I found this statistics pretty shocking: Image Unavailable, Please Login If he hadn't died, how many titles he would have conquered? 1 - He would have won the 1994 championship for sure (with all due respect to Hill). 2 - 1995 probably not. 3 - 1996 and 1997 probably yes if he had remained at Williams. After that he would probably retire. So I would put it between 4 and 6.
'Curious why you do. Interesting for sure, but shocking? Each of the record years, if I'm not mistaken, the drivers were in the championship winning cars, indicating that they (the cars) were the fastest those years. Add to that, if the drivers were number one on the team......? I agree with you on Senna's potential championships, and that got me thinking about "my" "only" guy, Jim Clark. I've wondered before but never sat down and calculated...... I'm sure any true F1 fan knows the story of Chris Amon stating, and most other drivers agreeing, that "If it can happen to Jim, what chance do the rest of us have?", such was the respect those many other drivers had for his ability. '68 was his having won the opener before dying. If he continued, say, another 5 years.....I'm thinking a sure 5 ('63 and '65 already), maybe 6. '69 might have been also, as as much as I respect Jackie, there's no doubt in my mind that Jim was better. The Lotus 49 was getting long in the tooth so it might have been interesting. '70? Jim. '71, Jackie, the Tyrrell was just too strong. '72, Jim '73? Jim Again, reinforcing my additional 3,"sure five", is the fact that Lotus won the WCC those years as it was with "lesser" drivers.
1994 absolutely...if Damon could take it to the wire (with some FIA help but sitll), then Senna would've walked it. However he was supposed to make the Ferrari move in 1995. Schumacher claimed he would've won the championship in that car, in particular he liked the way how he could manipulate the car with the torque of the V12. But I think you are right, 1995 Senna would've lost it. Schumacher was on insane form that season. 96-97 with Senna at Ferrari absolutely not, Williams absolutely yes...crazier things have happened but I doubt that Senna in a close year 1995 would make the abrupt move to Williams again. But what is interesting is where would the Schumacher era have gone? Schumacher was close to go to Williams in 96, where he obviously would've racked up the 96-97 title. Would Newey have stayed? Would Byrne & co followed schumacher anyways? Mclaren was also chasing schumacher for 98, 99 or 2000, I can't remember what year exactly, the same question follows...would Newey have stayed and Schumacher's edge won the titles? Or Byrne & co would've come with? The interesting bit is that Schumacher had the possibility to go to 2 Newey teams in a short period of time, and from those already good cars, Byrne & co would've simply evolved. It's amazing how the death of one man changed the shape of F1 so drastically. For sure Senna would be a 4x WDC, but just how many would schumacher have had? Had Schumacher & co not gone to Ferrari at all, what would remain of Ferrari in F1 and in the automotive world itself? Schumacher meant a stupid amount of money & status for Ferrari. There is a good chance Ferrari would've been utterly winless (championship wise at the very least) until at least 2007 if not beyond...
Shocking because both Michael and Hamilton had dominant cars for longer periods and still are not a match to Senna when it comes to pure speed. I know that Jim Clark won 33% of the races he disputed, but my knowledge on him is limited to that.
I see regarding the "shock". I wasn't comparing Jim to Ayrton, just that you spurred me on to thought about how many I thought Jim might have had that I hadn't done before, but.....thanks for the kick in the arse.... Anywho, I've posted similar some where/time elsewhere(I wish I remembered, I could cut and paste it).....Jim Clark, Ayrton Senna, and Michael Schumacher comparison of stats fer ya': (emboldened are best percentage) GPs participated in: JC - 72.....MS - 307.....AS - 307 Wins: JC - 25 (34.72%).....AS - 41 (25.47%).....MS - 91 (29.64%) Poles: JC - 33 (45.83%).....AS - 65 (40.37%).....MS - 68 (22.15%) Fastest laps: JC - 28 (28.89).....AS - 19 (11.80%).....MS - 77 (25.08) Laps lead: JC - 1943 of 3923 (49.53%).....AS - 2931 of 8,219 (35.66%).....MS - 5,111 of 16825 (30.38%) Podiums: JC - 32 (44.44%).....AS - 80 (49.69%).....MS - 155 (50.49%) (May I note the cars were far more fragile during Jim's (who was noted for his mechanical sympathy) reign than in Ayrton's.....in turn more fragile than Michael's.....as metallurgy and electronics developed. We won't even consider Lewis' where the cars are mandated to last..... "Lower costs" my arse!.....the sponsor's want their billboards circulating; and FIA/F1 to "improve" the "show".....heaven forbid we design/construct/race to win or bust.....!!!) I was not going to trace how many accidents each may have had...especially not knowing the causes of them. (I do know Jim had only but one, early in his F1 career....Monza, 1961; 2nd lap contact with Wolfgang von Tripps )
Oh heavens NO! They're allowed to intervene in the outcomes, remember? Let's see.....Abu Dhabi comes to mind, just this past year........
Easy…. Still to « ME » the fastest guy I ever seen. Schumacher was pretty darn close. This is why the Hamilton goat don’t bother me because I’m comfortable with what I personally saw (though ham is no slouch for sure). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Pretty sure senna’s didn’t do 307 races… % are hard to compare, one should compare with weighting factor not just straight %, plus senna’s spent what at least 3/4 years in a bad car, additionally when senna had rhe best car those were 16 races a season versus less for Jim and 18+ for Michael and now 23 for Hamilton… so all stats and percentage should be put into context imo Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Absolutely right.....I don't know how I duped MS's 307 in AS's starts , 161. I did the math with the right #s though. Thirty lashes to me with a wet noodle. Percentages are not hard to compare at all. One doesn't "weight" numbers when determining percentages. Basic math. They're the ONLY way to compare stats of anyone with diff #'s of races under their belt. (fer instance, 10/100 =100/1000; same reason used for diff #s of questions on tests to determine level, investments, etc. etc. etc. ....) Jim spent the equivalent amount of time in sheet cars, so what's yer pernt?
All that is in the realm of suppositions. Apart from his skill, Stewart was quite lucky in his association with Ken Tyrrell who had never ran a F1 team before. Initially Tyrrell entered customer cars (Matra and March) and his main asset was the Ford DFV, plus ELF sponsorship. Even when he started building his own cars, Tyrrell was fighting against established teams with more finance and bigger technical offices. Stewart won 3 titles in 5 years (I believe), and decided to retire. I think he had enough of racing, having seen many of his compatriots dying around him. As for Tyrrell, his fortune changed when the petrol money dried out, and the team declined to become a mid-fielder at best. So I am not sure if Stewart would have won more titles, had he kept on racing. Would have he found success in another team?
Because of what he already said, the seasons being longer now. Spend 3 seasons today in a great car vs before in a great car, with ~33% more races a year that's immediately a full extra season in your pocket to make up statistics. A great car is hard to comeby, world beaters even harder. (Mclaren MP4-4 to MP6, Williams FW14-15, F2002 and F2004, RBR 2011, 13, Merc 2014-2020). Find yourself in one of those cars and your chances of improving the statistics improve greatly. Motorsport is one of the few places where clear numbers don't tell the full story. Way too many variables. Only an objective can give a decent indication, but spanning over 8 decades, limited footage for the first 5, nostalgia factors and so on, a real verdict on who is the goat can never be given. What can be said is that some people just look special every single time they get into a car. Do it consistently enough and your name gets thrown into the GOAT hat. Senna, Schumacher (pre first retirement), Kimi on the michelins, Alonso (pre first retirement), Verstappen, even Hamilton. From there on personal factors come into the equation.
100% Imagine the stats of Senna if his team had been dominant for 7 years and with the same reliability of Ham's Mercedes !
I think Senna would have gotten at least 3 more. Schumacher was lucky he died, helped his stats alot.
Did you watch the Imola race ? MSC was all over the Williams and Senna The tragic Senna incident had ethereal timing as the baton was passed. Both were undeniably the guvnor's of their respective eras. Senna was robbed of the 1989 WDC
Yeah. But that doesn't change the fact Schumacher's stats benefited. Also Senna wasn't robbed, they just overrode it.