169 replies to this topic

[Autumnpuma]

pumpdoc, on May 12 2006, 10:30 PM, said:

early onset

Very early, Im not quite 40...I pity my wife, I'll be happy in my senility, but she'll go insane

[pumpdoc]

Autumnpuma, on May 12 2006, 10:39 PM, said:

Very early, Im not quite 40...I pity my wife, I'll be happy in my senility, but she'll go insane

my wifes gone over with me, as I type this in my lair (the entertainment room/bar/home office) she's content to do her sewing and crafts and later on make wild monkey love to me     

[Autumnpuma]

pumpdoc, on May 12 2006, 10:44 PM, said:

my wifes gone over with me, as I type this in my lair (the entertainment room/bar/home office) she's content to do her sewing and crafts and later on make wild monkey love to me     

Woo Hoo! Speaking of which, I'd better go see if my own wife is still awake  

Night all!

[nojvnof1]

Quote

Not the best stats I have seen, but again stats only goes that far in explaining a driver. But two pole positions and 6 wins from 67 races over 5 seasons and some races mostly in a Ferrari, I don't know...

Stats lie. Firstly, apart from the 1979 and 1982 Ferrari's, the rest were downright dogs. How Gilles managed to win at Jarama in '81 is beyond me, whilst he could have fought for the title in 1979 but honoured team orders. Siz wins might not sound alot to some of you, but that amount of wins will never do such a talent justice.

Fangio and Moss said Gilles was a driver of their era and was one of the best and certainly one of the fastest of all time.

For what it's worth Gilles isn't my all time greatest, Senna is, but Gilles is right up there with the very best, certainly in terms of speed.

[Ctrl300]

nojvnof1, on May 13 2006, 08:56 PM, said:

Stats lie. Firstly, apart from the 1979 and 1982 Ferrari's, the rest were downright dogs. How Gilles managed to win at Jarama in '81 is beyond me, whilst he could have fought for the title in 1979 but honoured team orders. Siz wins might not sound alot to some of you, but that amount of wins will never do such a talent justice.

Fangio and Moss said Gilles was a driver of their era and was one of the best and certainly one of the fastest of all time.

For what it's worth Gilles isn't my all time greatest, Senna is, but Gilles is right up there with the very best, certainly in terms of speed.

You still have not provided any reason for why you rate Senna over Prost. Do you even have a reason or is it purely based on the overall hype?

[AutoRacer5]

Gilles was a damn good driver, in my top-5 certainly. Monaco in 1981 and Jarama 1981 were brilliant, and didn't he break a suspension piece while 20 seconds ahead, and win the race by 20 seconds at one point?

Gilles had the testicular fortitude that the cars force many of the drivers to lack today.

[Autumnpuma]

AutoRacer5, on May 13 2006, 09:26 AM, said:

Gilles had the testicular fortitude that the cars force many of the drivers to lack today.

You, sir, have summed it up exactly!  

[funkejay]

AutoRacer5, on May 13 2006, 11:26 AM, said:

Gilles was a damn good driver, in my top-5 certainly. Monaco in 1981 and Jarama 1981 were brilliant, and didn't he break a suspension piece while 20 seconds ahead, and win the race by 20 seconds at one point?

Gilles had the testicular fortitude that the cars force many of the drivers to lack today.

When and where did you watch these races, AR5? They were before you were born!!!

Edited by funkejay, 13 May 2006 - 10:18 PM.

[Autumnpuma]

funkejay, on May 13 2006, 03:18 PM, said:

When and where did you watch these races, AR5? They were before you were born!!!

Exactly, and if you have a VHS or DVD of them, gimme the link so I can get them too!

[AutoRacer5]

Its called Reading. Many Americans haven't heard of it. If I find it, I'll get it.

Some Americans are the file below:

Edited by AutoRacer5, 14 May 2006 - 05:47 AM.

[Autumnpuma]

AutoRacer5, on May 13 2006, 10:47 PM, said:

Its called Reading. Many Americans haven't heard of it. If I find it, I'll get it.

Some Americans are the file below:

Excellent!

[AutoRacer5]

download the file.

[Autumnpuma]

        

Yes, it's far better with the soundtrack. You have just described almost all the students in California.

[AutoRacer5]

Or about half the state of Alabama, or Mississippi, or Louisiana.

[nojvnof1]

Quote

You still have not provided any reason for why you rate Senna over Prost. Do you even have a reason or is it purely based on the overall hype?

The point of my post was not to highlight Senna as my favourite but to explain why some could see Gilles as their no 1 and in explaining that stating Gilles isn't the best in my opinion.

As for Senna v Prost, whilst I have the utmost respect for Prost, I always thought Senna had that extra something to give always. Whilst Prost was rightly known as the professor for his calculating ways, Senna could just do things noone else could without thinking about it. Take qualifying at Monaco in '88 or '89 when he just went faster and faster and faster and was over a second faster than Prost.

Then there were drivers such as Suzuka '88, Donington '93 to name but two. The way he hauled the '93 McLaren to 5 wins and a shot at the title and the '94 Williams to 2 poles when neither car was befitting of such achievements is something I don't believe Prost could have done.

Take also Senna's brilliant qualifying abilities, hisbrilliance in the wet compared to Prost who for some reason couldn't get his head around the conditions in account and he comes out ahead of Prost.

Finally, there was Ayrton's attitude to the sport which totally revolutionised it. He was the first to focus heavily on fitness and fitness regimes, he was always the last to exit debriefs as he was so gifted in terms of the technical aspects of the car.

I have other reasons which I have mentioned when this debate occured on this forum a while back and I cannot be bothered searching for them, but that's just a tidbit to explain my view.

Don't get me wrong, I feel both are great, but Senna was greater.

[Ctrl300]

nojvnof1, on May 14 2006, 06:05 PM, said:

As for Senna v Prost, whilst I have the utmost respect for Prost, I always thought Senna had that extra something to give always. Whilst Prost was rightly known as the professor for his calculating ways, Senna could just do things noone else could without thinking about it. Take qualifying at Monaco in '88 or '89 when he just went faster and faster and faster and was over a second faster than Prost.

Then there were drivers such as Suzuka '88, Donington '93 to name but two. The way he hauled the '93 McLaren to 5 wins and a shot at the title and the '94 Williams to 2 poles when neither car was befitting of such achievements is something I don't believe Prost could have done.

Take also Senna's brilliant qualifying abilities, hisbrilliance in the wet compared to Prost who for some reason couldn't get his head around the conditions in account and he comes out ahead of Prost.

Finally, there was Ayrton's attitude to the sport which totally revolutionised it. He was the first to focus heavily on fitness and fitness regimes, he was always the last to exit debriefs as he was so gifted in terms of the technical aspects of the car.

I have other reasons which I have mentioned when this debate occured on this forum a while back and I cannot be bothered searching for them, but that's just a tidbit to explain my view.

Don't get me wrong, I feel both are great, but Senna was greater.

No one here disputed Sennas brilliance, but there are flaws which I find too big to ignore.
When he raced he had absolutely no regards to safety, neither for himself nor others on track. That is why Prost often did not go out in the rain as he felt this would put the safety of others and himself at risk. Senna did not care.
If you care to take a look at how Senna blocks Prost among others when he is about to be overtaken he is just all over the place, throwing his car form one side of the lane to the other cutting off the slipstreaming car behind. This was highly dangerous and is the one reason why people can only switch lane once when defending today.

Prost did much of Senna's set up work, thus Prost was the better technically.

Finally, when Senna started out in F1 and all throughout his carreer he had Prost as his benchmark, not Piquet, Mansell, Lauda or anyone else, only Prost. He admired his skills with the car and the way he understood it technically. The Professor got that nickname for a reason, same as Vale is the Doctor. The two greatest ever in their respectable fields.

Prost was just as fit as Senna all thourgh his career, so don't even paint him up as JPM

Edited by Ctrl300, 14 May 2006 - 08:28 AM.

[AutoRacer5]

Prost didnt go out in the rain, thus lacking testicular fortitude.

[Ctrl300]

AutoRacer5, on May 15 2006, 01:52 AM, said:

Prost didnt go out in the rain, thus lacking testicular fortitude.

You just have no idea do you.
Testucular fortitude? Have you even reached puberty?

[AutoRacer5]

I'm 17.

Prost I'm willing to bet didnt have as good of a rain set up as Senna did have because he didn't go out.

[Ctrl300]

AutoRacer5, on May 15 2006, 01:57 AM, said:

I'm 17.

Prost I'm willing to bet didnt have as good of a rain set up as Senna did have because he didn't go out.

He did go out, but not when it was drenched as he felt the sight would be reduced, which could lead to runners runing into the back of each others, thus putting life at risk.

[AutoRacer5]

Then wait for the track to be clear for a bit, not be around other cars.

[nojvnof1]

Quote

When he raced he had absolutely no regards to safety, neither for himself nor others on track. That is why Prost often did not go out in the rain as he felt this would put the safety of others and himself at risk. Senna did not care.

That doesn't hold water (pardon the pun). Everyone races in the rain, it's an essential part of racing my friend.

Quote

If you care to take a look at how Senna blocks Prost among others when he is about to be overtaken he is just all over the place, throwing his car form one side of the lane to the other cutting off the slipstreaming car behind.

Watch Suzuka 1989 where Prost turns in on Senna? Not as dangerous, but still dirty. Sure, Senna took things to the extremes at times, sometimes overboard, but they all do it, Senna just got highlighted as he was a big name and always got caught, same like Michael.

Quote

Prost did much of Senna's set up work, thus Prost was the better technically.

Where does it say Prost did Senna's setup work. It doesn't say much for Prost if he was beaten by another driver with his setup. I think Senna was technically better. He knew the intricacies of the car, alot of the things Berger has said about this is incredible, I've never heard of instances like it!

Quote

Finally, when Senna started out in F1 and all throughout his carreer he had Prost as his benchmark, not Piquet, Mansell, Lauda or anyone else, only Prost. He admired his skills with the car and the way he understood it technically.

Prost was the best at the time, so it was obvious he'd be Senna's main target. Sure he'd have to worry about Nelson and Nigel on the odd occasion, but to win the title, he'd have to beat Prost, and he did. You're right, it's a credit to Prost, but it's a credit to Senna that he beat him and made the McLaren-Honda team his own!

Quote

Prost was just as fit as Senna all thourgh his career, so don't even paint him up as JPM

I don't know how you can mention JPM in this entire thread mate!!!

[Ctrl300]

nojvnof1, on May 16 2006, 07:45 PM, said:

That doesn't hold water (pardon the pun). Everyone races in the rain, it's an essential part of racing my friend.
Watch Suzuka 1989 where Prost turns in on Senna? Not as dangerous, but still dirty. Sure, Senna took things to the extremes at times, sometimes overboard, but they all do it, Senna just got highlighted as he was a big name and always got caught, same like Michael.
Where does it say Prost did Senna's setup work. It doesn't say much for Prost if he was beaten by another driver with his setup. I think Senna was technically better. He knew the intricacies of the car, alot of the things Berger has said about this is incredible, I've never heard of instances like it!
Prost was the best at the time, so it was obvious he'd be Senna's main target. Sure he'd have to worry about Nelson and Nigel on the odd occasion, but to win the title, he'd have to beat Prost, and he did. You're right, it's a credit to Prost, but it's a credit to Senna that he beat him and made the McLaren-Honda team his own!
I don't know how you can mention JPM in this entire thread mate!!!

Although Senna was the rain master, Prost raced in the wet and did well at it too. But in those days monocoques were far less stiff than now and it was quite possible to have a poor car in the dry turn out to be very good in the wet, which resulted in many, you included, having a scewed view of Senna talent. The only thing Prost refused was to go out when the condotions where so bad that they would be unable to see the car infront in time to properly avoid it when breaking down hard. He was very concerned with safety, and he was a visionary in that field. Senna's disregard for safety eventually cost him his life.
As for Prost doing his set up work just goes to show that Senna did not have a great insight into the car when arriving at McLaren, and that Prost was a much nicer fellow taking the time to help out his new team-mate and rival. Senna was a loud brute, Prost was easy manered, but both where extremely intense and ambitious drivers.
Furthermore, Senna did things on track that was so hideous that the whole paddock was left screaming, even RD, but he never, not once, got sanctioned for it. He got his own way all the time, playing by his own rules. Disgusting to say the least.

In the words of Prost:
"Anyway, before the 1989 season I had dinner at the golf club in Geneva with Honda's then chairman, Mr Kawamoto and four other people. And he admitted that I was right in believing that Honda was more for Ayrton than for me."

"He said, 'You want to know why we push Senna so much? Well, I can't be 100 per cent sure.' But one thing he did let me know was that the new generation of engineers working on the engines were in favour of Ayrton, because he was more the samurai, and I was more the computer."

"So, that was an explanation, and I was very happy afterwards, because then at least I knew very well that something was not correct. Part of my problem had been that Ayrton was so bloody quick, it wasn't easy to know how much was that, and how much was Honda helping him. So after this dinner with Mr Kawamoto, I thought, 'Well, at least I'm not stupid - something really was going on, and now I know the situation.'"

Whatever, the situation was not to improve. Quite the opposite, in fact. In 1989, the fragile relationship between Prost and Senna broke apart utterly, and that existing between Alain and McLaren was not a lot better.

"Until then, I never had a problem with anyone at McLaren, but '89 was different. My contract was due to expire at the end of the year, but Ayrton's was not. Ron knew the future of his team was with Honda - and therefore with Senna. He tried hard to persuade me to stay, but in reality he couldn't keep both of us, and I told him in July that I would be leaving at the end of the season. In my opinion, he was not fair with me in '89. We're still very good friends, and, despite everything, I still even now think of McLaren as my team. But Ron knows my feelings about that period."

"At the time, I was completely disillusioned. After everything I'd done with the team, and for the team, I didn't think I should have been treated like that. But at the end of the day, you know, Ron was trying to push his company to the front, and of course I can understand that a little."

It was at Imola that the most bitter feud in motor-racing history took seed. Senna and Prost, as usual, qualified 1-2, a second and a half clear of the rest, and Ayrton suggested that they not jeopardise their prospects by fighting at the first corner, Tosa, on the opening lap: whomsoever got there first would keep the lead. Alain agreed. At the start, Senna led away, and at Tosa Prost duly fell in behind him.

Then, however, the race was stopped, when Gerhard Berger had a serious accident. On the restart, it was Prost who got ahead - but at Tosa Senna snicked by into the lead.

"Afterwards, he argued that it wasn't the start - it was the restart, so the agreement didn't apply. As I said, he had his own rules, and sometimes they were very... well let's say strange. It had been Ayrton's idea, in the first place, and I didn't have a problem with it. Afterwards, though, I said it was finished; I'd continue to work with him, in technical matters, but as far as our personal relationship was concerned, that was it. And the atmosphere in the team became very bad, of course."

"By the time we got to Monza, I was ahead of him in the championship, by about 10 points. But that race. was the real low point between McLaren and me. Senna had two cars, with 20 people around him, and I had just one car, with maybe four or five mechanics working for me. I was absolutely alone, in one part of the garage, and that was perhaps the toughest weekend of my racing career. Honda was really hard against me by then, and it was difficult trying to fight for the championship in that situation. In practice, Ayrton was nearly two seconds quicker than me - OK, as I said, he was certainly a better qualifier than I was, but two seconds? That was a joke."

In the race though, Senna retired, and Prost won; by the time they headed off to Suzuka and Adelaide, the last two races of the 1989 season, Alain led by 16 points. By now McLaren-Honda essentially worked as two different teams, which happened to operate out of the same pit. Once again, the two red and white cars were in front row, both its drivers in defiant mood, Senna knowing he had to win, Prost making it clear he'd be no pushover.

"I told both the team and the press, 'There's no way I'm going to open the door to him any more.' We talked very often, you should know, about the first corner, the first lap, and Ron always said the important thing was that we shouldn't hit each other, we should think of the team. Well, as far as I was concerned, Senna thought about himself, and that was it. For example, at the start of the British Grand Prix that year, going into Copse, if I hadn't moved three or four metres out of the way we'd have hit each other, and both McLarens would have been out immediately. That sort of thing had happened too often; I had had enough."

"As for the accident between us at the chicane, yes, I know everybody thinks I did it on purpose. What I say is that I did not open the door, and that's it. I didn't want to finish the race like that - I'd led from the start, and I wanted to win it."

"I had a good car; I'd been very bad in qualifying, compared with Ayrton, and I concentrated entirely on the race. In the warm-up I was nearly a second quicker than him, and for the race itself I was quite confident, even when he started catching me."

"I didn't want him too close, obviously, but I wanted him close enough that he would hurt his tyres; my plan was then to pus hard over the last ten laps. As it was he tried to pass - and for me the way he did it was impossible, because he was going so much quicker than usual into the braking area."

"I couldn't believe he tried it on that lap, because, as we came up to the chicane, he was so far back. When you look in your mirrors, and a guy is 20 metres behind you, it's impossible to judge, and I didn't even realise he was trying to overtake me. But at the same time I thought, 'There's no way I'm going to leave him even a one-metre gap. No way'. I came off the throttle braked - and turned in."

A year later the two were back at Suzuka, once again to settle the World Championship, and this time it was Alain who had to win. Although no longer in the same team, he and Ayrton had not in any way diluted the intensity of their strife. Prost, said Senna, had better not try to turn into the first corner ahead of him: 'If he does, he's not going to make it...' In the event, at 150mph, the McLaren ran into the back of the Ferrari.

"Well, what can you say about that? After I'd retired we talked about it, and he admitted to me - as he did to the press - that he'd done it on purpose. He explained to me why he did it. He was furious with (FIA President) Balestre for not agreeing to change the grid, so that he could start on the left, and he told me he had decided that if I got to the first corner ahead of him, he'd push me off."

Senna was a prick. End of story.

[AutoRacer5]

Everyone's a prick at some point in their lives. Another arguement that doesn't hold water.

[Ctrl300]

AutoRacer5, on May 16 2006, 08:44 PM, said:

Everyone's a prick at some point in their lives. Another arguement that doesn't hold water.

********************************************************************************
****************

Do you honestly believe it was meant as an argument?

Please stay out of the debate if you refuse to contribute anything but costant drivel.

Edited by ecapdeville: Sorry Ctrl300 but we dont want that kind of things here...

TotalF1 Jens: I'd love for people to remain civil. There's a line that can be crossed quite easily. Come on everyone, it isn't too hard to behave like adults.

[Wez]

Wow, its heated up in here since I last came past.

I would continue to argue, but Ive made my point and seen both drivers race and nothin is going to change my mind so to prevent a repetitive argument ill leave it at that.

As for Gilles, He was possibly the bravest driver of all time (if you can call it that)...

[Ctrl300]

Wez, on May 17 2006, 01:23 AM, said:

Wow, its heated up in here since I last came past.

I would continue to argue, but Ive made my point and seen both drivers race and nothin is going to change my mind so to prevent a repetitive argument ill leave it at that.

As for Gilles, He was possibly the bravest driver of all time (if you can call it that)...

The heat is on

Gilles was brave, but there is a thin line between barvery and insanity....

Edited by Ctrl300, 16 May 2006 - 03:30 PM.

[Wez]

Ctrl300, on May 16 2006, 05:30 PM, said:

The heat is on

Gilles was brave, but there is a thin line between barvery and insanity....

True, he would race without a front wing on his car because he feld it was a lot faster... which im sure it was but the fact that the car was probably nearly impossible to handle was besides the point... A fine line indeed.

[AutoRacer5]

Ctrl300, on May 16 2006, 06:29 AM, said:

********************************************************************************
**********************

Do you honestly believe it was meant as an argument?

Please stay out of the debate if you refuse to contribute anything but costant drivel.

Referring to my area as hillbilly? You dont know me, you dont know who I am, you don't know what I do.

Edited by ecapdeville

[Autumnpuma]

Ctrl, I hadn't read that excerpt on Prost's thoughts anywhere. Very interesting. It certainly goes to explain how Senna was so often quicker than Prost in the 'same' machinery. As I've learned in other threads, no amount of proof can ever convince people out of a belief they enjoy holding (look at me and Gilles ). Where it gets annoying is when you present a solid case and it isn't even acknowledged...ah well, a Senna supporter could easily say that Prost's words will never be disputed, eh?

To me, both were mesmerising to watch. I happen to enjoy watching Prost more. Senna had some mightily impressive drives, but Prost always consistantly amazed me (and still does..if he would compete in the GP Master's series, I have no doubt he's clean Mansell's clock).