamboyant or controversial as some, but he drove with a canny intelligence, which allied to his driving skills, enabled him to accumulate an impressive total of race victories.

Jim Clark is almost universally mentioned when people list their all-time greats. I would have no argument with that, but didn't Jim win a large number of his races in Formula One in a dominant and apparently effortless manner? However, he is not dismissed as dull and uninspiring. On the other hand, if he had raced in more recent era where "personality" and "attitude" figure high, perhaps he too would have been downgraded in people's assessment.

I don't deny that people like Rindt, Peterson, Villeneuve (Gilles), Senna and others of that ilk brought a visceral excitement to racing, but, please, credit where credit is due.

He certainly never seemed to fight for a win , and I was never so glad as when he was humiliated by Senna at Donington. He certainly wasn't cool and effortless that day . One of my un-favorites along with Ralph Schumacher.

[angst]

I think Prost's biggest crime was his self-harming in the extent to which he let Senna get inside his head. If 'most people' forget to list him as a great racing driver I think that tells us more about 'most people' than about him.

Those who dismiss him just don't understand racing, and have taste buds restricted by ignorance.

I always remember John Barnard telling me how Lauda had been cruising within the McLaren team, absolutely certain he could handle any team-mate with one arm tied behind his back...until he found himself teamed with Prost, and he "suddenly found he had Concorde up his arse".

DCN

Lauda 'cruising' because he felt he could handle anyone in the team? Was it Lauda or Wattie that was in the running for the WDC in '82? Was it Lauda or Wattie that won a GP for McLaren in '83? I don't remember Lauda having the better of Wattie at all in their two years at McLaren...., but perhaps my memory is failing.

[ovfi]

Alain Prost won 51 Grand Prix. In my books that makes him a great driver. Okay, he may not have been as flamboyant or controversial as some, but he drove with a canny intelligence, which allied to his driving skills, enabled him to accumulate an impressive total of race victories.

Jim Clark is almost universally mentioned when people list their all-time greats. I would have no argument with that, but didn't Jim win a large number of his races in Formula One in a dominant and apparently effortless manner? However, he is not dismissed as dull and uninspiring. On the other hand, if he had raced in more recent era where "personality" and "attitude" figure high, perhaps he too would have been downgraded in people's assessment.

I don't deny that people like Rindt, Peterson, Villeneuve (Gilles), Senna and others of that ilk brought a visceral excitement to racing, but, please, credit where credit is due.

I've made some calculations sometime ago, trying to find numbers for comparison between drivers of different eras. It's not easy because points, wins, poles do not reflect the entire races and the rules are different along time. Maybe the number of leading laps is a more fair way to compare not only their performance against their competitors, but justify people's preferences. I've made it for some drivers, Alain Prost between them (He's one of the all time greats for me):

-Jim Clark led 50.52% of all laps he did on F1 and 62.41% if we exclude the year of 1966 (his Lotus had no chance to lead, was underpowered)
-Fangio led 44.35% of all laps he did on F1 (he always had a competitive car)
-Senna led 41.38% of all laps he did on F1 excluding 1984 (his Toleman/Hart had no chance to lead, was underpowered)
-Stewart led 36.77% of all laps he did on F1 (he always had a competitive car)
-Schumacher led 36.72% of all laps he did on F1 (he always had a competitive car)
-Moss led 35.29% of all laps he did on F1 (I didn't examined yet if he had one year completely without chance)
-Prost led 25.46% of all laps he did on F1 (I didn't examined yet if he had one year completely without chance)
others above 20%:
-Mansell 23.9%
-Damon Hill 23.22%

Here we can find why Moss , who wasn't a champion, is ranked very high by some people (please, include me), and a very good reason for the title of this thread, because only 9 men in F1 history led more than 20% of all laps they did. And Stewart, Prost, Mansell and Damon Hill are between these drivers.
We can find too why Jim Clark is so beloved (please, include me too) and is completely different from Prost, in 1966 he led 102 laps with the underpowered (2.2 litre against 3 litres) Lotus. Finally only drivers like Rindt, Peterson, Villeneuve (Gilles), but not Senna, can be justified as top drivers only by "personality" and "attitude".

[angst]

He certainly never seemed to fight for a win , and I was never so glad as when he was humiliated by Senna at Donington. He certainly wasn't cool and effortless that day . One of my un-favorites along with Ralph Schumacher.

I remember an article that Mak Hughes did, when it was announced that refuelling was to be banned again in F1. It was about the Italian P of '88. Everybody remembers that Senna made a fumble as he lapped Jean-Louis Schlesser's Williams - but few understand the part that Prost's thinking played in that error. Prost knew his car wouldn't make it to the finish, so he pressed the pace at the front, forcing Senna to react. By doing so Senna was running dangerously low on fuel. Would Senna have made the error that he did without that pressure?

I never underrated Prost; he was always a factor in a race - even one he'd retired from
Senna tended toward other, less desirable, tactics - like squeezing drivers in toward concrete walls. Senna could put one hell of a lap in but, I had zero respect for his attitude toward racing ethics and other competitors. Prost, on the other hand, could put in one heavenly lap - deceptively fast, without all the histrionics - and competed fairly... at least on the track.

[angst]

I've made some calculations sometime ago, trying to find numbers for comparison between drivers of different eras. It's not easy because points, wins, poles do not reflect the entire races and the rules are different along time. Maybe the number of leading laps is a more fair way to compare not only their performance against their competitors, but justify people's preferences. I've made it for some drivers, Alain Prost between them (He's one of the all time greats for me):

-Jim Clark led 50.52% of all laps he did on F1 and 62.41% if we exclude the year of 1966 (his Lotus had no chance to lead, was underpowered)
-Fangio led 44.35% of all laps he did on F1 (he always had a competitive car)
-Senna led 41.38% of all laps he did on F1 excluding 1984 (his Toleman/Hart had no chance to lead, was underpowered)
-Stewart led 36.77% of all laps he did on F1 (he always had a competitive car)
-Schumacher led 36.72% of all laps he did on F1 (he always had a competitive car)
-Moss led 35.29% of all laps he did on F1 (I didn't examined yet if he had one year completely without chance)
-Prost led 25.46% of all laps he did on F1 (I didn't examined yet if he had one year completely without chance)
others above 20%:
-Mansell 23.9%
-Damon Hill 23.22%

Here we can find why Moss , who wasn't a champion, is ranked very high by some people (please, include me), and a very good reason for the title of this thread, because only 9 men in F1 history led more than 20% of all laps they did. And Stewart, Prost, Mansell and Damon Hill are between these drivers.
We can find too why Jim Clark is so beloved (please, include me too) and is completely different from Prost, in 1966 he led 102 laps with the underpowered (2.2 litre against 3 litres) Lotus. Finally only drivers like Rindt, Peterson, Villeneuve (Gilles), but not Senna, can be justified as top drivers only by "personality" and "attitude".

Interesting, but those stats tend to ignore that...., well, leading from the front - slapping in a pole for the sake of it and trundling off into the distance - wasn't necessarily the way Prost liked to play it. The only lap lead that matters is the final one, surely?

[David McKinney]

Very interesting stats, ovfi
I presume they include only world championship F1 races?
What about world championship F2 races?

[Mansell4PM]

He also did his reputation no good at all when he became a team principal...

That may or may not influence what people remember and think about, but to some it would have helped close the chapter on his career in a negative way.

The demise of Prost's eponymous team appeared (from the UK press at the time) to have been somewhat messy. Hardly surprising though, when a team is struggling. The tie-up with Peugeot seemed to be the root of the problem - the engine was rumoured to be underpowered, and not really up to the standard of contemporary manufacturer units.

IIRC there were accusations that they had run a car underweight in pre-season testing to attract sponsors (2001?). Not that there's anything illegal or rule-bending about that - it just seemed to smack of desperation. Though with a factory full of people to employ, surely worth trying?

All in all though, the Prost team seemed to damage the Prost 'brand' (a clunky way of putting it, but you get my drift).

Perhaps the team was just over-ambitious? IIRC it was always intended to be a totally French outfit, even down to the sponsors. A sort of French BRM maybe? - and we all know how long that took to come good ..... Ironically though, the teams best results came in the early days of the team when they were basically using what they got when Alain purchased the Ligier team - Japanese engines etc.

Compare and contrast with Stewart Grand Prix, which JYS and family sold to Ford (to become Jaguar), with a win (albeit a lucky one) in the bag and seemingly no harm to JYS's reputation in the long term. In fact, given how Jaguar's woes panned out, Stewart Grand Prix looked even better run as the years passed.

Poor Alain. Though he obviously still has 'the bug' as his exploits in the Andros trophy prove.

[Aloisioitaly]

I was never so glad as when he was humiliated by Senna at Donington. He certainly wasn't cool and effortless that day.

Pal, you should tell the whole story. In an interview to the italian magazine "autosprint", Patrick Head admitted two years ago that Williams at Donnington 93 had dry asset, so whenever Prost and Hill dared to speed up, their cars become impossibile to manage. I hope i can find the quote and post it later.
Anyway, as someone said, you can't rate a driver on the basis of a single race, you have to consider whole career.

[Aloisioitaly]

A proposito della difficile gara di Prost sul bagnato a Donington nel 1993 Patrick Head ha dichiarato che "ci rendemmo conto troppo tardi che sulla monoposto che usavamo, la Fw15 a sospensioni attive, l'altezza da terra era intenzionalmente di pochi millimetri. Non erano ancora i tempi del fondo scalinato, la scocca nella parte inferiore era completamente piatta e l'acqua in pista era tanta da causare aquaplaning sul fondo e non sulle gomme. Sarebbe stato possibile sollevare la monoposto regolando l'altezza da terra dall'abitacolo, ma fummo troppo lenti a rendercene conto. Senna vinse con merito, ma in un certo senso gli demmo una mano noi con le caratteristiche della nostra vettura". (Autosprint n.29/2008, pag. 7).

english translation (i did my best, but 'im sure it could be far better)

With reference to Donington 1993, Patrick Head has declared that "we became aware too late that on the car we used, the Fw15 with active suspensions, the height from ground was intentionally of little millimeters. They were not still the times of the scalinato bottom, the auto body in the inferior part was completely flat and the water in track was a lot to cause aquaplaning on the bottom and not on tyres. It would have been possible to raise the car height but we were too late to become aware of it. Senna won with merit, but in a certain sense we helped him". (Autosprint n.29/2008, pag. 7).

[MCS]

I find this thread vaguely ridiculous. On the basis that Prost is underrated, everyone apart from Fangio, Moss, Clark, Stewart, Senna & Schumacher is! Prost was not a self publicist and chose a low personal profile, but surely as a TNFer you could see past that? His record says it all.

I agree - it is ridiculous. How can anybody underrate a driver who has won over 50 Grands Prix for goodness sake?

[MLC]

I've said it before that, in my mind, the most impressive aspect of Prost's career is what he achieved while facing perhaps the strongest teammate line-up in F1 history. At the time Prost retired he held the record for most wins, points, fastest laps, and podiums. He was second in WDC, WDC runner-up, and poles. Not too bad while being teamed with the likes of Watson, Arnoux, Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, Mansell, Alesi and Hill!

Edited by MLC, 04 March 2010 - 20:01.

[ovfi]

Very interesting stats, ovfi
I presume they include only world championship F1 races?
What about world championship F2 races?

David, I did it in 2008 using data provided by a website casually found, they listed all World Championship GP's with lap by lap maps, so I think the F2 races are included. Unfortunately I lost my bookmarks when my PC ended its life in 2009, but I think it is possible to find it in a google search, I only didn't have the necessary time and patience to do it now.
The purpose I showed it here in TNF is to add some data that can justify the average people's preferences on drivers.

[irvine99]

Let's share some thoughts!

No problem.

(1983 brabham's illegal fuel)

Any _reliable_ source...???

[ebeneezer2]

To be honest I would suggest Prost is actually a notch below Senna/Schumacher (Clark/Fangio era too different to compare IMO), bearing in mind that he got thumped in qualifying by Senna in 88-89, and that he wasn't on their level in the rain. The talent for these tasks is generally more highly respected by fans than the talent for being kind on the machinery or being good at making decisions during the race, which is where Prost probably was particularly strong.

Is there anything that surprising about Prost Grand Prix failing? If you look down the years at all the teams that have been successful, a near universal factor is that the team principal has a lot of experience, either in Formula 1 or in other formulae. If you look at the successful newcomers, such as Peter Sauber, Eddie Jordan, Christian Horner, Jackie Stewart in each case they had spent years doing similar jobs beforehand - and people like Mario Thiessen and Nick Fry were experienced managers in other fields. For Prost to consider that he was blessed with the necessary skills to be a team manager without having done a day's management in his life demonstrated that his ego was probably a lot bigger than we'd been led to believe throughout his driving career.

Edited by ebeneezer2, 05 March 2010 - 00:31.

[stuartbrs]

I dont think Ive ever read anything where Alain Prost is mentioned in the same breath as Ralf Schumacher!!!
I really liked his style of driving, its great to see the fancy ones like Rosberg, Senna, Alesi, and Berger doing their stuff, but I also really liked Prost`s style as well, so smooth and fluent.

[hansfohr]

I dont think Ive ever read anything where Alain Prost is mentioned in the same breath as Ralf Schumacher!!! I really liked his style of driving, its great to see the fancy ones like Rosberg, Senna, Alesi, and Berger doing their stuff, but I also really liked Prost`s style as well, so smooth and fluent.

Somewhat in the smooth calculating style of Niki Lauda and with great effect. Both the Professor and the Rat hardly made any mistakes, whereas Senna and Schumacher were really roughies, often involved in controversial accidents.

Edited by hansfohr, 05 March 2010 - 07:58.

[seccotine]

"To be honest I would suggest Prost is actually a notch below Senna/Schumacher (Clark/Fangio era too different to compare IMO), bearing in mind that he got thumped in qualifying by Senna in 88-89, and that he wasn't on their level in the rain."

Never forget that Prost was directly involved in Pironi's accident at Hochenheim and was the first witness on the scene.
That happened on a rainy day and Prost never forget the lesson. Like Stewart, he had the skills, the obsessive attitude, etc., but he was also very aware that his job was dangerous.
That has made him a more cautious driver, a fact he never hid. That may be less romantic but does it chage him into a worse driver?

Another point : if Prost is underrated, it is mostly by people who never heard of him before he reached F1 or who forgot how impressive he was as a young driver.
Anyone discovering the young guy who won 12 races on 13 during his first F.Renault season knew he was far abobe the others. And he remained during the following years (remember his first F1 races, or his years with Renault).
Add to that the fact that he was this short, charmless guy with a crooked nose. The comparison with Senna may not have been too flattering for him. One was an anxious Little Napoleon, the other a glowing white angel...

[Aloisioitaly]

he got thumped in qualifying by Senna in 88-89

He got thumped in qualifying also by Mansell, and yet he outscored Nigel, as he outscored Senna and every team mate he had.
Is pole more important than points? Sorry, i don't buy it.

and that he wasn't on their level in the rain.

But he was less prone to be involevd in accidents. To me, it's more important.

[Aloisioitaly]

Any _reliable_ source...???

Bernie Ecclestone's (former Brabham boss) statements.

[kayemod]

.
Add to that the fact that he was this short, charmless guy with a crooked nose.

That's a bit unfair, the "charmless" bit. The restricted height and squashed nose comments I have no problem with.

[Lifew12]

Bernie Ecclestone's (former Brabham boss) statements.

I don't think it was illegal, as it came within the then very vague definition of what constituted legal fuel in F1. Ian Bamsey's superb 'The 1000bhp Grand Prix Cars' is very good information wise on this subject.

[angst]

He got thumped in qualifying also by Mansell, and yet he outscored Nigel, as he outscored Senna and every team mate he had.
Is pole more important than points? Sorry, i don't buy it.

On this point, wasn't it exactly this mentality by the lotus team that angered de Angelis (and rightly so, I think). In 1985 Senna made the lotus go like a rocket ship compared to de Angelis, but by doing so he ragged the thing stupid and so, unlike de Angelis, his car kept breaking. De Angelis was actually leading the WDC but the Lotus team insisted on backing Senna before him.

[Tim Murray]

... 1983 brabham's illegal fuel ...

Any_reliable_ source...???;)

Bernie Ecclestone's (former Brabham boss) statements.

I agree with Lifew12 - the fuel was not illegal as it met all the specifications then in force. It was obviously completely outside the spirit of the regulations, but it complied with them. There is an earlier thread on this:

BMW's exotic fuel in the Brabham in 1983 - is this story true?

See especially Michael Müller's posts.

Edited by Tim Murray, 05 March 2010 - 11:37.