- 27 Apr 09, 22:01#112810
alot of flaws in your post there. but its the usual Schumacher fun stuff. kinda bored going over it all the time so ill leave ya to it!
Prost, Senna and Schumacher were legends, as were Fangio, Ascari, Clark, Stewart and Brabham, to name a few of their predecessors. Personally, I look at the brilliance, the longivity, and a great many other factors when selecting the greatest or legends. I place Clark, Fangio and Schumacher all ahead of Senna. What ever people think of Prost or Senna, I've always had a hard time reconciling the fact, that while Senna out won Prost by a victory in each of their two seasons together, Prost outscored Senna so badly in each of those years, but dropped scores gifted Senna the '88 title, even though Prost set the then all time record for points in a season that year.
Another factor I look at is what I call qualifying points. If you look at the points a driver would have scored, if they finished at least where they started, Senna had 909 qualifying points, yet finished his career with only 614 points, Schumacher by contrast had 1354.5 qualifying points, but finished with 1369. There will be small differences in these two totals, but Senna's underperformance in scoring, relative to his starting position, is the largest of any champion at minus 1.83 points per race. I think Senna was brilliant, flashy and charismatic. His Donington drive was brilliant, but no more so than Stewarts German Grand Prix or Schumachers '96 Spain to name a few.
Another factor is longevity at the top. Senna jammed three titles into four years, a terrific run. He died three years later, but had he lived, Schumacher had still won the first three races of '94, and there is no objective reason to think that Senna would have been able to make up the 30 points, since no driver has ever come from 30 points down after three races to win a title. Prost, by contrast, has 4 titles in a span of 9 seasons, while Lauda won titles in 75, 77 and 84, a span of ten years. Schumacher won back to back, then won his 5th consecutive title over a span of 11 seasons, an unmatched longevity at the top.
As far as the competition goes, there are terrific drivers in all eras. All of the great drivers didn't suddenly dissappear with the arrival of Schumacher, then reappear with his retirement. Fangio had Ascari, Moss, Brabham and Hawthorn. Clark had G Hill, Brabham, Surtees, Stewart and Ickx. Lauda had Stewart , Fittipaldi and Hunt. Prost and Senna has Piquet and Mansell. Schumacher had D. Hill, Villeneuve, Hakkinen, Montoya, Raikkonen and Alonso. Hamilton has Vettel, Alonso and Raikonnen. There's no staggering depletion of talent in any generation of F-1.
I place Senna behind Prost because, although he was much better in the wet, he fared so poorly in the same car at the same time over the balance of two seasons. I place Schumacher ahead of both because he dominated for so long and in all conditions. He also defended titles for two different teams, and unlike Senna, he didn't need a team near the top when he arrived, to win a title. My choices for greatest ever are between Schumacher, Stewart, Fangio and Clark.
As far as Hamilton is concerned? Look at Jaques Villeneuve's first two seasons. He lost on the last day, then won the next year. Look at the rest of his career. Look at how this season is starting for Hamo.
Was Senna the greatest? If the criteria is bluster, probably. He is still the most loved and his Donington is still a great drive. However, looking a little deeper, he has fewer strengths then many of the others as far as career value goes.
Hamilton, although he has started well, hasn't done anything yet, as far as being with the legends. My money for next great driver is Vettel, but that's also just bluster at this point.
alot of flaws in your post there. but its the usual Schumacher fun stuff. kinda bored going over it all the time so ill leave ya to it!
