Senna vs. Schumacher - The debate continues

Discuss all the aspects of the Formula 1 sport here

Moderators: cmlean, Ed, The Qualiflyer, The Heretic

Post Reply

Senna vs. Schumacher

I rate Senna higher than Schumacher
368
62%
I rate Schumacher higher than Senna
151
25%
I rate them at the same level
23
4%
The 2 cannot be compared
51
9%
I don't rate either
3
1%
 
Total votes: 596

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Senna vs. Schumacher - The debate continues

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:15 am

This debate has been running on NewsOnF1 since October 2003 and now it continues here on the forums.

We've posted below a few of the posts from the old pages.

You can use this link to read the earlier posts.
Last edited by Tim on Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:25 am, edited 4 times in total.

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Jack from Turkey

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:58 am

Senna had charisma to throw away. He donated millions of dollars to charities every year, and did his best to keep that as secret as possible. Any one who disputes the Senna & Schumacher argument, please just watch Senna speak in a press conference. You will see that this man has a charisma that no one can reach. He has been dead for 10 years, ten years. And STILL the great Schumacher cannot equal his pole positions, the true measure of race driver speed & skill over 1 lap - Jack - Turkey
Last edited by Tim on Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Jeff from the USA

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:59 am

I have had the privilege of seeing both Senna and Schumacher race. It is not fair to compare the two drivers because they raced in different eras and in different times. Senna was not always the lead driver for his team if one remembers, he and Alain Prost got into quite a few good arguments during the period they both raced with McLaren. Schumacher has had the luxury of having a docile back-up driver that has not tried to rock the boat. Rubens is probably the nicest driver in F1 and I am a fan of his so before I get corrected let me explain. Say, for example, Montoya was on Ferrari, then the fun would start for that team. Schumacher is a perfectionist as a driver, he needs everything to go right during the race, and he has been blessed that the engineers at Ferrari have got it right. Senna was a natural race car driver, pure and simple he could drive any car to victory and he did.
The reason people bring up Donnington all the time is because Senna did the impossible in a piece of junk car that had no real chance that year to win the championship. I would like to see Michael drive a race or two for Minardi or Jordan and see where he finishes the race. (Sorry Eddie but your team has suffered as of late.)
Another point to take into consideration is the technological advances that have been made in the past 10 years since Senna's death. The cars now practically drive themselves which is not a fair comparison. It is a shame we will never get to see Senna drive a modern F1 car. I think it would be safe to say that he could win a championship or two, or more - Jeff - USA
Last edited by Tim on Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Vilash from The Netherlands

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:01 am

It is my firm belief that Schumacher was the greater of the two. This is based on the fact that Schumacher just simply knows how to win races and now titles better than Senna ever could.
Senna had more days of inspiration, take Donnington in 1993 for example. I find it hard to imagine even Schumacher bettering that. However taking a career as a whole the occasional act of pure genius does not compare to the ability and racecraft it takes to win for example 13 races in one season(2004).
I recently watched the 1993 season in review and Schumacher gave Senna a really good run for his money in many of the wheel to wheel battles. Then come 1994 and Schumacher was clearly the man destined for the title in spite of the widespread belief that this was Senna's year. Whatever might have happened at Imola (Schumacher perhaps making a better race strategy-and he is the all-time genius in this category) he would have beaten Senna fair and square in Monaco, the Senna's fabled power circuit. Schumacher took a 4 second advantage over the second placed car after one lap. This hadn't been seen since the days of Clarke. Even in Monaco '93 Schumacher had Senna well and truly beaten, however his engine cruelly gave up the ghost half way through the race. On top of this Senna was a matured driver at his peak when a young and inexperienced Schumacher came on the scene. Michael's development since those early years should leave most of us wondering just how Senna could have managed in equal equipment in say 2000.
Having said all this had they raced for the same team year after year I think Senna may have outclassed Schumacher in the wet and driven several inspired races. However in the overall plan of thingsHello, I am the lucky one to be both Schumacher and Senna admirer. I became a fan of MS in Moncao 1994, because I was watching my first ever GP. Ironically it was the first race without Senna. But in 1997 and further one I heard about Senna. I searched info about him and I became a fan of Senna AFTER his death. I did buy books and read about him. I even ordered races from 1980's and 1990's to see him drive again. I have a whole vitrine dedicated to Senna, with a lot of carmodels ( 1:18 ), helmets ( 1:2 scale ) and so on (lithographs). He inspired me FAR after his death and that is EXCEPTIONAL. I even visited his Grave one May 1st 2004 (10 years on exactly) in Sao Paulo all the way from Europe. Don't think I am Senna crazy or whatsoever.. I just love to collect things of him.. I am just normal. He was so charismatic and very a class of his own as a human being. It was like he never had to stay long with us on this planet... He is an idol for me and the only idol I ever had/will have. His qoutes/values guide me still a little bit in my life and I thank him for that.?
About the racing I think it is difficult to compare these two. Because for the first his career (MS) was just beginning and the other one going to his end. (AS) What you can say for SURE is that both were the ABSOLUTELY BEST of their own ERA and that is a fact.?
My opinions on several things: In the rain and changing conditions they are a class of their own. I would put them equal on this side. ( Maybe Senna an edge)?
I think on tactics Schumacher has little bit the edge. Of course he has a team around him, but he is so superb with those things. He can perform and transform in a race and can deliver a tactic... GREAT. Senna couldn't show us in the refuelling era sadly. (remember 1994 was the first year)?
Also on Racecraft I would put Schumacher a little bit ahead. I think he is more consistent than Senna. The consistency of his laps and hammering down on the key moments. Just look at the fastest laps in a race. I also regard Prost as one of the best on racecraft. Just reading the race. But they are very very close with each other.?
On pure mentality I would give Senna the edge. He had this ability to focus and put more out of his human body. That's very special.... its like a form of yoga. Some people are born with that and others not. This ability you cannot learn, he was born with it and it was God Given.?
I also believe that Senna had more raw natural (god given) talent than Michael, but Michael can compensate that with tactics and racecraft and he learns quick.?
Senna is one of the most talented driver Formula 1 ever has seen (including Jim Clark... and Fangio maybe, because I don't know much about Fangio)?
Qualifying: Senna was just the best ever (with again Jim Clark) I cannot say anything about this. Michael is not as good as Senna in qualifying.?
Under pressure: If the race was on I would give Senna the edge, I don't know why. My feeling says that he is better under pressure, but I don't know if I am able to say that.?
Some other things: Standing in a team: Schumacher: It is a fact that Schumacher like stated before transformed teams into wins and championships. He did it with Benetton and also with Ferrari. He made them better. Of coarse he has (still) a good team around him. Schumacher could choose for Williams in 1996 but chose Ferrari, which I admire really MUCH. He could have won more championships. He prefers to be absolute nr1 in a team. That is not that bad.. it is a way to achieve your goals effectively and if he wouldn't deliver, he never would have achieved that. Schumacher never complained really hard on the team, even when it was critical. He always was positive to the team even in bad times. He never slammed the team and this POSITIVE about him. I also admire this in him. This you CANNOT say about Senna. Senna: Cannot say that he transformed team into a better one. This is also stated before. He also choose for the best team, which doesn't mean that it was easy. Let this be clear!!. He drove against Prost at McLaren. Comparing to Schumacher he was not always that Positive on the team. He was upset in 1993 while driving for McLaren and said some things. This was his character.?
Other: I think if you look at the the last 18 years (1987-2004). The only man which I in my opinion can say that won the championships with a little bit lesser material is Schumacher. (Not much!!! please hold that in mind before people are going to shout, but still) All other drivers in my opinion became champions in the best car. Michael also came very near in 1997 and 1998 in less material. Although he didn't win the championship he made clear he was the best driver. Just like Senna did in 1993. What a great season that was. There are also some claims on that Senna had great characters to fight to and that is true. But remember in his prime days in 1988-1991 he fought only with Prost and had better cars than Mansell, Piquet, etc although they were great characters. Schumacher on the other had fought with lesser material against Williams and McLaren and that compensates this theory. Remember 1997,1998,1999 (not much). There are several things said about each other.. in the way I see them both, but to choose the best I really don't want to. I just admire them both. I can make my top 5 of the best ever, but this is personal. I just them list them: Schumacher, Clark, Senna, Fangio and Prost (order doesn't say a thing.. I just put it down) For myself I always have Senna as my only idol (not only was he a great F1 driver but an inspiration outside the track) Schumacher is no inspiration for me but I am his fan. On the track he is my man.?
Guys, I just want to say.. please be thankful that this world has known SENNA, even when it was not for a long time. He remains one of my ALL time heroes. With great respect - Vilash S - The Netherlands

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Ricardo L from Brazil

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:04 am

Hi there... Schummy is the greatest driver in the world... actually. Maybe we can put him in the TOP 10 of all time, but certainly this ranking is headed by Mr. Ayrton Senna da Silva. No one is, was, or will be like Him, with capital H. Ayrton was fantastic, it was exciting when He was not at the 1st place, because we knew that he would do everything to get the win. We cannot say the same for the German great driver. It's boring to watch him race, we cannot expect anything but a good luck from him. He can wait for all the others to break their engines or gears, to catch the positions. He drives for the championship, is fantastic with his mind and strategy. Ayrton drove for the win, always (except in 90 when he slapped Prost for "revanche"). Ok, luck is a result of good job and excellent skills. But Ayrton could win as many championships as Schummy did, in an exciting way. We all lost probably the biggest duel in autoracing of all times. Ayrton crosses the checked flag in 1st, 0.5 seconds ahead of Schummy. "The second, is the 1st to loose". Goodbye for all, from a Brazilian friend that had the luck to watch then both racing against, live at Interlagos - Ricardo L - Brazil

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Jo?o P from Portugal

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:05 am

For me Schumacher is just one step higher than Senna, because of his capacity to transform a team, first Benetton then Ferrari, which Senna never did and never had the force and desire to do. MS critics to the team are constructive where AS were destructive.
In terms of driving I think they were pretty even and share same of principal characteristics, like speed, rain ability, calculating, etc, with a little advantage for MS in race speed consistency and tactics.
I find funny when people say that in 93 MS had an advantage in the engine (only one serie down - maximum of 8-10 horsepower, but had TAG electronics - in the first race AS use, Silverstone, it MS beat him by a great margin with a great overtaking in the middle) and forget the fact that in 94 Senna had a V10 with reportedly more 80-100 horsepower than Schumacher's V8 engine.
In 93 MS only had traction control in Monaco, were he got first line behind Prost and was leading the race with 15s advantage over Senna when he had a technical problem. McLaren had in 93 a lot more experience than Benetton with active suspension and semi-automatic gearbox, because in 92 AS use both were MS had to use a manual gear box and conservative suspension the entire year. Remember?
In 94 AS was loosing the championship, he knew it, and was obvious that he was feeling the pressure from MS, reason why he was making several mistakes.
BTW this debate has been going since 93, so even when MS was almost a rookie the F1 world was already questioning who was better Senna or Schumacher. For me Schumacher. Thanks & Regards - Jo?o P - Portugal
Last edited by Tim on Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Sax G from England

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:06 am

This so called `debate` has been going on for too long!.
The way I see it, Shuey has had no competition whatsoever, since Mika retired, it's easier to win when there aren't any serious contenders. When Hakkinen was racing, he out qualified, out drove Schumacher for the 2 seasons that he was champion. The worst thing ever to happen, which was the best thing as far as the mighty Shu` was concerned was Mika `quitting`, taking a sabbatical... whatever. Since then it's been Shuey and nobody else.
So why do people think that he is so great?, who has he beaten year after year to become champion? A bunch of good drivers with good cars, but no one exceptional. How many times did the Shuey Ferrari suffer technical failure last season? So, he has not only the best car, but also the most reliable one. His team mate, in the same equipment(?) is frankly pathetic, if he rates himself as a good driver, why is he so far behind Schumacher? Is it because he is nothing but an average/good journeyman? Couldn't be much easier, could it?
Senna, doesn't really need me to make a case for him, when he became champion he had to beat Prost, Mansell, Piquet. Furthermore some of his most outstanding drives came in an inferior v8 Ford powered Mclaren. I could go on and refer to specific races, but there really is no need, the people that even roughly share my view will know. As for the others let them go on thinking that their Schumacher is the greatest...
I will finish by saying that I'm glad that Montoya has signed for Mclaren.. even after 10 years I still want someone to kick Schumacher behind, come on J.P. !!!!!!!!! Let's see if you can wipe the floor with ``immortal one`` I'm sure that I'll be very popular with the legions of Schumacher fans after this! - Sax G - England

Tim
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 11:57 am

Originally posted by Mark from the UK

Post by Tim » Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:07 am

This subject and debate will go on for many years ... sadly all too many who claim that Schumacher is better than the mercurial Senna are often too young to have witnessed the greatness of Ayrton Senna when he was alive and racing. And one has to say, blessed are the statisticians for they shall inherit the Earth! :)
Schumacher to all intents and purposes is a man-made, manufactured, star & champion of the sport ... Ecclestone saw to that post May 1994 and even has admitted as much! F1, claims little Bernard, needed a star to keep the millions watching and the millions rolling into his bank account!
Anyway ... Senna was a man gifted with enormous charisma and blessed with sublime talent ... although the word 'sublime' hardly does the 'Great One' justice in itself!
Senna also pioneered so much that is now taken for granted within the declining sport that is current F1 i.e. fitness, driver-marketing etc ... I could go on!
He was, and will always be, a man that transcended the sport ... a man that truly deserved living legend status - and now mythical status in his death!
To conclude Schumacher has raced in a largely benign period, and even then has been aided and assisted and abetted by 'whole-team back-up' and subservient team mates - quite tragic when you think about it! His abilities under pressure are questionable but he his without doubt a very accomplished and complete driver now, and thus deserved of Top 10 Greatest Driver Of All time status. But to compare Michael Schumacher to Ayrton Senna is like comparing Lennox Lewis to Muhammed Ali ... in other words it's a facile comparison and completely ridiculous imho!
To cap it all, I think you'll find even the current World Champion will tell you who was greater ... and without doubt (and I've read some of the nonsense written here about A.S. being 34 when he died ... largely from USA contributors sadly) Ayrton would have gone on to win 6 or even 7 WDC's although his sister Viviane has always maintained that her brother would have concluded his career at 5 WDC's in honour of Juan Manuel Fangio's record ... a driver who incidentally loved and admired his younger South American countryman!
To conclude I would put Ayrton at the top of the table with Fangio, Clarke, Nuvolari and Ascari sat at his side.
01 May 1994 was quite simply the most tragic date in motorsport history for more reasons than can be written by one writer! Nonetheless all 'real' and 'knowledgeable' F1 fans should rejoice that Ayrton Senna Da Silva gave us 10 years plus of amazing entertainment, pleasure and sheer feelings of awe!
Long Live Senna! - Regards Mark - R3MAF - UK

Crash
Getting Started
Getting Started
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:26 pm

Post by Crash » Sat Feb 05, 2005 7:16 pm

Has`nt this poor old horse of a topic been flogged enough over the years...lol

Really does seem pointless comparing any driver, unless they are in the same machinery.

Cheers.. :wink:

Graham Ross
Racer
Racer
Posts: 687
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:46 am
Location: Australia

Post by Graham Ross » Sun Feb 06, 2005 8:48 pm

I think such a topic gives people (especially the young ones) an idea of how great Senna was and realise that no matter how many (easy) championships Schumacher wins he'll never match the great Ayrton Senna

350Z
Go Kart Racer
Go Kart Racer
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:50 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by 350Z » Mon Feb 07, 2005 2:35 pm

Well said Graham :up:
The Montoya/Raikkonen battle is on!

Julian Mayo
Forum Hall of Fame
Forum Hall of Fame
Posts: 15661
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:07 am
Location: Tying the antenna to the tallest tree I can find.

Post by Julian Mayo » Thu Feb 10, 2005 7:03 am

Fangio was better than either of them, and Schumaker is not in the same post code as Senna.

Ronnie
Getting Started
Getting Started
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:07 am

The Senna Schumacher debate

Post by Ronnie » Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:15 am

Hello Martin. May I just say it?s a pleasure to listen to your insightful commentary every other Sunday and I?m sure I speak for not only myself when I say you?ve opened up a whole new dimension for F1 fans since you hung up your helmet and picked up the mic and began to share your invaluable knowledge with the millions that tune in, obviously it?s your job but I can think of many less passionate that wouldn?t do it with the same level of class and professionalism! Martin I came across a site on the Net called Senna vs Schumacher, the Great Debate and I couldn?t resist the temptation to respond. Then someone suggested I send it in to a newspaper but before I do I would like to ask your professional opinion on what I?ve written, you were lucky enough to have raced against them both and are better qualified than anyone to speak about this subject. So if you don?t mind, I?d really appreciate it if you?d have a read of the next couple of pages at your convenience and let me know what you think.

I must say I?ve found the comments made by all of you extremely intriguing but I would say those made by Ryan T from Sri Lanka were the most accurate. Now I would like to add mine and before I get judged I would just like to say that I am an enormous fan of both of them. I watched the qualifying session for the 1997 San Marino GP from inside the Tamburello Chicane next to the Senna Statue and wondered what might have been had the man behind the wheel of the Ferrari F310 that day got the man who?s statue I leaned against out there competing against him in the battle for supremacy.

When people ask me who do I think was the better between the two I always say that cannot be answered because of Ayrtons untimely death it is now only a matter of opinion not fact but I can offer valid arguments as any of us can for and against each of them as to whom I believed would have been number 1. Firstly I believe that because of the exceptional talent and dedication of AS and MS I believe that neither one of them would have been dominant over the other at least that?s what I like to believe anyway. Senna for me when he arrived raised the bar as Alain Prost before him had done and Jackie Stewart before him. Jackie was the first truly professional racing driver who concentrated his mind, his body and lifestyle 100% on GP racing, a highly intelligent man who was distinctly different from his colleagues a lot of whom were out of shape and simply just drove as hard as they could until either the body or the car gave up. By the time Prost had arrived most of these drivers had gone, any that were left soon filtered out (Keke Rosberg to name but one) and then there was the Brazilian. Senna as has been well documented believed Alain to be the ultimate pilot so he reasoned that if he studied Alain and could hone his own race craft, his fitness and tactical ability to the same level or indeed a higher level than Alain, with his own speed and will to win which was unprecedented he knew that he could become almost unbeatable and that?s exactly what he did, he established himself as the number 1 in formula 1.

Personally I believe that Alain doesn?t get the credit he deserves, he allowed Ayrton to join McClaren (neither Ayrton or Michael would have allowed Prost in) not because he believed he could beat him but because he believed his methodical, cool, calm and collective approach would still over the course of a season see him come out on top and if you look back at those seasons 88,89,90,91 and 93 Senna took 3 Championships to Prosts two now considering how fast Senna was I think that is impressive, a lesser man/driver would have got out of the sport for fear of being humiliated by the younger driver. Prost retired a 4 time Champion with 51 races in 1993 albeit with the best car but with the minimum amount of risk and effort which was Prosts style. Salute to a great Senna rival and a great Champion.

With regards to Ayrton and Michael it is my opinion that to draw any realistic comparison you must consider not only the rivals and the period of time each competed for but also for example if you took Ayrton at 30 and Michael at the same age, who would you say was better? Michael, I would give it to him every single time, at 26 he took his first win for Ferrari in Spain, Senna at 25 took his first win in Portugal both in conditions that were undriveable for any other driver, two geniuses but I believe from the time they started their careers Michael got to the level Ayrton was at when he died faster. Suffice to say it is my opinion that Michael at 34 was a more complete driver than Ayrton at 34 not necessarily faster but a better racing driver. I have felt for a long time that Schumacher is actually like a combination of Senna & Prost put together because he has all the speed and commitment of Senna but is also a great tactician and an extremely good and fast thinker.

but there were 9 years between them so the real question is what about Michael at 25 in 1994 and Ayrton at 34, over a full season? Ayrton, no question, faster more experienced, a master of his craft coupled with the fact that he was driving the Williams Renault, Hill lost the Championship to Schumacher by one point, Senna would surely have claimed his fourth crown had he lived, I also believe he?d have won it in 95,96 & 97 had he lived and not moved to Ferrari. Or would he?, Senna once said he believed it was not possible to drive a full GP distance flat out every lap, Schumacher has proved this is possible. In Brazil 94, the first race under new regulations including pitstops saw Schumacher beat Senna quite comprehensively and Senna spun out on lap 56 whilst chasing hard, he was fatigued, his neck and shoulders had tightened noticeably as could be seen when he got into a course car and Senna was fit, all this not withstanding the fact that he was wearing a chin strap. I recall Schumacher being the only driver that weekend on the anti clockwise circuit not to wear one and he got out of the car as usual looking as fresh as he had at the beginning of the race. So Could Senna have gone the distance at full pelt baring in mind Schumachers more or less equal talent and fitness edge? I?m not so sure and would he have settled for second to Michael in certain races where he hadn?t got the set up to his liking as Michael would have done if the situation was reversed? If not, he?d have struggled to win the title against the consistent points scoring German.

Senna was peerless in the lead of a GP (Donington 93, Monaco 92, Aus & Japan 03 etc) Schumacher has now perfected that art also but Senna was not as good at coming from behind in races to win when he really shouldn?t have as Schumacher was (European GP 95, Spa 95, Hungary 98, Spain 96 etc). My own personal opinion was and still is, Senna is the fastest man ever over one lap and Schumacher is the fastest and most complete racing driver ever to grace the sport, he is relentless and winning appears to come easier to him than it ever did for any other drive. Some would say that is because of his car but Schumacher has 77 wins since August 1991 and he has not always had the best car. For me if Schumacher gets to 65 poles (he needs 5 more) it will not compare to Senna?s 65 poles in 10 years. It?s a shame however that the only remaining Senna record looks set to go to Schumacher but it will have taken him 10/11 years after Senna?s death to beat it if he does. It?s a shame too that Schumacher is close to winning twice as many GPs as Senna but it goes without saying that this enormous tally is due in part to the premature departure of the Brazilian legend.

Ironically, I believe Schumacher would have excelled more in Senna?s era and vice versa because Senna was very technical and would have been unbeatable in a modern F1 car and Schumacher although not as technically astute as Senna is much more mechanically minded and I think with his acrobatic driving style would have reveled in the Turbo/normally aspirated era where the cars were less predictable and more mechanical. I don?t believe Senna had he lived would have moved to an uncompetitive Ferrari because then Michael would easily beat him in a McClaren or Williams (not withstanding the fact that Senna always sought the best tools for the job and believed he had a right to the best car as he was the best driver), probably neither of them would have joined Ferrari had Senna lived. However with Senna gone, Schumacher being head and shoulders above the rest could afford to take the Ferrari drive, everyone knew he was the best so even in an initially uncompetitive car he could still challenge his rivals such as Hill, Coulthard and Villeneuve and win, when Hakkinen got competitive equipment with McClaren the battle with Schumacher was fantastic, Mika in a better car and Michael pushing him all the way in less competitive equipment, when it was reversed sadly Mika hung up his helmet.

Hakkinen like Prost, if he had a perfect car he was unbeatable, both got confidence from their cars, Senna and Schumacher didn?t need that, they could go to the limit no matter what the circumstances. Hakkinen was a tougher opponent for Schumacher than Prost was for Senna I believe because he unleashed his potential in those McClarens from 98 to 00, Prost never showed his full potential, except for an odd race and had he, he probably would?ve won more titles. Mika was probably as fast as Senna and Schumacher, he outqualified Senna in his first ever GP and had countless epic battles with Schumacher particularly in Qualifying. So now Michael has the best car and the rest is history. There is no doubt however in my mind that had the legendary Brazilian lived that he would have more than 3 World titles, Schumacher wouldn?t have 6 but he would have won at least 2 in my opinion before Senna retired.

I feel that because Senna died we never saw the best of him or indeed Schumacher, both would have pushed each other to new and perhaps dangerous levels but then some would say that they didn?t need one another or anyone else to extract the best from themselves because they raced against themselves but I believe this to be untrue. There are some who believe everything happens for a reason and that the reason Senna died was to make way for another genius to create his own legend whilst forever preserving his own. Perhaps this is true? One thing for sure though is that it?s a fitting way to leave the Great Debate.
Ron from Ireland

Graham Ross
Racer
Racer
Posts: 687
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:46 am
Location: Australia

Post by Graham Ross » Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:25 pm

Good post Ronnie :up:

But one thing you didn't highlight in Schumacher's career is his demand for number 1 status making the whole team (including his team-mate) work for him. This team order business has not only damaged Schumacher's reputation but also Ferrari and Formula 1. Just remember Austria and the US in 02. He and Ferrari made a farce of Formula 1 and many of us won't forget that.

Ronnie
Getting Started
Getting Started
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:07 am

Post by Ronnie » Wed Feb 16, 2005 8:33 pm

Graham, you're right I didn't highlight that but there are pros and cons for both drivers as there are for every person and every sportsman. What makes these two in particular so fascinating and the reason why we as F1 fans compare Senna to Schumacher and Vice Versa is not by coincidence but because talent wise in the modern era of Grand Prix racing they are as similar to one another in terms of driving style as they are different to one another personality wise more so than any other two drivers in the history of the sport.

As good as Senna was and as good as Schumacher is raises the great question of who was the better and who is the better between the two which will probably never be answered but perhaps it is better that way.

We were robbed of perhaps the greatest duel in the history of the sport but aren't we lucky as fans to have witnessed two incredibly gifted drivers in more or less the same era? I like to think so.
Ron from Ireland

Post Reply