Let me put this out there regarding Prost.
Discussion
I wanted to put up a lengthy diatribe but can't find time. 
So in a nutshell: I think it could be said that Prost achieved as much as Senna did in their time in F1, and considerably more than say, Our Nige.
However with Senna and Mansell came a lot of 'stuff', baggage, sweat, arguments, argy-bargy, pushing about (both on and off track), more arguments, a lot of whinging, particularly in Mansell's case, and a lot of debate and lots of journalistic material required for both, which still goes on today and went on before either driver made it to F1.
In contrast, Prost could make it all look rather boring. He very rarely looked exercised when climbing out of his car after one of his many victories and there are precious few stories about how Prost won against the odds with tales of derring-do or whatever.
Now, I'd sooner watch a Senna or Mansell any day, but doesn't it say something that one driver could win so much yet very often make it look easy, and indeed, rather boring?
So in a nutshell: I think it could be said that Prost achieved as much as Senna did in their time in F1, and considerably more than say, Our Nige.
However with Senna and Mansell came a lot of 'stuff', baggage, sweat, arguments, argy-bargy, pushing about (both on and off track), more arguments, a lot of whinging, particularly in Mansell's case, and a lot of debate and lots of journalistic material required for both, which still goes on today and went on before either driver made it to F1.
In contrast, Prost could make it all look rather boring. He very rarely looked exercised when climbing out of his car after one of his many victories and there are precious few stories about how Prost won against the odds with tales of derring-do or whatever.
Now, I'd sooner watch a Senna or Mansell any day, but doesn't it say something that one driver could win so much yet very often make it look easy, and indeed, rather boring?
rallycross said:
If you were a team owner and could put any driver in your car from the past 40 years (each still at his peak) who would you chose to win the championship?
Love him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
This could go round in circles... One mr Schumacher would be my only choice. (Keep fighting)Love him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
rallycross said:
If you were a team owner and could put any driver in your car from the past 40 years (each still at his peak) who would you chose to win the championship?
Love him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
Depends... Love him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
If I had the best car in the field, I'd want Prost or Schumacher.
If I had a truly competitive car, I'd want Senna or Schumacher.
If I had a midfield car and could only hope for the occasional win, I'd want Senna, Mansell, Alonso or Hamilton.
If I had a dog of a car and needed all the stars to align for any hope of a result, I'd want Mansell (only at Silverstone), a young, hungry Alesi or Hamilton. Alternatively, I'd want Panis on his lucky day.
If I had a car incapable of making it to the finish, I'd want Webber - so I could blame his bad luck!
I read a (possibly mythical) line from a mclaren engineer that went along the lines of "if the car was perfect, Prost would extract the maximum from it and be untouchable. If the car was merely very good, Senna would make it work"
Given the realities of running a race team, who would you prefer?
Given the realities of running a race team, who would you prefer?
Every full season that Prost competed in, he was a title contender.
1980-broke his leg halfway through the season.
1981-Renault reliability let him down
1982-Renault reliability let him down
1983-Prost was the fastest on race day, Renault reliability let him down (especially after the dutch/Belgian GP (can't remember which one "that thing" happened at))
1984-Beaten by Lauda by half a point. Arguably Lauda showed him how to win a championship.
1985-won the championship
1986-won the championship as the Williams took points off each other
1987-was there to pick up the pieces if the Williams pair had had any problems. They didn't though.
1988-finished second to Senna despite more wins and overall points.
1989-won the WDC.
1990-taken out by Senna when racing for the championship.
1991-did a good job in a poor car.
1992-sabbatical
1993-won the championship.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
1980-broke his leg halfway through the season.
1981-Renault reliability let him down
1982-Renault reliability let him down
1983-Prost was the fastest on race day, Renault reliability let him down (especially after the dutch/Belgian GP (can't remember which one "that thing" happened at))
1984-Beaten by Lauda by half a point. Arguably Lauda showed him how to win a championship.
1985-won the championship
1986-won the championship as the Williams took points off each other
1987-was there to pick up the pieces if the Williams pair had had any problems. They didn't though.
1988-finished second to Senna despite more wins and overall points.
1989-won the WDC.
1990-taken out by Senna when racing for the championship.
1991-did a good job in a poor car.
1992-sabbatical
1993-won the championship.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
Mr E said:
I read a (possibly mythical) line from a mclaren engineer that went along the lines of "if the car was perfect, Prost would extract the maximum from it and be untouchable. If the car was merely very good, Senna would make it work"
Given the realities of running a race team, who would you prefer?
That was Jo Ramirez. He rated Senna better than Prost because it was difficult to attain the perfect set up for every race.Given the realities of running a race team, who would you prefer?
4 WDCs! Massively under rated because he drove without flair.
A master tactician, a schemer who could make Senna sweat and even make him crash: Prost coming out dressed as a civvie in a middle of quali; catching Senna at Monaco '88 and Senna hit the barriers; catching Senna in Brazil 1990 and Senna crashes into Nakajima; turning the wick up even though he had a misfire in Italy '88 and spooked Senna.
Wet conditions counts against him though for good reason. Didier Pironi's accident at a wet Hockenheim affected him. Withdrawing from a wet Australian GP deserves to be commended IMO.
Prost himself reckons that had Senna not been around he would have easily have won 7 world titles, which you could imagine had he not have left mclaren too early.
Possibly 8 had the stars aligned differently in that 84 season (for instance had the Monaco race not gone to half points).
Admittedly, you can't base a drivers talents on "what if's"!
However, to win 4 WDC's in such a competitive era stands out as something special.
Not as quick as Senna I don't think you'll find many that disagree. But better overall driver? I'm not sure you can call it IMHO
Possibly 8 had the stars aligned differently in that 84 season (for instance had the Monaco race not gone to half points).
Admittedly, you can't base a drivers talents on "what if's"!
However, to win 4 WDC's in such a competitive era stands out as something special.
Not as quick as Senna I don't think you'll find many that disagree. But better overall driver? I'm not sure you can call it IMHO
I was at Club one year. We'd got to the banking after a rush as the gates opened so had hours to fill. We formed a group, most of us strangers, of about 20 or so and started chatting. In one of the lulls a chap organised a quiz between groups that varied in make-up as the quiz went on. At one time I let down my side by not remembering what the A stood for in March, amid a lot of tutting from everyone, even my mate.
Then the quizmaster split us up into groups that supported specific drivers. As I didn't support a driver, I got the group supporting the then current McL driver, Senna. I forget the actual drivers but they had to have got on the podium of around 10 GPs I think. Memory fades. One was, of course, Prost. All each team had to do was list the previous 6 podiums the driver had previous to the British GP the previous year. (Figures may vary.)
You got a point for every win that was wrong/missed, and another team would get two points if they guessed it correctly.
Everyone was a sad nerd - except me of course, not knowing Alan saved me. So all the teams got maximum points. Apart that is from the Prost team. They got two or three wrong but only one of the other teams could fill the gaps.
It doesn't say it all of course, but says much. Not the most entertaining driver on the grid.
One of the first, if not the first, question was to list every winner of the WDC. I was over the moon that I got all of them. But then, so did almost everyone else. The quizmaster said that he used that just to judge the level of knowledge of the group.
Try it, it's not easy but has more point than a sudoku.
Then the quizmaster split us up into groups that supported specific drivers. As I didn't support a driver, I got the group supporting the then current McL driver, Senna. I forget the actual drivers but they had to have got on the podium of around 10 GPs I think. Memory fades. One was, of course, Prost. All each team had to do was list the previous 6 podiums the driver had previous to the British GP the previous year. (Figures may vary.)
You got a point for every win that was wrong/missed, and another team would get two points if they guessed it correctly.
Everyone was a sad nerd - except me of course, not knowing Alan saved me. So all the teams got maximum points. Apart that is from the Prost team. They got two or three wrong but only one of the other teams could fill the gaps.
It doesn't say it all of course, but says much. Not the most entertaining driver on the grid.
One of the first, if not the first, question was to list every winner of the WDC. I was over the moon that I got all of them. But then, so did almost everyone else. The quizmaster said that he used that just to judge the level of knowledge of the group.
Try it, it's not easy but has more point than a sudoku.
rallycross said:
If you were a team owner and could put any driver in your car from the past 40 years (each still at his peak) who would you chose to win the championship?
Love him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
easy: jim clarkLove him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
oh bugger... the 1960s were a while ago, weren't they?
Gaz. said:
There's no passion or flair but I didn't (or don't when watching the re-runs) find him that boring as you can appreciate that he was using his brain and playing the percentage game. Nor was he clear #1 and favoured driver (although Mansell disputes that it 1989 and I wonder if Hill does for 1993). What I admire most about him was the amount of champions he had as team mates - either future, past or present - Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, Mansell & Hill. Did he ever have a journeyman team mate?
One might argue that in 1980,1981,1982 and 1983 the standard of teammates was lower than later on in his career.Although Arnoux (pre-cocaine) was lightning fast. He just liked crashing.
1983 was Renault and Prost's undoing. The championship could have been won, Prost lost the team's support mid season.
RealSquirrels said:
rallycross said:
If you were a team owner and could put any driver in your car from the past 40 years (each still at his peak) who would you chose to win the championship?
Love him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
easy: jim clarkLove him or loathe him Senna would be the choice - to win, at any price perhaps.
oh bugger... the 1960s were a while ago, weren't they?
Always feel like he's underrated and made out to be the bad guy by the Senna film and all the people that watched the film but don't know too much about him. Was watching it the other day and don't think it mentions the 1989 San Marino GP at all...
Really was one of the all time top drivers though. The level of competition he faced from the teammates he had, and other drivers at the time like Piquet, hasn't been matched by any other driver.
Really was one of the all time top drivers though. The level of competition he faced from the teammates he had, and other drivers at the time like Piquet, hasn't been matched by any other driver.
CharlesAL said:
Always feel like he's underrated and made out to be the bad guy by the Senna film and all the people that watched the film but don't know too much about him.
Prost wanted out and signed for Ferrari.He won the 1989 Italian GP. The tifosi loved it. Whether it was because of the moment or spite Prost handed the trophy to the tifosi. Ron the Don was livid as he loves his trophies and thought it was disrespectful.
Justaredbadge said:
Any two drivers from 1950-now is an interesting thought.
I think I'd go for Clark and Lauda with Prost as a reserve driver and Damon Hill as test driver.
Lets make it harder: you have team orders. You must have a number 2 driver. None of those above would accept number 2 status. Or listen if you told them.I think I'd go for Clark and Lauda with Prost as a reserve driver and Damon Hill as test driver.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff