62 replies to this topic

[Wez]

narain fan, on Nov 15 2005, 06:24 PM, said:

either u have not looked at the videos or too naive to understand and analyse
and u would never know about senna and his "TOTAL WAR " so forget about 89

Indeed, thank you Narian Fan!
You cant argue with this guy... let him believe he's right since we all know he's talking cr@p!

[ecapdeville]

Wez, on Nov 16 2005, 03:49 AM, said:

You cant argue with this guy... let him believe he's right since we all know he's talking cr@p!

They didnt live those F1 seasons, they are not guilty of their ignorance

pitty tough

[Senna]

ecapdeville, on Nov 16 2005, 03:46 PM, said:

They didnt live those F1 seasons, they are not guilty of their ignorance

pitty tough

[AutoRacer5]

I was not even 1 when Senna and Prost met in 1989, not quite 2 in 1990.

[jimmyk]

Whether Schumacher was right or wrong in Adelaide, a true RACER would have made the same decision he did.... Everybody would love to win from pole by 2 laps every race,all season to be world drivers champion, but it doesnt happen like that....If all you dreamt about and worked for since your 1st go-kart race 20-odd years depended on one corner (AGP94) , there wouldnt be two options....

And Jerez was another situation where its easy to criticize Schumi....but I think any other driver on the grid would have done the same in the heat of battle....Lets face it, the spotlight has been on Schumacher since then and he has had the task of continuing to succeed to boot.....If any of you guys have driven in any type of motorsport, then surely you can see the value of his mentality when he races......

[monza gorilla]

Yes, I believe a number of us have driven competitively but driving into a fellow competitor doesn't figure in my mentality. Is that why I never won anything? I don't think your argument holds water.

[nojvnof1]

Quote

. Clearly we have to listen to the FIA but from onboard in Jerez, Michael had the corner and Jacques made a too oportunistic overtaking manourve which could have taken them both out.

that's the beauty of the move. Jacques knew he would probably have gone off, but Michael being the nut he was decided to drive into him instead of simply letting JV drive straight into the gravel. Michael panics in pressure situations and cracks. He cracked in '94, '97 and had a shocker at Suzuka in '03.

As for the Senna/Prost incident. Prost took Senna out in '89. Senna went on to win the race, but dirty politics robbed him of the win and title. In 1990, he won pole and wanted it on the clean side of the track, he won that right but was vetoed by the then FIA President Jean-Marie Balestre, a Frenchman. So Senna took Prost out. Do I agree with what he did? No. Do I understand his motives? Yes, and I probably would have done the same thing had forces other than my talent, car or team be working to conspire my downfall.

Quote

You don't just leave your opponents the option of the grass and down two positions or a crash with you. Jacques was inexperienced and unworthy that day and people still blame Michael today.

You really should stop right there as you know little of what you are talking about. Jacques was a worthy champion and would have been a worthy race winner. Jacques relative inexperience to Michael should have worked in Michael's favour. Instead, it was JV who kept his head, and M$ who cracked. JV has gone on record saying he knew if he tried a move, M$ would try to take him out. Face it, Michael got caught out for the cheat he is that day, and it still irks you for whatever reason to this day. The only thing the FIA got wrong was Michael's punishment. They should have banned him for 3 races.

Quote

Yes, I believe a number of us have driven competitively but driving into a fellow competitor doesn't figure in my mentality. Is that why I never won anything? I don't think your argument holds water.

neither do I. Such a thing is blatantly dangerous, seeing as there are open wheelers. What would have happened had JV's front left run over M$' right rear? We could have had a severe accident.

[schumi13]

I think it is complete ludacris that people on here think Senna doing exactly what you people think Michael did in 1994 and 1997 being unacceptable yet someone who isn't alive to defend himself doing what he did in those two years which were clearly both his faults is acceptable. There is a full analaysis from someone that actually watched those races and I believe that what they are saying is true. No I wasn't alive when it happened and I don't know why you can't understand that to the younger generation Michael Schumacher is the best ever driver. Just like in a few years someone else will be like Kimi or Fernando. And yes Michael Schumacher's move in Adelaide I say solely will haunt him later but Senna is not known as the best to me for not the reasons of his driving tactics, I have never seen him race live so therefore don't bother judging his capabilities regardless to what you lot say. I have see Michael Schumacher racing since 1998 to what I remember and also vividly remember other races from the '96 and '97 season but he totally dominated the sport from 2001-2004 except 2003 where he wasn't given such an easy ride. Now here is the link to above site that analysizes the events of Suzuka 1989 and 1990. They speak for themselves. Yes it may be biased after being written by an Alain Prost fan but maybe one of the Senna fans on here should then furthermore write an article about that race in responce to this one. http://www.alainpros...als/suzuka.htm

Edited by schumi13, 18 November 2005 - 06:22 PM.

[narain fan]

schumi13, on Nov 18 2005, 10:21 PM, said:

I think it is complete ludacris that people on here think Senna doing exactly what you people think Michael did in 1994 and 1997 being unacceptable yet someone who isn't alive to defend himself doing what he did in those two years which were clearly both his faults is acceptable. There is a full analaysis from someone that actually watched those races and I believe that what they are saying is true. No I wasn't alive when it happened and I don't know why you can't understand that to the younger generation Michael Schumacher is the best ever driver. Just like in a few years someone else will be like Kimi or Fernando. And yes Michael Schumacher's move in Adelaide I say solely will haunt him later but Senna is not known as the best to me for not the reasons of his driving tactics, I have never seen him race live so therefore don't bother judging his capabilities regardless to what you lot say. I have see Michael Schumacher racing since 1998 to what I remember and also vividly remember other races from the '96 and '97 season but he totally dominated the sport from 2001-2004 except 2003 where he wasn't given such an easy ride. Now here is the link to above site that analysizes the events of Suzuka 1989 and 1990. They speak for themselves. Yes it may be biased after being written by an Alain Prost fan but maybe one of the Senna fans on here should then furthermore write an article about that race in responce to this one. http://www.alainpros...als/suzuka.htm

u should be banned for saying this.......

narain fan, on Nov 18 2005, 10:24 PM, said:

@$*#***,the link is not working

narain fan, on Nov 18 2005, 10:27 PM, said:

@$*#***,the link is not working

Edited by narain fan, 18 November 2005 - 06:28 PM.

[schumi13]

narain fan, on Nov 18 2005, 06:27 PM, said:

u should be banned for saying this.......
@$*#***,the link is not working

I have no idea why it isn't working. Try and copy this into your browser: http://www.alainpros...ials/suzuka.htm

[narain fan]

schumi13, on Nov 18 2005, 10:35 PM, said:

I have no idea why it isn't working. Try and copy this into your browser: http://www.alainpros...ials/suzuka.htm

strangely started working now,and i would like to mention that it is the most biased article i have ever read
strangely after a second look ,it is not the most biased ,i feel......................

Edited by narain fan, 18 November 2005 - 06:39 PM.

[schumi13]

narain fan, on Nov 18 2005, 06:27 PM, said:

u should be banned for saying this.......
@$*#***,the link is not working

I don't know what you find so bad about my point of view. If I do get banned, what would it exactly be for.... and if anyone else thinks this i'd really leave this forum because my main aim was for this not to happen.

[narain fan]

schumi13, on Nov 18 2005, 10:40 PM, said:

I don't know what you find so bad about my point of view. If I do get banned, what would it exactly be for.... and if anyone else thinks this i'd really leave this forum because my main aim was for this not to happen.

i should have known,13 oops 14 year olds do not have a good sense of humour

[schumi13]

narain fan, on Nov 18 2005, 06:44 PM, said:

i should have known,13 oops 14 year olds do not have a good sense of humour

My remarks weren't actually meant to be funny or humourous or even sarcastic. This is what I think and I don't know if you lot can't handle three things called logic, common sense and the truth. May I add on to what the 1996 FIA Formula World Champion Damon Hill said about his ex 1994 team mate by referring you to the bottom of the homepage on the above link. (The second one as the first doesn't work)

[narain fan]

.

the link works fine
Damon Hill (1996 World Champion, Ayrton Senna's last teammate) on Senna's fatal accident and manslaughter charge against Williams:

"I am convinced that he (Senna) made a mistake, but many people will never believe that he could. Why not? He made many mistakes in his career.

"He was identified with pushing to the limit and beyond. He would often prefer to crash into his opponent rather than be defeated." (See picture.)

"These opinions are sacrilege in the world of driving gods. Ayrton was a great driver and a man with enormous humanity. He was not a god. He was as frail and vulnerable as you or I to the need to show what we are made of, and to whatever personal motives drove him to feel that risking his life was proof of his integrity.

"It was not the fault of anyone else that he kept his foot flat when he could have lifted, but Ayrton had to be this demigod "Senna", and "Senna" does not shrink from fear. And in that moment he fulfilled all our sorry needs for a hero for whom death is just an occupational hazard."

schumi13, on Nov 18 2005, 10:48 PM, said:

My remarks weren't actually meant to be funny or humourous or even sarcastic

my(on u being banned ) were

Edited by narain fan, 18 November 2005 - 06:56 PM.

[schumi13]

I believe that Damon here is talking a great deal of sense.

[Senna]

I am familiar with that article. It was in The Times (the paper I read) a few years ago.  It is true that Senna made several mistakes in his career but he did not make a mistake on Sunday 1st of May 1994. Here is a video of the accident:

The accident video  


As you can see, Senna’s car veered inexplicably to the right as if it was drawn to the concrete wall.  The car went in a straight line.  Please note that in 1994 the Tamburello 'corner' was flat out.  There are a great many theories on the matter and many popularised theories are groundless.  Tom Rubython’s book ‘The Life of Senna’ is a great book and covers this matter, and a great many others, in some detail.  It would be an excellent and affordable Christmas present.  If you are genuinely ‘interested’ in the subject of Senna’s crash, visit the following website:

The Senna Files website

It has a wealth of information regarding the accident.  Very informative indeed.

Edited by Senna, 18 November 2005 - 09:56 PM.

[ecapdeville]

Senna, on Nov 18 2005, 03:49 PM, said:

There are a great many theories on the matter and many popularised theories are groundless.

Wich is YOUR theory?

[Sato]

I do not know about Senna (the poster), but i am a believer in there being debris on the track, that got lodged under the car, causing it to bottom out, and become uncontrollable.

[nojvnof1]

schumi13, that link if from a Prost fan site, it is one of the most biased things I've ever seen. Why are we defending Senna and not Michael? Senna had the argument of provocation in his corner, and rightly so considering his account of events and in books. Michael was not hit by Damon or Jacques prior to their title deciders.

On the Senna incident, I think that it was a combination of that debris Sato talks about, and low tyre pressures due to the slow safety car.

[Wez]

nojvnof1, on Nov 19 2005, 09:37 AM, said:

schumi13, that link if from a Prost fan site, it is one of the most biased things I've ever seen. Why are we defending Senna and not Michael? Senna had the argument of provocation in his corner, and rightly so considering his account of events and in books. Michael was not hit by Damon or Jacques prior to their title deciders.

On the Senna incident, I think that it was a combination of that debris Sato talks about, and low tyre pressures due to the slow safety car.

YEAH!

And with regard to the most tragic event in modern F1 history, It wasn't Senna's fault... end of story! Of course Hill would defend his employers!

[AutoRacer5]

Sato, on Nov 18 2005, 08:35 PM, said:

I do not know about Senna (the poster), but i am a believer in there being debris on the track, that got lodged under the car, causing it to bottom out, and become uncontrollable.

There were two pics, one of debris in front of Senna's car, and right after he ran over said piece. The piece is still on the track in the second photo, so that I think goes out the window. But the lowered tire pressures made the car a bit lower, thus when he bottomed out he bottomed out so hard that it caused some steering thing to break or something, and thats what I think caused the off.

[Wez]

Similar to what AR said, What happened was that because the cars were behind the SC for such a long period the tyre pressures dropped therefore lowering Senna's car to the ground (this can be seen from the car bottoming out & sparks flying a corner before).
The flow of air below the car was decreased, and this caused major aerodynamic disruption causing the car to uncontrollably go straight of the track.

[AutoRacer5]

A Steering arm had to have broken before he went off the track though, otherwise he wouldnt have had an impact like that.

[monza gorilla]

I disagree.

[Wez]

monza gorilla, on Nov 23 2005, 01:33 PM, said:

I disagree.

With My theory or AR's?

I saw a documentary on the National Geographic channel and their theory was pretty much what I just said.
And for those new to F1 , the actual impact didn't kill him, it was a piece of front suspension.

I also got a report from the court case with pictures of the evidence (some are far to gruesome/upsetting for any Senna fan to post on a forum).

[monza gorilla]

I disagree with AR5 (surprise!), and agree with your post, Wez.

[AutoRacer5]

Explain why you disagree. A steering arm had to have broken. On the S Files website, they have a pic, the left front wheel is blacker, meaning that it is turned. Had the steering arm not broken, he would not have hit the wall at that angle, and the suspension piece might not have broken off.

[monza gorilla]

Give me a link to this photo, please. My point of view is that a fully bottomed out car on low tyre pressures would become a toboggan. There would be no steering control.

[AutoRacer5]

Before he hit the debris


After, supposedly the debris was flattened, maybe he ran over it.


"Schumacher's Benetton about to straddle the stray bodywork. Look very carefully and you'll see that it has been flattened, suggesting that Senna's car has just run it over…" says the photo's caption.

http://www.thesennaf...es/picsf06.html