52 replies to this topic

[pRy]

Does anyone here recall watching a TV programme which explained in detail a technique Senna used to drive in and out of medium to slow speed corners? I only saw it once, a few weeks after his death. It featured racing lines, and basically said something along the lines of Senna used to flutter the throttle constantly... something like that.

Anyone recall this? No smart replies please, I'm serious.

[StephenJK]

From what I understand, Senna's fluttering of the throttle was to compensate for turbo lag. By keeping the revs up close to where the boost would kick in, he could come off the apex of a corner and hit full power without any delay.

[F1Johnny]

In the Christopher Hilton book, he said the fluttering on the throttle gave the front end more bite and grip. When he drove a rally car he did the same thing as well and found it helpful.

[Marcel Schot]

You might want to check out the book "Ayrton Senna's Principles of Race Driving", which you probably have. Don't have it here at work, but I'll have a look when I get home.

[Arrow]

Originally posted by StephenJK
From what I understand, Senna's fluttering of the throttle was to compensate for turbo lag. By keeping the revs up close to where the boost would kick in, he could come off the apex of a corner and hit full power without any delay.

He drove the atmo cars like that as well.
From what ive read it was just his way of finding the limit and teetering on it.

Irvine once said that it was inferior to michaels smoother "always on it" technique.
Jackie stewart also wasnt a fan of that style and said it unsettled the car too much.

[speedmaster]

Senna had just one way to ride tracks.... FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

Senna forever

[Double Apex]

There was this tribute show on the BBC shortly after Senna died where they compared his driving with that of a McLaren test driver (Jonathan Palmer, I believe). It was done with telemetry graphs and all. This is probably the programme you also mean.

The basic story was that Senna braked less and later and wheras Palmer gradually increased the trottle, Ayrton would keep stabbing and pushing it so he could get the power down earlier. The end result was of course that Senna went faster into the corner and had a faster exit.

[hodgsonc]

I remember a similar programme on TV that compared teletry for Schumi against one of his old team mates (Johnny Herbert I think). When he was with Benetton.

The data was for a corner round Silverstone and it showed that Herbert drove with a smooth acceleration round the corner but Schumi had peaks in his acceleration line as he kept the car on the absoloute limit throughout the corner, hense he was a split second fast than Herbert through the corner.

I know this thread was about Senna but I also remember when Irvine was about to be Schumi's team mate he said he was looking forward to showing the world how good a driver he was. Then after a few races he admitted he didn't know how Schumi did what he did in the car.

[MacFan]

I think Senna's throttle-jabbing style was a kind of human traction control. I read an article years ago in Car magazine by LJK Setright, about a pre-war driver who had a similar style, Setright explained it more eloquently than I can, but it was basically a similar philosophy to the way ABS modulates the brakes (given that braking and accelerating are both exercises in maximising traction)

[Melbourne Park]

There was an article in F1 magazine this year, where they put some cameras on a corner, and compared all the F1 drivers. Some of the drivers lines changed a bit, due to whether they were right on it, but also some varied their lines more than others, due to their entry technique, some of were more precise (Ralf), although maybe not the best angle with Ralf. Some varied more than others, it seemed because they weren't as good. But the interesting thing was how much each driver's lines varied. There seemed to be different classes of drivers, it seemd Ralf on one side, and MS and Alonso on the other side of attacking the corner. JPM's line varied more that Ralf's, which was very steady. But JPM's line was not as straight as Ralf's, and therefore JPM's was more difficult, and maybe faster if done perfectly. I should re read the article; that was just what I remembered. An interesting article I thought.

Concerning Senna, Prost said that this throttle technique was beneficial on the turbo cars, but that when the engines changed it was no longer advantageous.

[Simioni]

Originally posted by Arrow
Irvine once said that it was inferior to michaels smoother "always on it" technique.
Jackie stewart also wasnt a fan of that style and said it unsettled the car too much.

Kinda hard to understand how other drivers can judge a technique they didn´t dominate. One could say 65 pole positions made pretty clear whether it worked or not.

Senna didnt use it only in med-slow speed corners, there´s a video of his Suzuka 89 pole lap on the net that shows him doing through the esses. I agree with Macfan that he used it the same way drivers today use traction control midcorner to help steering and it also allowed him to be on his way out of the corner earlier. Really short stabs, the rally driver who once ran beside him said he could see Senna´s foot working like mad but the rev counter hardly registered it. One side-effect of his style however is that he used 4% more fuel than other drivers with the same engine.

[joachimvanwing]

Senna was allways looking for a setup that would provoce the minimal ammount of 4wheel drift. Unlike Prost, he couldn't drive an understeering car. Senna wanted to make the rear step out at every corner for as little as possible.

On the braking side, he was harsh and agressive. Under accelarating he would start 'stabbing' the trottle like a mad man (that's how J.Palmer analysed a read out once)

I started watching F1 in 1982 and I never saw anyone being faster over 1 single lap than Senna. I've lots who're better driver, but never as genious or demi-god on groundspeed like Senna was. IMO the fastest I've ever seen racing, but not the best.

[Taxi]

I read in a magasine of 94, that Prost was the best in the slow corners. It was an williams engenier who said it. Seems like senna did the gambling with the trotle to "feel" the engine. But the case was that, prost was so precise in the balance of the breaking and getting in the corner that he would get out faster. In the very fast corners Mansell was the best. Is heart was bigger... But senna was, for him, the fastest overal.
Michel is very good in the fast corners But Mika did it better. In the slow corners he is realy the master.

[Fortymark]

My $0.02
He was controlling the car on apex with the accelerator/steering wheel, braked quite late. Not the tipical traditional style, not too extreme with too much entery speed.
I guess he could use the accelerator to almost have like rear wheel steering in slower corners. Makes a little sence when he was so fast around street circuits
Small slides, and not as seen as many of the drivers today with big moves. Finess in other words.
With being very responsive on the gas he could feel the traction, the grip etc and use it to be closer to the edge. This is why he was so good in the wet and semi wet conditions IMO. Always having the car/grip on the edge. Once you are controlling the car more than just driving it the easier it is when it´s wet.

[joachimvanwing]

Originally posted by Taxi
Michel is very good in the fast corners But Mika did it better. In the slow corners he is realy the master.

absolutely. MS is the mechanical grip and balance master, but had to let go MH through the really fast corners.

[whiteknuckles]

Agreed about Hakka. He was unbelievably accurate with his exit trajectory. I have seen few who have been able to consistently use the maximum road space available. I loved to hold my breath and watch him qualify because he frequently appeared to be on the verge of flying off the road on exit.

[red300zx99]

We'll technically speaking, not considering racing lines, MS's way is the fastest way to go around a corner. Braking until nessesary then appling the same amount of torque in the positive accelration direction. Therofore staying on the limit for a longer time the Senna's flutter method. Althouth Senna's method could probably allow for a higher exit speed

[cheesy poofs]

I've read that Wurz's driving is reminiscent of Senna's.

[scarbs]

As I recall senna would brake earlier and gentler for a corner carrying more speed in and then turn the car fluuidly at the apex before stabbing at the throttle (in a manner Honda likened to a "stacato") to contantly test the grip of the car to accellerate out of the corner. To achieve this he required a good front end on corner turn-in (not understeer) and good mid to exit control at the rear.

This approach is the antithesis of the conventional ego-ridden last of the late brakers latest turn-in style of many drivers. The result if the car handled well enough was a faster corner speed gaining a lot of speed earlier on corner exit, where as the conventional style gets you to the apex quicker but with less speed hence you lose out on corner exit.

Strangely Michael Schmacher has a similar style requiring a pointy car to get the car through the entry with alot of momentum before being very early on the power to gain speed on the following straight. this year Michael had a car that did not turn in as well as the F2002 did, hence he lost out to Rubens more classical style. But when you look at manouvres on Mihael like that of JPMs at Monza (or previous Hakkinen moves) the other drivers gets into the corner quicker and along side but michaels style leaves him with a faster exit pushing him back in front.

[HSJ]

Originally posted by Melbourne Park
There was an article in F1 magazine this year, where they put some cameras on a corner, and compared all the F1 drivers. Some of the drivers lines changed a bit, due to whether they were right on it, but also some varied their lines more than others, due to their entry technique, some of were more precise (Ralf), although maybe not the best angle with Ralf. Some varied more than others, it seemed because they weren't as good. But the interesting thing was how much each driver's lines varied. There seemed to be different classes of drivers, it seemd Ralf on one side, and MS and Alonso on the other side of attacking the corner. JPM's line varied more that Ralf's, which was very steady. But JPM's line was not as straight as Ralf's, and therefore JPM's was more difficult, and maybe faster if done perfectly. I should re read the article; that was just what I remembered. An interesting article I thought.

Concerning Senna, Prost said that this throttle technique was beneficial on the turbo cars, but that when the engines changed it was no longer advantageous.

That reminded me of something I've thought about. Often some drivers get praise for always taking the same line through a corner lap after lap, and similarly keeping the same lap times lap after lap in a race. But really both could be slightly 'wrong' in a sense: since the grip level of the car varies as the tyres, fuel load, and track conditions change, it might not be the best way to do a corner the same way every time; also because of the same things exactly consistent lap times may not in fact be a sign of great driving at all. I would agree, however, that as a rule of thumb both points are valid, but not in the strictest way, but only as a general trend. If a driver applies them too strictly he's probably doing less than optimal job.

[MilanF1]

I am not so sure that Mika was better in high speed corners. All I know is that in the past and also today there were speed traps up on the hill at the exit of Eau Rouge, at the exit of R130 and at the entry of swimming pool complex in Monaco. When McLaren dominated(98), Mika and David had highest speed at Eau Rouge, 2-3km/h higher than Michael and Villeneuve. But since 2000 Michael was the fastest in all of these corners, when it was measured.
Michael was usually 10km/h faster than his teammates in this kind of corners. Mika and David were comparable(MH usually a bit faster).

It’s definitely true that Mika used more road space than Michael. But it’s usually about using more or less of a kerb. But it isn’t true that using more of a kerb means better laptime. Schumi’s line is perhaps more impressive, because by same speed he doesn’t need so much road space and so doesn’t unsettle the car on the kerb in high speed corners, where it could be very crucial. Last year he was doing 306km/h in R130 in qualy, Rubens 298. Rubens was using a lot of the exit kerb(as almost all other drivers), Michael’s wheels only touched the white line.

Sorry if it’s too much OT.

[mtl'78]

Well I have very limited experience but it seems to me that jabbing the throttle mid-corner would have the effect of throwing the weight distribution back and forth. A short burst of acceleration would shift weight to the rear, which would increase understeer and coming off the throttle sharply would have the opposite effect, puting weight on the front and increasing oversteer.

In theory this technique is slower, because there are moments (off throttle) that you are 'below' the maximum available grip, but I suppose someone like Senna could make it work. Another important factor is driver preference. It's like Andre Agassi. Any tennis expert will tell you he has terrible fundamentals, he takes full swings on his volleys, rarely bothers to get in perfect position for his groundstrokes, etc. but he made it work for him.

[HSJ]

Originally posted by scarbs
As I recall senna would brake earlier and gentler for a corner carrying more speed in and then turn the car fluuidly at the apex before stabbing at the throttle (in a manner Honda likened to a "stacato") to contantly test the grip of the car to accellerate out of the corner. To achieve this he required a good front end on corner turn-in (not understeer) and good mid to exit control at the rear.

This approach is the antithesis of the conventional ego-ridden last of the late brakers latest turn-in style of many drivers. The result if the car handled well enough was a faster corner speed gaining a lot of speed earlier on corner exit, where as the conventional style gets you to the apex quicker but with less speed hence you lose out on corner exit.

Strangely Michael Schmacher has a similar style requiring a pointy car to get the car through the entry with alot of momentum before being very early on the power to gain speed on the following straight. this year Michael had a car that did not turn in as well as the F2002 did, hence he lost out to Rubens more classical style. But when you look at manouvres on Mihael like that of JPMs at Monza (or previous Hakkinen moves) the other drivers gets into the corner quicker and along side but michaels style leaves him with a faster exit pushing him back in front.

Hmm, and that post reminds me of the following things. First of all there seem to have been rather few analyses on the styles of the likes of JPM and KR for example. I guess people write "songs" about drivers only after they're established legends or thereabouts, so we'll have to wait. But there was an interesting comment by Hughes in Autosport after Monaco about Kimi: apparently KR managed to go through (some slow) a corner a whole gear higher than anyone else. Apparently he heard everyone else downshift one more time than Kimi. Of course we don't know the gear ratios used by every driver, so there's not necessarily anything particularly special about it, but it was an observation that struck me at the time.

[HSJ]

Originally posted by MilanF1
I am not so sure that Mika was better in high speed corners. All I know is that in the past and also today there were speed traps up on the hill at the exit of Eau Rouge, at the exit of R130 and at the entry of swimming pool complex in Monaco. When McLaren dominated(98), Mika and David had highest speed at Eau Rouge, 2-3km/h higher than Michael and Villeneuve. But since 2000 Michael was the fastest in all of these corners, when it was measured.
Michael was usually 10km/h faster than his teammates in this kind of corners. Mika and David were comparable(MH usually a bit faster).

It’s definitely true that Mika used more road space than Michael. But it’s usually about using more or less of a kerb. But it isn’t true that using more of a kerb means better laptime. Schumi’s line is perhaps more impressive, because by same speed he doesn’t need so much road space and so doesn’t unsettle the car on the kerb in high speed corners, where it could be very crucial. Last year he was doing 306km/h in R130 in qualy, Rubens 298. Rubens was using a lot of the exit kerb(as almost all other drivers), Michael’s wheels only touched the white line.

Sorry if it’s too much OT.

Eau Rouge is probably not the best indicator about skill in fast corners, because apparently with today's F1 cars the fastest way around the whole lap around Spa isn't to be flat out and all that at Eau Rouge. So if you set your car super fast at Eau Rouge you'll lose over the full lap, and I don't mean just going through Eau Rouge at full throttle which is apparently easy enough for any driver with today's cars, but rather how you set up the car for the whole lap.

[Bladrian]

I'm reminded of the time Michael Schumacher did a large part of a race using only 5th gear (including a pitstop) and finished second. Just imagine where he would have finished if he'd used all the gears ... possibly he should get advice from Kimi on how to use one less gear.

[MilanF1]

Do you really mean that Michael is sacrifising time in other sectors in Spa?

[pRy]

Thanks for all the response guys

[Vrba]

Originally posted by HSJ


Eau Rouge is probably not the best indicator about skill in fast corners, because apparently with today's F1 cars the fastest way around the whole lap around Spa isn't to be flat out and all that at Eau Rouge. So if you set your car super fast at Eau Rouge you'll lose over the full lap, and I don't mean just going through Eau Rouge at full throttle which is apparently easy enough for any driver with today's cars, but rather how you set up the car for the whole lap.

Yes, but if they all set up their cars in such a manner then their relative speed differences have merit.

Hrvoje

[mikabest]

This is not exactly on topic anymore, but since there's been some discussion about the driving styles of Mika and Schumi I quote here the old article in which Brundle compares Mika and Michael. This is what he says what their telemetry told about fast corners:

"Both drivers have a truly fantastic ability to maintain apex minimum speed in apparently straightforward corners - to prevent the appearance of a V-shaped dip in the track-speed line on their telemetry traces, if you like.
With both of them, the apex deceleration is smoothed out - it's more of a U than a V - and I've rarely seen that. It only works out as a couple of miles per hour, but it's consistently there and it makes a significant cumulative difference.

So how is it achieved? Mika uses the pedals smoothly. He didn't always brake later than I did - in fact, I often braked later than Mika and I think David Coulthard does the same today - but Mika is very good at synchronising the application and release of throttle and brakes.

Michael is also strong in this area, but he likes to steer the car with the throttle a bit more than Mika does. He's not quite as fluid. The net result is remarkably similar: a higher apex minimum speed, and the ability to set the car up for that apex so that once power is applied, the car is straighter sooner - so it's ready to accelerate away from the corner earlier and faster."

yours,

ever so biased MIKABEST

[AndreasF1]

I read in a magasine of 94, that Prost was the best in the slow corners. It was an williams engenier who said it. Seems like senna did the gambling with the trotle to "feel" the engine. But the case was that, prost was so precise in the balance of the breaking and getting in the corner that he would get out faster


______________________________________

Sure, that would explain why Prost dominated Senna in Monaco by over 2 sec in qualifying for the 1988 GP.

[ferrari_forever]

I know this is slightly OT too, but I seem to recall an article, or possibly a commentator last year talking about drivers and their positioning of cars through corners. I remember one of the comments that MS is one of the few drivers to consistently place his car slightly differently each lap through a race to try and find the perfect lap, whereas RS (I think) always placed his car on the exact same spot.

[Simioni]

for anyone interested on visual reference, here's a couple of shabby Senna laps from Monaco 90 qualifying and Suzuka 89 qualifying:

http://www.s2kca.com..._Suzuka_GP.mpeg

http://www.s2kca.com...h_narration.avi

always a nice trip down memory lane

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by Simioni
for anyone interested on visual reference, here's a couple of shabby Senna laps from Monaco 90 qualifying and Suzuka 89 qualifying:

http://www.s2kca.com..._Suzuka_GP.mpeg

http://www.s2kca.com...h_narration.avi

always a nice trip down memory lane

I couldn't read the second but the first was great. Interesting looking back how the suspension seems softer than now, and how that engine just does not rev!

I think fuel consumption issues do effect the way drivers now race in F1, as do the reliability issues of points scoring. So the modern driver is often holding it back a bit. But then Juan Fangio was very famous for being able to win the race in the slowest possable time ...

[senninha]

Originally posted by AndreasF1
I read in a magasine of 94, that Prost was the best in the slow corners. It was an williams engenier who said it. Seems like senna did the gambling with the trotle to "feel" the engine. But the case was that, prost was so precise in the balance of the breaking and getting in the corner that he would get out faster


______________________________________

Sure, that would explain why Prost dominated Senna in Monaco by over 2 sec in qualifying for the 1988 GP.

About Senna´s style with Turbo cars, i advice read John Watson´s comments when he raced with Senna in one race (85, British GP).

Watson, said it was wonderful and he didn´t beleive how he controled the car with only two hands.

Just after felt Senna´s style, Watson came fast to Lotus´s box to describe the "experience". Peter Warr said "we know it".

It is well written in "Ayrton Senna. The hard edge of genius".

Hope someone can bring it here.

[Rene]

Originally posted by AndreasF1

Sure, that would explain why Prost dominated Senna in Monaco by over 2 sec in qualifying for the 1988 GP.

I think that the reason Senna was so great in Monaco has more to do with his banzai style of driving than his ability through the slow corners....

[senninha]

Originally posted by Rene


I think that the reason Senna was so great in Monaco has more to do with his banzai style of driving than his ability through the slow corners....

So, in race he did only "banzai style" to build a 1 MINUTE gap over Alain every year?

The guy was a superman. What a fitness ...

[Ross Stonefeld]

Prost was a real slouch

[dan2k]

Saying this years car doesnt suit MS, and that is the reason why Rubens is beating him is not true.
MS after testing the F2003: "I'm so in love with this car". He Doesnt sound unhappy to me.
Since TC has been allowed RB is closer because he now has TC available to him too.

Senna suspected that MS was cheating, and said it many times but no one believed him.
MS needed computers to beat Senna's god given right foot.
Why does MS favour TC, yet Senna always hated it? Because he knew his right foot was better then anyone else.

[Merlin]

Originally posted by HSJ


Hmm, and that post reminds me of the following things. First of all there seem to have been rather few analyses on the styles of the likes of JPM and KR for example. I guess people write "songs" about drivers only after they're established legends or thereabouts, so we'll have to wait. But there was an interesting comment by Hughes in Autosport after Monaco about Kimi: apparently KR managed to go through (some slow) a corner a whole gear higher than anyone else. Apparently he heard everyone else downshift one more time than Kimi. Of course we don't know the gear ratios used by every driver, so there's not necessarily anything particularly special about it, but it was an observation that struck me at the time.

This is also a bit OT, but I was thinking that since the cars have traction control and some 900 bhp, why bother changing to the lowest gear. The cars have so much power that they hit the traction limit even a gear higher. Or how the engines cope with this?

[Melbourne Park]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Prost was a real slouch

[Newtown]

Originally posted by dan2k
...Since TC has been allowed RB is closer because he now has TC available to him too.

Senna suspected that MS was cheating, and said it many times but no one believed him.
MS needed computers to beat Senna's god given right foot.
Why does MS favour TC, yet Senna always hated it? Because he knew his right foot was better then anyone else.

Why would MS favour using TC if it brings the field closer to him as you say RB has gotten closer to MS? I would think that a driver like MS would want to keep his advantage over the whole field and want to ban TC...

[Oho]

Ave !!

Dont know of his current stance but at time they were allowed back Schumcaher was definately pro driver aids. He certainly seemed to get an advantage form TC, not in ultimate pace but in rear tyre wear. My understanding is that Schumcahers style stresses rear tyres quite heavily and TC alleviated those problems.

- Oho -

[Vrba]

Originally posted by Oho
Ave !!

Dont know of his current stance but at time they were allowed back Schumcaher was definately pro driver aids. He certainly seemed to get an advantage form TC, not in ultimate pace but in rear tyre wear. My understanding is that Schumcahers style stresses rear tyres quite heavily and TC alleviated those problems.

- Oho -

Perhaps it's not just that. I can hardly imagine who would be against the stuff that make one's job easier. For example, Nigel Roebuck periodically (when he judges it's time to attack today's Formula 1 again) writes how Senna absolutely loathed driver aids. OK, but if they weren't useful, why had he used them? Obviously because that way he was faster and that the car was easier to drive (probably) was a nice benefit. One may argue that he felt threatened by the driver aids in a sense that lesser drivers would catch up with him that way but the practice showed that driver aids have small if any influence (in any case a doubtful one) on pecking order. Driver aids of today are not a new thing. Back in the beginning of 20th century the tyres were not changed as today, i.e. by changing the complete wheel but by changing the rubber itself. It was much more laborious and time-consuming work. The drivers also had to press a pedal from time to time to lubrify joints on the suspension. Things change all the time and why would e.g. manual gearchange be any exception? As I once wrote, I'm surprised that by now gearboxes aren't fully automated and integrated with engines, not just in Formula 1 but in everyday use.

Hrvoje

[Zoe]

Originally posted by Vrba
For example, Nigel Roebuck periodically (when he judges it's time to attack today's Formula 1 again) writes how Senna absolutely loathed driver aids. OK, but if they weren't useful, why had he used them?

Your (good) point reminds me of the rain soaked Donington race. Evereyone, including our beloved Nigel, is in awe of Sennas drive in the rain, from 4th (or what) starting position to first in just a few corners. What noone, including our beloved Nigel, mentions is the little driver aids that certainly helped him with that task.....

Zoe

[kodandaram]

I regret the fact that I wasn't lucky enough to watch Ayrton Senna racing on TV ....in those days we didn't get F1 coverage like the one we get now courtesy of Star sports .........

But from what I have read and seen some clippings in a programme called " Grand Prix Racing - History and Legends " ......I can say that Senna drives very simialar to Panis , Hakkinen ....I mean the drivings style .....always braked in a straight line from what I can see and yes ....sometimes it sounded like he was on and off the gas going into corners ....for whatever reasons ....


But he was very smooth while turning in contrary to the claims of the car getting unsettled due to his throttle manipulations .....he had very good reflexes and wouldn't mind apllying some opposite lock and let the car kick out in the medium speed corners ...IIRC .....a bit like Villeneuve but not as ragged visibly ....very good control over throttle (which is expected of drivers who like to turn in with some power always on ), and steering ...

[flyingfin]

Originally posted by pRy
. It featured racing lines, and basically said something along the lines of Senna used to flutter the throttle constantly... something like that.

Interesting...i do the same thing when i play nfs5 and i didn't know Senna used to do it or anyone else too.....wow!...thx for info...now i am on cloud no. 9

[Fortymark]

Originally posted by Zoe


Your (good) point reminds me of the rain soaked Donington race. Evereyone, including our beloved Nigel, is in awe of Sennas drive in the rain, from 4th (or what) starting position to first in just a few corners. What noone, including our beloved Nigel, mentions is the little driver aids that certainly helped him with that task.....

Zoe

If the same driver was able to lap the field with an 800hp turbo monster without any driver aides and with stiffer competition in the rain, whom do you think gained the most by having driver aides?

[fingers]

Originally posted by speedmaster
Senna had just one way to ride tracks.... FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

Senna forever

You see a lot of drivers these days doing the things Senna did in the car I mean they're not as good at it because you can't copy 'feel' but you see a lot of throttle 'pursuasion' a lot of it has gone though since you can get on the throttle earlier or not so gingerly with traction control, Senna used to virtually force the car out of the corners. His entry speed was blindingly quick but not in the form of a short sharp snap very smooth very similar to Fisichella nowadays fast and smooth like Prost also. The difference in the cars makes it very hard to compare as always because what the drivers look to be doing in the corners rather look more impressive now purely due to better gearchanging, grip, power and traction and of course powered steering !! Senna's incredible speed was purely down to very good judgment/accuracy when choosing his tradjectory into corners he also was sensible with his choice of lines dependant on what was next e.g. a straight or a hairpin whatever . Along with the throttle control and general great touch the out and out main reason why he was so fast was purely down his higher level of determination and above all massive level of concentration to get every corner right one after the other monotinously. He like a slight touch of oversteer just to assist corner entry allowing him more entry speed. He was only great in the wet because he practiced and practiced until he couldn't practice no more determined to be bloody quick in the rain when still racing in Brazil.

[masterhit]

He did with his foot what traction control does these days, based on skill and feel. At the time a lot of successful racers thought it was wrong. Now it is the norm, but electronically operated as so few can think and react at that speed to do so with their feet. Amazing.

[RSNS]

Well, back to the original topic:

In fast corners Senna liked the car to understeer slightly; in slow corners he liked it to oversteer slightly (this is taken from his book on driving technique - which really says very little about racing technique, by the way).

The very fast jabs were, as far as I can fathom, a way of alwys feeling the adhesion of the car and of always remaining at the limit: with superfast reflexes that is what you can do: testing the car's adhesion constantly, both at the front and at the rear (remember the central point of gravity of the car is constantly changing during a corner).

Someone (I'm sorry I forgot who it was) mentioned the technique functioned as a kind of 'grip control'. In a way that may be true but I think that is linked with feeling the limits of adhesion at all time.

I particularly remember an incredible lap on the Parabolica of Estoril (a very long right hander) : how he kept the car going at that speed I just don't know (neither could anybody else) because one felt he was just about to lose it. That is what I mean by being in total control.

By the way, Schumacher had a broadly similar (different in the way he carries it out) technique during corners: hence the very tiny but very frequent corrections and the not very smooth style of his younger days. And also Fangio, who cornered using mostly the throtle.

::