Discussion
Smollet said:
Prost turned in at 30 mph. He did not try to kill someone at 150 mph. Senna apologists just don’t get the fact that their hero was a dangerous nasty piece of work. Had he been banned I doubt MS would’ve tried it on.
That doesn't excuse Scvhmacher's shenanigans though, does it? And Prost still took Senna off, irrespective of the speed at which he did it. For what it's worth, BTW, my personal all-time top five does not include Senna for exactly the reasons you've brought up.
paulguitar said:
Smollet said:
Prost turned in at 30 mph. He did not try to kill someone at 150 mph. Senna apologists just don’t get the fact that their hero was a dangerous nasty piece of work. Had he been banned I doubt MS would’ve tried it on.
That doesn't excuse Scvhmacher's shenanigans though, does it? And Prost still took Senna off, irrespective of the speed at which he did it. For what it's worth, BTW, my personal all-time top five does not include Senna for exactly the reasons you've brought up.
t. Smollet said:
Prost turned in and previously told Senna he was no longer going to be intimidated by him. He did not take him out. Senna deliberately drove him off the circuit with absolutely no regard to their safety or those nearby. That’s a massive difference but Senna being Senna could not comprehend that. Such a shame as he was gifted beyond belief. A totally odious piece of st.
I see a bigger picture than that. I think 1990 was completely out of order. But Prost did take Senna out deliberately, although yes, in a 'safe' way.t. But Senna was a complicated person, with a huge amount of good in him. Reducing him to 'a total odious piece of s
t' is unsatisfactory.paulguitar said:
Smollet said:
Prost turned in and previously told Senna he was no longer going to be intimidated by him. He did not take him out. Senna deliberately drove him off the circuit with absolutely no regard to their safety or those nearby. That’s a massive difference but Senna being Senna could not comprehend that. Such a shame as he was gifted beyond belief. A totally odious piece of st.
I see a bigger picture than that. I think 1990 was completely out of order. But Prost did take Senna out deliberately, although yes, in a 'safe' way.t. But Senna was a complicated person, with a huge amount of good in him. Reducing him to 'a total odious piece of s
t' is unsatisfactory.Edited by Smollet on Friday 24th May 23:26
paulguitar said:
Smollet said:
No it’s not because that is exactly what was. Completely devoid of any respect towards those he was racing against. Ask Brundle.
Brundle sees the big picture too, and has talked about that often.I suspect Brundle keeps quiet is because he’d be vilified for daring to speak the truth
Edited by Smollet on Friday 24th May 23:32
Smollet said:
paulguitar said:
Smollet said:
No it’s not because that is exactly what was. Completely devoid of any respect towards those he was racing against. Ask Brundle.
Brundle sees the big picture too, and has talked about that often.paulguitar said:
Smollet said:
paulguitar said:
Smollet said:
No it’s not because that is exactly what was. Completely devoid of any respect towards those he was racing against. Ask Brundle.
Brundle sees the big picture too, and has talked about that often.Smollet said:
Brundle referred to the numerous times Senna took him out in F3.
Which ones, besides Oulton Park?ETA.
Just found some footage of Oulton. Senna did stay to check on Brundle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frPPrEz4RYQ
Edited by paulguitar on Saturday 25th May 00:01
For some time I have felt that there was a fundamental difference in eras between Prost and Senna, that at least sheds some light on their approach to racing.
Prost cut his teeth in F1 during possibly one of its most dangerous periods. Fast ground effect turbo cars with steel chassis and feet alongside the front axle with no protection. Pironi ended his career crashing into the back of Prost.
Senna largely benefitted from the advances in carbon fibre tubs. They were nothing like as safe as today, but it was still light years better than before. Look at Watson’s accident where he walked away.
Senna was ultimately quicker than Prost, but I see Prost as the more complete driver. And Schumacher took Senna’s intimidation playbook and added pages to it.
Prost cut his teeth in F1 during possibly one of its most dangerous periods. Fast ground effect turbo cars with steel chassis and feet alongside the front axle with no protection. Pironi ended his career crashing into the back of Prost.
Senna largely benefitted from the advances in carbon fibre tubs. They were nothing like as safe as today, but it was still light years better than before. Look at Watson’s accident where he walked away.
Senna was ultimately quicker than Prost, but I see Prost as the more complete driver. And Schumacher took Senna’s intimidation playbook and added pages to it.
Leithen said:
For some time I have felt that there was a fundamental difference in eras between Prost and Senna, that at least sheds some light on their approach to racing.
Prost cut his teeth in F1 during possibly one of its most dangerous periods. Fast ground effect turbo cars with steel chassis and feet alongside the front axle with no protection. Pironi ended his career crashing into the back of Prost.
Senna largely benefitted from the advances in carbon fibre tubs. They were nothing like as safe as today, but it was still light years better than before. Look at Watson’s accident where he walked away.
Senna was ultimately quicker than Prost, but I see Prost as the more complete driver. And Schumacher took Senna’s intimidation playbook and added pages to it.
Agreed.Prost cut his teeth in F1 during possibly one of its most dangerous periods. Fast ground effect turbo cars with steel chassis and feet alongside the front axle with no protection. Pironi ended his career crashing into the back of Prost.
Senna largely benefitted from the advances in carbon fibre tubs. They were nothing like as safe as today, but it was still light years better than before. Look at Watson’s accident where he walked away.
Senna was ultimately quicker than Prost, but I see Prost as the more complete driver. And Schumacher took Senna’s intimidation playbook and added pages to it.
paulguitar said:
Leithen said:
For some time I have felt that there was a fundamental difference in eras between Prost and Senna, that at least sheds some light on their approach to racing.
Prost cut his teeth in F1 during possibly one of its most dangerous periods. Fast ground effect turbo cars with steel chassis and feet alongside the front axle with no protection. Pironi ended his career crashing into the back of Prost.
Senna largely benefitted from the advances in carbon fibre tubs. They were nothing like as safe as today, but it was still light years better than before. Look at Watson’s accident where he walked away.
Senna was ultimately quicker than Prost, but I see Prost as the more complete driver. And Schumacher took Senna’s intimidation playbook and added pages to it.
Agreed.Prost cut his teeth in F1 during possibly one of its most dangerous periods. Fast ground effect turbo cars with steel chassis and feet alongside the front axle with no protection. Pironi ended his career crashing into the back of Prost.
Senna largely benefitted from the advances in carbon fibre tubs. They were nothing like as safe as today, but it was still light years better than before. Look at Watson’s accident where he walked away.
Senna was ultimately quicker than Prost, but I see Prost as the more complete driver. And Schumacher took Senna’s intimidation playbook and added pages to it.
Smollet said:
Prost turned in and previously told Senna he was no longer going to be intimidated by him. He did not take him out. Senna deliberately drove him off the circuit with absolutely no regard to their safety or those nearby. That’s a massive difference but Senna being Senna could not comprehend that. Such a shame as he was gifted beyond belief. A totally odious piece of st.
What complete and absolute nonsenset. Senna went for the gap on the inside and Prost deliberately turned into him, about 10 yards earlier than normal for the chicane.
Prost caused the collision, deliberately knowing it would likely win him the championship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVh4oKqxtJo
Of course when Senna managed to recover and still win the race he still had Balestre in his corner to help him out.
As for 1990, there were other opinions about it, from 1:25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPXZyj8DpV8
Senna was absolutely fked over by FISA and the stewards at the 1989 Suzuka GP. Prost clearly didn't have that corner, he turned in early. So then Senna has to go down the 'escape' road to rejoin the track. According to Ballestre, the stewards and FISA, this isn't allowed. It's more dangerous than turning back around and going the wrong way to rejoin the track apparently, or some bullst excuse about not completing race distance.
So for that he is disqualified from the race knowing it will hand the title to Prost. Ron Dennis argued against the ruling and even provided evidence of other drivers at other races using 'escape' roads with no penalties or disqualifications whatsoever. Disqualified from the race, lost out on the title, a suspended 6 month ban on Senna's licence and a $100,000 fine to rub his face in it.
Ballestre's words "Even if you are one of the biggest drivers in the world, you don't have the right to cause a stupid accident." Isn't Prost the stupid driver here who's cause the accident, no penalty for Prost and a title in the bag? Smacks of favouritism to me.
Even Nelson Piquet speaks about it at the 1990 Suzuka GP drivers meeting saying saying the whole escape road fiasco was a fk up and the other drivers agreed.
Fast forward to 1990 and if i'm in that same position as Senna I am absolutely taking Prost out knowing how you had been completely screwed over the last year. Was it dangerous, absolutely but I completely understand why he did it.
ked over by FISA and the stewards at the 1989 Suzuka GP. Prost clearly didn't have that corner, he turned in early. So then Senna has to go down the 'escape' road to rejoin the track. According to Ballestre, the stewards and FISA, this isn't allowed. It's more dangerous than turning back around and going the wrong way to rejoin the track apparently, or some bullst excuse about not completing race distance. So for that he is disqualified from the race knowing it will hand the title to Prost. Ron Dennis argued against the ruling and even provided evidence of other drivers at other races using 'escape' roads with no penalties or disqualifications whatsoever. Disqualified from the race, lost out on the title, a suspended 6 month ban on Senna's licence and a $100,000 fine to rub his face in it.
Ballestre's words "Even if you are one of the biggest drivers in the world, you don't have the right to cause a stupid accident." Isn't Prost the stupid driver here who's cause the accident, no penalty for Prost and a title in the bag? Smacks of favouritism to me.
Even Nelson Piquet speaks about it at the 1990 Suzuka GP drivers meeting saying saying the whole escape road fiasco was a f
k up and the other drivers agreed. Fast forward to 1990 and if i'm in that same position as Senna I am absolutely taking Prost out knowing how you had been completely screwed over the last year. Was it dangerous, absolutely but I completely understand why he did it.
TO73074E said:
Fast forward to 1990 and if i'm in that same position as Senna I am absolutely taking Prost out knowing how you had been completely screwed over the last year. Was it dangerous, absolutely but I completely understand why he did it.
Whatever the circumstances of the previous year, there is absolutely no excuse for taking out another driver.Senna gets leeway on this from a lot of people because of the tragic events a few years later but it was an outrageous piece of driving for which he should have been disqualified at minimum.
TO73074E said:
Senna was absolutely fked over by FISA and the stewards at the 1989 Suzuka GP. Prost clearly didn't have that corner, he turned in early. So then Senna has to go down the 'escape' road to rejoin the track. According to Ballestre, the stewards and FISA, this isn't allowed. It's more dangerous than turning back around and going the wrong way to rejoin the track apparently, or some bullst excuse about not completing race distance.
So for that he is disqualified from the race knowing it will hand the title to Prost. Ron Dennis argued against the ruling and even provided evidence of other drivers at other races using 'escape' roads with no penalties or disqualifications whatsoever. Disqualified from the race, lost out on the title, a suspended 6 month ban on Senna's licence and a $100,000 fine to rub his face in it.
Ballestre's words "Even if you are one of the biggest drivers in the world, you don't have the right to cause a stupid accident." Isn't Prost the stupid driver here who's cause the accident, no penalty for Prost and a title in the bag? Smacks of favouritism to me.
Even Nelson Piquet speaks about it at the 1990 Suzuka GP drivers meeting saying saying the whole escape road fiasco was a fk up and the other drivers agreed.
Fast forward to 1990 and if i'm in that same position as Senna I am absolutely taking Prost out knowing how you had been completely screwed over the last year. Was it dangerous, absolutely but I completely understand why he did it.
Exactly right. I was following F1 far more closely in those days and was incensed by the blatant parochial favouritism shown to Prost by Balestre et al. While I regard Prost as one of the greats I'd never include him on my list due to his legacy being tainted by the French control of the sport then.ked over by FISA and the stewards at the 1989 Suzuka GP. Prost clearly didn't have that corner, he turned in early. So then Senna has to go down the 'escape' road to rejoin the track. According to Ballestre, the stewards and FISA, this isn't allowed. It's more dangerous than turning back around and going the wrong way to rejoin the track apparently, or some bullst excuse about not completing race distance. So for that he is disqualified from the race knowing it will hand the title to Prost. Ron Dennis argued against the ruling and even provided evidence of other drivers at other races using 'escape' roads with no penalties or disqualifications whatsoever. Disqualified from the race, lost out on the title, a suspended 6 month ban on Senna's licence and a $100,000 fine to rub his face in it.
Ballestre's words "Even if you are one of the biggest drivers in the world, you don't have the right to cause a stupid accident." Isn't Prost the stupid driver here who's cause the accident, no penalty for Prost and a title in the bag? Smacks of favouritism to me.
Even Nelson Piquet speaks about it at the 1990 Suzuka GP drivers meeting saying saying the whole escape road fiasco was a f
k up and the other drivers agreed. Fast forward to 1990 and if i'm in that same position as Senna I am absolutely taking Prost out knowing how you had been completely screwed over the last year. Was it dangerous, absolutely but I completely understand why he did it.
I cannot blame Senna for feeling justified in a "tit for tat" response the following year.
freedman said:
Smollet said:
Prost turned in and previously told Senna he was no longer going to be intimidated by him. He did not take him out. Senna deliberately drove him off the circuit with absolutely no regard to their safety or those nearby. That’s a massive difference but Senna being Senna could not comprehend that. Such a shame as he was gifted beyond belief. A totally odious piece of st.
What complete and absolute nonsenset. Senna went for the gap on the inside and Prost deliberately turned into him, about 10 yards earlier than normal for the chicane.
Prost caused the collision, deliberately knowing it would likely win him the championship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVh4oKqxtJo
Of course when Senna managed to recover and still win the race he still had Balestre in his corner to help him out.
As for 1990, there were other opinions about it, from 1:25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPXZyj8DpV8
Not a fan of some of Senna's actions. Indeed, I am not a fan of Schumi deciding - with no reference to a Senna influence as far as I am aware - that a propensity to go beyond the bounds of reasonably expected sportsmanlike behavior, is acceptable.
Brundle defends Max' "do this/do that and we crash" actions, which is odd, until he is close to the Verstappen family - which I believe he is(?).
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff