Let me put this out there regarding Prost.
Discussion
That's right, they don't mean nothing. They mean an awful lot.
Statistics are taking over the world of professional sport, because they are a more accurate representation of the truth than gut feeling. The Oakland A's example that is the focus of the book Moneyball is a famous example but racing cars have been leading the way in collecting data in sports, not least because the car was capable of carrying the 20kg or so of large equipment that early telemetry systems required without being put at an unmanageable performance disadvantage.
The statistics quoted above say as much if not more about the car and team as they do the driver but Prost was a team mate to four different world champions all well respected for their speed and ability, and he was able to take the fight to every single one of them.
Noone ever got an easy ride as Prost's team mate. He was too fast.
Statistics are taking over the world of professional sport, because they are a more accurate representation of the truth than gut feeling. The Oakland A's example that is the focus of the book Moneyball is a famous example but racing cars have been leading the way in collecting data in sports, not least because the car was capable of carrying the 20kg or so of large equipment that early telemetry systems required without being put at an unmanageable performance disadvantage.
The statistics quoted above say as much if not more about the car and team as they do the driver but Prost was a team mate to four different world champions all well respected for their speed and ability, and he was able to take the fight to every single one of them.
Noone ever got an easy ride as Prost's team mate. He was too fast.
As long as it didn't rain.....
heebeegeetee said:
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?
kiseca said:
That's right, they don't mean nothing. They mean an awful lot.
Statistics are taking over the world of professional sport, because they are a more accurate representation of the truth than gut feeling. The Oakland A's example that is the focus of the book Moneyball is a famous example but racing cars have been leading the way in collecting data in sports, not least because the car was capable of carrying the 20kg or so of large equipment that early telemetry systems required without being put at an unmanageable performance disadvantage.
The statistics quoted above say as much if not more about the car and team as they do the driver but Prost was a team mate to four different world champions all well respected for their speed and ability, and he was able to take the fight to every single one of them.
Noone ever got an easy ride as Prost's team mate. He was too fast.
The statistics involved in moneyball employed a direct correlation between various athletes playing the same sport at the same time.Statistics are taking over the world of professional sport, because they are a more accurate representation of the truth than gut feeling. The Oakland A's example that is the focus of the book Moneyball is a famous example but racing cars have been leading the way in collecting data in sports, not least because the car was capable of carrying the 20kg or so of large equipment that early telemetry systems required without being put at an unmanageable performance disadvantage.
The statistics quoted above say as much if not more about the car and team as they do the driver but Prost was a team mate to four different world champions all well respected for their speed and ability, and he was able to take the fight to every single one of them.
Noone ever got an easy ride as Prost's team mate. He was too fast.
To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
Justaredbadge said:
Every full season that Prost competed in, he was a title contender.
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.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
You really need to smell what you're shovelling.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.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
A few things you neglected to mention:-
88 Simply LIES, please check your "facts"
89 needed to add "by taking out Senna"
90 Senna returning the favour
LaurasOtherHalf said:
The statistics involved in moneyball employed a direct correlation between various athletes playing the same sport at the same time.
To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Then surely there is some validity when comparing two drivers who raced together in the same era, including a few seasons as team-mates with the same equipment at their disposal? Those statistics apparently say that Prost bested Senna in most metrics.To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
FeelingLucky said:
Justaredbadge said:
Every full season that Prost competed in, he was a title contender.
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.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
You really need to smell what you're shovelling.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.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
A few things you neglected to mention:-
88 Simply LIES, please check your "facts"
89 needed to add "by taking out Senna"
90 Senna returning the favour
Prost's worst results that were dropped from his points tally were two retirements and three second places, whereas Senna also lost two non-finishes, but also a tenth, a sixth and a fourth place. There is no question that Prost was robbed by the system that year.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
The statistics involved in moneyball employed a direct correlation between various athletes playing the same sport at the same time.
To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
What are you talking about? He didn't even compare Senna to Clark and Hamilton. He compared Prost and Senna and threw in Mansell, three drivers who did compete at the same time and in some events even for the same team!To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
And they certainly all performed in the same sport. I don't get your objection at all, frankly.
thegreenhell said:
FeelingLucky said:
Justaredbadge said:
Every full season that Prost competed in, he was a title contender.
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.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
You really need to smell what you're shovelling.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.
The only drivers who can get close to that record are Fangio and Clark.
A few things you neglected to mention:-
88 Simply LIES, please check your "facts"
89 needed to add "by taking out Senna"
90 Senna returning the favour
Prost's worst results that were dropped from his points tally were two retirements and three second places, whereas Senna also lost two non-finishes, but also a tenth, a sixth and a fourth place. There is no question that Prost was robbed by the system that year.
red55 said:
As long as it didn't rain.....
I do recall that after one particularly torrid wet race, more remarkable for the many crashes rather than the racing, Dereck Warwick saying "the only driver out there who had any balls was Alain Prost" after Prost had again refused to smash himself up for the benefit of the sport.As I said, I'm glad they weren't all like him. We like crashes, sweat and fisticuffs.
kiseca said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
The statistics involved in moneyball employed a direct correlation between various athletes playing the same sport at the same time.
To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
What are you talking about? He didn't even compare Senna to Clark and Hamilton. He compared Prost and Senna and threw in Mansell, three drivers who did compete at the same time and in some events even for the same team!To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
And they certainly all performed in the same sport. I don't get your objection at all, frankly.
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)
I'd reiterate again, unless you're counting 88 & 89 where senna & prost were teammates, statistically comparing drivers in F1 is completely pointless due to the extreme variables between different cars, teams and eras.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
thegreenhell said:
You're right that in '88 Senna had more victories than Prost (8-7) but Prost most certainly did score more points that season, 105-94. It was only the system employed at the time of only counting the best 11 out of 16 results that meant Prost had to drop more points than Senna, and thus lost the championship.
Prost's worst results that were dropped from his points tally were two retirements and three second places, whereas Senna also lost two non-finishes, but also a tenth, a sixth and a fourth place. There is no question that Prost was robbed by the system that year.
I'm not sure that argument stands. The WDC is method dependent. Prost's worst results that were dropped from his points tally were two retirements and three second places, whereas Senna also lost two non-finishes, but also a tenth, a sixth and a fourth place. There is no question that Prost was robbed by the system that year.
I favour the idea of the number of victories being the only criterion unless there is a draw in which case we drop back to the number of seconds, thirds, etc. As soon as you add in a points system, someone somewhere will be robbed.
We used to have points going back to 6th. Now they go back to 10th. We've had various points for various positions. Each of these changes robs someone of position.
Someone said that statistics say nothing. That is wrong. However, all stats have to be interpreted.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I'd reiterate again, unless you're counting 88 & 89 where senna & prost were teammates, statistically comparing drivers in F1 is completely pointless due to the extreme variables between different cars, teams and eras.
I think given the respective state of play between Ferrari and McLaren at the time, and given he had Mansell as a team mate, I think Prosts achievements in the Ferrari in '90 were incredible.heebeegeetee said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I'd reiterate again, unless you're counting 88 & 89 where senna & prost were teammates, statistically comparing drivers in F1 is completely pointless due to the extreme variables between different cars, teams and eras.
I think given the respective state of play between Ferrari and McLaren at the time, and given he had Mansell as a team mate, I think Prosts achievements in the Ferrari in '90 were incredible.LaurasOtherHalf said:
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
LaurasOtherHalf said:
kiseca said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
The statistics involved in moneyball employed a direct correlation between various athletes playing the same sport at the same time.
To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
What are you talking about? He didn't even compare Senna to Clark and Hamilton. He compared Prost and Senna and threw in Mansell, three drivers who did compete at the same time and in some events even for the same team!To try and use the same equations on jim clark in a lotus, ayrton senna in a mclaren and lewis hamilton in a mercedes 50 years apart is utterly pointless.
Also, who is noone and did he really get an easy ride?
And they certainly all performed in the same sport. I don't get your objection at all, frankly.
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)
I'd reiterate again, unless you're counting 88 & 89 where senna & prost were teammates, statistically comparing drivers in F1 is completely pointless due to the extreme variables between different cars, teams and eras.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
And you've just quoted the text where UKMike compares Senna and Prosts stats, as I had said they did, then suggest I'm reading a different thread? Come on.
Derek Smith said:
entropy said:
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.
That was a nasty move by Prost. It obviously meant to hurt and it did.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.
Remember 1989 Australian GP? History favours Prost as an honourable man for having the balls to withdraw from the race but according to Piquet most drivers were unwilling to race yet Prost went against the grain was prepared to race. Piquet lost the respect of Prost, they had got on well and Piquet publicly supported Prost after he was mistreated by Renault for losing WDC.
thegreenhell said:
You're right that in '88 Senna had more victories than Prost (8-7) but Prost most certainly did score more points that season, 105-94. It was only the system employed at the time of only counting the best 11 out of 16 results that meant Prost had to drop more points than Senna, and thus lost the championship.
Prost's worst results that were dropped from his points tally were two retirements and three second places, whereas Senna also lost two non-finishes, but also a tenth, a sixth and a fourth place. There is no question that Prost was robbed by the system that year.
Yes, because it's entirely appropriate that the driver with MOST wins LOOSES the championship.Prost's worst results that were dropped from his points tally were two retirements and three second places, whereas Senna also lost two non-finishes, but also a tenth, a sixth and a fourth place. There is no question that Prost was robbed by the system that year.
You rant as if the rules were some how changed halfway through the year without consultation, whereas in fact the "best results" rule had been in place for years.
Moreover, it is only YOU who feels Prost was "robbed", as the man himself said in a post Suzuka interview, "Ayrton has done a better season, and deserved to win..."
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff