F1

Senna vs Schumacher – arguments

Tagged: ,

Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 18 (of 18 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #212884
    safeeuropeanhome
    Participant

    @kingshark You make some good points but you seem to have a bit of a chip on your shoulder where Senna is considered. I remember from the discussion the other day you think Prost was a superior driver, and from the tone of your writing I gather you think Schumacher was as well but some of the arguments you present seem a bit tenuous to me.

    Senna wanted to win titles, the Williams of 92 was a second sometimes a second and a half quicker than the Mclaren, there is no way you can compete with such inferior machinery no matter how good a driver you are. Its not like nowadays where that is the difference a Red Bull and a Toro Rosso. At the end of 92 Senna was 32 with probably not that many years left at the top left, I don’t think you can hold it against him to try and get a better car for his last years. I’m fairly sure Prost was already confirmed at Williams for 93 but vetoed Senna, so hardly a lack of dedication if Senna was willing to go head to head once again with a driver as good as Alain.

    The lack of respect argument is rubbish, Mclaren were on a real downward slope after the 80’s and even in 1991 Mansell’s Williams was faster but had reliability issues. Senna knew that and wanted to get out. History has proved him right seeing as Mclaren didn’t win a race again from the time he left until 1997.

    #212885
    Kingshark
    Participant

    The lack of respect argument is rubbish, Mclaren were on a real downward slope after the 80′s and even in 1991 Mansell’s Williams was faster but had reliability issues. Senna knew that and wanted to get out. History has proved him right seeing as Mclaren didn’t win a race again from the time he left until 1997.

    The fact that Senna didn’t even try to improve Mclaren. Instead he jumped from best car to best car, even near the end of his career.

    I didn’t see Schumacher leaving to Williams after 1996, Mclaren after 1998 or Renault after 2005.

    #212886
    Kingshark
    Participant

    Why did he owe respect to McLaren? He won them 3 drivers championships and 4 constructors. I see where you’re coming from, but he did as much for them as they did for him.

    Mclaren gave him the best car 4 seasons in a row and gifted him 3 world championships. Even without Senna, they could/would have done it either way with Prost and a solid #2 driver like Berger. It’s Senna who owes Mclaren if anything.

    If anything, that just shows his dedication to the sport and to succeeding if he was prepared to drive for nothing.

    Well, he was already a multi-millionaire by 1992 so I don’t think finances were the problem there. Rather, it shows that he wasn’t a dedicated team leader nor did he have any interest in developing the team back to the top. He just wanted to drive for the best team and with the best car at all costs. In that respect, Schumacher is indeed clearly better than Senna.

    For one, I do not accuse Senna of being a criminal for chasing the best machinery throughout his career. However, that fact about him doesn’t make him as great IMO. Like I said before, I didn’t see Schumacher leaving to Williams after 1996, Mclaren after 1998 or Renault after 2005; even though he easily could have.

Viewing 3 posts - 16 through 18 (of 18 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.