Vettel is as good as Senna? BLASPHEMY!

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

Absolute nonsense.

For me, it's absolute impossible to compare Senna to Vettel. In fact, you can't compare anyone from that era to this era, as the cars are simply so different. I didn't mind the guys at Red Bull and Toro Rosso, but I just want all of them hanged, now...

Ascanelli should know better. Ever thought of putting Sebastian in a 1988 McLaren and telling him to do or die on the first lap?

(I'm just a bit tired right now, so I could just be exaggerating)

[Aerospeed]

There is one driver, though, that is heavily underrated and is, in my opinion, a racing god.

Alain Prost.

Four championships, one of which was given by the race stewards (Senna should have won in 1989), but he was a great driver nonetheless. I still think Senna is a great driver, but Prost is heavily underrated. Here is the top ten drivers in my opinion:

1. Jim Clark
2. = Ayrton Senna
= Alain Prost
4. Juan Manuel Fangio
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Graham Hill
7. Mika Häkkinën
8. Niki Lauda
9. Michael Schumacher
10. Jack Brabham

Now, how can you compare Prost and Senna? You can't. They're both good drivers.
Note Mansell did NOT make the list.
Also note that there are two drivers from the 2000's. One of which is a definite shoo-in: Mika Häkkinën.
Really, the best drivers that ever raced in my opinion.

Does Vettel have talent? Obviously. Better than Senna? Which one, Ayrton or Bruno? If it is Bruno, then... yes. Ayrton? HELL NO!

[F1000X]

Who says Prost is underrated? WHO? He's called The Professor FFS.

[Aerospeed]

Who says Prost is underrated? WHO? He's called The Professor FFS.

THANK YOU! One person besides me who respects The Prof.
Give this guy a beer.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

Who ever said Alain was underrated? He's fantastic! Perhaps he relied slightly more on his thinking ability than raw pace, but was a great driver nonetheless.

[Aerospeed]

OK, scratch everything I've said about Prost being underrated.

I assumed that since nobody seemed to talk about him.

[eagleash]

OK, scratch everything I've said about Prost being underrated.

I assumed that since nobody seemed to talk about him.

Your list seems to be based around multi championship winning drivers. No place for Moss or Gilles?

[Aerospeed]

OK, scratch everything I've said about Prost being underrated.

I assumed that since nobody seemed to talk about him.

Your list seems to be based around multi championship winning drivers. No place for Moss or Gilles?

GAH! How in the world could I forget Stirling freakin' Moss???
Oh well. There's hundreds of great drivers, I can't name all of them.

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

Oh well. There's hundreds of great drivers, I can't name all of them.

Seconded.

[P_Friesacher]

You clearly forgot a certain driver whose acronym shall not be spellt out here

[Jordan192]

you can't compare anyone from that era to this era, as the cars are simply so different.

Of course you can compare them, the cars aren't that different - there's big tyres and plenty of aero. The 'Can't compare drivers across eras' thing is mostly aimed at the 50s and earlier, when cars were front-engined, had hard, skinny, treaded tyres, and no wings. The real upheavals in terms of design came during the '60s and early 70s, and since then it's just been a gradual process of Improvement.
Sure, tyres have got better, and the rules occasionally change the specific ways you are or aren't allowed to generate aero grip, but cars from the 80s-90s are all based around the same basic design principles as cars today.

[Shizuka]

Well, his qualifying performace does indeed reminds me of Senna, but he needs to score poles even in an inferior car. And then if he does, there's still the racecraft...

[ANZ_TF110]

Vettel scored Torro Rosso (Minardi) only Pole and win so he is a talent, but to me Aytron is the best out their. He beat his teammate to pole in the 1988 Monaco GP Alain Prost who is a great driver by over a second and they were one and two!!!

[muttley]

What I also don't understand is why people only focus on F1. Before WWII there were many interesting (and deadly) races and great drivers too! Nuvolari, Caracciola, Rosemeyer were great not only in fast short races but in endurance races too (Le Mans, Mille Miglia, Targa Florio etc.).

[FullMetalJack]

Who says Prost is underrated? WHO? He's called The Professor FFS.

THANK YOU! One person besides me who respects The Prof.
Give this guy a beer.

I said Prost was the greatest of all time please dont shoot me, check Unpopular F1 Opinions. He would have won the 1988 Championship if all results counted.

[dr-baker]

Who says Prost is underrated? WHO? He's called The Professor FFS.

THANK YOU! One person besides me who respects The Prof.
Give this guy a beer.

I said Prost was the greatest of all time please don't shoot me, check Unpopular F1 Opinions. He would have won the 1988 Championship if all results counted.

I have the impression that le Prof was less controversial and at least as good as Senna so I would rate Prost higher than Senna.

[Shizuka]

Prost came close to win in 1983. He dropped it in the final races, IIRC he had... three retirements out of four races? And in 1984, he got beaten to the title by Lauda with 0.5 points. Then he won in 1985, sneaked the title away from the Williams duo in 1986. He could have been a 4-times champion by the time Senna joined him.
Okay, he did win in 1989 with controversy, but he lost it the same fashion in 1990.

I like both Senna and Prost, but Vettel needs to race a few years so we can say how good he really is. He does have talent, winning in a Toro Rosso labeled Minardi is no mean feat, even though it was helped by the rain in Monza.

[mario]

Vettel scored Torro Rosso (Minardi) only Pole and win so he is a talent, but to me Aytron is the best out their. He beat his teammate to pole in the 1988 Monaco GP Alain Prost who is a great driver by over a second and they were one and two!!!

Back home for a day, so I'll chip in with my $0.02 before I'm off again.

The thing is, the Toro Rosso car was actually fairly good at the end of the 2008 season, looking back at it - Vettel was at least on a par with, and sometimes ahead of, the main works outfit in the final five races. Take the 2008 Brazilian GP for example - whilst Vettel qualified in 7th place, Bourdais was in 9th, and whilst his Q2 time was about 0.2s off Vettel's, Bourdais was also 0.2s ahead of Webber in the works outfit (I'm ignoring Q3 because of the effects of race fuel qualifying, where Bourdais was put on a very heavy fuel load). During the race, Bourdais was running in 7th at one point, but a collision in Turn 1 when Trulli went up the inside of Bourdais pushed Bourdais off the road, damaging the floor of his car and costing him six places on the road.
At the previous race in China, Vettel's Q2 time was only a tenth ahead of Bourdais (but again Bourdais was put on a significantly heavier starting fuel load, so he started 10th whilst Vettel was in 8th), and Bourdais actually finished ahead of Vettel on the road in Japan, by five seconds and what would have been 6th place, but was (in my mind wrongly, but that is a separate matter) penalised for the collision between him and Massa and demoted to 10th.

And as for Monza, even there we can point out a few caveats - Bourdais, after all, qualified in 4th place, and Toro Rosso reckoned, based on his lap times, that had he not stalled on the grid that they could have managed his pit stops so he came out ahead of Kovalainen and finished behind Vettel.

So, although Vettel did do well in the end part of the 2008 season, and scored several times whilst Bourdais failed to, Bourdais did show enough pace at times to suggest that that Vettel's rise up the grid was not without the help of the Red Bull design team and the development drive of Ferrari (they are rumoured to have squeezed as much as 30bhp more out of their engine, which also went to Toro Rosso, over the course of the season, even with restricted development, such was their desire to beat Mclaren and Hamilton).

Absolute nonsense.

For me, it's absolute impossible to compare Senna to Vettel. In fact, you can't compare anyone from that era to this era, as the cars are simply so different. I didn't mind the guys at Red Bull and Toro Rosso, but I just want all of them hanged, now...

Ascanelli should know better. Ever thought of putting Sebastian in a 1988 McLaren and telling him to do or die on the first lap?

(I'm just a bit tired right now, so I could just be exaggerating)

Personally, I have to disagree with Ascanelli's judgement, even allowing for some of the complexities which arise from comparing the respective cars. At the moment, Vettel has shown that he can be blisteringly quick, especially over a single lap in qualifying but also during race conditions, which, in some respects, replicates what Senna was also capable of doing.

However, and this is crucial, Senna was about so much more than raw speed. Senna also had many other noted qualities - for example, his fastidious attention to detail, and to technical feedback, almost to the point of obsessing about it. He wanted to know about every last nut and bolt on his car; Coulthard notes that when he first tested a car for Williams, Senna, who was supposed to be doing fitness training, instead came to the track. For the rest of the day, Senna watched Coulthard on track, observed his telemetry and listened to what he said to the race engineers over the radio and in the briefing sessions. Why? Because he wanted to know how good a test driver he was so he could trust his judgement (and he did trust Coulthard) when pushing forward development of the car.

That is not to say that Vettel is useless at feedback - but at no point has anybody ever said that Vettel is good at car development, or praised him for the work he does outside of the cockpit and with the engineers. Compare that to Barrichello, who has won a lot of praise over the years from Ross Brawn and recently Sir Frank Williams - not easy men to please - for the quality of his feedback. And love him or loathe him (and there are many here who favour the latter), Alonso again is respected for the quality of his feedback.

Furthermore, Vettel has had, if we are honest, by far and away the fastest car over the course of the year, and despite the flawless way in which he drove in Abu Dhabi to take the title, there were several races this year where he threw away fistfuls of points for silly reasons (Spa Francorchamps, for example). Some of that was due to Red Bull's inexperience as a major team, but Vettel was equally capable of making mistakes on his own.
And that leads me onto another issue - the way that both drivers would behave around other drivers. One thing that Vettel has been criticized for has been the way he treats other drivers, and there have been a few unflattering comparisons with Schumacher's aggressive moves in years past. For example, many felt that he was far too aggressive against Webber in the British GP, where he cut across so sharply to try and squeeze Mark against the wall that it ended up hurting his own start and let Webber through. In Germany, he qualified on pole but ended up in 3rd because his overly aggressive defence against Alonso put him so far off line that Massa drove right round him into Turn 1, and compromised Vettel's own line so badly that Alonso squeezed through as well. Senna, too was no angel, but what was better about his moves was that his aggression was more measured, it could be argued.

To be blunt, whilst Vettel has driven very well at times throughout this year, if you had put either Alonso or Hamilton into the same car, I suspect that they would equally have been capable of taking the title this year, and perhaps done better. On a more personal and subjective level, I don't think that Vettel was the best driver this season in terms when considering overall race craft - in my mind, Kubica was the better driver, because he has had the 5th fastest car, generally, yet managed to score some very unexpected podiums and even compete for wins (Monaco, for example, and Spa Francorchamps).
Vettel is quick, there is no doubt about that - but at the moment, he just doesn't strike me as having the same overall depth of race craft and ability outside of the team that drivers like Senna or Prost had. Drivers like Senna and Prost could win races, and indeed championships, with technically inferior cars but superior race craft - but, for the moment, whether Vettel would have been able to compete for an entire championship if he had had a car that was only as competitive as the F10 or MP4-25 is still not entirely settled in my mind.

[AndreaModa]

Simply sublime post Mario, another brilliant contribution!

Vettel is quick, there is no doubt about that - but at the moment, he just doesn't strike me as having the same overall depth of race craft and ability outside of the team that drivers like Senna or Prost had. Drivers like Senna and Prost could win races, and indeed championships, with technically inferior cars but superior race craft - but, for the moment, whether Vettel would have been able to compete for an entire championship if he had had a car that was only as competitive as the F10 or MP4-25 is still not entirely settled in my mind.

I think this is the part I agree with, we saw how in 2009, Hamilton (and to a lesser extent Massa and Raikonnen) struggled in top teams which had produced poor cars in the wake of the new rule changes. Both Massa and Hamilton though by mid-season were coming to terms with their machinery and as Hamilton steadily got better over the year, and Massa showed good speed before Hungary. Raikonnen too, drove well following Massa's accident despite the fact that the McLaren and Ferrari were off the pace of the Brawn and particularly Red Bull.

2009 is often described as a learning year for Hamilton, one which allowed him to mature and become a better driver. For Vettel he hasn't really had this experience, perhaps you could argue the time he spent at Toro Rosso would equate to this but in reality as Mario pointed out, the Toro Rosso, particularly by the end of the year, was one of the more competitive cars on the grid. Vettel needs a similar year to Hamilton's in 2009 to demonstrate he has an ability to extract the maximum from any car that he is given. He needs to be taken out of his comfort zone to prove not only to the watching world, but probably also himself, that he has the skill and ability that distinguishes the great champions. If he can do that, then he deserves to be ranked amongst the sport's best.

[Myrvold]

And if I'm not wrong, Torro Rosso went for a more wet-setup than many of the others, because the forecast for Sunday on Monza 2008 was dry, not wet. That didn't do any harm!

[thehemogoblin]

There is one driver, though, that is heavily underrated and is, in my opinion, a racing god.

Alain Prost.

Four championships, one of which was given by the race stewards (Senna should have won in 1989), but he was a great driver nonetheless. I still think Senna is a great driver, but Prost is heavily underrated. Here is the top ten drivers in my opinion:

1. Jim Clark
2. = Ayrton Senna
= Alain Prost
4. Juan Manuel Fangio
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Graham Hill
7. Mika Häkkinën
8. Niki Lauda
9. Michael Schumacher
10. Jack Brabham

Now, how can you compare Prost and Senna? You can't. They're both good drivers.
Note Mansell did NOT make the list.
Also note that there are two drivers from the 2000's. One of which is a definite shoo-in: Mika Häkkinën.
Really, the best drivers that ever raced in my opinion.

Does Vettel have talent? Obviously. Better than Senna? Which one, Ayrton or Bruno? If it is Bruno, then... yes. Ayrton? HELL NO!

How do you have Hakkinen above Schumacher?

[Shizuka]

Vettel needs a similar year to Hamilton's in 2009 to demonstrate he has an ability to extract the maximum from any car that he is given. He needs to be taken out of his comfort zone to prove not only to the watching world, but probably also himself, that he has the skill and ability that distinguishes the great champions. If he can do that, then he deserves to be ranked amongst the sport's best.

I have a feeling that 2011 will be an off-the-boil year for Red Bull.

[Phoenix]

I have to disagree. Sure, Vettel has spades of talent, but I can't just help but thinking Ayrton Senna had much more raw talent. And his level of devotion was next to impossible to rivalize with. However, that doesn't matter if Vettel does achieve three WDCs and up 35-40 wins in his career.

[tommykl]

0. HWNSNBM
1. Jim Clark
2. = Ayrton Senna
= Alain Prost
4. Juan Manuel Fangio
5. Jackie Stewart
6. Graham Hill
7. Mika Häkkinën
8. Niki Lauda
9. Michael Schumacher
10. Jack Brabham

Fixed.

[f1-gast]

You can't compare vettel or schumi their not from the same generation, well that Schumi came back doesn't mean you can compare them.
Rubinho and Schumi are from the after turbo years.

Every decade (that's 10years right ? ) got a driver that was at that moment superb.

[Phoenix]

You can't compare vettel or schumi their not from the same generation, well that Schumi came back doesn't mean you can compare them.
Rubinho and Schumi are from the after turbo years.

Every decade (that's 10years right ? ) got a driver that was at that moment superb.

I think they can be compared to an extent: Schumacher the ruthless against Vettel the speed wunderkind. Time will tell...

[patrick]

I said this on another forum when someone also put schumacher down as "a senna" too.
- stats are nothing, neither of them have the raw talent that senna had. They are sprintmeisters - genius at tactical driving, team strength and sustained lapping speed but when it comes down to the raw racing.. well look at vettel's mistakes this year.

It's a difficult subject to compare drivers - especially when comparing a driver 3-4 years into his F1 career to the legend that Senna was. There's no doubting that Sebastian has talent. But if you were to put all these so called "Sennas" in the same car at their peak I think Ayrton would school the lot of them.
And so would Jim Clark. And Rosemeyer. And Nuvolari. It doesn't matter in the end.
What riles me is that people care more to argue over the talent levels of current drivers than consider the fact that there are drivers who could have been infinitely more talented than all of the aforementioned, and yet never got close to F1.

[eagleash]

What riles me is that people care more to argue over the talent levels of current drivers than consider the fact that there are drivers who could have been infinitely more talented than all of the aforementioned, and yet never got close to F1.

Would be interested to know if you had anyone in particular in mind?

& On the the Vettel question he has won his first title at 5 years younger than Ayrton at an age when Senna was (also) still finding out that Kamikaze overtaking moves don't always work. In his case in British F3; just ask Brundle.
Point being we don't yet know how good VET may turn out to be, he is still young & still learning. My own opinion is that he is one of the current 2 best but not in Ayrton's class. (& most likely won't be).

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

What riles me is that people care more to argue over the talent levels of current drivers than consider the fact that there are drivers who could have been infinitely more talented than all of the aforementioned, and yet never got close to F1.

Would be interested to know if you had anyone in particular in mind?

Mike Thackwell.

[eagleash]

What riles me is that people care more to argue over the talent levels of current drivers than consider the fact that there are drivers who could have been infinitely more talented than all of the aforementioned, and yet never got close to F1.

Would be interested to know if you had anyone in particular in mind?

Mike Thackwell.

Different Mike Thackwell to the one who actually had 2 F1 starts?

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

But he never had a serious chance right? He was just called up like that and was expected to do a good job. Someone should have hired him in 1984, and then we could have the Senna/Brundle/Bellof/Thackwell era.

Better still, Senna and Brundle in the 1990 McLaren, and Bellof and Thackwell in the 1990 Ferrari. Now that would be something.

[eagleash]

But he never had a serious chance right? He was just called up like that and was expected to do a good job. Someone should have hired him in 1984, and then we could have the Senna/Brundle/Bellof/Thackwell era.

Better still, Senna and Brundle in the 1990 McLaren, and Bellof and Thackwell in the 1990 Ferrari. Now that would be something.

The original post was referring to drivers who didn't get near to an F1 chance..

[Jeroen Krautmeir]

But he never had a serious chance right? He was just called up like that and was expected to do a good job. Someone should have hired him in 1984, and then we could have the Senna/Brundle/Bellof/Thackwell era.

Better still, Senna and Brundle in the 1990 McLaren, and Bellof and Thackwell in the 1990 Ferrari. Now that would be something.

The original post was referring to drivers who didn't get near to an F1 chance..

Oh, my bad...

[patrick]

What riles me is that people care more to argue over the talent levels of current drivers than consider the fact that there are drivers who could have been infinitely more talented than all of the aforementioned, and yet never got close to F1.

Would be interested to know if you had anyone in particular in mind?

One of the more well known "what if" drivers would be Tommy Byrne, although he had something like 5 races he was touted as a great talent but never went anywhere past those five DNQs. Apart from that I don't really know, I'm sure some feeder series fans can list plenty of people that disappeared due to lack of money or poor results on paper.
I like to ponder these what-ifs, and also the sad reality of it - these days, money talks, talent walks.

[Phoenix]

What riles me is that people care more to argue over the talent levels of current drivers than consider the fact that there are drivers who could have been infinitely more talented than all of the aforementioned, and yet never got close to F1.

Would be interested to know if you had anyone in particular in mind?

One of the more well known "what if" drivers would be Tommy Byrne, although he had something like 5 races he was touted as a great talent but never went anywhere past those five DNQs. Apart from that I don't really know, I'm sure some feeder series fans can list plenty of people that disappeared due to lack of money or poor results on paper.
I like to ponder these what-ifs, and also the sad reality of it - these days, money talks, talent walks.

This only confirms my suspicions - Tommy Byrne was a true talent criminally wasted. I can't really understand why Ron Dennis thought he didn't have the attitude to succeed in F1. It just looks after reading the text like if Ron Dennis had some sort of grudge against Byrne - that story about the manipulated throttle really looks somewhat suspicious. In any case, the guy really deserved more chances.

[patrick]

Would be interested to know if you had anyone in particular in mind?

One of the more well known "what if" drivers would be Tommy Byrne, although he had something like 5 races he was touted as a great talent but never went anywhere past those five DNQs. Apart from that I don't really know, I'm sure some feeder series fans can list plenty of people that disappeared due to lack of money or poor results on paper.
I like to ponder these what-ifs, and also the sad reality of it - these days, money talks, talent walks.

This only confirms my suspicions - Tommy Byrne was a true talent criminally wasted. I can't really understand why Ron Dennis thought he didn't have the attitude to succeed in F1. It just looks after reading the text like if Ron Dennis had some sort of grudge against Byrne - that story about the manipulated throttle really looks somewhat suspicious. In any case, the guy really deserved more chances.

While it may be true that Byrne was treated unfairly, I have read plenty stories of throttle manipulation during young driver tests in years gone past. I think they did it not necessarily to sabotage the driver's chances but to save the car and ensure that it got back to the pits for the other drivers to use.