FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Sandspider]

After looking at the previous "who would win" threads i came across this:

http://celebrityscraps.wordpress.com

they put different celebs against each other and today was Senna Vs Schums!

I reckon Senna would win cos he owned back in the day!

[ferraribird]

Though it breaks my heart to say it, I think Senna would win because of the unfortunate incident in Monte Carlo when Schui had to park his car thereby rather denting his image. Senna was a jolly decent chap though.

[McLaren Fan]

Though it breaks my heart to say it, I think Senna would win because of the unfortunate incident in Monte Carlo when Schui had to park his car thereby rather denting his image. Senna was a jolly decent chap though.

Yeah, and Adelaide 1994 and Jerez 1997 and a whole host of other incidents.

[7UpJordan]

Some people can argue that Senna was just as dirty, but his actions were often fueled by his feud with Alain Prost.

Even Nigel Mansell drove dirty as well and ignored the black flag at Estoril in 1989.

[certom]

oh please folks...save us from stuff like this

[deMuRe]

Do we really want to open up this can of worms?

My position on this is Schumacher was better, because he always made cars faster by being in the team as opposed to Senna who always wanted to drive the fastest car...

[darwin dali]

The Prince of Asturias prize for Schumacher
Seven-time world champion Michael Schumacher was on Wednesday awarded one of Spain's highest honours, the Prince of Asturias prize for sports, organizers said.

Schumacher, 38, was chosen because his record 'had turned him into a sports legend and the racer who has won the most trophies in the history of the sport' as well as for his charity work, said the jury that awards the sports prize.

Schumacher, 38, was chosen because his record 'had turned him into a sports legend and the racer who has won the most trophies in the history of the sport' as well as for his charity work, said the jury that awards the sports prize.

"His generosity with the poor has transcended the borders of his country, a fact which was taken into account by the jury," it added in a statement. Schumacher gave 1.15 million euros (1.56 million US dollars) to UN cultural organization UNESCO in 2005 and 10 million US dollars one year later to help the victims of the earthquake and tsunami in southeast Asia, the jury noted.

After winning two championships with Benetton, Schumacher moved to Ferrari in 1996 where he won five consecutive drivers' titles with them.
He retired last year but occasionally still works for his former Ferrari team.

Schumacher beat 17 other candidates for the prize, including Iraq's national football team, which won the Asian Cup for the first time in history earlier this year, and a joint candidacy by tennis aces Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.

Former winners of the award include seven-times Tour de France cycling champion Lance Armstrong of the United States and Moroccan middle distance runner Hicham El Guerrouj who holds the world record for the 1,500-metre race. It was awarded last year to Spain's national basketball team.

Spain's Crown Prince Felipe is the patron of the Asturias foundation which annually hands out eight awards - each worth 50,000 euros (68,000 US dollars) - in fields ranging from sports to science and literature.

[racechick]

Though it breaks my heart to say it, I think Senna would win because of the unfortunate incident in Monte Carlo when Schui had to park his car thereby rather denting his image. Senna was a jolly decent chap though.

Senna was many things but "jolly decent chap" well I'm not so sure about that.
He was the first king of 'win at all costs', Schumacher inheruted the crown and Alonso is pretender to the throne.

[McLaren Fan]

Some people can argue that Senna was just as dirty, but his actions were often fueled by his feud with Alain Prost.

A lot of his actions were about not allowing the law to get in the way of justice. For example, taking Prost off at Suzuka in 1990 was illegal but morally correct, in my view anyway. I would have done the same thing.

My position on this is Schumacher was better, because he always made cars faster by being in the team as opposed to Senna who always wanted to drive the fastest car...

Senna was not given carte blanche to change an entire team, being able to chose engineers, team mates, strategists etc. Senna tried to bring his usual race engineer to Williams, but wasn't allowed to, and he liked the atmosphere at McLaren, so I think he recognised that the staff are important just like the car.

[ferraribird]

I shall return then to what I have always held to be true, that Schumacher is the greatest F1 driver to date. Certainly no one can beat him for managing poor weather conditions (not called the Rainmeister for nothing!) and he has been instrumental over the years for his input into the machines that he, at least, drove. He is now a tech. adviser to the Ferrari team. The man is amazing, and all this with a lower heart rate than I now have sitting at my computer, relaxing and writing this.

[aboldero]

can i say guys, i've said it before on other posts, but it is true..

there is no way to know, you can only truly compare drivers who raced together, at similar points of their careers, and even then you have to take into account the quality of their equipment.

unfortunately senna was still at his best in 93, and 94 when he died, depriving us of an epic battle, while schumacher was still learing the ropes.

all you can say is that they truly were the class of the field in those two years and their cars were pretty similar performance wise, even in 93, the only drivers who came close were prost and hill, and i don't think either would have been up there if the williams had not been so superior.

[darwin dali]

and all this with a lower heart rate than I now have sitting at my computer, relaxing and writing this.

Well, your heart rate has to be a bit higher to get at least some of your blood all along your long neck to your pretty head or else you'd turn into an airhead, right?

[7UpJordan]

Some people can argue that Senna was just as dirty, but his actions were often fueled by his feud with Alain Prost.

A lot of his actions were about not allowing the law to get in the way of justice. For example, taking Prost off at Suzuka in 1990 was illegal but morally correct, in my view anyway. I would have done the same thing.

Indeed, because Senna had told the Stewards at the track to move the pole position side to the clean side of the track. The stewards agreed to move the pole, but on raceday, they didn't bother and Senna was to start on the dirty side of the track and had pre-warned everybody he'd take Prost off if Prost had got a better start thank to being on the clean side of the track, and the rest wrote itself. It was quite sad such a thing happened considering Prost and Senna had finally shaken hands and made peace earlier on in the season, but all the hard work had been undone and Prost and Senna's feud was back to square one. Senna tried to defend his actions by coming clean and explaining himself and having a go at Balestre at almost every opportunity when he was FISA President.

[ferraribird]

ferraribird wrote:
and all this with a lower heart rate than I now have sitting at my computer, relaxing and writing this.


Well, your heart rate has to be a bit higher to get at least some of your blood all along your long neck to your pretty head or else you'd turn into an airhead, right?

I have enough blood to fuel my ostrich self. And I AM an airhead!

unfortunately senna was still at his best in 93, and 94 when he died, depriving us of an epic battle, while schumacher was still learing the ropes

I have tried to imagine what it would have been like. Ben Hur's chariot race would have been but a child's cart race at the fair!

McLaren Fan wrote:
7UpJordan wrote:
Some people can argue that Senna was just as dirty, but his actions were often fueled by his feud with Alain Prost.

A lot of his actions were about not allowing the law to get in the way of justice. For example, taking Prost off at Suzuka in 1990 was illegal but morally correct, in my view anyway. I would have done the same thing.

Indeed, because Senna had told the Stewards at the track to move the pole position side to the clean side of the track. The stewards agreed to move the pole, but on raceday, they didn't bother and Senna was to start on the dirty side of the track and had pre-warned everybody he'd take Prost off if Prost had got a better start thank to being on the clean side of the track, and the rest wrote itself. It was quite sad such a thing happened considering Prost and Senna had finally shaken hands and made peace earlier on in the season, but all the hard work had been undone and Prost and Senna's feud was back to square one. Senna tried to defend his actions by coming clean and explaining himself and having a go at Balestre at almost every opportunity when he was FISA President.

Agreed! It was a pity about the feud getting restarted. There was a whole load of stuff here that sparked it, really unnecessarily. Yes, Prost got an advantage but that wasn't his fault. Senna had warned everyone, as is pointed out above, so really no one could be surprised. And Senna was entirely open about what he was going to do and what he did. And yet, no one can be surprised that Prost was p****d off.

[McLaren Fan]

And yet, no one can be surprised that Prost was p****d off.

Given that he was gifted the 1989 championship by some deft political maneuvering by Balestre and his FIA acolytes and that Balestre attempted to do so again the following season, he can't complain too much.

Prost: Champion of 1985, 1986 and 93
Senna: Champion of 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991

You know it's true.