104 replies to this topic

[troyf1]

Let me make it clear ahead of time that I respect the hell out of MS and what he has accomplished. But people talk about him as the greatest driver of all time!!! Who has he beaten to earn this title?? Can anyone honestly say that MS has beaten anyone of similar talent to his?? Senna had to beat Prost in equal cars!!! The level of competition Senna faced week in and week out was miles ahead of what Michael has had to beat. I am not blaming Michael for this as he can only beat the competition that is provided to him. Look at who Prost had to beat to earn his 4 World Titles......Lauda, Senna, Mansell, Piquet!!! Again this is not another MS bashing thread........I am simply trying to rationalize the talk of MS as the greatest of all time.

[Bernd]

He is the greatest of his time 1994-Present but he is FAR from the greatest ever.

[silver fan]

Well looks like it's that time again, time to copare drivers of different eras and chase our tails until the cows come home. All this is pure speculation and achieves nothing. There are those that say Senna is the best, there are those that say Schumacher is the best. There is no way of proving or disproving either theory or any other for that matter so it remains in the court of 'pub talk/speculation'. For the record I'd say that Tazio Nuvolari would kick seven shades of shite out of both of them with one hand tied behind his back. Can't prove it though so it remains idle speculation, no different to Senna v Schumacher.

[troyf1]

Good reply Silver fan!!!..... Senna thought Fangio was the greatest of all time!!!

[squiggle bob]

statistically, i have a feeling few (if any) will even come close to beating schumacher EVER.. he has a minimum of 55 races left in his career and he already leads wins, fastest laps, laps lead, km's lead, is second in pole positons and so on.. who knows how much he will achieve in the next 55 races?! he could end up with 70 wins (only needs 19 out of 55 races - very possible) and he could even eclipse senna in pole positions.. he may even, as eddie irvine predicted, retire with 7 wdc..

statistically speaking, i think it would've been a hell of a battle to watch schumacher race the likes of senna, prost, mansell, piquet, lauda, fangio, moss, ascari to name but a few.. unfortunately it can never happen, and all we can do is say schumacher was by far the best driver of HIS era.. 4 wdc, runner up twice, out of the running once due to car (96) and once again in 99 due to broken leg..

[baddog]

why cant you just post this to one of the threads already discussing this same topic? is it SO important to have your very own special thread?

you make the admins life a pain with this sort of rubbish

Shaun

[kouks]

I went to Maranello last week, it's only a small wee little town with a main street, a bus stop, a few nice resturants and a cool cafe that sells "Maranello Made in Red " merchandise. I also visited the Ferrari Galleria which was quite impressive. If anyone is planning to go there using public transport, be carefull as there are only 3 buses each day that go from Modena to Maranello, and the Galleria is only open certain hours.

[Jaybee]

Here we go again!!!!!!! and they dare to call the season boring. They should see the countless repeats on this very topic.
Yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn, yawn.
(how do you do a yawning smilie?)

[ebe]

probably for the 1000th time:

MS has shown that he can beat AS, AP, NM, NP.

So what ?

[magic]

this not boring but THE question.

fangio was a 30+rookie.
jim clark and senna died too early and stewart retired too early.

ms's record is not finished but so is senna's.
how would senna or clark have progressed?

just imagine silverstone'99 a careerending crash for ms.
a 2x wdc, 2 lost wdc's, 1 rammed wdc, a few poles, and lots of buts and ifs.

[schumigal]

Here we go again!!

I dun think u will ever find an answer. Most SEnna fans will say Senna was the best and Schumacher's, Schumi the best. Does it really matter which one is better than another? IMO, it does not.

[Odyss]

The most objective measure of comparison of drivers even of different generations is the WDC titles won ( but is that the best measure? - don't look at me!). After all winning WDCs is what drivers set out to do in the first place and their achievements vis-a-vis their primary goal is an objective way to measure their performance. For those drivers who were not part of a strong team etc. - too bad. Picking or creating a strong team is part of the package.

That however does not apply when drivers who's careers have been prematurely terminated are being discussed. Senna vs MS is never going to be an objective comparison. But then you know that already know that.

[bravo2zero]

I suppose this debate will continue for years to come... I'm an out and out Senna fan and there is no doubt in my mind who's the better! We don't know how many more pole positions or race wins Senna would have achieved, suffice to say he would have certainly have passed Prost's 51 race victories plus countless more poles. Also to reiterate an earlier post Senna had Prost to race against! no direspect to the current crop of drivers I don't think most will go down in history as one of the greats and that includes Hakkinen (who is a very good driver) Schumacher has not got a Prost equivelent to compete against and I know that's not his fault, so as far as I'm concerned records don't tell the whole story. Any debate in any sport on who or was the best is subjective, we're all entitled to our opinions. I hope this reply stimulates more debate I would be more than happy to respond.

[LeTurc]

96 Michael Schumacher won 3 races. This solely makes him great.

Is he better than Senna? You cannot compare them. Senna fougt for wins first than points, Schumacher for points than wins. When a driver fights for wins it is normal that he seems better. But MS has 4 wdc now , the next year if he fights for wins instead of points we can see more Monaco 93,spain96, spa95... like drives from MS.

For me nobody matched 83-85 raged Senna.

[The RedBaron]

too difficult to compare racers from different eras.
Schumacher kind of suggested that Fangios 5 WDC's were on a different level due to the difficulty of driving such cars and it's appalling safety record.

On the other hand Nelson Piquet last night, intimated that Schumacher might be the greatest ever F1 driver!
We can't discount other greats like Senna, Prost, Clarke, Ascari too....it's really to hard to make a judgement.

Senna Vs MS.....IMO, Senna was the faster qualifier and marginally better in the wet , but I think MS overall is the better racer.
For argument sake without stirring up the pot...I would put them
on a equal level. It is pointless trying to make a comparison between them using data from 1992 to May 1994 ,as MS was a rookie just breaking into F1 whilst Senna was already a 3x WDC.

[olschak]

right, you cannot compare eras. anyway. yesterday's race was won on saturday's qualifying really, and that was a Senna-performance. let's say MS is the only driver alive who we measure against Senna's
style and perfection.
There is always the argument that Senna had the better competition. there's some dog-chasing-tail argument here. if you look at Senna's times and all his success you could easily say that Senna never really anyone against him that would live up to his performance. Prost I believe always had a top-car. It is MS 100% commitment that makes everyone else look slow.

[deangelis86]

Originally posted by troyf1
Let me make it clear ahead of time that I respect the hell out of MS and what he has accomplished. But people talk about him as the greatest driver of all time!!! Who has he beaten to earn this title?? Can anyone honestly say that MS has beaten anyone of similar talent to his?? Senna had to beat Prost in equal cars!!! The level of competition Senna faced week in and week out was miles ahead of what Michael has had to beat. I am not blaming Michael for this as he can only beat the competition that is provided to him. Look at who Prost had to beat to earn his 4 World Titles......Lauda, Senna, Mansell, Piquet!!! Again this is not another MS bashing thread........I am simply trying to rationalize the talk of MS as the greatest of all time.

The point Troy is making is the difference in competition when compared to the 80's.

I have to make Senna the more worthy champion simply because he faced the likes of Prost/Mansell/Piquet/Berger and then Schumacher on a daily basis. A pretty competitive bunch I think you would all agree!

However, If I had to choose between Senna and Schuey, then I simply could not give you an answer as to who was the 'best' driver.

[HSJ]

I agree with Magic 100%. Also, MS has gotten his results way too easy. In an era in which there was too often no one to beat, least of all his teammates (the only talent, MH, usually in non-competitive cars, plus MS is the only top team driver who has essentially a one-car team around him which means that it is the easier for him to win compared to other top team drivers who don't get special treatment and have actually challenging teammates). MS the best ever? Yeah, when pigs fly! (Though even if pigs do fly, he still isn't the best ever. Senna was. And yes, it is in fact fairly easy to see if you bother to research it.)

[HP]

Why even compare? We all have our preferences, but those comparisons rather reveal the mental state of the poster than anything else. My mental mark when I read such posts, "Needs a hero to succeed in his/her personal life." I know I get flamed for that comment but that's how I perceive it.

[Amadeus]

Originally posted by HSJ
the only talent, MH, usually in non-competitive cars

Can I share the drugs you are on that make you think that the McLaren of the last few years is "non-competitive"?

[Smooth]

Prost beat Senna
Senna beat Prost
Prost beat Schumacher
Schumacher beat Prost
Senna beat Schumacher
Schumacher beat Senna
car vs. car vs. driver vs. Newey vs. blah blah blah.....



Schumacher showed he had no problem taking on the 'establishment' on his arrival, and when Senna left, Schumacher was left with no real measure of talent, and he chose another challenge by going to Ferrari. Would he have done so if Senna was around? Would Bernie have let him? More likely Bernie would have had Senna in a Ferrari and Schumacher in a Williams..... that would have been great for business in Senna's last year. But I digress: The two seemed to me as if they would have been pretty evenly matched over a season, given comparable machinery. Senna was a slightly better qualifier, but not by the margin some may perceive. Schumacher seemed to be the better 'sprint' racer, and that is, as of the re-introduction of refueling in 1994, what we have now. Schumacher has a very canny sense of what is going on over the entire track, and seems better at 'reading' the race. Senna was very quick, but found the limit very often when pushing. His immense talent kept him on track, but he would have found a maturing Schumacher a much larger challenge in 1995 and on than Prost. Prost was quick, and clean, but often his biggest strength was his ablity to think. Schumacher has that, almost at Prost's level, and he had an aggression more like Senna. Fireworks? Oh yes. We were robbed, but to continue blaming Schumacher for the 'lack' of competition is a affront to any racing fan who has seen Hakkinen on full song, or who realizes exactly what Schumacher did by going to Ferrari instead of staying at Benetton or going to Williams or McLaren.

Schumacher, in 1996-1997 (In my opinion, his two best years of absolute driving brilliance) would have been a tough nut for Senna to keep cracking.

[Dr.Raj]

Originally posted by HSJ
(Though even if pigs do fly, he still isn't the best ever. Senna was. And yes, it is in fact fairly easy to see if you bother to research it.)

This question has been put to people who know more about F1 than you ever will and they've struggled to answer. It isn't clear that Senna was better. When you say Senna was the greatest, that's your opinion, it doesn't become a fact, and it doesn't matter how much research you've done.

Also, MS has gotten his results way too easy.

When he joined Ferrari, they were far from what they are today. It has been very much a struggle since then for them to reach where they are today. MS had a big role to play in that, he worked very hard as did the team. He regularly put cars that didn't deserve to win on the top step of the podium, and lead the way for Ferrari. That didn't come "easy", he had toil for it. Recovering from a broken leg wasn't easy either. Coming back after the shame of Jerez, and being competitive next season wasn't easy.

Prost often spoke about how Senna got lots of his motivation from wanting to beat him, who did Schumacher have?? He constantly kept himself motivated, and any sportsman will tell you how important motivation is and how hard it is to keep yourself constantly motivated.

plus MS is the only top team driver who has essentially a one-car team around him which means that it is the easier for him to win compared to other top team drivers who don't get special treatment and have actually challenging teammates).

That's a trait all the greats have, the ability to get the team to focus on you. Senna proved that in his very first year, Toleman-Hart were 100% behind him. Senna didn't stay in a team long enough for it to be fully built around him. He had to chase good rides because the opposition was so good. If he had stayed in a team long enough, the exact same thing would have happened.

The other drivers on the grid don't deserve special treatment, they haven't consistently proved that they're better than their teammates. If you can do that, special treatment is automatic.

BTW, you sound nothing like Magic. Though not often, he acknowledges that MS is very good. Quoting Magic, "the only worthy successor of senna."

[mhferrari]

I agree, this debate, you could bring up things from both sides. It is impossible to compare drivers, sometimes even in the same year sometimes, due to their machinery. So to compare drivers in different years is impossible at best.

[RJL]

There is no winning this debate, no matter which side a person takes. All that really needs to be said is that the world was cheated of a tremendous rivalry. I was eagerly anticipating watching the maturing Senna fight with the talented newcomer. With Senna's loss, only Mika has truly been able to (sporadically) rise to Michael's level.

[janusa]

I felt compeled to answer this post. First and formost I have been an MS since his first race with Jordan and will continue to support him untill he retires.

Having said this I feel comparing Schumi to Senna is like comparing apples to oranges. There are so many factors to compare when looking at the Champions of today to yester year. But I find it impossible to make a genuine comparison. Here are some examples.

The professor Alan Prost won 4 titles. Same number of titles then MS but Prost drove for Ferrari and tried to bring Ferrari back up. Prost did not suceed in his quest as we all know. So is MS better then Prost? Who knows

Senna: Some people say he was the best that ever lived. But looking back he won 3 titles but all with one team. Who knows how many more he could have won haad it not been for his untimely death. Also, another factor had Senna lived I doubt MS would have left Benetton. So, it is conciviable that MS could have won more OR less titles because of Senna and or the Benetton.

About Fangio: Fangio won 5 titles. When the car was not as commputerised as today. The sport was a lot more dangerous but I believe the drivers respected each other more then today. Because back then dieing on the track was a comon thing. The drivers I think had to not do so many bone headed moves ie cause wrecks because it was more dangerous. But I guess that is just my opinion.

Fact is you can't compare thw WC's from today to yesteryear because it is not possible. Of course the statistions will try because its their job. But fact is all have some form of bias to them in my opinion. They have a bias to them because people tend to compare the greats of today higher then the greats of yesterday because they remember the current greats because they autually saw them race. When they try to stack them up against the greats of yesteryear they sometimes tend to have to rely on other people's perspectives. I hope this makes some scense.

As for me personaly I rate Schumi the greatest from 94-to the present. I put him in the same league as (in no piticlar order) Prost, Stewart, Senna, Fangio, Clark etc

Janusa

[Maranello Man]

Dear Janusa:

Bless you! We are on the same page.
I TOTALLY AGREE.
MS will go down as the Greatest EVER before he retires from the sport.

Forza Ferrari!

[kenny]

Originally posted by Maranello Man
Dear Janusa:

Bless you! We are on the same page.
I TOTALLY AGREE.
MS will go down as the Greatest EVER before he retires from the sport.

Forza Ferrari!

huh? he never said ms is the greatest...

[The RedBaron]

Spot on JanUsa
However by the time Schuey retires, he will probably be elevated to the status of "the Greatest of all time" purely based on his achievements.

[Maranello Man]

I should have said:
He will go down as the greatest of HIS time. Statistically the Greatest ever.

I know it's like trying to compare Great baseball players from different eras..you can't. But it sure gets everyone in a heated conversation.

[Robbie]

Proposition:

It is said that MS has never had the same competition as Senna or Prost, and therefore cannot be as great.

But maybe, just maybe, the competion looks less strong simply because MS is so good?

If MS had not existed might we not all be hailing Hakkinen as the new Fangio, or Damon Hill as the new Prost, or J. Villeneuve as the new G. Villeneuve???!!.

[Raelene]

IMO Schumacher is the best...prove me wrong ;););)

you can't...it's all opinions, with no right or wrong answer.

[TAB666]

I think schumi would have beaten senna in the same car. Prolly not in qual but in racetrim he would have smoked senna. Senna wasnt well traind so shumi would have been able to hold a beter pace during the races.
I remeber a race in brazil ( 92 or 93) when you could see Sennas puls , it was almost 190 bpm. And after the race he was so tired he almost needed help out of the car. I have never seen MS in that situation.

[TimC]

Who's better, Senna or Schumacher? Who knows? Who cares? Senna was incredible to watch driving a racing car. Schumacher is incredible to watch driving a racing car. And that's all that matters.

[Chui]

Some of you are smoking some strong stuff. Schumacher was not Ayrton's equal and I'm sure he'd tell you as much. No one denies that the Williams was an evil handling car when Schumacher won the title in '94. The fact that Senna could put that ill-handling beast on the pole says a lot. Look at Donington '93 in the underpowered McLaren-Cosworth or '88 Suzuka or any wet race in which he simply shined. There seemed to be no limit to the guy's talent. It's difficult to assess current driver skills with the current rules, but no doubt Schumacher is one of the best.

Also, recall that Nelson Piquet and Ayrton were eternal enemies - both vying for the hearts of the Brazilian fans - so anything he says should be prefaced with a reminder of the ridiculous and acrimonious comments from Piquet towards Ayrton during their days of competition.

The level of competition is not quite up to par today as it was with Senna, Piquet, Mansell and Prost all able to win... This was true at one point in his career and eventually it turned into a three man series of sorts with Senna, Prost and Mansell. Today it's Hakkinen and Schumacher for three seasons and now he has some measure of competition from his brother on some tracks. Definitely not the same.

[Raelene]

Chui

no one can say difinitively which one was best, we all have our opinons. i think MS is better, seems Patrick Head agrees ;)

Patrick Head believes Schumacher is the best he has come across, with the Williams technical director having been in Formula One for more than 25 years.
Head did work with Senna, but all too briefly as their partnership lasted just three races before the Brazilian's untimely and tragic death at Imola in 1993.
But having watched Schumacher since then, Head said: "As an all round driver I would say Michael is the best I've seen.
"Certainly if you look at the last 10 years, he is the outstanding driver by far and for sure as hell while he is in there he's going to be the man to beat.
"The rest of us have to stand up to that and produce equipment to compete, while for the drivers as well, they have to raise their game to the same level.
"But Michael is also very intelligent and given his level of fitness he could go on for quite a few years yet and be very competitive.
"A lot also depends on how long that team (with sporting director Jean Todt and technical director Ross Brawn) stays together because they do work well.
"Some of the members of that team may stop before Michael does and then it will be interesting to see whether they manage to replace a member of that group with someone as strong."

[senninha]

Originally posted by TAB666

I remeber a race in brazil ( 92 or 93) when you could see Sennas puls , it was almost 190 bpm. And after the race he was so tired he almost needed help out of the car. I have never seen MS in that situation.

I tried to stay away form this thread since it'll go to nowhere but couldn't resist after reading taht post...

1 - On every start all drivers heart goes to almost 200bpm. Even MS, if he has a heart .... So what ? Piquet usually sleeps on grid, so he's the best driver ever to you?

Senna was tired in the end of the BRAZIL 91 due:


1 - Senna was pushed almost all race by Mansell
2 - Senna was at Brazil - Sao Paulo (where he was born) - and until THAT MOMENT Senna never had won at home. Prost joked a lot about it, just to tease Senna
3 - Senna had a big V-12 car, without TC, LC, electronic gearbox in a rainy track;
4 - Senna run 20 laps without 4th gear in a MANUAL gearbox and 7 laps ONLY on 6th gear doing an amazing lap times!! NP said he didn't beleive Senna was only in 6th gear. But on board camera showed Senna without CHANGE the gears !!

[baddog]

senna was, by that times stanbdards, a very very fit guy. MS is/was fitter, but senna was highly athletic and took fitness very seriously, unlike most of his contemporaries

Shaun

[senninha]

About fitness: just compare 84's Senna with 94's Senna and you'll see the difference!

[ebe]

@ magic

just imagine silverstone'99 a careerending crash for ms.
a 2x wdc, 2 lost wdc's, 1 rammed wdc, a few poles, and lots of buts and ifs.

just imagine Silverstone 99 has not happened:

MS a 5 time WDC, 55 wins ?????

maybe, maybe

[bravo2zero]

Well to continue with the observations... I would like to cover some of the comments, as far as fitness levels go you can't compare the two of them science has changed so much over the past few years new training regimes and diets etc... all sportsmen and women are fitter thats not to say Senna wasn't fit. As far as some claiming that Schumacher was the more intelligent driver is utter nonsense!! There is no basis or foundation for that remark Senna is the only driver I'm aware of that was able to recall a total lap describe every part of the circuit, camber, undulations etc.. and how the car behaved this is well documented in various books.
The sure sign of greatness is the ability of a driver to put a car on the podium when really it has no right to be there, Schumacher did it in the first couple of years at Ferrari, Senna did it in the Mclaren in 1993 when they had to use customer Ford engines. Who will forget Donnington that year! Murray Walker is quoted as saying Of all the laps of Grand Prix racing he's seen over the years if he has to go to his grave with one lap to remember it would be the opening lap at Donnington. I personally think that 93 was his best season ever to finish second to Prost in a Williams is the stuff lengends are made of. Another point I would like to mention is this point on motivation that Senna had Prost to motivate and Schumacher had to provide his own, again it's a little inaccurate Senna had stated many times that his motivation came from within and he used himself as a benchmark and tried to better his own achievements. Remember his racing record is incomplete

[olschak]

i remember ms beating senna in the last races of his ( senna's) career.
now go kill me for that!

[deangelis86]

Originally posted by Chui
The level of competition is not quite up to par today as it was with Senna, Piquet, Mansell and Prost all able to win... This was true at one point in his career and eventually it turned into a three man series of sorts with Senna, Prost and Mansell. Today it's Hakkinen and Schumacher for three seasons and now he has some measure of competition from his brother on some tracks. Definitely not the same.

At last, someone agrees - therefore common sense gives the benefit of the doubt to Ayrton, right?

But like I said earlier, put Schuey and Senna in the same car for 10 laps and I have not the faintest idea who would come out on top!

They are/were both in a different class.

[olschak]

in the eyes of you Senna believers out there MS could only live up to Senna if Schuey found a way to gas up Senna, get him out of his grave and race again.
Should Ferrai have a strong partnership with the pope we may see this happen.
Until then I guess we have to enjoy MS in life and Senna in memories.

[SennasCat]

Olshak has it right. To me Senna was probably the greatest ever (but I only started watching in 1976). MS is the closest thing to Senna. It says a lot for Senna that he is constantly dragged out as the yardstick all others are measured by. As I see it
Qualifying 1. Senna 2. Schu (but not much in it)
Strategy 1. Schu 2. Senna (just)
Test and development - even split
Rain 1. Senna (just) 2. Schu

The list goes on and on.

Go and flame me for it, but I believe that Senna was just slightly going downhill for the last 6 months of his life. Schu was young, brave and improving all the time.

Both truly greats, the rest are a long way away (except Hak on a great day like Spa 00 or Suzuka 00)

As the others have written, remember Senna fondly - he deserved it. Don't shitcan Schu just because the opposition is weaker. I honestly think that Senna is the only other one that was capable of galvanising Ferrari into what Schu made it into

[magic]

senna like prost would have struggled a lot at ferrari without luca, lauda, todt, brawn, byrne, bernie, agnelli and marlboro supporting him.

the root of ms's ferrari success is the brilliance of luca , like luca proved to be ferrari's savior in mid seventies.

[John B]

Prost and Lauda seemed to me like the drivers who really brought about the fitness boom. Lauda was into it from 1982 at McLaren as did his comeback (though there was a very funny story when he was caught trying to disguise Camel cigarettes as Marlboros ) and when Prost joined McLaren they both were always with a trainer. I have Prost's driving book which goes into some detail on his training and 50 BPM heart rate. I do remember Senna in 1984 being totally wiped out after some of the races. I assume, Senna being Senna, that when he moved to McLaren to take on Prost he got pretty serious with his training so as not to give any advantage....

[bravo2zero]

All I will say to Olshak is Schumacher may have beaten Senna in his last races... but that doesn't give an accurate observation to the last 3 races
Brazil.. Senna was passed in the pits hardly Senna's fault
Asia.. Senna beaten off the grid by MS (Benetton were discovered later in the season to have illegal software on their car, launch control! but claimed not to have used it) Then Senna was shunted by Larini in a Ferrari on the first corner
Imola.. Leading the race and we all know to well what the outcome was
So you see we didn't really have a consistent head to head with these two guys to make a judgement in 94. And as far as the other remark about Senna going downhill in his career what nonsense I think he was driving at his best '93 proved that... I hardly think at 34 you're past you're best, Senna would have retired if he thought he was there just making up the numbers. Remember Prost was nearly 40 when he won his 4th title. I'm sure as Schumacher progressed he would have pushed Senna to the point were he would have beaten him consistantly, but Senna would have retired before that and finished at the top he was intelligent enough to know when his time had come. It's just a shame that he was never able to make that decision.

[olschak]

bravo2zero, I did not want to say that from an objective point of view Senna was beaten by MS in those races. However I strongly believe that Senna himself knew there was somebody out there who would collect the points should he face a problem. And I am sure he knew it would always be the same driver doing that. And even more than that he knew that MS with his style could beat him fair and square when the time comes.
Unfortunately for us spectators Senna died and we'll never know the end to that story.
MS drives the torch he inherited from Senna lap by lap.

[Chui]

How good a car was the '94 Williams-Renault? Not very. To state that MS "beat" Senna and that Senna was past his prime is the quintessence of ignorance.

Am I a blind Senna fan? No. I like Nigel Mansell ON the track. I like Alain Prost. I even like Nelson Piquet... IN the car.

I don't think Schuey is better, but he and Senna would have been 1-2 and 2-1 with Hakkinen coming along [assuming the opportunities would have arisen].

Again, the level of competition and the additional software enhancements on the cars make it rather difficult to compare and, yes, statistically, there are numerous metrics where neither Ayrton or Michael are number one. But what - if there is any - is the definitive metric? There isn't one.

Numerous cars have been able to defeat the anti-traction control rule for a number of years yet still be within the letter of the law. Ferrari is one of them. I assume - with no proof - that McLaren is another one.

Some things I'd like to see:

Jacques Villeneuve in an "equal car" to Michael Schumacher.

Ralf Schumacher in an "equal car" to Michael Schumacher.

David Coulthard in an "equal car" to Michael Schumacher.

and depending on what Montoya develops into I'd like to see him as well.

As far as Patrick Head's comments are concerned he has been implicated in Ayrton's death and he was found guilty yet was not sentenced. The same is true with "Sir" Frank Williams. There opinions on Ayrton don't mean much to me. OK, now I'm back to being objective. Pat only worked with Ayrton for three races and it's exceedingly difficult to gather much info about the guy in, what, seven weeks time.

However, recall the "Championship that got away" from Ayrton with the aiding and abetting of one Jean-Marie Balestre? I've not forgotten. Jean even stated that he "assisted Alain" in procuring that Championship. Ayrton recalled that statement - as did Ron Dennis.

That aside Michael has dominated his competition in a manner that is more whole, perhaps, than Senna due to having only one true competitor with Coulthard nipping at him from time to time. Count the number of Championships between their respective main competitors... 2 versus 8 or 9. [don't recall how many Keke Rosberg won]

Michael will prove to put up the better numbers if he continues at his current pace; perhaps another title next year. I'm happy for Scuderia Ferrari as it's good for Fiat, Italy and the sport, but let's face it: Michael is not really being challenged like Senna was being challenged on a week to week basis. Sometimes it was Prost, sometimes Mansell in his latter days. Earlier it was Prost, Mansell, Piquet and Rosberg. Michael has to worry about Hakkinen, though not this year, Ralf on occasion and Coulthard on occasion. Only one, Hakkinen, have won a World Driving Title, but he's been pretty dormant this season.

Only early in Michael's career have we seen him tested on a regular basis with Villeneuve, Hill and only very briefly, though he was the stalker, with Ayrton.

Congratulations, Michael! May there be more.

[baddog]

prost is the only driver senna raced against who could be fairly emphatically stated to be better than schumachers rivals in recent years.

Hakkinen especially, and possibly jacques villeneuve, hill and others who have been unable to shine because of michael and mika could well be better than mansell, piquet, rosberg et al. Noone will ever know.

You talk of wanting to see coulthard in an equal car to schumacher, villeneueve in an equal car to schumacher.. why? wasnt seeing them in superior cars enough for you? villeneuve if you recall was outdriven but in the end won, coulthard has failed horribly to exploit that advantage.

As for coulthard being his main competition.. you mean only this year right? because prior to this year coulthard has never been any competition worth speaking of, and even this year has not in the end made it. or perhaps you were joking.

you also talk of sophistication of software, but the 93 mclaren was hugely sophisticated in many ways (with the exception of engine management software) than any car prior to spain this year, far more so than schumachers rides in the intervening period.

Shaun