Ayrton Senna is overrated. Discuss...
Discussion
entropy said:
Evangelion said:
But people will quite happily hero worship somebody who deliberately took another driver out, prepared to risk any number of deaths to stop him winning a championship.
Senna wanted pole to be on the racing line despite having no concerns in previous years. The race stewards were willing to grant this but Balestre overruled them so pole was on the dirty side and again Senna made a bad start.entropy said:
At least Senna admitted his actions cf. Schumi who never has.
Not true. In the early 00's, before the reboot of Top Gear, Schumacher did an interview with Jeremy Clarkson where he admitted that 97 was deliberate. Furthermore, he said he didn't regret it because it was an all or nothing moment, so he went for it.While both of Schumacher's title deciding crashes were deliberate, neither of them put lives in jeopardy as Senna's did.
whatxd said:
... While both of Schumacher's title deciding crashes were deliberate, neither of them put lives in jeopardy as Senna's did.
My point precisely. Senna's action was deliberate, cynical, unsportsmanlike and potentially fatal. He could have taken out any number of drivers, marshalls and spectators. Had that happened, I wonder how we would be talking of him now?Evangelion said:
whatxd said:
... While both of Schumacher's title deciding crashes were deliberate, neither of them put lives in jeopardy as Senna's did.
My point precisely. Senna's action was deliberate, cynical, unsportsmanlike and potentially fatal. He could have taken out any number of drivers, marshalls and spectators. Had that happened, I wonder how we would be talking of him now?You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
CraigyMc said:
F1 at the time was potentially fatal anyway.
You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
For your first point, well - crossing the road is potentially fatal so by your logic it's perfectly ok for me to just keep going and if I run them over then You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
F1 didn't have the same safety measures in place in '90 that it does now but dangerous driving is still dangerous driving regardless of the era, if anything the lack of safety features such as HANS, wheel tethers etc in the earlier eras places moreresponsibility on the drivers to avoid incidents not the other way around! That's not "special snowflake" that's just showing basic respect for the safety of your fellow competitors. It's sport not war!
As to the second point, Senna wasn't just risking his own life with that maneuver - he was risking Prost's and potentially others as well (Hitoshi Ogawa's fatal crash at the same corner a couple of years later showed how badly Senna's move could have ended).
If the additional risk had just been to himself that would have been one thing but to deliberately place others at increased risk because of a dummy-spit is the last thing I'd describe as "heroic"
Oh and for what it's worth Balestre wasn't really "screwing with the rules" that time around - he was merely enforcing what was already there. Pole position had been on that side of the grid at Suzuka for at least three years. Senna asked for it to be changed and although the stewards initially agreed Balestre overruled them, effectively keeping the rules the same as they were going into the weekend. While I do think Senna had a very good point about swapping the grid sides over and I can understand why he'd feel pissed off given he went into qualifying having been told one thing only for it to be reversed afterwards, especially after Prost's dodgy driving and Balestre's subsequent dicking around with Senna the previous year. Trying to use that as justification for deliberately driving into another car at ~130mph is where my sympathy for him runs out on though.
CraigyMc said:
F1 at the time was potentially fatal anyway.
You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
And it's not 'potentially fatal 'now? The 80s did see driver deaths but far , far fewer than previous decades You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
entropy said:
Senna wanted pole to be on the racing line despite having no concerns in previous years. The race stewards were willing to grant this but Balestre overruled them so pole was on the dirty side and again Senna made a bad start.
Post race Ron Dennis defended Senna by making the point that Prost left the door open.
A year later Senna admitted it was a deliberate act in revenge for Prost taking him out in '89.
I don't fully agree with it but there fan boys out there who do.
At least Senna admitted his actions cf. Schumi who never has.
There is no doubt that Prost left the door open. There is no doubt that Senna would not have made the corner at that speed. There is no doubt that Prost must have known Senna was going to try something as Senna had said so and even I knew. Post race Ron Dennis defended Senna by making the point that Prost left the door open.
A year later Senna admitted it was a deliberate act in revenge for Prost taking him out in '89.
I don't fully agree with it but there fan boys out there who do.
At least Senna admitted his actions cf. Schumi who never has.
What no one knows is why Prost went for the corner. If he'd backed off, even a little, he'd have been able to take the line and pull away after the corner.
That's not to suggest it was Prost's fault of course. The blame was all Senna's but I was with a group of friends, some of whom were F1 nerds, and none of us, not even the (lone) Prost supporter could believe that he hadn't driven with a bit more sense. We were recording it on tape and we all watched it after the race and we were still of the same opinion afterwards; Senna to blame, Prost could have avoided it and probably gone on to win the race.
Eighties cars required herculean effort and finesse to control.I didn't like Senna when he raced, thought he took out that other driver deliberately to win the championship, which he obviously did. What I didn't know about was the shocking level of biass and rule bending by Balestre to ensure a French winner. Senna had little choice really, dog eat dog and you only have to talk to Ron Dennis to get an idea of the unfairness.
I admire the chap now, especially after seeing footage of some of his racing. Hugely brave fellow.
I admire the chap now, especially after seeing footage of some of his racing. Hugely brave fellow.
Oilchange said:
I didn't like Senna when he raced, thought he took out that other driver deliberately to win the championship, which he obviously did. What I didn't know about was the shocking level of biass and rule bending by Balestre to ensure a French winner.
Such as? IIRC Prost and Balestre did little other than loath each other.CraigyMc said:
F1 at the time was potentially fatal anyway.
You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
You don't need to be a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool to say that whilst there was cynical behaviour behind the scenes, ramming into someone at 150 mph is wildly, madly disproportionate as 'justice'. You can't simply apply today's moral/safety standards to that era without sounding like you are a special snowflake who is wrapped in cotton wool.
Senna risking his own life because of his faith, and because of the injustice of a French autocrat screwing with the rules to help a French driver win, is part of the thing that makes him heroic.
Evangelion said:
whatxd said:
... While both of Schumacher's title deciding crashes were deliberate, neither of them put lives in jeopardy as Senna's did.
My point precisely. Senna's action was deliberate, cynical, unsportsmanlike and potentially fatal. He could have taken out any number of drivers, marshalls and spectators. Had that happened, I wonder how we would be talking of him now?Was it Schumacher who nearly had Rubens into the wall in 2010 in Hungary?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih3hRAOfuwI
Was it Schumacher who tried having Hakkinen off at Spa in 2000?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghltTBNK4QI
Come on Eileen! Next we'll be saying Schumacher was as charismatic as Senna...
Just to be clear, I do not define a 'loser' as someone who has not won a Grand Prix...Amon has been mentioned and no way was he a loser. In fact, all I said was "nobody remembers a loser". The fact we remember Amon says it all.
Lauda retired from Fuji in 1976. He was a 'winner' for doing that. Same with Prost in '89 at Australia.
The title of 'Ayrton Senna is overrated. Discuss...' is like saying 'Max Verstappen is not quick enough. Discuss'
BlimeyCharlie said:
Lauda retired from Fuji in 1976. He was a 'winner' for doing that. Same with Prost in '89 at Australia.
Taken from Mike Doodson's interview with Piquet in Motorsport Magazine, December 2013:"Usually I never say anything bad about Prost, because I like him.
But he was the one who screwed us completely at Adelaide. We were a very strong group: we had six or seven drivers who said, 'We will not start this race.' (Piquet is actually referring to the restart; Prost was reluctant to start the race proper and started in pitlane [url]https://youtu.be/SI9-zLudMtE[url]) But Prost turned around, without saying anything, went to his car and sat in it. After that everybody was dead, everybody went to their cars. Then he did one lap and stopped. Why? Because he had already won the championship and had nothing to prove. That was very brave of him..."
entropy said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
Lauda retired from Fuji in 1976. He was a 'winner' for doing that. Same with Prost in '89 at Australia.
Taken from Mike Doodson's interview with Piquet in Motorsport Magazine, December 2013:"Usually I never say anything bad about Prost, because I like him.
But he was the one who screwed us completely at Adelaide. We were a very strong group: we had six or seven drivers who said, 'We will not start this race.' (Piquet is actually referring to the restart; Prost was reluctant to start the race proper and started in pitlane [url]https://youtu.be/SI9-zLudMtE[url]) But Prost turned around, without saying anything, went to his car and sat in it. After that everybody was dead, everybody went to their cars. Then he did one lap and stopped. Why? Because he had already won the championship and had nothing to prove. That was very brave of him..."
Prost would have looked a bit odd sitting on the grid on his own...
However, I enjoy reading these tales. Motorsport magazine is great. I am spending more time reading older interviews via their website such as the one quoted from above.
Senna is not overrated though...
Senna was massively fast, totally committed to finding the limits quickly and then using that to destroy his team mate and other opposition, especially in qualifying or the wet. He was ruthless, and played the required mind games well. Politics was not a strong point, or not as strong as Prost, he lived and died on his talent alone. His feedback to engineers was second to none. He was one of the few over the years that were the complete WDC package.
However, yes he was hot headed when things went against him. Having said that, I do not think his driving ability is at all over rated.
He was also a generous and philanthropic human being outside of the competitive bubble of F1.
However, yes he was hot headed when things went against him. Having said that, I do not think his driving ability is at all over rated.
He was also a generous and philanthropic human being outside of the competitive bubble of F1.
BlimeyCharlie said:
Assuming you believe everything that Piquet says is true, then why, as a 3x times World Champion, did Piquet not refuse to start and urge the other drivers to do likewise?
Prost would have looked a bit odd sitting on the grid on his own...
The drivers were split in to two camps: those who wanted to race and those who didn't; young/ish drivers such as Brundle and Alesi, veterans like Piquet and Prost. Prost would have looked a bit odd sitting on the grid on his own...
Joe Saward's race report for Autosport at the time, Berger succinctly puts it:
"I shouldn't have started. I know it. We agreed we wouldn't but then the pressure began, from team managers, officials and so on. In conditions like this, it really shouldn't be up to the drivers to choose whether or not to race; the FISA stewards should have said it was too dangerous. FISA punish Senna because they say he's dangerous - and then they let us race in weather like this, which is a hundred times more dangerous than any driver could ever be. The guy who let this race restart should be put in an electric chair. This is worse than Spa, worse than Silverstone last year, worse than any race I've seen. The drivers aren't the losers today, we're hopeless, can't stick to anything we agree."
http://www.autosport.com/premium/feature/2695/gran...
cf. the effectiveness of the driver strike during the FISA/FOCA war even though Teo Fabi grassed on his fellow drivers.
SeeFive said:
Politics was not a strong point, or not as strong as Prost,
I'd say he was equal to Prost. Senna pushed Prost out of McLaren, Honda favoured Senna and gave him better engines than Prost.At Lotus he convinced the team not to run Derek Warwick.
At the end of '92 Senna tested a Penske Indycar at a time he was disillusioned with F1 and was not committed to McLaren for '93. He would eventually race with the team on a race by race basis, Phillip Morris relented and willing to pay $1m per race retainer. Arguably Senna playing hardball and won.
For me, growing up in the 1970's I loved F1.
Same with the 1980's.
As I grew up, other things took priority, but in 1989 I was fascinated by the Senna/Prost 'duel', particularly Suzuka.
Maybe it was a combination of my age (18) and having a good but boring job (a printer) but the thing about Senna that struck me was his principles. I thought he was 'cool' and something of an outsider.
I also loved the fact he was cast as a 'bad guy' by the media, and of course the Great British Public would boo him and blindly adore 'Our Nige'. I remember in 1993 at Donington that each time he drove past people would actually 'boo' or jeer him.
I was lucky to meet Senna in 1990 on 2 occasions, one of which was he insisted on posing for photos/autographs with the children present, until they got what they wanted before signing autographs for adults.
For me, Senna was a flawed genius, but I've never seen a genius who isn't flawed in some way.
Senna was the complete F1 driver, fast, charismatic, cool, principled, ruthless, intelligent, latin.
Ayrton Senna? Overrated?
How can a driver with 3 World titles and 65 Pole positions be overrated?
Ayrton Senna is the coolest man I've ever seen.
Same with the 1980's.
As I grew up, other things took priority, but in 1989 I was fascinated by the Senna/Prost 'duel', particularly Suzuka.
Maybe it was a combination of my age (18) and having a good but boring job (a printer) but the thing about Senna that struck me was his principles. I thought he was 'cool' and something of an outsider.
I also loved the fact he was cast as a 'bad guy' by the media, and of course the Great British Public would boo him and blindly adore 'Our Nige'. I remember in 1993 at Donington that each time he drove past people would actually 'boo' or jeer him.
I was lucky to meet Senna in 1990 on 2 occasions, one of which was he insisted on posing for photos/autographs with the children present, until they got what they wanted before signing autographs for adults.
For me, Senna was a flawed genius, but I've never seen a genius who isn't flawed in some way.
Senna was the complete F1 driver, fast, charismatic, cool, principled, ruthless, intelligent, latin.
Ayrton Senna? Overrated?
How can a driver with 3 World titles and 65 Pole positions be overrated?
Ayrton Senna is the coolest man I've ever seen.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff