Senna vs Brundle
Discussion
REALIST123 said:
Eric Mc said:
I don't particularly want to open up this debate again. It's been done to death many times on PH.
.
.
...........but you did didn't you?
You either take/swallow what you are told, or you actually use your brain and make your own mind up, based on what was visible on the day and thereafter.
The steering broke, he died, the 'sport' would have had massive problems returning to Italy, so an 'agreement' was reached. Funny how the official FIA on-board footage was 'lost' and the 'black box' on his car was too damaged to retrieve data from the accident. There is/are insurance complications/issues and blaming a dead man is the best result for many, apart from his family etc.
He died as a result of an accident, and the law in Italy is different to the law in other countries (see when Rindt was killed).
On the previous lap, Senna had actually taken Tamburello slightly faster, with no accident, which would indicate that the car, with slightly more fuel and heavier, was actually able to go around Tamburello fine with less fuel and therefore lighter. Tyres and temperature not an issue, and ride height not an issue therefore.
But the official reason is he lost control. Of course he did! The steering column broke!
BlimeyCharlie said:
REALIST123 said:
Eric Mc said:
I don't particularly want to open up this debate again. It's been done to death many times on PH.
.
.
...........but you did didn't you?
You either take/swallow what you are told, or you actually use your brain and make your own mind up, based on what was visible on the day and thereafter.
The steering broke, he died, the 'sport' would have had massive problems returning to Italy, so an 'agreement' was reached. Funny how the official FIA on-board footage was 'lost' and the 'black box' on his car was too damaged to retrieve data from the accident. There is/are insurance complications/issues and blaming a dead man is the best result for many, apart from his family etc.
He died as a result of an accident, and the law in Italy is different to the law in other countries (see when Rindt was killed).
On the previous lap, Senna had actually taken Tamburello slightly faster, with no accident, which would indicate that the car, with slightly more fuel and heavier, was actually able to go around Tamburello fine with less fuel and therefore lighter. Tyres and temperature not an issue, and ride height not an issue therefore.
But the official reason is he lost control. Of course he did! The steering column broke!
I too am not keen on the beatification of Senna , I suspect mainly attributable to F1 fans who experienced his death at an impressionable age. He was flawed - in a way which a Clark ,Prost or Stewart never were - but bloody hell he was special. I first saw him in FF1600 and it was obvious even then that he was an extraordinarily talented driver and nothing I saw afterwards made me change my mind .Watching him in a McLaren Honda in qualifying was something won't forget.
The F3 battle was wonderful that year - surprising really as the F3 car of that era was underwhelming to watch , mainly because the cars had a lot of grip but no power(160bhp ish I think ?), a narrow power band which stopped at about 6k . The earlier 1 litre cars were better in every way to watch, as were the last iterations of F3 before it died in UK.
The F3 battle was wonderful that year - surprising really as the F3 car of that era was underwhelming to watch , mainly because the cars had a lot of grip but no power(160bhp ish I think ?), a narrow power band which stopped at about 6k . The earlier 1 litre cars were better in every way to watch, as were the last iterations of F3 before it died in UK.
I think I agree with Coppice.
(The caveat for this is 'outside Brazil')
I was asked whether people think Senna was THAT good because he died.
I said 'No, he was THAT good. However he is as loved as he is because he died'. (see my caveat)
I think had he finished his career off, he would be a much more divisive figure than he currently is.
(The caveat for this is 'outside Brazil')
I was asked whether people think Senna was THAT good because he died.
I said 'No, he was THAT good. However he is as loved as he is because he died'. (see my caveat)
I think had he finished his career off, he would be a much more divisive figure than he currently is.
Vocal Minority said:
I think had he finished his career off, he would be a much more divisive figure than he currently is.
I think that sums it up really well for me. I've wondered for a long time how those last 6 years of the 90s may have played out. I'd assume he'd have most likely retired by the start of the 2000 season if he had stayed with Williams. Champion in 94, 96, & 97 perhaps? BlimeyCharlie said:
The steering broke, he died, the 'sport' would have had massive problems returning to Italy, so an 'agreement' was reached. Funny how the official FIA on-board footage was 'lost' and the 'black box' on his car was too damaged to retrieve data from the accident. There is/are insurance complications/issues and blaming a dead man is the best result for many, apart from his family etc.
On the previous lap, Senna had actually taken Tamburello slightly faster, with no accident, which would indicate that the car, with slightly more fuel and heavier, was actually able to go around Tamburello fine with less fuel and therefore lighter. Tyres and temperature not an issue, and ride height not an issue therefore.
But the official reason is he lost control. Of course he did! The steering column broke!
I still remember watching Senna's accident live on TV and thinking "something must have broken on the car" because, as you say, at the time Tamburello was little more than a fast kink on a straight in an F1 car. However, Williams always maintained they were getting data readings up to the point of impact which they couldn't have received had the steering column broke and I also remember Michael Schumacher (who was immediately behind Senna when he had his accident) saying something to the effect that the car had started to step-out on him on the previous lap and he'd caught it but then on the following lap it stepped-out again and he couldn't catch it (so perhaps everything wasn't fine on the previous lap even though he didn't actually have an accident?). Truth is I don't think we'll ever know for sure what happened; part of me still thinks Senna was too good to make a mistake on a corner like that but equally part of me also trusts the integrity of people like Adrian Newey who was a key member of the Williams team at the time and who I don't think would have been party to any sort of cover-up.On the previous lap, Senna had actually taken Tamburello slightly faster, with no accident, which would indicate that the car, with slightly more fuel and heavier, was actually able to go around Tamburello fine with less fuel and therefore lighter. Tyres and temperature not an issue, and ride height not an issue therefore.
But the official reason is he lost control. Of course he did! The steering column broke!
Returning to the original topic, Brundle and Senna had a great battle for the 1983 F3 championship and I for one will be keen to see some of the footage again!
JNW1 said:
part of me still thinks Senna was too good to make a mistake on a corner like that
He's the only person I can ever recall crashing at the final corner in Mexico (the corner Mansell overtook Berger on the outside the year before)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzP6nFYdXkE
coppice said:
He was flawed - in a way which a Clark ,Prost or Stewart never were
There's a lot of stuff on this thread which I don't agree with but it has been raked over many times.However, Prost being flawless prompts comment.
Senna taking Prost off is well documented, Prost doing the same the other way around the previous year, not so much.
Balestre gifting the WDC to Prost after Senna won it on the track was a massive injustice. When he f
ked him again a year later there's no wonder Senna took it all in to his own hands. In no way am I saying that's right but I can understand it. Prost waving off the 1984 Monaco GP to prevent Senna, Bellof etc from beating him? Prost blocking Senna's move to Williams would IMO appear to be a weakness, but justifiable given in like-for-like equipment Senna would have stuffed him, again.It's amazing all of the other stuff that people overlook or forget.
I will declare a bias on being a Senna fan, but I don't see him as flawless. It's sport, characters therein tend to be flawed.
The theory of his death cementing his legacy is equally flawed. The extra WDCs he would have won had he lived would have taken care of that. FFS, he already had three and his CV was hardly lacking in examples of brilliance.
And I believe Prof. Watkins reference to fishing related to the conversation he had with Senna prior to the GP that fateful weekend given how badly shaken Senna was and the fact he had nothing left to prove. I've not seen another reference anywhere that the Prof. said Senna would be better off fishing.
I could go on, I won't.
ferrisbueller said:
There's a lot of stuff on this thread which I don't agree with but it has been raked over many times.
However, Prost being flawless prompts comment.
Senna taking Prost off is well documented, Prost doing the same the other way around the previous year, not so much.
Balestre gifting the WDC to Prost after Senna won it on the track was a massive injustice. When he fked him again a year later there's no wonder Senna took it all in to his own hands. In no way am I saying that's right but I can understand it. Prost waving off the 1984 Monaco GP to prevent Senna, Bellof etc from beating him? Prost blocking Senna's move to Williams would IMO appear to be a weakness, but justifiable given in like-for-like equipment Senna would have stuffed him, again.
It's amazing all of the other stuff that people overlook or forget.
I will declare a bias on being a Senna fan, but I don't see him as flawless. It's sport, characters therein tend to be flawed.
The theory of his death cementing his legacy is equally flawed. The extra WDCs he would have won had he lived would have taken care of that. FFS, he already had three and his CV was hardly lacking in examples of brilliance.
And I believe Prof. Watkins reference to fishing related to the conversation he had with Senna prior to the GP that fateful weekend given how badly shaken Senna was and the fact he had nothing left to prove. I've not seen another reference anywhere that the Prof. said Senna would be better off fishing.
I could go on, I won't.
I didn't mean to imply that Prost ,Clark et al were flawless. rather that Senna was flawed in a way and to an extent the others named were not. Mind you , I struggle to think of Clark's flaws ...However, Prost being flawless prompts comment.
Senna taking Prost off is well documented, Prost doing the same the other way around the previous year, not so much.
Balestre gifting the WDC to Prost after Senna won it on the track was a massive injustice. When he f
ked him again a year later there's no wonder Senna took it all in to his own hands. In no way am I saying that's right but I can understand it. Prost waving off the 1984 Monaco GP to prevent Senna, Bellof etc from beating him? Prost blocking Senna's move to Williams would IMO appear to be a weakness, but justifiable given in like-for-like equipment Senna would have stuffed him, again.It's amazing all of the other stuff that people overlook or forget.
I will declare a bias on being a Senna fan, but I don't see him as flawless. It's sport, characters therein tend to be flawed.
The theory of his death cementing his legacy is equally flawed. The extra WDCs he would have won had he lived would have taken care of that. FFS, he already had three and his CV was hardly lacking in examples of brilliance.
And I believe Prof. Watkins reference to fishing related to the conversation he had with Senna prior to the GP that fateful weekend given how badly shaken Senna was and the fact he had nothing left to prove. I've not seen another reference anywhere that the Prof. said Senna would be better off fishing.
I could go on, I won't.
I was a huge Senna fan, his driving was sublime, he was immensely charismatic but he had a brutality about his will to win , and an apparent contempt for others, which few other drivers have had . One obvious example is Schumacher of course .
FourWheelDrift said:
He's the only person I can ever recall crashing at the final corner in Mexico (the corner Mansell overtook Berger on the outside the year before)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzP6nFYdXkE
I'm not suggesting Senna was infallible (he was only human after all), all I'm saying is Tamburello wasn't really a corner that would have tested the ability of any F1 driver, much less one as talented as him; therefore, my immediate reaction to see him going off in the way he did was "car failure". However, the findings seem to suggest he simply lost control after the car bottomed-out over the bumps and if that's the case you have to say that's driver error - still something I struggle to believe but in the absence of any evidence of either mechanical or tyre failure I guess it's the only plausible explanation.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzP6nFYdXkE
Just in terms of some of the comments on his ruthless driving style, I personally thought he used to take aggression on the track much too far and the fact the authorities never dealt with it properly almost certainly contributed to people like Michael Schumacher behaving in the way they did. Senna's opening lap at Donington in 1993 was probably the best I've ever seen but by the same token what he did at the start at Suzuka in 1990 was probably the worst piece of driving I've ever seen; to deliberately ram another driver off the track in a pre-meditated move with over 20 cars following closely behind was both unsporting and dangerous yet he was allowed to walk away with the World Championship as a result. Whatever he felt about what happened at Suzuka the previous year what he did that day was just plain wrong and set an awful example IMO.
Senna was renowned for driving at - and sometimes over - the limit. Indeed, it's why people adored him. Why should that characteristic not have contributed to his final accident?
If you look at the history of Imola, there were many accidents in all sorts of cars at Tamburello.
I recommend this book -
If you look at the history of Imola, there were many accidents in all sorts of cars at Tamburello.
I recommend this book -
ferrisbueller said:
Senna taking Prost off is well documented, Prost doing the same the other way around the previous year, not so much.
It wasn't the same though was it? To make the overtake stick at the chicane would have needed Prost's co-operation (in the sense of leaving the door open) and Prost was never going to do that (and nor would Senna had the positions been reversed!).ferrisbueller said:
Prost blocking Senna's move to Williams would IMO appear to be a weakness, but justifiable given in like-for-like equipment Senna would have stuffed him, again.
ferrisbueller said:
It's amazing all of the other stuff that people overlook or forget.
Or choose to remember with their own slant on it! 
m444ttb said:
Vocal Minority said:
I think had he finished his career off, he would be a much more divisive figure than he currently is.
I think that sums it up really well for me. I've wondered for a long time how those last 6 years of the 90s may have played out. I'd assume he'd have most likely retired by the start of the 2000 season if he had stayed with Williams. Champion in 94, 96, & 97 perhaps? Enough conjecture, Senna vs Brundle F3 video? Why not?
Eric Mc said:
Senna was renowned for driving at - and sometimes over - the limit. Indeed, it's why people adored him. Why should that characteristic not have contributed to his final accident?
If you look at the history of Imola, there were many accidents in all sorts of cars at Tamburello.
I recommend this book -
Got to say I don't remember many F1 accidents at Tamburello that didn't involve an issue of some sort with the car but thanks for the tip on the book, looks an interesting read! If you look at the history of Imola, there were many accidents in all sorts of cars at Tamburello.
I recommend this book -
Eric Mc said:
Senna was renowned for driving at - and sometimes over - the limit. Indeed, it's why people adored him. Why should that characteristic not have contributed to his final accident?
Indeed. It's hard not to take this factor into account with the circumstances leading up to the accident.The car began the season as being difficult to drive and set up and, Senna was convinced and incensed that Benetton was cheating with TC and up to Imola he scored nil points - Brazilian GP he spun at the last corner chasing down Schumi and at the Pacific GP he was taken out at the start of the race.
I met and spoke in great detail with Prof. Watkins at the Monaco GP in 1997 (we were in the same hotel). Such a charming and polite man and he spoke with a lot of sincerity.
It was a very emotional subject for him to discuss even three years later (as it was then). He told me that he had said to Ayrton on more than one occasion that he had nothing to prove and with the political changes in the sport, Prost retiring and his growing business interests in Brazil and around the world, there were many other things Senna could have done without risk.
He said it was not even a subject Senna would discuss. He lived to race and that was his life, nothing else mattered to him at all.
So they definitely had those conversations, and I recall every aspect of my chat with Sid in detail. He was a very sincere man who clearly loved Ayrton like a son.
It was a very emotional subject for him to discuss even three years later (as it was then). He told me that he had said to Ayrton on more than one occasion that he had nothing to prove and with the political changes in the sport, Prost retiring and his growing business interests in Brazil and around the world, there were many other things Senna could have done without risk.
He said it was not even a subject Senna would discuss. He lived to race and that was his life, nothing else mattered to him at all.
So they definitely had those conversations, and I recall every aspect of my chat with Sid in detail. He was a very sincere man who clearly loved Ayrton like a son.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff