Let me put this out there regarding Prost.
Discussion
heebeegeetee said:
What utter tosh.
Not really!Mansell had a 6 point lead and needed to finish 3rd or above to win, and his blow out ended that. Mansell still could have won the championship, had prost or piquest not won the race.
After mansells blow out, williams then pitted piquet, handing victory and the championship to prost.
Prost was consistent that year, but the williams was the superior car (driver squabbling aside!). Williams did win the constructors though.
GCH said:
Not really!
Mansell had a 6 point lead and needed to finish 3rd or above to win, and his blow out ended that. Mansell still could have won the championship, had prost or piquest not won the race.
After mansells blow out, williams then pitted piquet, handing victory and the championship to prost.
Prost was consistent that year, but the williams was the superior car (driver squabbling aside!). Williams did win the constructors though.
The championship wasn't about one race.Mansell had a 6 point lead and needed to finish 3rd or above to win, and his blow out ended that. Mansell still could have won the championship, had prost or piquest not won the race.
After mansells blow out, williams then pitted piquet, handing victory and the championship to prost.
Prost was consistent that year, but the williams was the superior car (driver squabbling aside!). Williams did win the constructors though.
Prost failed to finish the first race of the championship and Mansell the last. Both lost equal points. When the point were lost is irrelevant imo.
Nige in a faster car failed to beat Prost and when he was in the same team he didn't get close, so under what circumstances would/should Mansell beat Prost? When in an Adian Newey penned super-car perhaps?
And is then down to luck or skill on Mansell's part?
GCH said:
Prost liked to moan- (hence being fired by both renault and ferrari), and play politics (balestre!).
'86 he was gifted the championship after mansells tyre blow out, '89 he turned in on senna at suzuka, wrongly got out of the car, then complained to his chum balestre, who hated senna as much as he did.
Suzuka '90 he got what he deserved for the year before imho.
No disputing he was phenomenally quick and naturally gifted driver, but he certainly liked to play games behind the scenes, whereas mansell & senna were more outspoken in their opinions and criticisms.
It would have been very interesting to see him when refuelling returned and race strategy /pitstops played an increasingly important role. For sure his professor moniker would have played a part and i have no doubt he would have won more championships.
I don't disagree that he liked to play games, but I do have counterpoints to some of your suggestions.'86 he was gifted the championship after mansells tyre blow out, '89 he turned in on senna at suzuka, wrongly got out of the car, then complained to his chum balestre, who hated senna as much as he did.
Suzuka '90 he got what he deserved for the year before imho.
No disputing he was phenomenally quick and naturally gifted driver, but he certainly liked to play games behind the scenes, whereas mansell & senna were more outspoken in their opinions and criticisms.
It would have been very interesting to see him when refuelling returned and race strategy /pitstops played an increasingly important role. For sure his professor moniker would have played a part and i have no doubt he would have won more championships.
Firstly, '86 the championship was over 16 races (of which the driver's best 11 scores counted) over the course of which Alain had done enough to be able to take advantage of a single tyre failure in the final race, despite not being in the dominant car that season. Yes, Williams could have focussed on a team leader rather than letting their two drivers duke it out, but equally either of the Williams drivers could have dominated through their own skill, but could not. They equalled eachother out. Prost, on the other hand, had little challenge from Keke in the other McLaren that season. If anything, Prost possibly worked harder for the '86 championship than for any of his others except perhaps....
...'89. And on this part I have three bones of contention with your version.
1) Were Prost and Balestre chums? I've seen a fair few sources from within Formula 1 at the time say that they hated eachother, but the only evidence supporting the suggestion that they were working with eachother that I have seen is that they were both French.
2) Prost, in the Senna film, was seen running off to the stewards office after the collision. After the race, Senna was summoned to the stewards to discuss the same event. So did Prost choose to go of his own accord or was he too summoned? I can't find evidence either way but it stands to reason that if the stewards were investigating, they'd want to speak to both drivers.
3) Balestre apparently wasn't even present when the decision was made to disqualify Senna. This happened before the drivers took to the podium. Was he present when Prost went to their hut and was he even available for Prost to complain to?
For both these last two points I have seen and could find no quotes supporting either outcome, so I genuinely don't know, but I think it is often assumed that it was all a Prost / Balestre love-in, just because they were both French.. and certainly the Senna movie was strongly edited to make it seem that way. Maybe it was.
Finally, for clarity, my thoughts on the collision itself? I saw it very much the same way as Schumacher / Hill 1994. The overtaking driver tried an overly ambitious move from way back, giving the driver they were overtaking an opportunity not to concede and instead to crash, and the driver being overtaken took the opportunity. I think Prost collided deliberately, and I think Senna was a bit silly to give him that opportunity.
Finally (again), like the Senna film, this collision is often projected as the start of their dispute to justify the 1990 collision. This is a viewpoint that completely ignores all the events that had led up to Prost declaring he'd no longer leave the door open for Senna pre race. While Senna's overtaking may look quite tame nowadays, at the time it was comparatively very aggressive and was regarded by many, including some drivers and indeed Prost, as too dangerous or risky, and was indeed the subject behind that famous interview with Jackie Stewart.
Edited by Alfanatic on Monday 12th May 14:27
Being gifted the '86 WDC is one way of looking at it.
McLaren TAG were down on power but better on fuel consumption, Williams Honda had the quicker package. Prost was rarely off the podium.
It's worth remembering Goodyear took sh*t tyres to Adelaide. Prost had a tyre failure but made it back to the pits whereas Rosberg didn't and retired; Piquet pitted after Mansell's spectacular blowout. Not only that but Prost was catching both Williams before Mansell's retirement...
Lucky perhaps but most definitely not an unworthy WDC.
McLaren TAG were down on power but better on fuel consumption, Williams Honda had the quicker package. Prost was rarely off the podium.
It's worth remembering Goodyear took sh*t tyres to Adelaide. Prost had a tyre failure but made it back to the pits whereas Rosberg didn't and retired; Piquet pitted after Mansell's spectacular blowout. Not only that but Prost was catching both Williams before Mansell's retirement...
Lucky perhaps but most definitely not an unworthy WDC.
GCH said:
Prost liked to moan- (hence being fired by both renault and ferrari), and play politics (balestre!).
That's not why he was sacked from Renault and he was entirely correct to complain about Ferrari at that point.GCH said:
'86 he was gifted the championship after mansells tyre blow out,
He had put himself in the position to win the championship in an inferior car against the to Williams'. He didn't get the championship by default, he won it fairly. You may forget, he also had a puncture earlier in the Australian race...GCH said:
'89 he turned in on senna at suzuka, wrongly got out of the car, then complained to his chum balestre, who hated senna as much as he did.
Suzuka '90 he got what he deserved for the year before imho.
No disputing he was phenomenally quick and naturally gifted driver, but he certainly liked to play games behind the scenes, whereas mansell & senna were more outspoken in their opinions and criticisms.
Maybe if Mansell and Senna had put as much effort into making the team work for them, rather than complaining/playing golf/being outspoken, they may have been more successful.Suzuka '90 he got what he deserved for the year before imho.
No disputing he was phenomenally quick and naturally gifted driver, but he certainly liked to play games behind the scenes, whereas mansell & senna were more outspoken in their opinions and criticisms.
GCH said:
It would have been very interesting to see him when refuelling returned and race strategy /pitstops played an increasingly important role. For sure his professor moniker would have played a part and i have no doubt he would have won more championships.
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?
Fangio has the best race start to win ration, pretty sure last time I saw the stats it humiliated every one else in the history of formula one.
Alfanatic said:
Finally, for clarity, my thoughts on the collision itself? I saw it very much the same way as Schumacher / Hill 1994. The overtaking driver tried an overly ambitious move from way back, giving the driver they were overtaking an opportunity not to concede and instead to crash, and the driver being overtaken took the opportunity. I think Prost collided deliberately, and I think Senna was a bit silly to give him that opportunity.
Finally (again), like the Senna film, this collision is often projected as the start of their dispute to justify the 1990 collision. This is a viewpoint that completely ignores all the events that had led up to Prost declaring he'd no longer leave the door open for Senna pre race. While Senna's overtaking may look quite tame nowadays, at the time it was comparatively very aggressive and was regarded by many, including some drivers and indeed Prost, as too dangerous or risky, and was indeed the subject behind that famous interview with Jackie Stewart.
Good comments.Finally (again), like the Senna film, this collision is often projected as the start of their dispute to justify the 1990 collision. This is a viewpoint that completely ignores all the events that had led up to Prost declaring he'd no longer leave the door open for Senna pre race. While Senna's overtaking may look quite tame nowadays, at the time it was comparatively very aggressive and was regarded by many, including some drivers and indeed Prost, as too dangerous or risky, and was indeed the subject behind that famous interview with Jackie Stewart.
It is well known and often described that in order to overtake, Senna would place his car in a position where the other driver always had to make the decision - let him through, or crash. It could therefore be concluded that Senna didn't think Prost was the type of driver to 'choose to crash', forgetting perhaps that in this one instance, it would be to Prost's advantage to do so. Prost on the other hand never had a reputation for such positioning, but did have a reputation for being calculating and precise. Again, it could be concluded that he calculated the situation (to his advantage), the risk (low speed = low risk) and executed the move precisely (wheel to sidepod, not wheel to wheel).
It is interesting to note that Prost has been quoted in the last couple of weeks, telling Rosberg he has got to be more aggressive in order to beat Hamilton.
To hold in mind that one Alain Prost knows a little about the words: fast, aggressive and Rosberg. Prost put the fastest, most fearless bloke in an F1 car in his box. In the adjoining seasons he scared the bravest bloke ever to sit in an F1 car with his sheer speed. Rosberg and Lauda were in a different league to Senna for balls and bravery. A different universe. Hes probably the only bloke who can look Nico in the eye and tell him whats needed.
Prost was a phenomenal driver in his time.
I have logged the majority of the top F1 drivers into a spreadsheet which divides the results by the number of race starts.
Using this information, in terms of fastest race laps Prost took FTD in 20.6% of the races, putting him 6th behind Fangio, Jim Clark, Ascari, Stirling Moss and Michael Schumacher. He is just ahead of Raikkonen and Vettel.
Senna is down in 18th place with FTD only 11.8% of the races. (Hamilton is 22nd at 10.4%) The drivers with a reputation for being fast just don't seem to be able to put it together.
In Race wins per start he is 7th, behind Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Vettel, Michael Schumacher and Stewart - but ahead of Senna.
He is well behind Senna in Poles - 13th for Prost and 4th for Senna, but clearly well ahead in race trim, and is 3rd in the number of podiums per start (Senna 7th).
In short it would appear that Prost is often under-estimated and Senna is usually over-hyped.
If you are looking for a stealthy World Champion you might take a look at Denny Hulme - 1 World Championship but only 8 race wins in his career, 1 pole, 9 fastest laps and 33 podiums out of 112 races.
(PS- for Mansell fans, as he has been mentioned a few times - he has more fastest laps per race start than Senna by 4%, but is 9% behind in race wins)
I have logged the majority of the top F1 drivers into a spreadsheet which divides the results by the number of race starts.
Using this information, in terms of fastest race laps Prost took FTD in 20.6% of the races, putting him 6th behind Fangio, Jim Clark, Ascari, Stirling Moss and Michael Schumacher. He is just ahead of Raikkonen and Vettel.
Senna is down in 18th place with FTD only 11.8% of the races. (Hamilton is 22nd at 10.4%) The drivers with a reputation for being fast just don't seem to be able to put it together.
In Race wins per start he is 7th, behind Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Vettel, Michael Schumacher and Stewart - but ahead of Senna.
He is well behind Senna in Poles - 13th for Prost and 4th for Senna, but clearly well ahead in race trim, and is 3rd in the number of podiums per start (Senna 7th).
In short it would appear that Prost is often under-estimated and Senna is usually over-hyped.
If you are looking for a stealthy World Champion you might take a look at Denny Hulme - 1 World Championship but only 8 race wins in his career, 1 pole, 9 fastest laps and 33 podiums out of 112 races.
(PS- for Mansell fans, as he has been mentioned a few times - he has more fastest laps per race start than Senna by 4%, but is 9% behind in race wins)
Edited by ukmike2000 on Tuesday 20th May 22:16
Ukipdefect said:
I thought Senna was a bugger but http://youtu.be/qFZKkK6odgY
Jeez. Reminds me why I wasn't a fan.ukmike2000 said:
Prost was a phenomenal driver in his time.
I have logged the majority of the top F1 drivers into a spreadsheet which divides the results by the number of race starts.
Using this information, in terms of fastest race laps Prost took FTD in 20.6% of the races, putting him 6th behind Fangio, Jim Clark, Ascari, Stirling Moss and Michael Schumacher. He is just ahead of Raikkonen and Vettel.
Senna is down in 18th place with FTD only 11.8% of the races. (Hamilton is 22nd at 10.4%) The drivers with a reputation for being fast just don't seem to be able to put it together.
In Race wins per start he is 7th, behind Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Vettel, Michael Schumacher and Stewart - but ahead of Senna.
He is well behind Senna in Poles - 13th for Prost and 4th for Senna, but clearly well ahead in race trim, and is 3rd in the number of podiums per start (Senna 7th).
In short it would appear that Prost is often under-estimated and Senna is usually over-hyped.
If you are looking for a stealthy World Champion you might take a look at Denny Hulme - 1 World Championship but only 8 race wins in his career, 1 pole, 9 fastest laps and 33 podiums out of 112 races.
(PS- for Mansell fans, as he has been mentioned a few times - he has more fastest laps per race start than Senna by 4%, but is 9% behind in race wins)
First of all, holy thread resurrection.I have logged the majority of the top F1 drivers into a spreadsheet which divides the results by the number of race starts.
Using this information, in terms of fastest race laps Prost took FTD in 20.6% of the races, putting him 6th behind Fangio, Jim Clark, Ascari, Stirling Moss and Michael Schumacher. He is just ahead of Raikkonen and Vettel.
Senna is down in 18th place with FTD only 11.8% of the races. (Hamilton is 22nd at 10.4%) The drivers with a reputation for being fast just don't seem to be able to put it together.
In Race wins per start he is 7th, behind Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Vettel, Michael Schumacher and Stewart - but ahead of Senna.
He is well behind Senna in Poles - 13th for Prost and 4th for Senna, but clearly well ahead in race trim, and is 3rd in the number of podiums per start (Senna 7th).
In short it would appear that Prost is often under-estimated and Senna is usually over-hyped.
If you are looking for a stealthy World Champion you might take a look at Denny Hulme - 1 World Championship but only 8 race wins in his career, 1 pole, 9 fastest laps and 33 podiums out of 112 races.
(PS- for Mansell fans, as he has been mentioned a few times - he has more fastest laps per race start than Senna by 4%, but is 9% behind in race wins)
Edited by ukmike2000 on Tuesday 20th May 22:16
Second of all, I can't believe you spent the time to figure our all of the above.
Third of all, who cares? Fastest laps in race mean f
k all, it like proclaiming a driver to be the best in history as he had the best left rear wheel man throughout his entire career.The statistics don't mean nothing.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff