So, apparently, you're the one who needs to learn some F1 history. Perhaps you could learn from Senna's sister, who said "I think Ayrton and Alain needed each other very much. In order for them to develop their own capabilities to the fullest. Their rivalry helped them to reach that level of excelence. Ayrton wouldn't be who he was without Alain Prost an vice versa". I'm tired of all you Senna fans who still need to hate Prost. They were both great and gave us the most brilliant F1 era. Bye now.
Hi, I kinda agree with ya. Each driver was responsible for each of them finding more potential out of their cars. I personally am a fan of both drivers. Tho Nigel is my driver from that era but you get what I’m saying.
Senna fanboys are such bigoted hypocrites. Imagine if the tables were turned, and we played devil's advocate. It is now Senna in the lead in '89, with Prost just behind with laps running out. It is Prost that has to win to keep the championship alive. Would Senna take Prost out in the same way? Absolutely. Fast forward 1 year. Senna has to win. Would Prost take Senna out in the same way? I very much doubt it. The '89 crash was low speed. The '90 crash could have been life threatening. On UA-cam, there is a clip of a driver being killed in the same corner when his car became airborne after an impact. Look for it yourself. Prost after '89 race "you know Ayrton's problem? He cannot accept not to win, and he cannot accept that somebody will resist his overtaking maneuvers". Prost after '90 race "unlike him, I am afraid to die". Prophetic words indeed. On UA-cam there is a clip of Ayrton, the great warrior, walking through his pits after securing the '90 championship. He is walking up to McClaren staff, shaking hands, giving pats on back. There are no smiles, and nobody seems very happy. A championship was won, but without honor. The great warrior is a coward. Prost lost in '84 by half a point to Nikki. He lost despite being quicker in both qualifying and the race. He learned, and changed his approach. If the battle (race) is unlikely to be won, minimize the damage, and go on to win the war (championship) Senna was always Win, Win, Win!!!! Show everybody how great I am!!! Senna was like the football team, full of champion players. They ARE the best, and MUST prove it by winning eveygame. They mostly do win, but lose occasionally by taking big risks to score. They end up losing the championship, because another team settled for safe draws in some tight games, and went on to accumulate moe points then the team full of great players, whose greatness was ultimately there downfall.
That may or may not be the case. Haven't really given it any thought. But I fail to see how that has anything to do with my above comments. Prost lost a in 88 fair and square. Both drivers knew that the champion would likely be the driver that won the most races because of the rule at the time only counting best results from certain amount of races. Forget how many.
I wrote a long argument about the way I believe (my opinion, but hey, I am entitled to it) Prost and Senna would have acted in reverse situations. Principally, would Senna have taken Prost out in 89, and would Prost have then gotten his "revenge" in 90 by causing a high speed accident taking him and a Senna out. You responded with some ridiculous dribble about Prost fanboys and the 88 tital, which had NOTHING to do with ANYTHING I originally wrote. Neither Prost nor the majority of his fans feel that Prost should have won in 88. Prost drove to win the championship by collecting as many points as possible. He was aware of the rules, and was beaten by the rules. Accumulating the most points wasn't enough. You can twist it all you like IDGAF!!!! Senna fans go on and on and on and on about the way their "hero" was "robbed" of the tital in 89, without stopping to think that in the same situation, Senna would have taken Prost out in a heartbeat. Your comments (couple of crude sentences) add NOTHING to counteract my original comments. Prost won in 89 fair and square. Where you even alive then? Are you just another one of those guys that has formed their opinion on the Senna movie?
@@monotoneman5980 You wrote an long argument beginning with the line '' Senna fanboys are bigoted hypocrites..'' If you want to pretend you didn't that's your prerogative. I am perfectly entitled to counteract that by stating Prost fanboys are just as hypocritical. Were you even alive then? Senna movie?? Odds are I am older than you and have been following f1 longer than you so shove your allegations up your rear end.
voce só pode estar brincando, em 89 as imágens do helicoptero mostram nitidamente prost jogando o carro em cima para bater bem antes da chicane e Senna de maneira brilhante voltou a pista e cruzou em primeiro, em 90 foi a consequência de 89, até se poderia considerar disputa de posiçoes, se nao fosse o histórico dos dois, Prost bateu em 89, Senna deu o troco em 90 ficou elas por elas
He almost kills himself and prost on the racetrack, but saves erik comas's life two years later. Ya know, i saw the helicopter shot of senna hitting the tyre barrier, if that barrier didn't have a row of tyres in front of it, then at best senna and prost would have suffered serious injury.
Senna was complicated. He used to take things too seriously. I mean, his life, at that moment, meaning nothing compared to the championship, doing it just because previous year Prost closed the gap, which is pretty normal once he was ahead, once they were in the chicane corners, once they were slow. Doing it just for the revenge. Putting his and another man's life in risk, on purpose. He could win that grand prix without doing it. He could be champion without doing it. It's a stain in his carreer, to me.
In my opinion, he should've had his superlisence terminated. Both could've died at that speed, and it was very clearly deliberate. The FIA could've saved Senna's life here.
The FIA and Balestre created this war to improve F1 ratings. Senna’s pole position was on the wrong side of the track. Reckless and dangerous yes but I can understand Senna’s going for the small gap in that corner. Good to see that finally before the Imola crash these 2 legends mended their broken relationship...ALain can be at peace with that..
@75NZ Oh... and something else: The pole position 1990 was in the dirty side of the road, just like in 1989, 1988 and 1987. The first time it was on the clean side was in 1991. Don't believe everything they say in the Senna movie, much of it is just not true... So even that so called "fact" is not true... However it's no secret that Balestre didn't like Senna. That's not surprising the way Senna drove... Nowadays he would be disqualified in every second race for all the collisions he caused...
I'm happy he didn't say anything bad, that he would regret after 1994.05.01. I grew up in F1 - I mean my first impression about the sport - was these two guys fighting. And I'm still crazy about the sport. 👍
@28MattO I never said I'm not biased. Of course I'm biased. And I'm accepting that people have different opinions. I just expect other people to accept that there are people who think Senna was not as good as Prost, that's all... But see, you said it friendly, that's the way people talk...
May I suggest you read Christopher Hilton's biography of Ayrton Senna's life? after the press conference after the 1991 Japanese Grand Prix, Ayrton admitted to Christopher Hilton that last year he took out Prost on purpose.
He didn't crash into him on purpose. That's what so many people say for some reason. Because of all the politics and cheating from Ballestre and Prost from 1989 and 1990 Senna didn't want to get cheated of another title again. So he said went into that corner going for it. He left it up to Prost to turn in on him and crash or give him room. Not saying it's Prosts fault for the crash at all. Senna had nothing to lose, Prost the exact opposite.
@@monstalova « going for the corner » meant crashing into Prost, and Senna knew it. I’m a big fan of his so I don’t care I think it was good revenge for 89 but Ayrton clearly wanted to wipe him out, don’t be naive.
E fez muito bem feito afinal Prost 1 ano antes lhe roubou a chance de continuar na luta pelo título e além do mais a batida de Prost em Senna 1 ano antes foi muito mais descarada
@han06040721 Yea they can . Senna is my favorite driver ever but that move he pulled in 1990 was fucking insane by anyone's standards. If he had killed Prost in that incident Senna would have gone down as the most hated man in the sport . pay-back or not it was plain wrong and absolutely lethal. they were both lucky to walk away from it .
e se Prost tivesse matado Senna em 89 já que ele jogou propositalmente o carro em cima para ambos batetem? prost teve o que mereceu, tirou Senna da corrida um ano antes e foi tirado do mesmo jeito da corrida um ano depois. 1 x 1 segue o jogo
Watching this, makes me wonder alot.. Prost is a kind hearted man. He wanted to cut the drama and be mature. He didn't want any more heat with Senna because, he feels its already passed the point of rivalry and feels its best to put out the fire before its too late and thought of retirement. Like Senna, he too did have a mind/heart for children. I guess similarities do cause tension. I am a Senna fan too
Blaaa, Blaaa, Blaaa🗣 and... 1976 real champion Lauda 1982 real champion Pironi 1986 real champion Mansell 1989 real champion Senna 1994 real champion Hill 2000 real champion Häkkinen 2007 real champion Alonso 2008 real champion Massa 2010 real champion Alonso 2012 real champion Alonso
Senna did ask for the grid position to be moved due to dust and dirt on the track making pole position useless as the track's conditions weren't up to standard, they shoulda just cleaned the track
@Goron333 Truth is: Before qualifying for the 1990 race had even begun, Senna lobbied track officials for pole position to be moved to the left and onto the racing line. He believed he’d got their consent, but that wasn't the case. Regarding your the second argument: I don't think the race in Australia would have been going any different. Ayrton Senna himself said he always goes for the win. That wouldn't have changed, no matter if he won the championship already or not...
I would like to correct you on this one point. The pole position at Suzuka was always at the dirty side of the track. Senna knew that if Prost took the lead he would have no chance in catching Prost. Senna was much more of a media manipulator than Prost ever was, Senna begging the officials to have pole position on the clean side of the track was just to make himself look like a victim as he did quite often. Senna claimed many times through his F1 career that he was the victim of conspiracy from Prost all the way to Balestre and the FIA. Senna created such a huge shitstorm in the 89’ Japanese gp that a year later when he deliberately rammed into Prost at the first corner at 180mph with the entire grid behind them, potentially putting both of their lives at risk just smiled. The head steward of the 90’ Japanese gp didn’t want to create another shitshow and Senna wasn’t even reprimanded let alone disqualified for the season and having all his 1990 points and wins taken from him. Had it been Prost in a reverse situation rammed Senna at the first corner at Suzuka 90’, Prost would have been hung drawn and quartered by the press, the governing body and most likely banned for life. Senna was a prick on and off the track all the time. I met Senna on a few occasions and all I can say is this. He thought he was god. He had the biggest ego ever and he certainly wasn’t humble like he constantly made his fans feel terrible if they asked him for an autograph. Prost on the other hand was a complete gentleman, humble and down to earth. Senna was at fault clearly in the Japanese gp in 89 and 90.
@@thedeathlyhallows8087 Yeah i don't get why this propaganda about Senna being an angel and Prost a conniving prick keeps going around. Prost was always a gent, confirmed by fans and people that worked with him, just a normal, reserved guy that was never interested into stardom and stuff like that. I've seen him also respond and talk to fans on social media, how many big worlwide stars do that? Senna on the other hand was pretty weird and complicated, Nannini himself told us how Ayrton wasn't very nice, treated everyone like shit, including people in his team. Like you said he had a huge ego and thought he was a god.
Prost won FOUR championships, not 3. Really? He won when he didn't have serious opponents? The FOUR times he was the champion, he defeated drivers who were (before or later) champions too (Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, and Hill). Senna is the one who only won 3 championships, two of them with Berger as his teammate (never a champ). FYI, when Prost and Senna were teammates (2 seasons) Prost won 186 points, Senna won 154. And when Prost and Mansell were teammates, Prost got 73 points against Mansell's 37
Malabarista Senna first championship was won over Prost, Mansell, Piquet, what are you talking about?! 89 was a shame, Prost won with political help, drove the car into Senna in the corner. Then won another championship with a car that drove itself.
@@ismafoca He's talking about teammates with the same car, Prost had 5 world champions and beat them all, a record still. Senna is nowhere near. And to the other clown here, in 1993 Ayrton's McLaren had better and more sophisticated electronic than Prost's Williams. And if you absurdly give 1989 to Senna you should give 1990 to Prost, hypocrite.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 cause he said what he thoght about mclaren back then and later complaining the ferrrari 642? That makes you a big mouth about it? Then so be it pal.if you were a champ you will got a big mouth back then.and if you complain about prost its cause you never heared piquet.
@@lucaslaino7292 I know Piquet was even worse, he bullied Mansell like hell in 1986. But with big mouth I meant that he just said even the negative stuff just as harshly and realistically as possible, which isn't bad in itself but still caused him trouble, for example calling 1991 Ferrari a formula one car like a truck to drive.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 He never said Ferrari was a truck, that was an error, intentional or not, from the italian's press translating one of his interviews. He said that after he broke a suspension, from what i remember, the car felt like a truck, not that the Ferrari was a truck. Very different, still Ferrari ran with it and fired him.
I dispute that, Senna's McLaren was much quicker than the Ferrari that year and he had the advantage over Prost for most of that year. He had nothing to lose by ramming Prost off the circuit that year considering the fact that if Prost failed to score he would be WDC with 1 race to go.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 That gearbox was still experimental and they still had to use the clutch to use it. The only advantages it had over a manual was the fact that it was more consistent over a full race and that you could keep both hands on the steering wheel, that's it.
You are so right.. both were using the rules and beyond to get to the very top.. sadly there is only room for one there... it was always going to be heartbreaker.
@1ma11 Fair conditions ? Honda gave better engines to Senna in 88 & 89. Prost has beaten Senna in 1989 and showed that he could beat him again in 1990 with an inferior car to the McLaren. And Prost scored more points than Senna (105 to 94) during 1988 season.
Former McLaren personnel disagree with that rumour that Senna had better engines than Prost. Senna worked harder with the Honda engineers than Prost. Prost scored more points than Senna in 1988 but Senna had more victories and more DNFs. The best driver won.
@Crixus Mauperthuis Why should I believe Honda's president more than Ron Dennis? If there is abundance of reliable sources about this alleged meeting between Prost and Honda's boss, it should be easy for you to prove your claim.
@@hidenorif9440 Prost haters missed that. I remember Senna saying before the race that if Alain takes the corner first he would take him out...Guess what? He wasn't penalised by Ballestre after the incident....But respect to Senna...He was and will remain the greatest of Formula 1 and no one comes closer in my honest opinion.
It would have been sooo easy for him to close the door and have the first corner but he opened the door by mistake...It can be seen so clear if you see the replay from Mansell's onboard camera. Prost had the better start but Senna came faster and Prost just opened the door and then closed it when there was impossible for both of them to avoid the accident. Maybe Senna pushed it a little...but remember this: "If you don't go for a gap that exists,you are no longer a racing driver".
Just the fact that both Balestre and Prost were both french doesn't prove that they collaborated. In order not to fall victim to conspiracy theories like yours, the FIA would have needed to disadvantage Prost on every occasion possible.
Why do even the simplest of people think that Prost crashing into Senna at Suzuka '89 was the reason why Senna took him out at Suzuka '90? That is not true at all. Senna did what he did because FIA Fuhrer Balestre, a Frenchman, was manipulating the championship to a Frenchman's favor for his own political gain in France. Senna had requested to the stewards to move pole position to the left, cleaner side of the track where there are no marbles (rubber thrown from the car's tires), where it is easier to get a good start and where the racing line happens to be on that point of the Suzuka track (the pole sitter must have the best line into the first corner). Senna's request was approved, then overridden by Balestre, to move pole position back to where it originally was, on the dirty side of the track where the marbles, where it was harder to get a good start. Senna did what he did to prove a point to Balestre that if pole position was on that side of the track, then it would lead to a crash because the speed of the two front row cars would be more or less the same. And that is what happened.
***** Good point- it had been; but Balestre did what he did what he did not because he liked Prost specifically- but because a Frenchman stood a chance to win a very important and prestigious championship, and if a Frenchman won the F1 world championship, that would have benefitted Balestre politically in France. I think that Balestre didn't do anything because he knew he would get into trouble if he actually punished Senna. There was already evidence that Balestre put the starting grid back to the way it was after it was approved by the stewards.
Does getting a pole position always guarantee a racing driver "clean" side of the track? and if not, is it appropriate or should I say, "fair" for a driver to just "ask" for the race management give him that particular advantage? Not starting an argument here. that I always wondered while learning something about these two legendary drivers.
Proves FIA double standards Senna got away with this championship which he should of been disqualified from. Schumacher in the other hand got disqualified for hitting Jacque in 1997 same same.
@ Alostpilot. Senna admitted in the winter pre 1991 that he had made a promise to himself not to let Prost lead into the first corner in Japan 1990. In other words he admitted to not lifting & causing the accident. He was incensed that pole position had been moved to the opposite side of the track at the last minute allowing Prost to jump him thanks to better traction & semi auto box. He felt that The FIA & Jean Marie Ballestre in particular were against him. Senna was a fantasticly quick natu
Replying to a 9 year old post :D The side of the track was not moved. It was regulation that the starting position should be on the inside of the 1st corner. All circuits were like that at least during all 70's and 80's race. I give credit to Senna though, it was usual for the inside of the straight to be dirtier than the inside, that was the reason he tried to get it moved.
you're right. Fan boys still spread the conspiracy theory of the 1984 Monaco Grand Prix that the red flag had kept him from winning the race. This is not true. Ayrton himself had admitted that on lap 17 he had massively hit the cerb at the harbor chicane, which had damaged his right front suspension. Senna said he could already see his right front wheel moving forward and backward under braking. Senna's car never would have made the full distance. In fact, the rad flag saved him a second place.
I agree, I used to be a bit blind, but now I see, Prost was very very talented too, shame Ballestre swapped Pole position, but I hope Alain is happy now.
When someone was bad for the sport at this time, then it was Jean-Marie Balestre. He always favored the Frenchman and Prost knew that and took use of it. That what happened in Suzuka 1990 was the payback from Senna after the events of 89, and probably also 84.
Pole Position in suzuka has always been on the dirty side of the track. Senna didn't complain about it before, 1988 and 1989 and then got angry at balestre for not to change the spot. As a result he promised to himself that if after the start Prost got ahead of him before the first curve, he would crash onto him and he did it and in 1991 he revealed that.
@jiricekk86 It seems pretty clear that Senna did that intentionally, but I probably would have too after Prost did the same thing the year before. I'm not saying it was right to do it, but just that I understand. In the end it's the politics in F1 that really get me and not the poor judgment on the part of Prost in 89 and Senna in 90. Prost and Senna had their time, made some mistakes, but ultimately both contributed immensely to F1. The politics however remain today and are still ruining F1.
Senna maybe had a bit more raw talent than Prost but Prost was the overall better package. Both acted like emotionally unstable women at times, Senna more often than Prost. Prost was much stronger mentally than Senna.
@prostfan it was confirmed before the 1990 race that pole position WOULD be moved, it was mentioned in the build up a few times. It was only about 30 minutes before the race they changed it. Also, the argument 'Senna wouldn't have won the championship in 1989 because he didn't win the last race' is irrelevant as circumstances would have been different going into that weekend and due the millions of variables present at every second of a race, anything could have happened.
Senna is a cheat driver. He had a scheming manipulative character. That senna documentary is ridiculously biased and out of touch with reality with regard to Alain Prost. They made it look like Senna never engaged in scheming.
@zhiman It wasn't taken away of Senna. He wouldn't have won the championship anyway, because he would have had to win the last race which he didn't. Study the facts before talking crap. And if anything, it would have been the FIA's fault not Alain Prost's fault.
ooh.. By the way. I have some friends who are Senna fans. They accept that there are people who think Prost was much better than Senna. So I didn't want to offend ALL Senna fans. Just those who can't respect that.
I like senna but i agreed that the 89 situation was not unintentional. Senna didnt calculate his speed properly .prost didnt expected that. But in 1990 senna did it with that intention and was stupid abd dangerous
i dont think that senna should made that dirty move against prost. after all alain was a driver.he made too a bad move to speak to balestre after the collision in 1989.but after all balestre has as he usually said "the best decision" for the sport while the professor could not made the decision against senna.thats totally unaceptable but prost didnt have to be blamed about it.and i have to accept that he made a terrific work on the 641 ferrari.
Fact is that Prost took a wide line going into the corner which left an opening for senna and then cut across sharply. Immediately after the start Prost got cleanly in front and should've taken a narrower line, he knew the risk.
It doesn't matter, Alain was well in front, his choice to pick an entry line. Ayrton had no way to overtake him and decided to keep the gas down and crashed into Prost.
i rate prost higher than Senna, senna had that aggression and fearlessness but Prost was a grandmaster of racing like a cobra waiting for his opponent and biting at the very right moment
AP was the giant of his era. And it's sad to realize that this was the era of real racing cars and races. Not like now - a tv show of combine-harvester's competition. And I wouldn't say that Senna was better than him. In some aspects he was better - in particular in the corners - in some aspects Senna was better.
....of course the 1989 Suzuka crash was Senna's fault. You can't attack an identical car under braking when you are 20 yards behind. Of course Prost turned in earlier than usual, and I firmly believe he did it on purpose. But it is his RIGHT as the race leader. Who reaches the corner first is to freely chose his way through it. By the way, even according to modern F1 rules Prost would not get penalized for his move. He changed his line - once.
Yes you have taking a great man's name and rubbished it with this comment. Prost could have not crashed and if good enough done the same next lap in 89 like a real racer but he wasn't good enough so he took the only option available to him which wasn't racing it was crashing
On the contrary: the fact that you don't consider World champions as serious competitors proves you have no point at all and very little (if any) knowledge of F1. But I'll explain something to you: the only way you can compare drivers is when they drive similar cars. Mansell in 1992 was unstoppable because of his far superior car, that's it. Again, when teammates, Prost was much, much better. About Senna, he was the best under the rain, so? I've never even questioned him. Prost AND Senna ruled.
@Dealow12 I know, I technically gave up arguing with them a long time ago. But sometimes can't keep my mouth shut. That's my weakness ;-) ... I know, I love Top Gear as a show but of course they are biased. However I know I'm not unbiased myself. But these Senna-fans have to learn to respect different opinions. Most other fans have accepted that there are people with different opinions. But what can you expect of people who idolise a driver who would have killed to win?
thats the mind set of a winner if you dont have that be a Prost fan and stay on 2nd and 3rd, only a real champion would kill to win, he was design to win and you and Prost were design to be 2nd or 3rd.Its hard for you to understand but you have to try
@@naidingeorgecristian9666 Is that why Prost has more titles, races won and better stats overall than Senna? Because he didn't have a winning mentality? Do you guys even hear yourselves? Hilarious.
@75NZ That is just a wrong statement, Alain Prost won the championship 1989 with 76 points. Senna had 60. The win in Suzuka would have given Senna 9 points. So he would have had 69 points with the win in Suzuka. Ron Dennis just made an appeal because he thought, that the punishment was too harsh, which it was maybe. But that's another story. All I'm saying is: Senna would NOT have been world champion 1989, no matter what. Why does everybody tell this wrong all the time? I'm getting sick of it!
This is incorrect. Suzuka was not the last race of '89, Adelaide was. If Senna won at both Suzuka and Adelaide and Prost finished with no more than 1 point in the last two he could have won 78-76.
I just don't believe prost when he says he never lies. I agree with him in the sense that senna crashed into him on purpose. but i don't care what prost says he did it on purpose to senna the year earlier. He turns like 20m early for the corner. If senna wasn't there he'd have been turning into the grass, I wish at least now he'd finally admit it
It's true, Alain is a very honest and consistent man, what he says is easily supported by evidence and facts. In 1989 he said he wasn't going to leave doors open anymore for Ayrton's intimidating overtakes. And that's what he did, he defended his right to his line, being in front, from a desperate divebomb from Senna.
@@livingbeing1113 he didn’t defend his line he turned into senna. like I said in my original comment if Senna wasn’t there and Prost turned into the corner like he did he would’ve ended up off the track because he turned so early. Are you actually disputing that?
Calling the guy who uploaded this video a 'troll' is incedibly stupid, but even worse is saying that Prost was overrated. He and Senna were the best of their generation, everybody knows that. Mansell was ok, but far from being great like Prost or Senna were. And, please, Piquet??? Give me a break!!!
I was a Prost fan until Suzuka 89, after all he said about Senna the hypocrisy of Prost to blatantly swipe Senna was too much tbh, and then his a Balestre's manipulation to illegally dsq Senna left a very bitter taste in my mouth and I switched allegiance. I would've preferred he win 90 fairly but sticking Prost out seemed karmic.
They both behaved wrong. Senna wanted revenge for what happened the previous year at the very same scenario. I reckon that Prost caused the accident that blighted Senna's chances to obtain the world championship. Prost never admitted it though. In 1990 Senna was pissed off for two reasons. Firstly because he still had in mind Suzuka 1989. Secondly because they put him on the dirty side of the track in spite of having the pole. In 1991 Senna said that he crashed Prost deliberately.
every one is biased not just senna supporters and yes I am a senna fan, but I respect Prost as well as other formula one drivers. but you have to be bias when your name is prostfan so get off your high horses please.
Prost was a baby, He took out senna in 89. Senna returned the favour in 90. Only senna could stop Prost from winning the championship in 89 so Prost took him out. Only Prost could stop senna from winning the championship in 90 so senna took him out Today if a driver goes for a corner on the inside and another tries to cut him up, there would be mutiny. It’s to be avoided at all cost but Prost got away with it because he was french. Well karma is a bastard so go on home to your children Prost, you got what you deserved. You won 89 unfairly and you lost 90 unfairly. You reap what you sow
Senna cheated. the reason does not matter. He deliberately hit prost. Why not wait and pass him on track? he knew he couldnt and knew prost was better driver.
@LouieGee your level discusión is in your words: your only way to refut me me is with to insult.... Recomendation: Read de speciallist magazine around the entire world about the incident this year, and read de Niki Lauda declarations about the same...
Prost always complaining, in 1989 he said on a different way, weird at that time the pole position was on dirty side of the track, mmmm why? for me it was obvious, Senna was always faster them Prost ad they put him on dirty side... cry Prost to France Balesti
Senna annoys me a little he was far to serious and really how many drivers beat him anyhow, so what he had one or three exceptional drives otherwise no more special then anyone else . His ego is embarrassing to look back at now. Get over themselves a little so what you race toy cars around like big boys 👶
@superpatagonia I don't need to insult you to win this argument and, for the matter of fact, I haven't done it. Please show me the specialists' opinions about it. Just take a look at the helicopter footage about the accident. If Senna's car wasn't there, Prost would've turned onto the grass. It's obvious. By the way, I have a documentary where drivers and specialists say that it was Prost's fault.
Alain Prost says nothing about moving the pole position from the clean side to the dirty side of the track. It was notorious that he and FIA President Mr. Jean Marrie Balestri were acting against Ayrton Senna. The previous year Prost threw his car against Ayrton's, as well as Balestri using his power to give the title to Prost, which is fairer than Senna, leaving the dirty side of the track to give change to these two bums.
The pole position was not moved. It was on the dirty side of the tracks the previous years already. Senna wanted it to be moved, but they didn't. Senna was just a spoiled brat.
@@aydankhaliq2967 All of you are right, I watched all the starts of the Japanese Grand Prix since 1985 and really in all pole positions They started on the right side of the track, and left for those who are watching on TV. I apologize, I was wrong.
I accept the fact that Prost was indeed a great driver, no question about it. I respect that. In 1989, after Senna/Prost crashed they waited to see if Senna could finish the race first which would make him the Champion again for the second time in a roll. Now, to everyone's surprise, he did it, then Balestre decided to disqualify him, letting the championship lending on Prost's hand. Senna was robbed the victory. My understanding is that Prost was not to blame in this, but Balestre alone is to blame for his complete lack of Honor, character, sportsmanship. To me, Senna was really 4 times Champion... 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991. Too bad Prost didn't have the balls to go to the F1 president (even many years later) and tell the truth about Balestre dishonorable decision, at least dividing with Senna his 1989 title. That would be the most Honorable thing to do!
+Gil-da-Base-Aerea Silva Try harder, Senna was disqualified for breaking the rules. It made no difference to the title, even if Senna had got away with it again he would not have won the title, a small matter of Senna needing to win at Adelaide as well which he failed to do, Sennna lost because he had too many collisions in 1989,. Prost won in 1989 fair and square, he was 21 points ahead of Senna, even 1988 Prost scored 11 more points than Senna and Prost was robbed of victory. An honourable thing would be if Senna had admitted he deliberately took Prost out in 1990 instead of waiting a year to admit it Prost was rightly 4 times world champion Senna did not really earn two of his titles.
Prost+Ballestre = The ultimate F-1 Driver of that time. Senna was fierce and had the balls to take what was there for him. He was the man that lift the brazilian spirit at the time. He was a brave pilot that never felt ashamed in showing our nation's colors. Both were great and I find it very childish and ignorant what you guys are talking about him here.
Prost the legend. Then and now.
and Senna the idol, then, now and for ever
I have been a Prost fan since 1986 when I was 9 years old and I am now 46 years old i have been a formula one fan since 1986
So, apparently, you're the one who needs to learn some F1 history. Perhaps you could learn from Senna's sister, who said "I think Ayrton and Alain needed each other very much. In order for them to develop their own capabilities to the fullest. Their rivalry helped them to reach that level of excelence. Ayrton wouldn't be who he was without Alain Prost an vice versa".
I'm tired of all you Senna fans who still need to hate Prost. They were both great and gave us the most brilliant F1 era. Bye now.
Hi, I kinda agree with ya. Each driver was responsible for each of them finding more potential out of their cars. I personally am a fan of both drivers. Tho Nigel is my driver from that era but you get what I’m saying.
I’m a massive Senna fan and couldn’t agree more.
@Michaelis Arcanjo Pretty much.
Senna & Prost, kings of f1
Prost is a good guy.
Prost was better than Senna and only fool can deny this fact ))
Prost was always smarter
Always perfect gentelman,and probably the best driver ever.
Alain Prost , el mejor piloto que vi en mi vida .
I like Prost too, he was a great driver. To watch him drive is magic. Sorry that time passes and he got too old for F1.
Senna fanboys are such bigoted hypocrites. Imagine if the tables were turned, and we played devil's advocate. It is now Senna in the lead in '89, with Prost just behind with laps running out. It is Prost that has to win to keep the championship alive. Would Senna take Prost out in the same way? Absolutely.
Fast forward 1 year. Senna has to win. Would Prost take Senna out in the same way? I very much doubt it. The '89 crash was low speed. The '90 crash could have been life threatening. On UA-cam, there is a clip of a driver being killed in the same corner when his car became airborne after an impact. Look for it yourself.
Prost after '89 race "you know Ayrton's problem? He cannot accept not to win, and he cannot accept that somebody will resist his overtaking maneuvers".
Prost after '90 race "unlike him, I am afraid to die". Prophetic words indeed.
On UA-cam there is a clip of Ayrton, the great warrior, walking through his pits after securing the '90 championship. He is walking up to McClaren staff, shaking hands, giving pats on back. There are no smiles, and nobody seems very happy. A championship was won, but without honor. The great warrior is a coward.
Prost lost in '84 by half a point to Nikki. He lost despite being quicker in both qualifying and the race. He learned, and changed his approach. If the battle (race) is unlikely to be won, minimize the damage, and go on to win the war (championship)
Senna was always Win, Win, Win!!!! Show everybody how great I am!!! Senna was like the football team, full of champion players. They ARE the best, and MUST prove it by winning eveygame. They mostly do win, but lose occasionally by taking big risks to score. They end up losing the championship, because another team settled for safe draws in some tight games, and went on to accumulate moe points then the team full of great players, whose greatness was ultimately there downfall.
Imagine too if Prost won the 1988 title by the same best scores rule all the Prost fanboys would find it acceptable and defend it to the hilt.
That may or may not be the case. Haven't really given it any thought. But I fail to see how that has anything to do with my above comments. Prost lost a in 88 fair and square. Both drivers knew that the champion would likely be the driver that won the most races because of the rule at the time only counting best results from certain amount of races. Forget how many.
@@monotoneman5980 Just table turning like you are. Prost fanboys are just as hypocritical.
I wrote a long argument about the way I believe (my opinion, but hey, I am entitled to it) Prost and Senna would have acted in reverse situations. Principally, would Senna have taken Prost out in 89, and would Prost have then gotten his "revenge" in 90 by causing a high speed accident taking him and a Senna out.
You responded with some ridiculous dribble about Prost fanboys and the 88 tital, which had NOTHING to do with ANYTHING I originally wrote.
Neither Prost nor the majority of his fans feel that Prost should have won in 88. Prost drove to win the championship by collecting as many points as possible. He was aware of the rules, and was beaten by the rules. Accumulating the most points wasn't enough.
You can twist it all you like IDGAF!!!!
Senna fans go on and on and on and on about the way their "hero" was "robbed" of the tital in 89, without stopping to think that in the same situation, Senna would have taken Prost out in a heartbeat.
Your comments (couple of crude sentences) add NOTHING to counteract my original comments.
Prost won in 89 fair and square. Where you even alive then? Are you just another one of those guys that has formed their opinion on the Senna movie?
@@monotoneman5980 You wrote an long argument beginning with the line '' Senna fanboys are bigoted hypocrites..'' If you want to pretend you didn't that's your prerogative. I am perfectly entitled to counteract that by stating Prost fanboys are just as hypocritical.
Were you even alive then? Senna movie?? Odds are I am older than you and have been following f1 longer than you so shove your allegations up your rear end.
Why was senna not disqualified for this one ? This one was way more obvious then in 1989 where he shouldn't been disqualified
Because prost used politics to claim the title of last year. The president of fisa was a little biased don't you remember?
Ficaram envergonhados de roubar Senna 2 anos seguidos, por isso não desclassificaram Senna em 90
voce só pode estar brincando, em 89 as imágens do helicoptero mostram nitidamente prost jogando o carro em cima para bater bem antes da chicane e Senna de maneira brilhante voltou a pista e cruzou em primeiro, em 90 foi a consequência de 89, até se poderia considerar disputa de posiçoes, se nao fosse o histórico dos dois, Prost bateu em 89, Senna deu o troco em 90 ficou elas por elas
@@ricardoporto23 que foi óbvio foi sim, mas uma resposta do que aconteceu extamenteum ano antes, Senna pagou na mesma moeda e foi muito bem feito
@@2mmarcelorj pagou, mas o de 90 tb não deixa de ser na cara dura tb, assim como foi o de prost em 89
Ron Dennis to Senna "I'm disappointed in you." The telemetry left no doubt, sadly.
He almost kills himself and prost on the racetrack, but saves erik comas's life two years later. Ya know, i saw the helicopter shot of senna hitting the tyre barrier, if that barrier didn't have a row of tyres in front of it, then at best senna and prost would have suffered serious injury.
Senna was complicated. He used to take things too seriously. I mean, his life, at that moment, meaning nothing compared to the championship, doing it just because previous year Prost closed the gap, which is pretty normal once he was ahead, once they were in the chicane corners, once they were slow. Doing it just for the revenge. Putting his and another man's life in risk, on purpose. He could win that grand prix without doing it. He could be champion without doing it. It's a stain in his carreer, to me.
@@ViniciusFiocco go watch Driver61 video about senna/prost crash
It was unacceptable what do Ayrton in 1990 in Suzuka.
I never understand why Senna was not fired of the championship after that. All my respect to Alain Prost.
In my opinion, he should've had his superlisence terminated. Both could've died at that speed, and it was very clearly deliberate.
The FIA could've saved Senna's life here.
Oh yeah? Let me tell you something. Payback is a bitch!! Good night
But in 1989 prost did the same.
Plus prost had balestre on his side.The second pair of eyes never hurts .
@@tiagobial4 not true
The FIA and Balestre created this war to improve F1 ratings. Senna’s pole position was on the wrong side of the track. Reckless and dangerous yes but I can understand Senna’s going for the small gap in that corner. Good to see that finally before the Imola crash these 2 legends mended their broken relationship...ALain can be at peace with that..
there was no gap, senna decided he was going to take prost out
wrong.... look at pole position the previous year or any year... Senna wanted preferential treatment
Senna was neither an angel but a master. May his soul rest in peace.
@75NZ Oh... and something else: The pole position 1990 was in the dirty side of the road, just like in 1989, 1988 and 1987. The first time it was on the clean side was in 1991. Don't believe everything they say in the Senna movie, much of it is just not true... So even that so called "fact" is not true... However it's no secret that Balestre didn't like Senna. That's not surprising the way Senna drove... Nowadays he would be disqualified in every second race for all the collisions he caused...
I'm happy he didn't say anything bad, that he would regret after 1994.05.01.
I grew up in F1 - I mean my first impression about the sport - was these two guys fighting. And I'm still crazy about the sport. 👍
Hey man wise words you look a nice guy.
@28MattO I never said I'm not biased. Of course I'm biased. And I'm accepting that people have different opinions. I just expect other people to accept that there are people who think Senna was not as good as Prost, that's all... But see, you said it friendly, that's the way people talk...
Prost is a legend.
May I suggest you read Christopher Hilton's biography of Ayrton Senna's life? after the press conference after the 1991 Japanese Grand Prix, Ayrton admitted to Christopher Hilton that last year he took out Prost on purpose.
Well no shit, who would have thought that it was on purpose?
He didn't crash into him on purpose. That's what so many people say for some reason. Because of all the politics and cheating from Ballestre and Prost from 1989 and 1990 Senna didn't want to get cheated of another title again. So he said went into that corner going for it. He left it up to Prost to turn in on him and crash or give him room. Not saying it's Prosts fault for the crash at all. Senna had nothing to lose, Prost the exact opposite.
@@monstalova « going for the corner » meant crashing into Prost, and Senna knew it. I’m a big fan of his so I don’t care I think it was good revenge for 89 but Ayrton clearly wanted to wipe him out, don’t be naive.
E fez muito bem feito afinal Prost 1 ano antes lhe roubou a chance de continuar na luta pelo título e além do mais a batida de Prost em Senna 1 ano antes foi muito mais descarada
@han06040721 Yea they can . Senna is my favorite driver ever but that move he pulled in 1990 was fucking insane by anyone's standards. If he had killed Prost in that incident Senna would have gone down as the most hated man in the sport . pay-back or not it was plain wrong and absolutely lethal. they were both lucky to walk away from it .
Payback from 1989 well worth it.
e se Prost tivesse matado Senna em 89 já que ele jogou propositalmente o carro em cima para ambos batetem? prost teve o que mereceu, tirou Senna da corrida um ano antes e foi tirado do mesmo jeito da corrida um ano depois. 1 x 1 segue o jogo
30 years on, Alain Prost is a *living* legend, father of three and happy grand dad.
All is forgiven.
Watching this, makes me wonder alot.. Prost is a kind hearted man. He wanted to cut the drama and be mature. He didn't want any more heat with Senna because, he feels its already passed the point of rivalry and feels its best to put out the fire before its too late and thought of retirement. Like Senna, he too did have a mind/heart for children. I guess similarities do cause tension. I am a Senna fan too
Prost is the real champion of 1990 season
Blaaa, Blaaa, Blaaa🗣 and...
1976 real champion Lauda
1982 real champion Pironi
1986 real champion Mansell
1989 real champion Senna
1994 real champion Hill
2000 real champion Häkkinen
2007 real champion Alonso
2008 real champion Massa
2010 real champion Alonso
2012 real champion Alonso
Senna did ask for the grid position to be moved due to dust and dirt on the track making pole position useless as the track's conditions weren't up to standard, they shoulda just cleaned the track
Good times!!!
@Goron333 Truth is: Before qualifying for the 1990 race had even begun, Senna lobbied track officials for pole position to be moved to the left and onto the racing line. He believed he’d got their consent, but that wasn't the case.
Regarding your the second argument: I don't think the race in Australia would have been going any different. Ayrton Senna himself said he always goes for the win. That wouldn't have changed, no matter if he won the championship already or not...
I would like to correct you on this one point. The pole position at Suzuka was always at the dirty side of the track. Senna knew that if Prost took the lead he would have no chance in catching Prost.
Senna was much more of a media manipulator than Prost ever was,
Senna begging the officials to have pole position on the clean side of the track was just to make himself look like a victim as he did quite often.
Senna claimed many times through his F1 career that he was the victim of conspiracy from Prost all the way to Balestre and the FIA.
Senna created such a huge shitstorm in the 89’ Japanese gp that a year later when he deliberately rammed into Prost at the first corner at 180mph with the entire grid behind them, potentially putting both of their lives at risk just smiled.
The head steward of the 90’ Japanese gp didn’t want to create another shitshow and Senna wasn’t even reprimanded let alone disqualified for the season and having all his 1990 points and wins taken from him. Had it been Prost in a reverse situation rammed Senna at the first corner at Suzuka 90’, Prost would have been hung drawn and quartered by the press, the governing body and most likely banned for life.
Senna was a prick on and off the track all the time. I met Senna on a few occasions and all I can say is this. He thought he was god. He had the biggest ego ever and he certainly wasn’t humble like he constantly made his fans feel terrible if they asked him for an autograph.
Prost on the other hand was a complete gentleman, humble and down to earth.
Senna was at fault clearly in the Japanese gp in 89 and 90.
@@thedeathlyhallows8087 Yeah i don't get why this propaganda about Senna being an angel and Prost a conniving prick keeps going around.
Prost was always a gent, confirmed by fans and people that worked with him, just a normal, reserved guy that was never interested into stardom and stuff like that. I've seen him also respond and talk to fans on social media, how many big worlwide stars do that?
Senna on the other hand was pretty weird and complicated, Nannini himself told us how Ayrton wasn't very nice, treated everyone like shit, including people in his team. Like you said he had a huge ego and thought he was a god.
Prost won FOUR championships, not 3. Really? He won when he didn't have serious opponents? The FOUR times he was the champion, he defeated drivers who were (before or later) champions too (Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, and Hill). Senna is the one who only won 3 championships, two of them with Berger as his teammate (never a champ). FYI, when Prost and Senna were teammates (2 seasons) Prost won 186 points, Senna won 154. And when Prost and Mansell were teammates, Prost got 73 points against Mansell's 37
Malabarista Senna first championship was won over Prost, Mansell, Piquet, what are you talking about?! 89 was a shame, Prost won with political help, drove the car into Senna in the corner. Then won another championship with a car that drove itself.
Prost deserved 88 and 89 championship. Senna 1 Prost 6
Ismael Pagani Senna 4 (yes 89 is his) Prost 3. Prost 93 is a joke. The electronic on the Williams did all.
Carlos Rubio are you on crack or sth?
@@ismafoca He's talking about teammates with the same car, Prost had 5 world champions and beat them all, a record still. Senna is nowhere near.
And to the other clown here, in 1993 Ayrton's McLaren had better and more sophisticated electronic than Prost's Williams. And if you absurdly give 1989 to Senna you should give 1990 to Prost, hypocrite.
i love prost
Me too buddy.with hakkinen was the last gentleman of the f1.
@@lucaslaino7292 Yeah, your gentleman Prost was sacked twice out of his team cause he had a big mouth.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 cause he said what he thoght about mclaren back then and later complaining the ferrrari 642? That makes you a big mouth about it? Then so be it pal.if you were a champ you will got a big mouth back then.and if you complain about prost its cause you never heared piquet.
@@lucaslaino7292 I know Piquet was even worse, he bullied Mansell like hell in 1986. But with big mouth I meant that he just said even the negative stuff just as harshly and realistically as possible, which isn't bad in itself but still caused him trouble, for example calling 1991 Ferrari a formula one car like a truck to drive.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 He never said Ferrari was a truck, that was an error, intentional or not, from the italian's press translating one of his interviews.
He said that after he broke a suspension, from what i remember, the car felt like a truck, not that the Ferrari was a truck.
Very different, still Ferrari ran with it and fired him.
I dispute that, Senna's McLaren was much quicker than the Ferrari that year and he had the advantage over Prost for most of that year. He had nothing to lose by ramming Prost off the circuit that year considering the fact that if Prost failed to score he would be WDC with 1 race to go.
I wouldn't say much quicker, a bit quicker and more powerful definitely but Ferrari was more technologically advanced with semi-automatic gearbox.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 That gearbox was still experimental and they still had to use the clutch to use it.
The only advantages it had over a manual was the fact that it was more consistent over a full race and that you could keep both hands on the steering wheel, that's it.
@@livingbeing1113 Still, the cars were quite equal on a performance stand point.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 The power difference in 1990 was not as significant as all that
i am a great Prost fan from New Zealand
+Barrie Cockliffe Man you get me into trouble lol
me too prost was the best of all time
stuart crigan ROFL 😆👏👏👏 shitty sour Frenchmen
prost is the best of al time
stuart crigan LMFAO!!!!😆😆😆😆😆
The Best Alain prost 51 victoire 4 titre 1985,1986,1989,1993
You are so right.. both were using the rules and beyond to get to the very top.. sadly there is only room for one there... it was always going to be heartbreaker.
@1ma11 Fair conditions ? Honda gave better engines to Senna in 88 & 89. Prost has beaten Senna in 1989 and showed that he could beat him again in 1990 with an inferior car to the McLaren. And Prost scored more points than Senna (105 to 94) during 1988 season.
Shogo5000 wath kind of a fucking animal u are 😂😂😂😂 so prost was just affraid williams will give senna better engins if they will team mates again ?
Former McLaren personnel disagree with that rumour that Senna had better engines than Prost. Senna worked harder with the Honda engineers than Prost.
Prost scored more points than Senna in 1988 but Senna had more victories and more DNFs. The best driver won.
@Crixus Mauperthuis Ron Dennis would beg to disagree. Look it up. And since you're on it, show me the statement (source) from Honda's president.
@Crixus Mauperthuis Why should I believe Honda's president more than Ron Dennis? If there is abundance of reliable sources about this alleged meeting between Prost and Honda's boss, it should be easy for you to prove your claim.
@Crixus Mauperthuis Go fetch the source that proves your claim. Oh wait, you made that up!
We miss this kind of F1 battle. Not this "Valterri this is James" shit.
Senna did it on purpose to secure the title, no doubt about it!
ua-cam.com/video/VH5c3VEgBQA/v-deo.html
He admit it at suzuka in1991
@@hidenorif9440 Prost haters missed that. I remember Senna saying before the race that if Alain takes the corner first he would take him out...Guess what? He wasn't penalised by Ballestre after the incident....But respect to Senna...He was and will remain the greatest of Formula 1 and no one comes closer in my honest opinion.
It would have been sooo easy for him to close the door and have the first corner but he opened the door by mistake...It can be seen so clear if you see the replay from Mansell's onboard camera. Prost had the better start but Senna came faster and Prost just opened the door and then closed it when there was impossible for both of them to avoid the accident. Maybe Senna pushed it a little...but remember this: "If you don't go for a gap that exists,you are no longer a racing driver".
Just the fact that both Balestre and Prost were both french doesn't prove that they collaborated. In order not to fall victim to conspiracy theories like yours, the FIA would have needed to disadvantage Prost on every occasion possible.
Get your meds in order and stop twisting history
@@m5p944 do you want to contribute to the discussion or is all you want to do just to offend?
@LouieGee wathever is a polemic crash. But in Suzuka 1990 Senna crashed intencionally against Prost.
Why do even the simplest of people think that Prost crashing into Senna at Suzuka '89 was the reason why Senna took him out at Suzuka '90? That is not true at all. Senna did what he did because FIA Fuhrer Balestre, a Frenchman, was manipulating the championship to a Frenchman's favor for his own political gain in France. Senna had requested to the stewards to move pole position to the left, cleaner side of the track where there are no marbles (rubber thrown from the car's tires), where it is easier to get a good start and where the racing line happens to be on that point of the Suzuka track (the pole sitter must have the best line into the first corner). Senna's request was approved, then overridden by Balestre, to move pole position back to where it originally was, on the dirty side of the track where the marbles, where it was harder to get a good start. Senna did what he did to prove a point to Balestre that if pole position was on that side of the track, then it would lead to a crash because the speed of the two front row cars would be more or less the same. And that is what happened.
*****
Good point- it had been; but Balestre did what he did what he did not because he liked Prost specifically- but because a Frenchman stood a chance to win a very important and prestigious championship, and if a Frenchman won the F1 world championship, that would have benefitted Balestre politically in France. I think that Balestre didn't do anything because he knew he would get into trouble if he actually punished Senna. There was already evidence that Balestre put the starting grid back to the way it was after it was approved by the stewards.
Does getting a pole position always guarantee a racing driver "clean" side of the track? and if not, is it appropriate or should I say, "fair" for a driver to just "ask" for the race management give him that particular advantage? Not starting an argument here. that I always wondered while learning something about these two legendary drivers.
hmdwgf Dude, it was still stupid. He risked his and Prost's life in a dangerous era where they could have die.
But pole was on the right since 1987..
Proves FIA double standards
Senna got away with this championship which he should of been disqualified from.
Schumacher in the other hand got disqualified for hitting Jacque in 1997 same same.
@ Alostpilot. Senna admitted in the winter pre 1991 that he had made a promise to himself not to let Prost lead into the first corner in Japan 1990. In other words he admitted to not lifting & causing the accident. He was incensed that pole position had been moved to the opposite side of the track at the last minute allowing Prost to jump him thanks to better traction & semi auto box. He felt that The FIA & Jean Marie Ballestre in particular were against him.
Senna was a fantasticly quick natu
Replying to a 9 year old post :D
The side of the track was not moved. It was regulation that the starting position should be on the inside of the 1st corner. All circuits were like that at least during all 70's and 80's race.
I give credit to Senna though, it was usual for the inside of the straight to be dirtier than the inside, that was the reason he tried to get it moved.
you're right. Fan boys still spread the conspiracy theory of the 1984 Monaco Grand Prix that the red flag had kept him from winning the race. This is not true. Ayrton himself had admitted that on lap 17 he had massively hit the cerb at the harbor chicane, which had damaged his right front suspension. Senna said he could already see his right front wheel moving forward and backward under braking. Senna's car never would have made the full distance. In fact, the rad flag saved him a second place.
Senna hits Prost intentionally and with full speed. How was he not disqualified and forever banned from sport after that?
Prost did the same thing in 89
@@lebronjohnson6735 prost didnt crash into him in full speed....
@Luiz Gustavo are you okay man?
That proves the FIA at the time was even more ridiculous
@@bensolo639 Prost was ahead 1989. Senna was behind in 1990.
senna was fastest driver who ever drove a car.And despite what he did a good person.R.I.P.
Perfect. I am from Brazil and i agree with you.
I agree, I used to be a bit blind, but now I see, Prost was very very talented too, shame Ballestre swapped Pole position, but I hope Alain is happy now.
Balestre did NOT swap pole position, pole sitter was ALWAYS on that side of the track. Check 1989 start, check 1988 start and so on.
I'am only say: Jean-Marie Balestre
When someone was bad for the sport at this time, then it was Jean-Marie Balestre. He always favored the Frenchman and Prost knew that and took use of it. That what happened in Suzuka 1990 was the payback from Senna after the events of 89, and probably also 84.
Rubbish - Prost didn’t like JMB.
Pole Position in suzuka has always been on the dirty side of the track. Senna didn't complain about it before, 1988 and 1989 and then got angry at balestre for not to change the spot. As a result he promised to himself that if after the start Prost got ahead of him before the first curve, he would crash onto him and he did it and in 1991 he revealed that.
@jiricekk86 It seems pretty clear that Senna did that intentionally, but I probably would have too after Prost did the same thing the year before. I'm not saying it was right to do it, but just that I understand. In the end it's the politics in F1 that really get me and not the poor judgment on the part of Prost in 89 and Senna in 90. Prost and Senna had their time, made some mistakes, but ultimately both contributed immensely to F1. The politics however remain today and are still ruining F1.
Senna maybe had a bit more raw talent than Prost but Prost was the overall better package.
Both acted like emotionally unstable women at times, Senna more often than Prost. Prost was much stronger mentally than Senna.
@prostfan it was confirmed before the 1990 race that pole position WOULD be moved, it was mentioned in the build up a few times. It was only about 30 minutes before the race they changed it.
Also, the argument 'Senna wouldn't have won the championship in 1989 because he didn't win the last race' is irrelevant as circumstances would have been different going into that weekend and due the millions of variables present at every second of a race, anything could have happened.
Senna is a cheat driver. He had a scheming manipulative character. That senna documentary is ridiculously biased and out of touch with reality with regard to Alain Prost. They made it look like Senna never engaged in scheming.
@zhiman It wasn't taken away of Senna. He wouldn't have won the championship anyway, because he would have had to win the last race which he didn't. Study the facts before talking crap.
And if anything, it would have been the FIA's fault not Alain Prost's fault.
IKR, people come here after watching the Senna movie and talk shit, like they've been following the sport for the past 3 or 4 decades!
ooh.. By the way. I have some friends who are Senna fans. They accept that there are people who think Prost was much better than Senna. So I didn't want to offend ALL Senna fans. Just those who can't respect that.
I like senna but i agreed that the 89 situation was not unintentional. Senna didnt calculate his speed properly .prost didnt expected that. But in 1990 senna did it with that intention and was stupid abd dangerous
This was similar to raikonnen and Perez in Monaco
i dont think that senna should made that dirty move against prost. after all alain was a driver.he made too a bad move to speak to balestre after the collision in 1989.but after all balestre has as he usually said "the best decision" for the sport while the professor could not made the decision against senna.thats totally unaceptable but prost didnt have to be blamed about it.and i have to accept that he made a terrific work on the 641 ferrari.
if there were not senna, prost would pass with all four wheels on the grass. But okay, that was his right ....
bahhhh....
Fact is that Prost took a wide line going into the corner which left an opening for senna and then cut across sharply. Immediately after the start Prost got cleanly in front and should've taken a narrower line, he knew the risk.
It doesn't matter, Alain was well in front, his choice to pick an entry line. Ayrton had no way to overtake him and decided to keep the gas down and crashed into Prost.
Senna never lifted for the corner.
i rate prost higher than Senna, senna had that aggression and fearlessness but Prost was a grandmaster of racing like a cobra waiting for his opponent and biting at the very right moment
AP was the giant of his era. And it's sad to realize that this was the era of real racing cars and races. Not like now - a tv show of combine-harvester's competition.
And I wouldn't say that Senna was better than him. In some aspects he was better - in particular in the corners - in some aspects Senna was better.
I agree they were extremely level , it wasn’t a clear one or another
....of course the 1989 Suzuka crash was Senna's fault. You can't attack an identical car under braking when you are 20 yards behind. Of course Prost turned in earlier than usual, and I firmly believe he did it on purpose. But it is his RIGHT as the race leader. Who reaches the corner first is to freely chose his way through it. By the way, even according to modern F1 rules Prost would not get penalized for his move. He changed his line - once.
I know this is very old, but it is incorrect, when someone dives in next to tou, you can't turn into him, you have to leave space.
Yes you have taking a great man's name and rubbished it with this comment. Prost could have not crashed and if good enough done the same next lap in 89 like a real racer but he wasn't good enough so he took the only option available to him which wasn't racing it was crashing
1:01 - that is a lie.
How did that nose fit under a helmet? Same with bird beak Ricciardo.
On the contrary: the fact that you don't consider World champions as serious competitors proves you have no point at all and very little (if any) knowledge of F1.
But I'll explain something to you: the only way you can compare drivers is when they drive similar cars. Mansell in 1992 was unstoppable because of his far superior car, that's it. Again, when teammates, Prost was much, much better.
About Senna, he was the best under the rain, so? I've never even questioned him. Prost AND Senna ruled.
@Dealow12 I know, I technically gave up arguing with them a long time ago. But sometimes can't keep my mouth shut. That's my weakness ;-) ... I know, I love Top Gear as a show but of course they are biased. However I know I'm not unbiased myself. But these Senna-fans have to learn to respect different opinions. Most other fans have accepted that there are people with different opinions. But what can you expect of people who idolise a driver who would have killed to win?
thats the mind set of a winner if you dont have that be a Prost fan and stay on 2nd and 3rd, only a real champion would kill to win, he was design to win and you and Prost were design to be 2nd or 3rd.Its hard for you to understand but you have to try
@@naidingeorgecristian9666 Is that why Prost has more titles, races won and better stats overall than Senna? Because he didn't have a winning mentality? Do you guys even hear yourselves? Hilarious.
@75NZ That is just a wrong statement, Alain Prost won the championship 1989 with 76 points. Senna had 60. The win in Suzuka would have given Senna 9 points. So he would have had 69 points with the win in Suzuka.
Ron Dennis just made an appeal because he thought, that the punishment was too harsh, which it was maybe. But that's another story. All I'm saying is: Senna would NOT have been world champion 1989, no matter what. Why does everybody tell this wrong all the time? I'm getting sick of it!
This is incorrect. Suzuka was not the last race of '89, Adelaide was. If Senna won at both Suzuka and Adelaide and Prost finished with no more than 1 point in the last two he could have won 78-76.
@@johnmckay6607 That's what I say. But Senna crashed out in Adelaide, so he wouldn't have been World champion in 89 no matter what.
100% intentional by Senna as like as 100% intentional by Prost the previous season.
@thehitchrules Correction again !! 1990
Dude, you were snitch your entire racing carrier
I just don't believe prost when he says he never lies. I agree with him in the sense that senna crashed into him on purpose. but i don't care what prost says he did it on purpose to senna the year earlier. He turns like 20m early for the corner. If senna wasn't there he'd have been turning into the grass, I wish at least now he'd finally admit it
Senna couldnt take prost in that corner on speed pal. check the view onboard by senna.was moving fast nevermind if they show that with nannini.
Wrong, Prost had that corner. Check the video again. I was unsure myself, but it's correct Senna at fault there and nothing to do with Ballestre etc.
@@alanb5690 how did Prost have it?
It's true, Alain is a very honest and consistent man, what he says is easily supported by evidence and facts.
In 1989 he said he wasn't going to leave doors open anymore for Ayrton's intimidating overtakes. And that's what he did, he defended his right to his line, being in front, from a desperate divebomb from Senna.
@@livingbeing1113 he didn’t defend his line he turned into senna. like I said in my original comment if Senna wasn’t there and Prost turned into the corner like he did he would’ve ended up off the track because he turned so early. Are you actually disputing that?
Calling the guy who uploaded this video a 'troll' is incedibly stupid, but even worse is saying that Prost was overrated. He and Senna were the best of their generation, everybody knows that. Mansell was ok, but far from being great like Prost or Senna were. And, please, Piquet??? Give me a break!!!
@han06040721 Correction : 1989
Yeah he crashed into you on purpose, just settling the score for suzuka 1989.
I was a Prost fan until Suzuka 89, after all he said about Senna the hypocrisy of Prost to blatantly swipe Senna was too much tbh, and then his a Balestre's manipulation to illegally dsq Senna left a very bitter taste in my mouth and I switched allegiance. I would've preferred he win 90 fairly but sticking Prost out seemed karmic.
They both behaved wrong. Senna wanted revenge for what happened the previous year at the very same scenario. I reckon that Prost caused the accident that blighted Senna's chances to obtain the world championship. Prost never admitted it though. In 1990 Senna was pissed off for two reasons. Firstly because he still had in mind Suzuka 1989. Secondly because they put him on the dirty side of the track in spite of having the pole. In 1991 Senna said that he crashed Prost deliberately.
@LouieGee maybe...but de collision in 1989 was diferent...Prost leads in this moment.
@superpatagonia Yeah, but Senna was overtaking him. He just didn't 'cause Prost crashed on him.
what??
every one is biased not just senna supporters and yes I am a senna fan, but I respect Prost as well as other formula one drivers. but you have to be bias when your name is prostfan so get off your high horses please.
I think Senna is not fault in Suzuka 1989
If Guy watches Senna, then Guy knows everything about F1. A logical fallacy.
O que o Ayrton fez não foi correto, poderia ter se matado ou poderia ter matado o Prost!!!
Que estranho que esse comentario venha dum brasileiro
@@Lucky.Man.Altimori foi verdade!
@@rafaelsilva5877 Prost é que fechou senna
RENNIE
Prost was a baby,
He took out senna in 89. Senna returned the favour in 90.
Only senna could stop Prost from winning the championship in 89 so Prost took him out.
Only Prost could stop senna from winning the championship in 90 so senna took him out
Today if a driver goes for a corner on the inside and another tries to cut him up, there would be mutiny. It’s to be avoided at all cost but Prost got away with it because he was french. Well karma is a bastard so go on home to your children Prost, you got what you deserved. You won 89 unfairly and you lost 90 unfairly. You reap what you sow
@Dealow12 That about sums it up...
Senna cheated. the reason does not matter. He deliberately hit prost. Why not wait and pass him on track? he knew he couldnt and knew prost was better driver.
ua-cam.com/video/VH5c3VEgBQA/v-deo.html
Senna > Prost
@LouieGee your level discusión is in your words: your only way to refut me me is with to insult....
Recomendation: Read de speciallist magazine around the entire world about the incident this year, and read de Niki Lauda declarations about the same...
Prost always complaining, in 1989 he said on a different way, weird at that time the pole position was on dirty side of the track, mmmm why? for me it was obvious, Senna was always faster them Prost ad they put him on dirty side... cry Prost to France Balesti
Senna annoys me a little he was far to serious and really how many drivers beat him anyhow, so what he had one or three exceptional drives otherwise no more special then anyone else .
His ego is embarrassing to look back at now. Get over themselves a little so what you race toy cars around like big boys 👶
@superpatagonia I don't need to insult you to win this argument and, for the matter of fact, I haven't done it. Please show me the specialists' opinions about it. Just take a look at the helicopter footage about the accident. If Senna's car wasn't there, Prost would've turned onto the grass. It's obvious.
By the way, I have a documentary where drivers and specialists say that it was Prost's fault.
89 or 90?
@superpatagonia So Senna is the "real champion" in 1989 season?
Nope.
It's a bit strange how it works out. I think senna was the better driver in the 89 season and prost was the better driver in the 88 season.
Alain Prost says nothing about moving the pole position from the clean side to the dirty side of the track. It was notorious that he and FIA President Mr. Jean Marrie Balestri were acting against Ayrton Senna. The previous year Prost threw his car against Ayrton's, as well as Balestri using his power to give the title to Prost, which is fairer than Senna, leaving the dirty side of the track to give change to these two bums.
The pole position was not moved. It was on the dirty side of the tracks the previous years already. Senna wanted it to be moved, but they didn't. Senna was just a spoiled brat.
Even 1988 pole was on the dirty side. So ezio's point doesn't make sense.
@@aydankhaliq2967 All of you are right, I watched all the starts of the Japanese Grand Prix since 1985 and really in all pole positions They started on the right side of the track, and left for those who are watching on TV. I apologize, I was wrong.
I accept the fact that Prost was indeed a great driver, no question about it. I respect that. In 1989, after Senna/Prost crashed they waited to see if Senna could finish the race first which would make him the Champion again for the second time in a roll. Now, to everyone's surprise, he did it, then Balestre decided to disqualify him, letting the championship lending on Prost's hand. Senna was robbed the victory. My understanding is that Prost was not to blame in this, but Balestre alone is to blame for his complete lack of Honor, character, sportsmanship. To me, Senna was really 4 times Champion... 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991. Too bad Prost didn't have the balls to go to the F1 president (even many years later) and tell the truth about Balestre dishonorable decision, at least dividing with Senna his 1989 title. That would be the most Honorable thing to do!
+Gil-da-Base-Aerea Silva
Try harder, Senna was disqualified for breaking the rules. It made no difference to the title, even if Senna had got away with it again he would not have won the title, a small matter of Senna needing to win at Adelaide as well which he failed to do, Sennna lost because he had too many collisions in 1989,.
Prost won in 1989 fair and square, he was 21 points ahead of Senna, even 1988 Prost scored 11 more points than Senna and Prost was robbed of victory.
An honourable thing would be if Senna had admitted he deliberately took Prost out in 1990 instead of waiting a year to admit it
Prost was rightly 4 times world champion Senna did not really earn two of his titles.
But I agree that Prost never beat Senna on the road in 1989 and was reliant on Senna's retirements for his points advantage.
Senna was not robbed. Senna very bad man, Prost good man.
Entendi foi nada do q ele falou
Prost+Ballestre = The ultimate F-1 Driver of that time. Senna was fierce and had the balls to take what was there for him. He was the man that lift the brazilian spirit at the time. He was a brave pilot that never felt ashamed in showing our nation's colors. Both were great and I find it very childish and ignorant what you guys are talking about him here.
im a senna fan, but i personally think that senna knew his mclaren was not a match for the ferrari, oh well revenge for 89
Well, in 1989 Senna went for the pass and Prost turned into him.
Prost was defending his corner as he was in front. Prost was also in front in 1990.
trying to pretend "the good guy"
@danilotoledo You are funny :-D