Your view: Senna the greatest driver

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/23022009/58/view-senna-greatest-driver.html

Your view: Senna the greatest driver
Eurosport - Mon, 23 Feb 19:56:00 2009

Eurosport-Yahoo! readers have voted Ayrton Senna the greatest Formula One driver of all time, with Michael Schumacher second.




Brazilian Senna, the three-times world champion who perished at the Tamburello corner at Imola in 1994, garnered a massive 47 per cent of the vote.

German Schumacher, who brought the glory days back to Ferrari with five World Championships while also winning a pair of titles with Benetton, was more than 1,000 votes behind with 37 per cent.

Of the 12,000 plus who registered their driver of choice, five per cent opted for Jackie Stewart, and four for both Jim Clark and Juan Manuel Fangio - with the Scot marginally ahead in terms of the exact number of votes.

Frenchman Alain Prost took a disappointing two per cent, Niki Lauda managed one and Jack Brabham was unable to win enough votes even for that.

Who is the greatest driver of all time?

12,118 votes as of 17:00 UK time on Monday February 23

Results:

Ayrton Senna - 47%

Michael Schumacher - 37%

Jackie Stewart - 5%

Jim Clark - 4%

Juan Manuel Fangio - 4%

Alain Prost - 2%

Niki Lauda - 1%

Jack Brabham - 0%


Hambone did not even make the list........ I guess Timo Glock did not vote.

 

Neither did Tazio Nuvolari.

I think that this type of junk science survey only reflects the limited historical knowledge of the survey pool.

It is not really useful for much in real life.

 

I only started to watch F1 in 87. Since then, not a single Driver impressed me more than Senna.

 

IMHO, Senna was the FASTEST driver. It was always important for him to be on pole and dominate. His ruthless style and extreme talent was all part of the mystical legend. As a lifelong F1 fan, and not having seen any of the greats from the 50's and most of the 60's, I tend to boil it down to statistics (although they don't tell the whole story) and vintage footage of those I did not get a chance to see. Taking all this into account, here is my personal top 5.

1) JM Fangio - 5 Titles in 7 full F1 seasons, 24 wins in 51 starts, never started off the front row.

2) Jim Clark - All time wins leader upon his death, 2 titles, 1 team throughout career, never finished second.

3) A. Senna - 41 wins, 3 titles, record poles upon death, raced many drivers in his era that were more than capable (Prost, Mansell, Piquet)

4) M. Schumacher - 91 wins, 7 titles, every significant record. Only this low because competition seemed to be not as competitive. (No fault of his, just the times he raced in)

5) N. Lauda - 3 titles, lost 4th title in 76 due to crash and missed races. Very calculated, knew when to drive hard and when he was the dominate car and drove accordingly.

I know this list is subjective, but this is how I see it.

 

+1 Polls like this don't mean Jack to me, unless the age of the voters are made known.

 

But, then Kraftwerk - we are never going to be without them, are we?

Along with the "was Babe Ruth a better ball player than A-Rod", "Rocky Marciano could take on anybody today", etc.

Just so long as we realize we are not writing fundamental science nor constitutional law with this stuff...

 

True, it's a forever debatable circle of who is the best.

 

Why would he?

 

These comparisons are stupid, but we all do them.

IMHO Schumacher should be first, not Senna.

Why? And all the Senna fans on here know I'm not a big MS fan.

- The #1 goal of any F1 driver is the title. If you have more of that, you win.
- While MS did have a walk in the park with some of his titles, he also faced very tough competition, a ridiculous FIA who took him out of 94 in favor of Hill and he deliberately chose to forego his winning team and start from scratch with the loosers of Maranello. And he made them into the winning machine they are still today. Granted with help of Brawn, Todt and others, but still.
- No doubt, had Senna lived he'd accumulated more titles and MS less, but that's a bunch of woulda, could, shouldas. For all we know Belloff could have won all the titles from Senna or MS.
- Finally, MS was giving Senna hell in 94. Senna was on the decline and MS rising, so the comparison is not fair (it rarely can be), but it did show, that had they both been living in the exact same time, their battles would have been any bit as big as Senna-Prost or Prost-Lauda. Which is a long way of saying, racingwise I think for all practical purposes they were equal. And at that moment, the cold statistics settle the matter.

In the end even the hypothetical direct comparison is futile because ultimately MS was a product of Senna. He learned and copied from him. Without Senna, MS might never have become the star we know. So does that leave Senna in the lead? Well, he wasn't raised in a vacuum either but studied the people before him.

As I said, these comparisons are stupid, but I still did it.

 

It's a bit soon to be pointing out that he's not on an all-time-greats list after only 2 seasons...

 

It never fails, this topic gets re-visited every single off season. Talking about who is the greatest F1 driver ever is like trying to figure out who is the greatest Jedi knight ever.

 

Takuma Sato for his pass on Alonso in Canada 07'.


/discussion

 

Classic!

 

I would argue that Senna made a lot of mistakes that Schumacher did not... if you look at the number of races that Senna lost because of simple mistakes... its a lot more that Schumacher.. Senna's Lotus days were frequently filled with errors in race craft... accidents, tires, engines etc....I think Schumacher so far takes the number one slot...sheer consistency alone gets him there... that being said I think guys like Fangio and Clark are overlooked, but they drove in the days when you had to be good or else you died.

Again all that being said I think Mario Andretti is the greatest driver of them all... he simply raced and won in everything... he's only missing a Le Mans victory... but still raced there and finished well.... here is a guy who raced everything from dirt cars to F-1 and could win! amazing! can you name anyone else close?

 

AJ Foyt has the LeMans win, but no F1 title, let alone starts.

That's about as close as you will get.

Until Jack Villeneuve wins in Nascar... LOL

 

There's this book i bought about Schumacher, and the engineer that worked with him during his early days as well as Senna, i can't recall his name now tho, he pointed out that MS always used to push whatever sort of car given to him, whether the car is fast, with great handling, or slow with terrible handling, he always pushed to the limit.

Senna, however, will never push the car to it's limit when he's not hapy with the setup, the handling, according to his likes.

I think Senna will alays be remembered for his talent, his passion, and his ruthless-ness. But Schumi will always be remembered because he took the losers from Maranello form craps to world champions thru hard work, dicipline, and no nonsense approach.

 

Andreas, as usual, you don't know what your talking about. Why? Because the cars in MS's times were much more reliable, look at how many more times Senna led laps, period.

 

Nuvolari is my all time hero, but I wouldn't call him an F1 driver so I think it is right that he isn't in this list. I think of F1 drivers as people who have competed in the World Championship that started in 1950.

These type of surveys are a way of filling time in the off-season but it is impossible to know who is the best driver.

 

While MS didn't need the FIA to do his dirty work, he himself took Hill out to win the title.

 

Wouldn't call him an F1 driver??? After he beat both Auto Union and Mercedes in that obsolete Alfa?

And then became number one in the super-dangerous Auto Union 12 cylinder?

I submit that it was more Formula One back in the 1930s than it has probably ever been.

Not to diminish JMF, Stirling, Jackie or Jimmy - of course.

 

Steve Matchett' s "Life in the fast lane" perhaps? An excellent read and recap of what went down in 94.

Wow. I thought we were friends.

Regarding the reliability: If it were that easy, why doesn't have Alonso 4 titles by now. Or Schumacher 8?

There is always something that prevents one from winning. Before Senna's time it was the cars that easily crushed into nothingness and before that the cars that burnt instantly and before that the cars that threw out their drivers. Yet Fangio managed to collect 5 titles despite all that.

 

You know I was kidding with you buddy. That is why I had put the Smiley Face with the wink wink...

 

Wasn't so sure since I was under heavy Sniper fire from the Scott Speed fanclub.

All is well again.

 

Thank God, your one of the guys agree with on here about 99% of the time. I was trying to be funny with the "as usual" because normally "as usual" you are correct.

 

That still doesn't mean that reliability doesn't play a factor. You know as well as I do that engines went kablamo far more often compared to today. Before Michael's Suzuka mishap, when was the last time a Ferrari engine blew? You think Mclaren had that level of reliability during the Senna years? Do you remember F1 2002 and 2004? It was a snooze fest. Also, that same Fangio you're talking about, although great, you simplly can't compare. Drivers weren't bred in those days, many were only wealthy thrill seekers. Fangio also had the comfort of a teammate who literally stepped out of his car so Fangio couldn't have it.

P.S That "Scott Speed fanclub" remark is bull****. When your arguement sucks, you go ahead ignore other points, refuse to consider any other way of thinking, and then talk down to them. You then pull the "I've watched F1 for this many years" card, as if that means anything, as if that gives you the credibility to talk out of your ass. For the record, I don't think Mr. Speed is particularly bright, and closer to average than above it, but just because I argue against your close minded judgement, doesn't mean i'm biased in his favor. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.