Senna

I enjoyed it, and that coming from someone who is not a big Senna fan.

I remember when Senna was first coming up and all the buzz. He beat most of the at the time current top F1 drivers in a promotional spec race all using identical Benz 190E-16 valves and everyone was saying he was the new "SUPERKID".

But Niki Lauda said he was reckless, prone to accidents and likely to kill himself. HE was not the only one to say this, and the reality is Senna WAS reckless and he took absurd chances expecting others to get out of his way because he was Senna.

My understanding is his fatal crash was due to equipment failure and really bad luck... but he had plenty of accidents before that.

I look at Senna in much the same was as Stefan Bellof. Amazing talent... incredibly fast... leaves older more experienced drivers in a stupor with jaws dropped at his raw speed... but his judgement does not match his talent.

Not a Fangio in other words.



Terry

 

Senna wasn't reckless at all. There is a small, but very distinctive difference between reckless and ruthless. Senna knew what he was doing. Always.

 

Are you judging Bellof solely by his fatal accident?

 

No, though there is that. I recall reading a number of comments about his speed and talent - and youthful lack of judgement. I think (though do not have it front of me) that Derek Bell was one who commented such.

I do get your point relative to ruthless vs reckless and would agree that Senna probably fits into the former category better than the latter. I would say Senna was more in the Schumacher model perhaps. Ooodles of talent... ruthless to a degree that would have yielded an early death in era's gone past.

Bellof I tend to view perhaps more like Riccardo Rodriguez.


Terry

 

Enzo, who had a rocky relationship with Fangio, was somewhat guarded in his praise of Juan Manuel's driving skill. He writes in his memoirs, "he was conscious of his ability, he invariably used every endeavor to ensure that if possible he would always drive the best car available at the moment; and he was successful in this, placing his self interest -- which was quite legitimate and natural -- before the affection which has instead kept other drivers faithful to certain makes through good and ill fortune."

It is true that Fangio jumped from team to team to maximize his opportunities at a time when leadership in the cars themselves changed from year to year. Still he prospered and lived to a ripe old age when most of the other greats were killed off.

 

Terry,
+++1!!
But explain this to the race-nuts in the UK. For them Senna is still GOD!
As of Bellof - he would have never kicked someone off the road to become the Champion.

 

OK, then he was both! He was an egomanic with a fantastic talent.

 

Yea... well.... Enzo was a seriously egotistical jerk who viewed the cars as the reason for victory when Ferrari won and the driver the reason for losing when Ferrari lost.

But he was still smart enough to hire Fangio for '56 because he knew nobody else was going to beat him... and he lost Fangio for '57 because his ego just wouldn't let him pony up the cash (and because Fangio didn't trust him).

Fangio did it ALL right - almost all the time.


Terry

 

Such a great movie!! I have seen it in theatres probably 10 times and now that it is on netflix i watch it nonstop. Me to am not from the time era of Senna but definately wish i was and might have lost a bit of respect for Michael Schumaker. He is a great driver but after hearing what Senna thought of him I just feel like there was a big chance he was cheating. But no disrespect to the guy. Amazing driver and won with ferrari so that makes up for it but the movie is great and it is really well put together.

For anyone who hasn't seen it watch it on netflix or go buy it offline.

 

Yes, Enzo was not a nice guy, but he knew talent. BTW when he was asked who was the greatest driver, he would always say one name -- "Nuvolari." When you read about his exploits you can see why. Nuvolari also lived to die in bed, but not that old (about 60 I think). Almost all the rest of them were killed off, Fangio and Moss being exceptions.

 

...and Phil Hill.

 

Enzo would have loved Senna in a Ferrari, pushing the envelope all the time and tempting fate for the checkered flag.

 

So many things went wrong in Imola 1994...

After watching several near fatal crashes before and after, some drivers were just incredibly lucky not to get killed. Berger, Wendlinger, Häkkinen. Mansell's tire rupture in the last race in '86 at high speed. Senna just wasn't.

And I hate how everyone forgets about him or just acts that Ratzenberger didn't exist.

 

great movie
doubt that Prost liked it... smile

 

It was a great movie. It sucks how it made Prost look though. He may have done a few shady things in his career but he was a very talented driver. Prost would have driven to the checkered flag in the '89 Suzuka race if Senna wouldnt have hit him.

Senna was an awesome driver though that made the sport very exciting to watch.

 

That really is debatable, and always will be forever.

Reckless?
He was always on the edge, and sometimes went over it, that's a style.
Other guys that were not on the edge or seldom went over it never won a race.
If you were to put Senna in whatever-year's best car of his time nobody would have beat him, but he did drive some real POS cars, but developed them. Senna said the best (handling) chassis he ever drove was the Toleman - can you imagine that car with a BMW Turbo as opposed the Brian Hart Turbo? WOW.

If Senna didn't drive the way he did I don't know if he would have won the races he did, the WDC's he did, or the poles he did.
You could argue Schumacher was faster - 'better' - but MS came along at a time where Engineers developed cars moreso than drivers did, and that is still true today.
How would Vettel do in a backmarker? Why isn't MS winning? Who developed his Ferrari's?

You can look at any era, almost any year, and you will see drivers that overdrove just a little bit more than others, and some that simply don't push the envelope - they stay in their comfort zones. These guys may make a podium, but seldom win. Nobody remembers who comes second.

I would have LOVED to have seen Stefan in a truly competitive car.

 

He did, one lap at a time over the thousands of laps he completed at Fiorano in sun, rain and sleet. In the days of unlimited testing, he was without equal.

 

in 1989, Prost Senna at the chicane exit
Ayrton and win the GP.


in 1990 there was 53 laps to win for Prost. 53 is long time

 

And don't forget the other Argentine: Jose Froilan Gonzalez http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/07/14/60-years-ferraris-win/

He never won a world championship but he set other records. At 90, he is the oldest living grand prix winner. This from Wiki: "On 10 July 2011, during the British Grand Prix meeting, González was honoured by the Ferrari team and the FIA on the 60th anniversary of Ferrari's first Formula One World Championship race victory. As part of the celebration, Ferrari driver Fernando Alonso drove González' Ferrari 375 F1 for four laps of the Silverstone track. Later that day, Alonso won the British Grand Prix in his current Ferrari F1 car."

 

But Enzo did try to put Senna in one of his cars! just read "Chasing for the title", by Nigel Roebuck: the deal foundered due to the financial expectations of Senna being "imaginativo", according to Enzo...

 

1989 Italian Grand Prix at Monza, mere days after
Prost signed with Ferrari.

Senna blew up in Parabolica, Prost went on to win
his usual well measured race.

On the podium, no one from McLaren went up to
accept the manufacturer's trophy so Prost accepted
the trophy then dropped it to the delerious Tifosi below.
I was there photographing for Panorama and it was
wonderful theatre.

The Senna documentary somehow failed to show this,
opting instead to set Senna up as the underdog hero
and villanize Prost as Ballestre's "teacher's pet".

The documentary seemed go only dwell on two Grands Prix,
Monaco and Japan. While these were important, two
races, they don't tell the story of an entire season.

 

From here in France, I remember having read a declaration by the movie Director of "Senna" that, afterwards, he aknowledged that the movie is "not entirely fair to Alain Prost" and that he now regrets it. Seems that the movie was, at the beginning, much longer and more balanced, but that it has been heavily edited to be brought to an acceptable length for the average spectator, so...
I have to say that don't remember having read any reaction to the movie by Alain Prost, though; but that would be typical of him, he does not speaks a lot about that period.

 

If I were Ron Dennis I would have been happy to see Alain go if only to relieve the acrimonious atmosphere on the team. Ayrton was Honda's boy anyways. That said, Senna blew up with less than 10 laps left so maybe Ron wasn't in the mood to get the constructor's trophy as he'd just lost a sure 1-2 finish in Ferrari's "house", and the "enemy/traitor" won the race. He figured he'd embarass Alain by having Alain deliver it to the team, but Alain gave him the "f u" by tossing it into the crowd.

 

Paul,

If my memory serves me well...Alain did it on purpose, to embarass Ron Dennis because there was a rule at the time at McLaren which made mandatory that all the trophies were property of the team.
By tossing it to the crowd, Alain therefore made sure that there will be at least this one permanently missing from Ron's collection...