Drivers in the Senna era vs. Schumacher era | Page 3 | FerrariChat

Drivers in the Senna era vs. Schumacher era

Discussion in 'F1' started by Tifoso1, Aug 13, 2008.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. 355

    355 F1 Rookie
    BANNED

    Jan 4, 2005
    3,643
    Toronto
    Full Name:
    Frank
    #51 355, Aug 19, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2008
    Dont have to know any of Alonsholes mechanics to know he is an idiot. They said it to the reporters earlier in the season.
    You obviously forgot all about the beginning of the season.
     
  2. 355

    355 F1 Rookie
    BANNED

    Jan 4, 2005
    3,643
    Toronto
    Full Name:
    Frank
    Thanks Tony..Your the best baby.
     
  3. 355

    355 F1 Rookie
    BANNED

    Jan 4, 2005
    3,643
    Toronto
    Full Name:
    Frank
    Please refresh yourself with the thread title and you will see that the word "if" is very applicable when making comparisons. I have no problem letting go...what I have a problem with is people like you who contstantly have to slam the best driver Ferrari ever had and doing it right here on a Ferrari site. Who really are the trolls anyway?
     
  4. Senna3xWC

    Senna3xWC F1 Rookie

    Nov 30, 2006
    3,152
    NYC
    +10000000000000000000000000
     
  5. Gilles27

    Gilles27 F1 World Champ

    Mar 16, 2002
    13,337
    Ex-Urbia
    Full Name:
    Jack
    Very true. Good point.

    Um, seeing as how there are only 10 teams...
     
  6. Tifoso1

    Tifoso1 F1 Rookie

    Nov 18, 2003
    2,602
    Pacific NW
    Full Name:
    Anthony C.
    I disagree. In the Senna era, with the exception of a couple of odd years, you had to either be in a McLaren-TAG/Honda or a Williams-Honda to have any realistic chance of winning a title, and to challange for race win on a regular bases. In the 90's, with the exception of 1990 and maybe 1995 you had to be in either a McLaren-Honda/Mercedes or Williams-Renault to do the very same thing. Which is the exact same thing as in the Schumacher era.

    Under the right circumstances, any driver and team can win a race. And on any given Sunday, there were just as many challengers in the Schumacher era as in the Senna era that can potentially win races.
     
  7. Gilles27

    Gilles27 F1 World Champ

    Mar 16, 2002
    13,337
    Ex-Urbia
    Full Name:
    Jack
    I did a little math. I compared how many different chassis and drivers won during both drivers' eras. Here is what came back from the lab:

    Senna, 1984-1994
    Avg. # Chassis = 3.5
    Avg. # Drivers = 5.2

    Schumacher, 1991 - 2005
    Avg. # Chassis = 3.2
    Avg. # Drivers = 4.9

    Not enough difference there to say there were profound differences. However, I believe the sentiment arises from the fact that, during Michael's 15 seasons there were 10 with only 3 teams reaching victory--and usually only 1 or 2 races--and in 2000 only two teams won. So for most of his career, it seemed as if only his and one other team were doing all the winning (Benetton vs Williams and Ferrari vs McLaren). On top of that, Michael never had a teammate who could unseat him, and as a result was always the "preferred victor" for Ferrari. During Senna's 11 seasons, there five seasons where 4 teams won, and in '85 there were 8 drivers from 5 different teams to take victory. There were two seasons that kind of cancel out--1988 for Senna, when McLaren fell one race short of running the table, and 2000 when Ferrari and McLaren won all the races.

    No analsysis would be complete without discussing teammates. Overall, I would say Senna had stronger teammates, mainly due to the way Schumacher crafted his arrangement with Ferrari. In '85 Senna paired with Elio de Angelis who tragically didn't get to show the world his full ability. '86 & '87, not so much with Dumfries and Najajima. '88 and '89 he raced along side Prost, and after Michael Andretti got the boot in early '93, Mika came on board. From '90-'92 his teammate was Gerhard Berger, one of my favorites. Overall, I would classify Berger as equal or better to anyone who partnered Michael at Benetton and Ferrari. But for the sake of argument, we'll call it a wash.

    So, in a nutshell, I'd have to say Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna were both really good.
     
  8. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Nov 11, 2003
    13,189
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    Excellent Anaylsis Jack, as usual. I don't know why these threads always have to turn into a pissing match, as both were great drivers of their respective ERAs. In addition, we should be happy to have witnessed two of the greatest F1 Drivers in history.

    The sadness that comes to mind for me was Gilles Villenueve who I believe was the fastest driver in any car and only had one season (1979) when he had a car that was one of the best. At the time the FW07 Williams chassis was coming up and was the dominant car, yet you never here of Alan Jones being compared to a Gilles Villeneuve. IMHO if Gilles had not been killed in 82 what he would have done with the 82 and 83 Ferrari would have been incredible. At the time McLaren was beginning on an upswing and in Gilles biography, Ron Dennis wanted him very badly and almost got him for the 1982 Season. Therefore, how many Championships would he have won? We will never know.
     
  9. Gilles27

    Gilles27 F1 World Champ

    Mar 16, 2002
    13,337
    Ex-Urbia
    Full Name:
    Jack
    Isn't it amazing how many great ones departed early, leaving us wanting more?

    Clark, Villeneuve, Senna, de Angelis, Bellof, Hendrix, SRV, Morrison...and on and on...
     
  10. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Nov 11, 2003
    13,189
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    Yup, Bellof is another example and watching him at the 84 Monaco when he was catching Senna and Prost in the Tyrrll was amazing.
     
  11. Senna3xWC

    Senna3xWC F1 Rookie

    Nov 30, 2006
    3,152
    NYC
    Actually at the beginning of the season there were 11... ;)
     
  12. kraftwerk

    kraftwerk Two Time F1 World Champ

    May 12, 2007
    26,826
    England North West
    Full Name:
    Steve
    Lennon.
     
  13. Senna3xWC

    Senna3xWC F1 Rookie

    Nov 30, 2006
    3,152
    NYC
    +1

    Everyone remembers Senna reeling Prost in but most people forget that Bellof was reeling them both in. What would have happened had that race not been called?

    We lost Senna at the height of his greatness but we will never know how great Bellof would have become.
     
  14. Gilles27

    Gilles27 F1 World Champ

    Mar 16, 2002
    13,337
    Ex-Urbia
    Full Name:
    Jack
    I knew someone would catch that:)

    ...and I knew I would leave out some important ones. That's almost worthy of its own thread over in OT.
     
  15. Tifoso1

    Tifoso1 F1 Rookie

    Nov 18, 2003
    2,602
    Pacific NW
    Full Name:
    Anthony C.
    Stats are great but just like many would say, they do not tell the complete story. There is one major factor that was involved in F1 racing that the above numbers does not reflect, attrition. It was touched on earlier in this thread, and I think most here will agree that cars are less reliable in the Senna era than in the Schumacher era, which makes it easier for lesser teams and lesser drivers to score points based on attrition of the field. If you factor attrition in, one can argue again that the numbers would be even closer than what is listed above.
     
  16. Tifoso1

    Tifoso1 F1 Rookie

    Nov 18, 2003
    2,602
    Pacific NW
    Full Name:
    Anthony C.
    Do you seriously feel that Senna was at his prime in in 1994 ? IMO, he was at his prime in the late 80's and early 90's. On the other hand, I would say that Jimmy Clark and Gilles Villeneuve die in their prime.
     
  17. Gilles27

    Gilles27 F1 World Champ

    Mar 16, 2002
    13,337
    Ex-Urbia
    Full Name:
    Jack
    True, but at the same time attrition affects the lesser teams more than the top end. If I had the time, I would love to look at all those types of numbers season to season and micro-analyze the stats, just for kicks.
     
  18. Senna3xWC

    Senna3xWC F1 Rookie

    Nov 30, 2006
    3,152
    NYC
    Absolutely. Look at how well he drove the year before in that piece of crap McLaren. 5 wins, including perhaps the greatest drive in F1 history, Donington. He was on pole for every race in 1994 before his accident. This was not a driver on the decline.

    I have no doubt that he had several more WDCs in his future had he not died at Imola.
     
  19. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Yes I have to agree, the car had issues not Senna.

    I will add though that the pressure due to MS and lack of results thus far was visibly mounting ... shades of Alonso there. One would have thought that Senna would have had self belief than that. I guess because Prost had walked the WDC in the Williams there was massive expectations and the season was just not happening for Senna.
    Pete
     
  20. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Nov 11, 2003
    13,189
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    Senna died just turning 34, Villenueve was 32 and Clark 33 or 34 I believe. He was at his peak as the great F1 Journalist Denis Jenkinson and Nigel Robebuck have said, considering he put that ill handling FW14 on the pole 3 times in 3 races before he died.
     
  21. Tifoso1

    Tifoso1 F1 Rookie

    Nov 18, 2003
    2,602
    Pacific NW
    Full Name:
    Anthony C.
    Not according to Ruben, Senna's psychy was suppose to be rock solid, not fragile like many champions before or after him.
     
  22. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Nov 11, 2003
    13,189
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    +1 In the book on Williams, from Tragedy to Triumph there is a good section about the 94 Season with Patrick Head and Frank Williams, explaining the early problems with that Chassis as Williams was one of the first teams with active suspension and it took them a while to adjust to the 94 Rules of a passive Chassis than other teams. In addition, the lack of other controls with that car and the adjustment from Imola on made the car much better, unfortunately Senna did not live to see that. There are no comparisons to Alonso as Senna never publicly complained about the issues with the car, but told the team what needed to be done. If anything, Alonso's personality is much more like Prosts.

    By the way Anthony C, I very much respect your opinions and knowledge about F1, Pete (PSK) as well. I am glad that this thread is so constructive and not too much Trolling going on except for the one Individual that I will not mention. Fortunately, the Ignore Function has helped a great deal, until someone responds and that Individuals stupid comments show up.


    Best,

    Tony
     
  23. Whisky

    Whisky Three Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2006
    31,836
    In the flight path to Offutt
    Full Name:
    The original Fernando
    #73 Whisky, Aug 20, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2008
    Of course I disagree.

    I said 'win', not 'win championships', and I also said 'not be a total shock if XYZ won', I didn't say 'win on a regular basis', but THANKS for twisting most of what I said...

    Back then, it simply would not have been a total shock to see Laffitte win in a Ligier, or Berger or Surer in an Arrows-BMW, or Cheever in a Renault, the top-12-14 cars were CAPABLE of winning - some obviously more than others, but today, we have the top-4 or 6 cars, and a HUGE HUGE gap back to the rest of the field - a gap that wasn't so big back then. Heck - on the short courses folks would put money on the Tyrrell-Cosworth - the ONLY non-turbo car out there, and it did well in Monaco and Detroit.

    Yes, we did have a bunch of PAY-AS-YOU-GO drivers, such as whoever brought money to be the #2 driver for Lotus (Dumfries, and the Japanese guy - Nakajima ?) and Ligier-Renault's #2, Francois Hesnault, but the cars were more competitive overall than they are today. Today it's so bad we have this silly three-tiered qualifying round just to keep the slow folk away from the fast folk.
     
  24. Tifoso1

    Tifoso1 F1 Rookie

    Nov 18, 2003
    2,602
    Pacific NW
    Full Name:
    Anthony C.
    I am not so sure that the 1993 McLaren-Ford was such a "piece of crap". McLaren has always been good when it comes to building a race car, the weak link in those lean years were the engines, which in 1993, was also shared by Schumacher's Bennetton. Consider the following: The "crap" was able to earn a rookie driver (Andretti) with a serious lack of committment to the series and a serious lack of seat-time, 7 WC points and a podium finish that year, not to mention how well the replacement driver (Hakkinen) was able to do for the remaining 3 races in that very same car (Q-position of 3rd, 3rd and a 5th) and earns him 4 WC points. Now, as per opinions of many forum members here, neither of the two drivers were even close to Senna's talent, and if that were indeed the case, Andretti and Hakkinen would not have been able to do what they did in 1993.

    This is based on the same logic that some forum members here used to dispute about Schumacher's first title and his talent as a F1 driver, which is that the 1994 Bennetton can not be that bad of a car just because it was able to earn Schumacher his first title. With that very same logic, the 1993 McLaren-Ford can not be that bad of a car as it was at least able to allow two very inexperienced and vastly inferior drivers ( Compared to Senna and his rivals ) those points and Q-positions.
     
  25. Tifoso1

    Tifoso1 F1 Rookie

    Nov 18, 2003
    2,602
    Pacific NW
    Full Name:
    Anthony C.
    Again, I disagree. The Q-gap this year hasn't been as great either but realistically, most would agree that you need either a Ferrari or McLaren-Mercedes to be a consistant threat to win races. Also, to have the above mentioned driver and car winning is pretty shocking as they may win a race or two in the season under the "right" circumstances, but they are not exactly someone that you can bank on winning the race on those Sunday mornings.
     

Share This Page