88-89 Mclaren statistics. what was it like

Sort of a new-ish perspective here, but I find it interesting how while both were with Mclaren, Senna was of course the king of pole position but Prost won 11 races to Senna's 14. Surprisingly, it looks like Prost was every bit as good a racing driver because other statistics make up for his lack of poles and outright wins, namely points and fastest laps. Not trying to stir up controversy, but the figures are very much surprising to me. I'm not old-school like many fchatters who lived through this stuff, so bear with me as I would love to get the commentary from those who witnessed this stuff. It would have been nice to be old enough to appreciate this titanic battle at the time, so naturally I am objectively curious with all this Senna-hubub and movie stuff going on.


Some statistics for 88-89 season:

Prost wins: 11
Prost poles: 4

Senna wins: 14
Senna poles: 26 (!!)

average finishing position Prost: 1.81
average finishing position Senna: 2.61

fastest laps Prost: 10
fastest laps Senna: 5


total points Prost: 186
total points Senna: 154


It's very much a situation of: vanity of amazing banzai pole position runs vs racing driver who collects the points, has fastest racing laps, and essentially brings home the bacon just as well as the other. The fact that Prost won so many while NOT being on pole is most impressive IMO.

For those who went through this, what was it like? What was your honest assessment of the situation between the two at the time? Was there no question of Senna's dominance? Or was Prost's consistency and race-pace too good to go ignored??

 

My 02c, possibly slightly skewed because I'm English & the Professor is French

- The Professor garnered that moniker because he could set up a car. Story is that Ayrton "stole" his setup on many occasions.
- They started out as something close to buddies - Possibly even a close parallel to LH & Fred in the early days at Mclaren. Prost expected to be quicker, and wasn't......
- There has never been a period of utter domination like it - I haven't checked, but would guess that about half the races over those two seasons saw the Mclarens as the only cars on the last lap!...... To say they (with either driver) blew *everyone* else into the weeds would be doing them a disservice.
- Nobody (with the possible exception of Jimmy) could wring more from a single lap than Ayrton. I've said this before, but he was (IIRC) a rookie in FF in the British championship when I was doing F3 - If we weren't busy, we'd go and watch the start of the FF final - It was always good for a few shunts, but even then Ayrton would put the thing on pole and simply disappear into the distance - *Nobody* did that in FF - They were simply too evenly matched - We *knew*, even then, we were watching something special.....
- I believe Ayrton got into Alain's head a lot more than the reverse - The former didn't give a damn, and the latter was psyched out many times.
- Ron always allowed them to race.....

Hopefully some others will chime in. In the meantime here's a vid of his pole lap at Suzuka in '89 - Still one of the most awe inspiring onboards I've ever seen.

http://vimeo.com/10427952

From "50 years of F1 Onboard" BTW. Enjoy!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Laps/Miles led:

Senna: 1,040/3,087
Prost: 708/1,968

Mechanical Failures

Senna: 4 (3 while leading)
Prost: 3

Accidents:

Senna: 4 (3 while leading)
Prost: 1 (1 while leading)

Disqualified:

Senna: 2 (Brazil 1988 changed car after parade lap, Japan 1989, did not go back though the chicane after leaving track due to contact)
Prost: 0

Withdrew:

Senna: 0
Prost: 1 Australia 1989

 

Great data, thanks.

It's always interesting hearing from people who were actually there and knew without a doubt they were witnessing something truly special. It makes for a more tangible fan experience as opposed to people who are fans after the fact, like me, but certainly not by choice.

 

At this time in F1, I had more of a passing interest in F1, great to hear Ian's story, I have tons of books on the subject and F1 history, slowly working my way through them.

I see parallels in Hamilton and Button to Prost and Senna styles.

 

+1 so I have heard already. Ham and Senna share the *banzai!!!* qualifying lap and no limit knife-edge style seek and destroy race pace while Button is the calm calculative and set-your-watch steady and clever racing driver.

 

This was my Heyday in F-1. I was privliged to have seen alot of the F-1 Races in person from 87 - 91. with 89 & 90 living in Europe, I think I saw almost every race those years other than Brazil and Japan & ironically USA.

The stats on the first post show the truth. Prost while not the most favored guy in the paddock was THE GUY to beat. Even Senna knew and respected that.

Senna was the more flashy driver, more wild & agressive driving. Prost got the name professor for biding his time and always beign there in the end. That is how you win races and world championships. if you look at 81 - 84, Prost had a close chance to win the WDC every year. reliability let him down constantly at Renault. He was always in the hunt.

While Senna was equally strong, and nobody qualified like him, Prost was so slow looking that it did not seem special. that is much like Jim Clark & Jackie Stewart. Both of them were smooth and steady drivers. (Clark either won or broke down - while Stewart was there if his car lasted).

As I've stated before the new Senna movie unfairly paints Prost as an evil villan... if anything he was the last great old style F-1 Champion - he had chivalry, where Senna was the first of the "ruthless" drivers... What would be intereting to look at is the number of accidents that were instigated / involved each driver . My guess is that Senna would have many more than Prost.

To get a great perspective of Prost - read the 1984 Autocourse - it was a great F-1 year where Lauda beat Prost by .5 of a point - in my opinion it was Prost at his fragile best. he pushed Lauda to the end, but just made small errors that added up, while Lauda -SuperRat- tallied up the points. Fast forward to 1988, It was Prost in the Lauda role, and Senna as the young gun ....

I have to say that watching Senna in the rain was spectacular, he was ALWAYS way faster than everyone, the harder it rained the faster he was. Prost was always surrounded by the French "crowd" in the 80's ... a huge clinging group of idiot journalist, and hangers on... that drove him away from fans and gave people the impression that he was aloof, where Senna was pretty open with fans, and people just liked him.

 

I would love to see a stat on unforced driving errors. Even forced, but that's difficult to imagine with those two drivers...

 

that one surprised me.

 

Great perspective. This is the stuff that really allows people to understand the rivarly. It makes it something tangible. Many thanks

 

Let's also not forget that the scoring system back in those days are very different as well. IIRC, it was the best of 14 out of 16 finishes or something like that. Which means, it rewarded the drivers that wins races more than drivers that finish races. However, the reason behind that is that the cars tend to not finish their races back in those days.

Both Senna and Prost belong in the Top 10 greatest of all times, where Prost was a little more cerebral, calculating and technical, Senna was a little more ruthless, gutsy and shear speed.

 

Hmmm, errrrr, hmmmm, gee whiz ... hmmm

Prost was about ten times better driver than Button. The difference between Prost and Button is that Prost COULD drive a car over the edge like Senna if he needed to. He only didn't because he had learnt how to win WDC.

Prost learnt that points are what matter, not fastest laps. Prost learnt this from Lauda, but in those days Prost was more like Senna.

spirot hit the nail on the head; Prost looked slow because he was soooooooooooooooooooooo smooth, but he wasn't slow at all. I guess to be fair to Button he isn't that slow ... but if Button was a Prost he would have been in the top car long ago instead of spending years in the wilderness.

LH and Button aren't even anywhere near the level of Senna and Prost. Senna didn't crash into backmarkers or people he was passing. Senna crashed because he was on or over the ragged edge.

But yes best years of F1 with out a doubt. If only Ferrari had truly let Barchello race MS when they were also dominating we might have had some races, instead they KILLED F1 for me. I've never watched it the same since ...

IMO Prost > Senna.

Senna like MS had insecurities and they were their downfall. MS would have won the WDC years early for Ferrari if he had not tried to win every damn race and Senna would have won more often too if he had not tried to lap the entire field to prove to himself that he was the fastest. Senna had to top every session ... weird. It was these insecurities that caused the problems at McLaren, and McLaren ended up with 2 separate teams on race day where mechanics were not allowed to talk and share details. MS had the same issue and solved it by ensuring in those days that all his team mates (once at Ferrari) were knobbled before any racing occurred. MS learnt from Senna in this area, unfortunately.

IMO it was these insecurities that killed Senna.

Senna, through no real fault of his own, had a terrible start to '94 as the car was not balanced. He had no points by the time they reach Imola and MS was looking pretty racy. Senna because he HAD to top every session was piling the pressure on to himself and you could see it in that short race. Senna was absolutely HAMMERING that car putting qualifying type race laps in lap after lap, but he was not able to get away from MS. MS was still there, yes a second or so back but he was able to trailing him and this after the dreadful start to the season was simply too much for Senna. Senna kept pushing faster and faster and was over the limit of the car and the car was bottoming and getting real twitchy through that awesome corner and he simply lost it ...

If Senna had been at McLaren Ron Dennis would have been able to manage the no points situation and Senna would not have been quite so on edge (possibly). Frank Williams on the other hand does NOT manage drivers and if anything piles the pressure on to his drivers. This was the last thing you do with somebody like Senna who was way harder on himself than anybody else could possibly be. Frank should have been reassuring Senna and telling him to relax, we'll get it right, etc. I have no proof, but I doubt very much that Frank would have been doing this. Instead Senna was in the dominant team and failing. The press was out for him and he just pushed too hard and asked too much for even himself.
Pete

 

For me, there was an eye-opening quote from Prost that went something like this: "it is not about going the fastest, it is about going as slow as possible, but still win".

 

One of the best post i've ever read. Thanks you.

To the OP, try to get your hands on this book, called Senna VS Prost. One of the best stories, dawning from their early days, to the fallout, and Senna's death.

 

http://www.automotobookshop.com.au/senna-versus-prost-story-most-deadly-rivalry-formula-p-3742.html

Link to the book..

 

I disagree on one point of the 84 season. Prost would have won the title if he wasn't afraid of the rain. The race in Monaco where Senna was closing 6 secs. a lap made Prost, IMO, fearful of losing to the rookie. He complained on the radio constantly about the weather and Frenchman Jacky Ickx took the flag and waved it to stop the race. Prost earned 4.5 points for that, instead of the 6 he would receive for finishing second. Oh, and the rain stopped 4 minutes after the flag was waved. Prost was probably the greatest tactical racer in F1, but he never had the ability to drive at 10/10ths for any stretch of time.

 

To win races you never have to ...

Pete

 

And Jacky Ickx is not french...but belgian, and he would tell you how different it is...

 

Well as we both know it is not the done thing to compare drivers from a different era, because we would never really know. Hence my wording parallels, but you knew that. But in a sense you highlighted my point, as in Button smooth, like Prost, Hamilton known fact his idol is Senna, so one can assume he likes to try to drive like him. Talent wise I know you never rated Button, so I will leave it at that. Hamilton I'm not sure how you rate him, but you cannot make a definitive answer either way comparing on talent, your judgement as you said is set back when you had more of a passing interest, in F1.

Buttons problem were of his own making picking the wrong team to be with.

The rest of the post good stuff.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmBl_XT0BpU&feature=related[/ame]

 

I have made the comparison of Button to Prost, simply comparing their smoothness in driving. Button just isn't as fast as Prost.

I started off being attracted to F1 in the late '80s because of Alain Prost. That is until Senna came along. Senna was one of the most exciting drivers to watch - he drove with passion, precision, and intelligence. Sometimes the passion got the better of him. Nobody will ever claim he was perfect. Someone above mentioned Senna stealing Prost's setups? I don't believe that at all...........Senna showed that immense talent when he wasn't partnering with Prost. Senna was a master at setup as well. He didn't need Prost's info.

Prost was incredibly fast and smooth, very technical and cool. Drove with his head, not his heart. This didn't make him quite as exciting to watch. Still, one of the very best drivers ever to drive in F1.

If Senna hadn't died, I firmly believe he would have held the title for most WCs. Schumey would not have won as many as he did. My opinion, yes. For me, Senna was the greatest of all time. I feel it is a privilege to have seen that era of F1 live on TV. I've also seen Senna race live in Montreal 10 years in a row. I will cherish that forever.

In today's field of drivers, I think both Hamilton and Vettel have the capabilities of claiming that title, but they have a long, steep road ahead of them.

 

We;re just going to disagree. Prost was a very good wet weather driver, however 84 Monaco was a monsoon. I dont remember the rain stopping 4 min after the flag??? it did lighten later in the evening. Also the Radio's back in those days only worked when they went past the pits... if at all, but Prost was making jestures to stop the race lap after lap. I'm not sure if Senna would have won if it went full distance, but most likely he would have passed Prost... again Prost was very tactical... how many drivers would remember while driving Monaco in the pouring rain with an 800HP turbo car that positions are awarded for the previous lap in a red flag situation? that is what was so good about Prost. this takes nothing away from Senna, but he was in a car that simply could not really compete with McLaren that year. the weather was the great equalizer.

 

[Senna like MS had insecurities and they were their downfall. MS would have won the WDC years early for Ferrari if he had not tried to win every damn race and Senna would have won more often too if he had not tried to lap the entire field to prove to himself that he was the fastest. Senna had to top every session ... weird. It was these insecurities that caused the problems at McLaren, and McLaren ended up with 2 separate teams on race day where mechanics were not allowed to talk and share details. MS had the same issue and solved it by ensuring in those days that all his team mates (once at Ferrari) were knobbled before any racing occurred. MS learnt from Senna in this area, unfortunately.

IMO it was these insecurities that killed Senna.

Senna, through no real fault of his own, had a terrible start to '94 as the car was not balanced. He had no points by the time they reach Imola and MS was looking pretty racy. Senna because he HAD to top every session was piling the pressure on to himself and you could see it in that short race. Senna was absolutely HAMMERING that car putting qualifying type race laps in lap after lap, but he was not able to get away from MS. MS was still there, yes a second or so back but he was able to trailing him and this after the dreadful start to the season was simply too much for Senna. Senna kept pushing faster and faster and was over the limit of the car and the car was bottoming and getting real twitchy through that awesome corner and he simply lost it ...

If Senna had been at McLaren Ron Dennis would have been able to manage the no points situation and Senna would not have been quite so on edge (possibly). Frank Williams on the other hand does NOT manage drivers and if anything piles the pressure on to his drivers. This was the last thing you do with somebody like Senna who was way harder on himself than anybody else could possibly be. Frank should have been reassuring Senna and telling him to relax, we'll get it right, etc. I have no proof, but I doubt very much that Frank would have been doing this. Instead Senna was in the dominant team and failing. The press was out for him and he just pushed too hard and asked too much for even himself.
Pete[/QUOTE]

in 94, dont forget that the cars in 93 were the super techno cars... Active suspension, auto box, drive by wire, traction control, abs etc... in 94 the removed all those gizmos but you were still left with the raw car that was essentially designed to have all that technical stuff on them... so they were un stable because the FIA removed the technology.... I blame Mosley & co.

Clearly Senna did not like Benatton coming from no where, and had his suspicions that they were cheating... so I'm sure he was trying extra hard in a car that was super edgy to drive. As for Frank & how he treats his drivers... someone of Senna's ability is not going to need the team principal to tell him to relax etc... at that point its a partnership of "what else do you need to win" the team leader is there to serve the driver... not "manage him" that is what made Dennis so good, he worried about providing the car to the best of his ability since he did not have to groom drivers... You see what happend to Mclaren when they got rookie or un successful drivers in the team... they had to concentrate on both... car and drivers and it sapped all the energy. From 1982 to 1993 Mclaren either had some of the most experienced drivers or WC's in the team.... so all they had to do was focus on the car... after 93, it took 4 years to get Hakkinen up to speed.

 

Wow....great thread. I usually run away from the Senna/Prost threads as they always seem to degenerate into Team Ayrton vs Team Alain.
This was the era that I became an F1 fanatic....started as a fan of Senna when he joined Lotus, but ended as a fan of Prost.
I have to agree with spirot that "Senna" makes Prost look down right evil....espicially the longer version cirulating on the net, but the film is named "Senna" after all.
...but I was soaking wet at Donington in '93 and it was magic

 

That was my comment, and I'll stand behind it given my memories of the times.

Please don't misunderstand - Ayrton is for sure in the frame as one of the GOAT's [IMO, along with the Schu and Jimmy.] I also mentioned that watching him as a rookie in Formula Ford was awe inspiring - We knew, even then, that he was going to be very, very, special.

However, in an attempt to back up my claim I came across this at Wikipedia - I'm not claiming it's 100% accurate, but it does somewhat confirm my memories, my emphasis added;

This general theme has often been confirmed by those around at the time.

Cheers,
Ian
Quote from; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Formula_One_season