Why I'd pick Prost over Senna
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2025
- Watch the Hamilton vs Vettel video we did on Zach's channel:
• Why Vettel is BETTER t...
...or just go straight to his channel here:
/ @theapex8341
----------------------------------------------------------------------
HOT TAKES + TRIGGER WARNINGS. Many of you won't agree with opinions being spouted out in this video. If you can't handle that, this is your warning. Today we discuss the age old battle of Prost vs Senna. I'm team Prost, and my good friend Zach of ApexF1, is team Senna. We have a great chat discussing the pro's and con's of both standpoints, hope y'all enjoy!
KEEP IT NICE IN THE COMMENTS YA MUGS. xoxo
----------------------------------------------------------------------
🎙️ Check out my podcast, The Cool Down, available now on UA-cam, Spotify & iTunes!!
Home: tommof1.buzzsp...
UA-cam: • Video
Spotify: open.spotify.c...
iTunes: podcasts.apple...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My socials:
📷 Instagram: / tommccluskey_
🐤 Twitter: / tommccluskey_
💻 Website: tommccluskey.c...
🎨 "Main" Channel: / @sportingtommochannel
💬 Discord: / discord
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Business enquiries: me@tommccluskey.co.uk
Copyright Disclaimer: Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. There are certain scenes from the Formula 1 calendar where race footage is used. All those rights are property of FOM. Other photos and news elements are used solely for the purpose of assisting the original content illuminate a more in depth story. - Спорт
Ayrton for his personality and unbelievable skill
Prost for his absolute almost perfect consistency and his amazing guts to tell Ferrari their car handled like a truck
What personality?
About the truck comment, was it not the case that it was due to a power steering failure?
All apart from guts I don’t think he reckoned on the sack🤷🏻♂️
@@salmanfarruz a great one
Prost got yeeted out by Ferrari before the season finale in 1991, but that was a great decision at least on Prost’s part, as Ferrari went through a bad slump after that. Meanwhile, Prost replaced Mansell at Williams and ended up winning the championship in 1993. I’d like to imagine how Ferrari felt when that happened.
Oh god I can hear the heavy breathing and keyboard mashing already
From people who never saw Senna race live just saw a couple of highlights online and rarely talks about how Senna is a whiny bitch off the track, that quote about "if u no longer go for a gap" is rubbish if u take a step back and think about it
Adrian Alfrin
You’re not helping Prost’s case by being so bitter
@@nai_29 i'm sorry I didnt say anything about Prost that's just my general opinion on Senna fans how can u put a driver so high up on a pedestal when u never saw him in action
@@adrianalprin5752 you have a point but really aren't working it right
Adrian Alfrin
But that was Senna’s Personality
He didn’t give a shit about what you thought of him off track, he just proved his worthiness on track.
Much of what Senna accomplished, and what separated Senna from Prost in some situations, was simply due Senna's willingness to take risks. If Prost had been as reckless and willing to take risk, do you not think he would have had many more moments of brilliance which would have caused fans to like him more?
Why was Prost NOT willing to take those risks? He had different life experiences, and a different personality. Early in his career, Prost was much more aggressive and reckless. And then what happened? He was close friends will Gilles...and Gilles would always tell Prost "you can not die in Formula 1...". This was based on some of the crazy accidents Gilles had walked away from. He had this supreme self confidence that baffled Prost. And then just like that, he was killed, running into the back of Jochen Mass at Zolder, he car going airborne, disintegrating on impact, and Gilles still strapped into his seat ending up sans helmet in the catch fence, his body mangled. 3 races later, rookie driver Paletti, a very serious and committed young Italian on a lower tier team died at the Canadian Grand Prix in the first race he qualified for. He was in a multi-car crash, his car smashed around him, his chest pinned against his seat. Before they could pry him out, the gas ignited, and the car went up in flames. He burned to death. Four races later at Hockenheim, Didier Pironi touched the back of Alain's car in qualifying, in the rain, and the resulting crash nearly costing him is legs and ending his career. Pironi claimed that the medics and track workers discussed if he would need to have his leg or legs amputated to get him out of the car. In These things had a profound effect on Alain, and he changed his approach, especially after driving along side and learned from Nikki Lauda, who was famous for carefully analyzing risk, and taking no more than was required. Was Alain a coward? LOL...no way. No one who gets into an F1 car in the 80s is that. But Alain had profound experiences that impacted the way he thought about racing and risk. For him, certain risks were simply not worth taking. He had seen the results personally. He had seen friend die in the most horrible way.
And why was Senna willing to take more risk? Well it was pretty simple. He had what many would call a foolhardy approach to risk because he believed he was chosen by got and his religious commitment protected him. Alain said as much..."Ayrton believes he can not die because he believes in God" Also, Senna came into F1 in 1984. He was not personally connected to the deaths and injuries that had happened in recent prior years. The only death in Senna's early career was the gentlemanly and excellent Elio DeAngelis, who did not die at a race, but in testing, away from other competing drivers. Ayrton simply had not personally experienced the things that Prost had. He had not seen it with his own eyes. Look at the stock footage from Imola in 1994. Senna was badly shaken by Rubens crash on Friday, and nearly devastated by Roland's death. He finally experienced what Prost had experienced a full decade before. If Senna had learned these life lessons a decade earlier, the history of F1 might be much different.
Now for some more driving focused discuss. I often wonder if people who idolize Senna have actually raced at a competent and high level. Because it seems that few really understand what Senna's brilliance was. Sennas talent was this - he had a natural gift that enabled him to adjust to new conditions almost instantly. This was probably because of his vast experience in various forms of racing, and driving many different types of kart, then cars. Senna could literally get in a car, take a corner or two, and almost instantly be at the limit on the rest of the track. So when conditions were new of unknown, such as in qualifying, or when it started raining, Senna could adjust so much faster. It would start raining, and Senna on hist first lap would turn 1:30s. Everyone else would turn 1:40. Over the course of 2 or 3 more laps, Senna would get down to say 1:28s. Other drivers might take 8-10 laps to get to 1:28s...and they might go even faster.... But by then Senna had built a 25s lead, and the race was over. THAT was Senna's talent, and it was miraculous, and so different from how most drivers, even brilliant ones, get up to speed. THAT was Senna's talent. He top speed was oftne not as great as people believe. He did not set as many fast laps and you would expect for a driver of his caliber.
Prost on the the other hand, had much different strengths. He learned patience. He was very good at setting up the car, and focusing on the whole weekend, and not focusing on maximum speed over any one lap or session. Prost would have been a perfect driver for the modern highly technical era, where tire management and strategy over the course of the entire race weekend are so critical. Prost was also blindingly fast in race trim, and his ultimate speed and limit, were ofter better than Sennas. But quickly adjusting to changes in conditions was not his forte. And finally, he was simply more cautious. The memory of Pironi flying over his car at Hockenheim in the rain, had more a bit to do with Alains disdain for the rain. You can not chose to not let these things affect you, unless you are a born sociopath who has no empathy. That is not Prost.
To back up what I have said, here lets compare Poles, and Fast Laps.
Senna
Race Starts - 161
Poles - 65 (40.4%)
Fast Laps - 19 (11.8%)
Podiums - 80 (49.7%)
Wins - 41 (25.5%)
Prost
Race Starts - 199
Poles - 33 (16.6%)
Fast Laps - 41 (20.6%)
Podiums - 106 (53.2%)
Wins - 51 (25.6%)
Let also not forget that Prost should have won at least one title with Renault, but the team inflicted failure upon themselves due to reliability issues that they created for political reasons. In 1982 for instance, they had 9 failures of the same part, and they refuse to chance the part, because of a French industrial partner that supplied the part! On an British team, they would have changed to a different part after the second failure, and never even told anyone. These absurd issues were why Prost left and went back to McLaren. Then he lost to Lauda by only 1/2 point. If the Monaco race had gone to the 75% point, and Senna had passed Prost, relegating him to 2nd, Prost would have actually won the title.
They were so similar in Podiums and Wins, but exact opposites in Poles vs Fast Laps. This just backs up what I was saying...they were quite equal in talent, speed and results. Prost and Senna just had different approaches and strengths. It also shows that it is posssible for a driver to be better than either of them...just combine their strengths. Take the strong points of Senna and Prost and combine them, and you would definitely have the best drier ever.
Based on the data, if I were choosing a driver to deliver most consistently, I would choose Prost every time. Espeically in the modern technical era where implementing strategies are key. If I wanted the most excitement and fervor from fans (which might translate into sponsor dollars), I would chose Senna. It is so very very close. They are much more evenly matched than people realize.
It's not about taking risks.
It's about perception.
Stewart said it: Alain was an artist and his smoothest of style was pure art compared with Senna's jerkiness.
The so-called fans are looking for crashes and collisions and Senna provided them with plenty of that.
In terms of points scored (and F1 is a points game), Prost absolutely obliterated Senna, given the circumstances.
With today's point system, Prost would have been 8 times world champ instead of winning 4 and finishing second 4 times while Senna would have won 1.
Prost was the best on every level. He also proved in 1993 that collecting poles was not an issue... But ultimately it's not important.
Finally Prost is the record holder of Senna's home GP while Senna never won in France. That's simply phenomenal. I mean it: PHENOMENAL.
This is the best analysis of any topic on UA-cam I've ever read and I very much agree with you sir.
I really appreciate the time you took to post this reply. I agree completely and I know it's not popular. There's not one thing you've said that I don't believe is true. You've done a great job here laying out the case. Well done
Outstanding post!
1982 was a crazy year... great comment man
Prost is underrated for a 4-time world Champion. Nobody ever talks about him as much as Senna. Probably because Senna died doing what he loved.
The effect of dying in your sport is powerful and Senna's legacy did grow from his death but I would argue he was still better than Prost, Prost was more of a politician who used his connections with the FIA to his benefit.
@@123dan165 lol you watched the senna movie too much
@@123dan165 Not true, if anyone was a "politician" back then it was Senna, who manipulated the press, media and the team to get favors.
Prost was the best, better than Senna, and won even less than he should've.
No because Senne demolish prost in the same car !1.4 second fester in a qualy lap in Monaco is insanity!!!Lewis never was 1.4 second fester than bottas so stop the bullshit!!why prost have in his contract with williams that senna cant be his teammate i toll this fear,FEAR!!!WHO WAS BETTER IN THE SAME CAR BITCH PROST OR SENNA?SO STOP THE BULLSHIT PROST BETTER THEN SENNA!!THAT IS LIKE NICO ID BETTER THAN LEWIS STOP THE BULLSHIT PLEACE
@@livingbeing1113 yeah, sure bud, let's forget Jean-Marie Balestre, a man whose only presence made you think he was the f***ing devil in disguise. Not like you are biased, not at all 😂😂
I really hate it when people mention Pole switching sides in Japan like Prost had some kind of hand in it. It's nonsense, pole position was always on that side of the grid and didn't become an issue until 1990, this myth is propagated by the heavily bias Senna Movie.
Facts, but I think senna is great anyway.
Drivers just love to complain and people don't realise its part of them.
Wow, finally someone says this! It's like all think that Senna was a saint and the "hero", while Prost was the "villain", as the film shows.
not to mention that senna missed his start 3 times in a row 88-89-90
at the same side of the grid
But Senna requested it before qualifying, so he wasn't just playing into his own pocket but just making a statement that pole position is worthless by being on the wrong side. And it was first agreed, but then Balestre the bastard made a decision pole would be back in the dirty side.
yes exactly! that senna movie was an absolute load of garbage
I'm with picking Prost. He was able to keep track of the bigger picture during a race and remember that winning is more than just going flat-out constantly. And sidenote: I'd have to look into myself, but I've heard pole at Suzuka was traditionally on the dirty side of the track, and not because of anything Prost did.
Senna was the better driver
You are correct.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868
He is not
@@michaeltrumph121 he is
@@clubpenguin13531
Senna was superior.
I'm going to be quite controversial here. For me, both Ayrton and Prost were equally talented and had special qualities. However, I feel that Senna is given more credit because of the way his life tragically ended, which leaves a lingering thought in everyone's head of "what could have been". Prost is criminally underrated in my opinion, but his statistics show otherwise!
They have exactly the same winning rate : 25 % so I think that you are right
@@alecyerikian8073 Yet one has 4 titles and finished second 4 times while the other one "won" 3 titles and finished second 3 times.
This makes Peost the best driver of his era without a shadow of a doubt.
Prost would never do something like Senna in Interlagos 1991
Prost was the Best all-round Driver ,He could have won 8-10 F1 World Championships Senna And Mansell Both Excellent Drivers but more Reckless And Dangerous at times especially Senna.
@@JasonDetheridge Prost would never win 8-10 championships when the cars are reliable, he does not push the car to the limit. I would say Senna is as reckless as Max Verstappen is.
it's important to know that Senna only one in 88 and had a chance to win in 89, because only the 12 best results out of 16 were counted in the championship, in modern F1 rules Prost easily beat him
Those rules were for both of them...
@@INDIGOBLUE555 yea but why host 16 races in a season when you are only gonna count 12 of them. The whole season was around 16 races and in those 16 races Prost beat Senna. It just looks like Senna cheated his way into the title, it wasn't his decision but it feels like he lucked into it. Turns out they raced the rest of the races and risked their lives for nothing. I get it was for promotion and to race in as many countries as possible but why such stupid rule. Just count all the races and get it done jeezus fricking complicators...
@@srxt6758 That's a good point.....
I really don't know the reason for such rules.
Possibly FIA wanted to push teams and drivers towards competition rather than playing on mere tactic based on arithmetic... Just my two cents :)
@@srxt6758 The rule was implemented because the cars were really unreliable. The rule also encouraged drivers to put it all to win the race instead of finishing second, third, fourth or the fifth just like Senna said. This proved that Prost's strategy didn't really work.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 you're right, that were the reasons
I have to disagree with ur first point I feel it was fair enough senna felt the rule had been reversed but overall I do feel Prost is overlooked for his achievements
Joe Ramirez said in Beyond the grid, put Prost in a car he is comfortable with and he will not be beaten. There has never been a driver as clever as Prost in the art of driving
Lauda said he was the hardest driver to beat to the championship. He knew way more about them than us!
He also said how many times is a car perfect, thats where the greats step up like Senna very seldom a car perfect race weekend at that time my miney be on Senna
@@y_fam_goeglyd you've just answered his question. Lauda was more Wiley than Prost, but Prost slightly faster.
@@y_fam_goeglyd Lauda states in his book To Hell and Back that Piquet was the best driver he raced against.
Prost doesn't get as much respect as senna because he is still alive.
That's a good point....
THANK YOU. THANK YOU for saying this LOL
Senna washed him in quali. Proving he is faster
@@thegoat-ishere4414 stfu prost was a more complete driver who didn’t keep crashing into people on purpose
i think it's because senna had a cult of personality thing going on. he got away with murder because of it... as i've gotten on in the years i've come to realise - Senna was the bad guy.
With all due respect to Senna, i dont think there would be this many people arguing for senna if he hadnt died
But i guess we'll never know
I think if he didn't have that awful crash in 94', he would take one to two more titles (more likely one) and then retired, him and Prost were both incredible, but senna has my bias favorite
That's a good point but I do think it's a fair argument in any case - Prost was figuratively better but he managed to live out his entire career whereas Senna's was cut short - he was highly anticipated to dominate following the departure of Prost & even Mansell but because he was tragically killed in '94, I guess we'll never know. Both amazing drivers in their own right though
I don't think he'll be known that well for regular racing but he would be known for pioneering safety and his wet weather driving
Yes there would, cause he was the better driver.
What I liked about Prost is he drove by the numbers. He didn’t take unnecessary risks
It's a shame that they didn't discuss this in more depth (btw Zach is clueless), Senna was prepared to risk his life and the lives of others, the irony is that this is rarely pointed out. There were a couple of gutsy people in the world of F1 that were prepared to point out Senna's dare I repeat it "dirty" - fwiw Jackie Stewart and Murray Walker were prepared to call him out.
@@davffwatto77Zach is absolutely clueless, why does this guy even get screen time?
NAH - HE COPPED OUT COS HE COULDNT DRIVE AS QUICK AS SENNA SO HE SETTLED FOR 2ND AND HOPED SENNA'S CAR BROKE
I think that was something he learned from studying Fangio. Similar style.
Well, about Monaco 1984... Why do people keep forgetting thet Senna wasn't THAT impressive in comparison to Stefan Bellof who was catching Senna faster than Senna was catching Prost...
And he started 20th whilst Senna started 13th.
Stefan tbf had an advantage. A lighter car which was later disqualified for it in at the end of the year and the engine which was non turbo and also less powerful which made it easier to drive in rain.
I agree,
I have always thought Prost was just a bit better. He is a very smart person and wouldn't risk something very dirty and cheaty like Senna + Schumacher
We have to agree that Senna and Schumacher were dirty drivers, but let's not forget the 1989 Japanese Grand Prix where Prost deliberately drove into Senna.
@@billyjov deliberately is very wrong for me, Senna came from way to far back for that move to ever work out without contact, now Prost although closed the door, fact is Prost would have never went for that move
Wouldn't cheat?
Cough...Suzuka 89...cough
Mate, say any other compliment you want but not that. Prost had the FIA in his back pocket.
Cough cough Fia Suzuka 1989 cough cough
Suzuka 89 ?? He and his compatriot who was fia president
I do agree with some of your points, but I do think you are overlooking some key points, for example Senna was insane in qualifying for most tracks, which is ,as Max Verstappen says, it’s very hard. Although, I would say Prost was more consistent with performances. They are both truly incredible drivers, and both changed the way F1 is forever.
Nobody cares about qualifying.
For a long time they were not even broadcasted.
The only reason fanboys mention it is because Senna has more poles than Prost.
Funny as that is the only relevant stat in favour of Senna.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868 Prost cared in 1993. Don't ever recall Senna getting 13 in one season, bitch
13:11 Pole position had always been on the dirty side of the track, so again an invalid argument
not always
@@sviniciusbraga No, the thing is that he requested this before the qualidying, so there was no personal interest. Race officials agreed. The stupidest thing is that 30 minutes before the race Balestre the Beelsebub decided to change the pole back to the dirty side, and understandably this furiated Senna.
@@sviniciusbraga Just as I mentioned before, he requested it before the qualifying, so it was not about him willing to start on the dirty side previous years and not in 1990. Maybe he was so "selfish" as Tommy says that he wanted to give the pole sitter a better chance of winning the race, even though he wouldn't be on the pole himself. And yes, maybe he was just finding an excuse for taking Prost out, not necessarily to win the championship but to revenge the unjustice from previous year. Senna was ok to crash for me, but I think he still endangered Prost's and his own life with those huge speeds in that fast corner, he should have crashed in a slower corner.
@@sviniciusbraga No, Prost should have been disqualified from 1989 season for his political cheating and the FIA president Jean-Marie Balestre should have been thrown into the pits of hell. And I agree that Senna was not robbed from a title but from his chances of fighting for it yes. If he'd not been disqualified he would have had a theoretical chance of winning it in the final race. And crashing for your opponent is never ok, but because Prost did it the previous year without any punishment so Senna was just settling the score and putting an end to the terror of Balestre The Beelsebub.
@@sviniciusbraga I really suggest you to watch some more footage of that 1989 crash, Prost turns twice into the corner which is really suspicious and what's even more suspicious is that if Prost held that racing line he would have cut the corner like hell. And all the crashes in 1989 that Senna did were unfortunate but unlike Prost he didn't do them deliberately. I can see that you are a big Prost fan as you just can't see the way he abused the political structure of FIA to do whatever he pleased. And just to remind that I would have no problem in Prost being the champion in 1989 and he deserved that title , but due to his dick move in Suzuka he should be disqualified drom the championship and there should have been something done to stop bullying Senna with senseless accusements.
"Why I chose Prost over Senna"
So .... you have chosen death
Is it fair to say that Senna was the way more exciting driver to watch compared to Prost, but Alain was the better all-rounder? I’m only 20 and I’m new to F1, but from the limited archive footage I’ve seen and from what I’ve heard, Senna in quali was literally cinema-worthy material, people would stop whatever they were doing, to watch him fly round a track.
@@magnustan841 .......but the greatest drivers never look spectacular, because they are so smooth.
@@magnustan841 that's very fair to say
Calling a 4 time world champion underrated may seem outrageous, but I do think Prost isn't as fondely remembered as he should be and it's nice to see someone give him some credit. There's a few things I'd like to point out:
- the pole position in Suzuka has always been on the dirty side and it was never an issue until Senna made it one in 1990. Prost had nothing to do with it, that's a myth made up by the heavily biased Senna docu.
- the role of the FIA in Prosts career get's blown way out of proportion. Aside from Suzuka 1989 (where would have become WDC anyway after Senna ramed Brunlde in Adelaide) and Monaco 1984 (which was Jacky Ickx sole decision, not even the FIA, ironically Prost would have one that years WDC if they woud have raced on), there is no factual evidence that Prost ever got favoured. You could even make the argument that Prost got some questionable penalties in his later career, especially 1993. Senna wasn't punished for his crash on purpose at Suzuka 1990, a move that got Schumis entire 1997 season terminated just 7years later and so on. Prost didn't win 4 titles just thanks to the FIA.
- Prosts career was much more than just his rivalery with Senna. Anyone remember the young Renault pilot who managed to score wins with a notoriousely unreliable car? Remeber the guy who was able to rival the legend Lauda at McLaren? Remember the guy who destroyed Mansell at Ferrari and still got podiums with a horrendous Ferrari 642? Prost had a 13 year career stretching from 1980 to 1993 and drove in some of the most competitive grids ever. He raced against the likes of Alan Jones, Gilles Villneuve, Carlos Reutemann, Niki Lauda, Nelson Piquet, Gerhard Berger, Nigel Mansell, Elio de Angelis, of course Ayrton Senna, a young Michael Schummachen and Damon Hill and many more. And he came out on top with 4 WDC, 51 victories, the most points and the most fastest laps.
- in my opinion Prost gets too much shit for his McLaren time with Senna. He was the one who suggested Ron Dennis to get Senna over the likes of Piquet or Mansell, thinking in long terms and and aknowledging the Brasils once-in-a-generation-talent. And he did race fair until Senna started breaking agreements and got favoured by Honda and Ron Dennis. Senna wanted the escalation and he got what he asked for, ending in the infamous Suzuka 89 incident, where Prost definitely wasn't innocent, I'm not denying that, but Senna hat it coming a for a long time. Saying Prost was the villain protected by the FIA who terrorized poor innocent Senna definitely doesn't tell the full story.
I've talked negatively about Senna quite a bit now, which is not nescecarely my motive. Senna was a once-in-a-lifetime-driver and one of the best ever, no doubts about that. He put racing above everything else and I get why people loved him, and he became the hero of a struggeling nation. His eraly death only further iconized him. But he wasn't invincible. He was incredibly fast, especially in qualyfing, but being the fastest doesn't always equal being the best. Senna was his own biggest enemy in many cases, making unescecary mistakes that cost him points and even wins. Prost was overall more consistant and strategically thinking, which was why he was able to rival, and sometimes outmach Senna.
Overall Prost really should get more regocnition. In his 13 year career, Prost won 4 WCDs (one with an inferiour car) and had 4 runner ups, some being very close, like the half a point in 1984 and when he had more points than Senna in 1988. He beat many of his famous teammats and outperformed Senna in terms of points at McLaren. At the time of his retirement in 1993, he had 4 WDS (only Fangio had more back then), the most wins, the most points, the most fastets laps, the most poles 2nd only to Senna, all that during the arguably most competitive F1 grid ever. To this day only Schumacher, Hamilton and Vettel managed to overcome (some) of these numbers, by having an invicible car for years and driving 20+ races every year. Prost really deserves more credit that being that guy who got "destroyed" by Senna and supposedly stole his 1989 title via FIA.
Imo, Prost is f1's 3rd best driver of all time behind Schumacher and Hamilton
@@harroldinab He's definitely up there. It all comes down to preferences and what you value, but the fact people question if he even is a top 10 driver is ridiculous.
12:50 Pole position at Suzuka was on the "dirty" line in 1989. It was not changed to handicap Senna in 1990.
the pole position was , since a lot of time, on the dirty side.
Actually, it was changed. Senna suggested it to be changed to clean side, first it was agreed but Balestre did a dick move and changed it back to a dirty side.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 Yes, Balestre over ruled the Suzuka stewards, so there was no change. Senna was driving very angry on race day!
3:30 Gives more reasons why you would take Prost. If you're a team boss raw speed means F all if you put it in the wall and don't finish
I’ve been saying this for decades.
As much as I love Ayrton as a driver, he was sheer skill and instinct, totally unpredictable. If I was Senna's team principal back in the day, I'd suffer a attack every weekend…
Bro thats racing, you are born with that instinct, that iching to get in a car and go full throttle, Senna is remembered as the best by a lot of people and that's no coincidence.
After 1992 he was driving more clever, looking 1993 it was obvious that he was extrating more on race strategy.In pit stop area with his senses on tires we would see very good races with Senna.He was smarter than Schumacher
Prost knew the mental game and how handle the media and promote himself. Senna was just a racer with raw speed and talent but outside the racetrack he was just a nice guy with a great personality.
Naganachiketh Chinnamuttevi true, Prost manipulated and gained influence with the media and fia
Senna was not a nice guy, he was a massive dick.
@@Vipa567 was he really a dick but prost was dick to but that's doesnt matter cause both are great drivers
It's actually the opposite, Senna was the media's darling and manipulated the narrative to fit his complaints.
He always got preferential treatments in every team and vetoed teammates.
@@Vipa567 Sorry to open this up to you but so was Prost and Piquet and Mansell wasn't a dream team mate either.
100% I'd choose Prost, i'm not saying that Ayrton was bad, he is one of the greats. But Prost is my go to because of his intelligence (inside and outside the track) and his businessman mindset.
Finally, someone agrees with me
I was just about to comment that bro 😂
yeah let's stick toghether against 9 year olds
@@nic_the_grekk0262 So you're saying that everyone who'd pick Senna is a 9-year-old? oh yeah everyone who disagrees with you is a toddler, fuck sake mate, try to use a better argument.
Ye PROST GANG
@@nic_the_grekk0262 I never knew human intelligence was at its peak when 9-years-old.
Being from Brasil I can safely say that Prost doesn't get the credit he deserves, what a master on the track he was. I still think Senna was the best, but not by a huge margin, and that was the fun of watching them race, they had a rival on their level, they had eachother. Like Prost himself said before "you can't talk about me without talking about Ayrton, and you can't talk about Ayrton without talking about me".
Prost was better. More complete, better consistency, strategy, better at setting his car up, and FASTER when he wanted to.
The fact that he was able to drive so smoothly while being gentle on the car, and still be as fast or faster than anyone when it mattered, is incredible. He was truly the master, the Professor.
Absolutely funny when fans make their top fives, putting Senna at number one, and Prost is nowhere near to be seen. Hilarious.
Oh, and at 12:45 that's absolute nonsense, including the myth about the pole position.
'' ...FASTER when he wanted to be '' That explains out of the 19 times both Mclarens finished a race between 1988-89, Prost managed to beat Senna 5 times. This includes never finishing ahead of Senna in a fair fight in the entire 1989 season. How was Prost more complete? Senna was a better qualifier, better in the rain, better on street circuits
It's nice finally hearing someone criticize Senna. I agree I feel like because of his death it made him "untouchable" to any criticism and the definitive best of all time. He's top 5 for sure but my #1 will always be Schumi and if I was running a team I'd take Prost over Senna just to spare myself of the headaches. Prost in my opinion is also top 5.
Schumi never even had a decent teammate. Prost beat five world champion teammates. K.Rosberg, Senna, Lauda, Hill and Mansell. Schumacher is not even close to Prost's level.
Let's put it that way : if you actually consider Senna to be the best, you have to chose the driver who pushed him to the limit, outscored him twice in the same team, and beat him on a regular basis. Prost, of course.
Schumacher pushed him so much he couldn't control the car anymore, hence he crashed. Is Schumacher better then?
@@tosehoed123 Difficult to say as Schumacher was on his way up while Senna was on his way down.
Neither was in his prime.
Senna culminated the early 90s, Schumacher in the mid 2000s.
Difficult to judge but Prost in his last season never let Schumacher take liberties and retired as a champion.
Senna was humiliated and died.
Yes, Schumacher was better than Senna, but not as good as Prost.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868
Prost was not as fast as Senna.
@@michaeltrumph121 Indeed. Prost was faster. When he wanted and needed to.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868
Prost was never faster. And don't forget, he had a weight advantage that translates in over half a second.
I think Prost once said that his goal was to get pole with the minimum effort possible and win the race and the slowest possible speed. Goes to show his tactical brilliance and it's this approach that helps maximize points and win world championships. Even during their two seasons in the same car, the championship score was 1-1 but he outscored Senna in both years. Got fewer wins in each of the two seasons but had more podiums and points finishes, highlighting his metronomic consistency. The 1988 Monaco GP is touted as one of Senna's greatest performances but it's pretty ironic that it's a race he crashed out of. And guess who was there to pick up the pieces because he didn't push beyond the limit when there was no need to?
Just a small note on the toxic presence in the team. I think Prost was as bad as Senna. Mansell was effectively forced out of Ferrari because Prost had the management pandering to him, to the extent that he got the team to give him Mansell's car because the latter was performing better. That was followed by his acrimonious departure from Ferrari and then the infamous contract and veto for the 1993 Williams drive. The defending champion Mansell thought it would be better to retire than team up with Prost again as well. And finally, early on in his career he got booted out by Renault, which is crazy given he was a top French driver driving for a top French team.
YOO TOMMO!! DO YOU KNOW WHAT?! IF YOU PICK PROST INSTEAD OF SENNA!! I'LL PICK ALPHATAURI INSTEAD OF REDBULL!!
@@TommoMcCluskey just kidding. Please dont do anything to me
@@N7P7 *calls police*
Someone called Alpha Tauri, Torro Rosso
@@N7P7 do you know in the current point system prey would have won 7 titles and senna only 1 . Alain prost was better in that but senna was way more than titles..
For me Jim Clark is much better than both in terms of raw speed and skill. Most people forget Senna’s selfishness. Jim was still sportsman like while battling Jackie Stewart, Graham Hill, Jack Brabham, and many other legends. He was also killed and does not get as much praise as senna even though he had more raw speed. Just look at 1965 Belgium.
50’s and 60’s half of the grid = rich and bad paydrivers
@@joejohnnys you usually don't battle pay drivers for the championship, and Clark's competition in that regard was certainly not weak
More raw speed??? How do you maintain that? Senna's 1985 Silverstone qualifying lap is 20 seconds faster than Clark's 1967 qualifying lap despite the 1985 version of Silverstone being a tad longer. Don't compare drivers from different eras. It's silly
there is so little between these two legends and so many different angles you can approach the debate from you just can't say one is better than the other - the pure guts, raw speed and always pushing the cars to their limits that likes of senna showed did wonders for the sport, while on the other hand prost's methodical approaches were also fascinating to watch and also did good for the sport.
If you make the decision based on the Senna documentary (which the Senna family was heavily involved in making) then you’re only getting one half of the story. If you want a fuller picture go watvh Aidan Millward’s videos. He explains things well.
I think that if was Prost that died in a racing car probably there would be more people with your same idea. Senna was a great driver, but his death promoted him from great to legend
You dressed in the Merc colors xD
Haha lowkey Merc fan.
Cant forget that Schumacher tried to take out Villeneuve at Jerez in 97
Schumacher is a dirty champion. Just so unsportsman
harryjs2000 agree there, the older I’ve got the more I’ve got to realise the way he won and tried to win just wasn’t right
The 89 and 90 Susukas incident are not comparable. 89 would be a 5 second penalty for prost. Is a type of accident that happens all the time in motorsport. The 90 accident was premeditated (senna told berger what would happen), and he threw his car at prost on porpose at over 200km/h. That was a japanese honda engeneer that quit his job after seeing the telemetry and looking what Senna's did. Today i would imagine that a move like that would get the driver a 1 year ban or maybe worse. It was so ugly, theres no excuses comparing the two inccidents.
Senna doco was so insanely biased - if anyone is getting their info from that, I dismiss them out of hand. I watched that era live.
13:00 you have no idea what you're talking about. The pole position at Suzuka was always on that side of the grid. Senna was playing politics as usual
Senna- Raw speed
Prost- overall driver
And your history on the pole position conspiracy in 1990 is nonsense.
Pole back then was ALWAYS EVERY TRACK on the inside to the first turn. Senna was so desperate he approached Ballestrie to change the pole to the outside because he wanted better grip.
I'm a french F1 fan and there in france Prost isn't hated like he can be in other country. And I'm really happy that someone who's not French says that. I'm not saying that Senna is rubbish but just that Prost is not just a guy who does some political things to win. Senna is a really good raw speed driver but Prost is really fast too and overall, he's the professor he calculates everything every single point and it isn't really simple to drive a formula one like he did and to think about everything.
Sorry for my English I'm not the best
Senna was the dirtiest driver in F1 history. Senna is the only driver in F1 history who intentionally crashed into another driver at 250 kmh to take him out. Also Senna tried to push into the wall or outside the track almost every driver that tried to overtake him.
Prost beat Senna both 1988 and 1989. He got more points both seasons. Only the idiotic points system gave Senna the 1988 title.
Prost is the only F1 driver ever who beat five world champion teammates. Mansell (he demolished him on Ferrari), K.Rosberg, Hill, Senna and Lauda. And then we have complete morons who say that Schumacher (who never had anything but clowns as teammates) is better. During the Scumacher reign he only had to face three absolute top drivers. Hakkinen, Alonso and prime Raikkonen. Prost's competition was super tough all through his career. 1985 alone had seven world champions on the grid.
It is incredibly disingenuous to say that Hill was one of Prost's best team mates and then not mention him as a guy that Schumacher beat, twice. The bias is quite clear.
Schumacher, in only his second season, beat Ricardo Patrese by margins that the likes of Mansell and Piquet couldn't even come close to managing. Schumacher was faster than Piquet as a mid season rookie in 91.
@@Mark-zk3gu Schumacher never had a world champion level teammate. Never. And he was always clear number 1. Prost never had a number 1 status. He simply beat 'em all.
@@detonator2112 he wasn't always clear number 1. He was number 1 because he earned it. He was quicker than Piquet as a rookie lol! the guy who was on par with Mansell.
Nice deflection regarding Damon Hill. Hill was closely matched with Prost in 1993. The points difference (99 vs 69) are mostly due to Hill's 4 technical failures to Prost's 1.
Schumacher beat Hill in 1995 in a slower car. Frank Williams knew it. That's why Hill's contract wasn't renewed
@@Mark-zk3gu I never said Schumacher wasn't a great driver. He definitely was. Hakkinen and Schumacher were easily the best drivers of their generation... and head and shoulders above everyone else. I'm just saying he wasn't at Senna / Prost level. He never proved himself against a legit teammate on equal footing. Irvine and Barrichello were nothing but lackeys and puppets. Prost beat five world champions on equal footing. Senna twice (if you forget the idiotic 1988 points system) There's a big difference.
@@detonator2112 I think you'll find that any driver you put up against Michael in his prime would've been crushed. So what exactly is your point? You can only beat what's put in front of you.
Hakkinen was not THAT good. his performance against Herbert, Brundle, Coulthard showed that while he was in the next tier of drivers, he wasn't at Schumacher level.
One of the most competitive drivers in the 80s was Thierry Boutsen. Barrichello outperformed Boutsen in the same car as a ROOKIE.
I think you'll find that Schumacher's team mates were quite a lot stronger than you think they were.
Absolutely, you want someone that is fast on race day, and has the smarts to take only calculated risks. Dream team for me would be Prost and Clark
Personally it would be Prost and Schumacher, Schumacher also was technical driver, Schumacher is basically Senna and Prost combined, technical driver but one that can drive faster then anyone else.
....I think you may have actually changed my mind 🤔. I only looked at Senna's passion for the sport. But the things I really can't stand about Schumacher and Alonso are present in Senna. You brought up "TOXIC," and...yeah, you're right.
Why do you care if an f1 driver is toxic? are you going to marry them? I don't give a fuck about their personalities, it's racing mate if you care about that go watch big brother.
@@vrs9486 I personally dislike toxic people because they're a burden on EVERYONE ELSE.
Schumi and Senna where arrogant dirty drivers, hard to relate.
And Prost is not toxic then? The man fired from a team TWICE because he couldn't behave properly. And this whole toxicness debate is useless anyway cause it doesn't define anyone's driving talent.
Jo Ramirez said, if they both had a perfect car, Senna couldn't touch Prost.
if my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike. cut the bs, loool stop crying
7:16 Senna v Prost "we're never going to have" Um, Zack, 1988, 1989 we did have it. And it was 1-1. A Championship apiece. In-the-same-car. No offence but it shows a bias and perhaps a lack of knowledge?
Agree. I think the special guest is a bit of a Senna fanboy. I tend to rate Prost fans as connoisseurs.
An F1 title ins't a sprint, but a marathon and Prost was more consistent so in my opinion he was the better driver without having to result to running people off the track instead of racing them.
Prost weighed less, he had an unfair advantage.
@@michaeltrumph121 lmao
@@ivaniii9707
Haven't you read the FIA rules ?!
The problem with 1990 start conspiracy is that the start position wasn't changed, it was the same as previous year.
Think you’re spot on tommo, Personally don’t think Senna would’ve been considered such a legend if he hadn’t passed away at Imola. On the other hand there’s no doubting that he was an immense which could’ve gone on to win more titles but I think we’ve all had this idea that he was the best forced on us. My personal reasoning is that I knew about Senna far before I knew about Lauda who’s life/career is arguably more impressive considering what he did after his Nurburgring crash.
Senna was the best at qualifying
Prost was better at racing
Yeah, if racing involves using the biased FIA to cheat your way to the title. Prost was great but but nowhere near as good a racer as Senna.
@@areebsiddiqui758 With time Senna grew as a driver, we didn't see his full potential so who knows.
@@corey6537 You know, if he'd lived on and won 6 championships like he rightfully would have and been tied with Schumacher on most championships, we wouldn't even be sitting here having this debate.
@@areebsiddiqui758 I agree with you, but from the statistics prost was the better driver
@@corey6537 Well, he'd also made a lot more starts. Not to mention that Senna started in uncompetitive machinery.
I accept prost was a better driver. He outscored senna in 1988 but the points system made senna win the championship
This system didn't respect the risks taken by pilots. It was an unfair rule.
But he knew the points system and could have changed his driving style into more aggressive in order to have less points lost. But guess what? He didn't.
I realize you play the game by the rules in place, but....if today’s scoring system would have been in place throughout Prost’s/Senna’s careers, would this discussion even be taking place. If it had been, Suzuka 1989 would never had happened as Prost would have clinched 2 races earlier. Suzuka 1990 wouldn’t have happened either and Prost probably would have won there. Prost would be an 8X champion (83,84,85,86,88,89,90,93) and Senna would only have 1991. Thoughts???
@@andrewschuster4772 He would have won the 1988 championship, but the other years wouldn't make any difference because he only had to drop two points in 1990 and wouldn't have won the championship and he had to drop no points at all the other years.
@@patepulkkinenvtec2403 it goes beyond just points, but when he earned them. Prost clinches in 89 two races before Suzuka and lets Senna by at chicane. Senna isn’t angry at ‘90 Suzuka and doesn’t run him off. Prost leads flag to flag, then clinches ‘90 WC after the win in Australia.
People say *some particular driver* is the most underrated driver. That goes to say Prost is underrated even as an underrated driver
FINALLY someone shares my opinion that Prost is better than Senna! He’s just better man, I can’t describe it fully but he’s just better...
Prost is a huge champion with an exceptional intelligence. Had he died instead of Senna we wouldn't be debating who's best anymore...
Correction pole position wasn’t changed in 1990 to favour Prost. It was always on that side. It was changed for the following year with the consent of all the drivers but this has been a narrative spread by the biased senna movie
For me the greatest top 5 f1 drivers of all time
1 - Senna
2 - Hamilton
3 - Prost
4 - Schumacher
5 - Lauda
Nah I think that the 2nd spot goes to Clark and the 3rd to Hamilton... Prost is only 4th for me... Behind Schumacher...
@@giovannigiudici4508
Ye Clark was amazing driver
For me : 1- Senna 2- Prost 3- Fangio 4- Schumacher 5- Clark plus Hamilton
interresting but for me is a bit different
1. Jim Clark
2. Prost
3. Senna
4. Ascari
5. Schumacher
No way Hamilton is 2nd, yeah he is an amazing driver but to say he is better then Senna, Fangio and Michael is wrong
I’m old enough to have seen them race in person, 1989 and 1990. Who ever you think was faster is well and fine, and I’m sorry to say but Senna was overly obsessed with winning; never smiled, never relaxed, always high strung, never enjoyed anything outside of cars, which is actually quite sad
Until Senna met Gerhard Berger. Senna and Berger did practical jokes on each other all the time in their McLaren years 1990-1992.
It’s a great comparison from a time when real nuts to butts rivalries existed I like to think that Prost was the perfect tactician racing to perfection for the long run of the championship and Senna was just pure win every race no matter what
0:52 The story was told incorrectly. Senna and Prost had this agreement that whoever started best would be indisputable. Senna started better at the start and had this right in the race. With the Berger accident, the red flag was triggered, but the race continued. On the restart, Prost started better ... there is an interpretation of each one but I am in favor of Senna, since it was not a new race but the same dispute.
@Crixus Mauperthuis When did senna admit he was wrong? It's just a fact, Prost was not loyal to the agreement. Typical of him. Don't be ignorant.
Prost played nicely, like the gentleman of the times. No rough overtaking, no pushing off track, and all in all, more consistent and would deliver better results. Senna is certainly overlooked on, possibly due to the accident.
Well, yea, the eternal discussion. Are we forgetting the fact tha Prost beat Senna twice on the same car? In 88, when Senna won his title, Prost actually scored 18 points more than Senna. Senna won the title on weird regulation technicalities. Next year, he again out scored Senna on the same car. Ok, Senna was faster than Prost. But Piquet was way faster and more agressive than Senna. Do we forget Hungaroring 86, when a frustrated Piquet passed a very slow and defensive Senna, drifted the car and had time to show Senna the finger? And if we got talking about this, Mansell was faster on a lap than all 3, which even Piquet acknowledges.
If we think about it, Prost lost the 83 title by 2 points, the 84 one by half a point, won the 85, 86 ones, scored more points in 88, won the 89 title, was outscored by only 5 points in 90, and won the 93 title at a huge margin. Only 7,5 points and a very weird regulation stood against him being 8 all times world champion. Could Senna have beat that? Who knows? But my hunch is no, because Schumacher was just about to hit the stage. And he was, in my oppinion, as fast as Mansell, agressive as Piquet and smart as Prost.
32 races in equal machinery you tell me:
Driver A: 11 wins, 4 poles, 1 WDC 12 fastest laps, 25 podiums; 3 mechanical DNF's
Driver B: 14 wins, 26 poles, 1 WDC, 6 fastest laps, 18 podiums; 6 mechanical DNFs
All of these stats are close...except for one. Driver B wins in my book.
What about overall points totals, and non mechanical dnfs because that makes a difference
@@Accid3ntProne
Driver A: 2 non mechanical DNFs, 76 pts WDC, 87 points 2nd
Driver B: 3 non mechanical DNFs, 90 pts WDC, 60 pts 2nd
I'm not entertaining the "Button beat Hamilton because at the end of their tenure as teammates he had more total points" argument. I don't think that is even remotely valid considering WDC and WCC don't award for multiple seasons. So points total is a wash hence why I didn't include it but here ya go.
Which is which driver. Sorry I don't the records.
@@abhishekmandal3168 A is Prost, B is Senna
@@TheDoomAboveAll I'd be concerned that 26 poles was only converted into 14 wins with the gap in performance to the rest of the field in the late 80's
I’m on Senna side but I’ve been listening to podcast about Prost and I’m starting to realise how much of a great he was too. Yes I’m on Senna side but the question is would Senna have won more or no? would he have faded out and been looked at like “Another champion and not a great”
There is a difference between being a fan of the driver and who is the better driver. A lot of people in the comments on the Senna side seem to say “I’m a Senna fan”. Of course liking the driver is ultimately the prime thing, but in terms of who was overall better, definitely Prost. Senna has the legacy.
Edit: Also, you used the Senna doc as a reference? Ouch haha
The question was already answered. From the perspective of the team owner, Senna was preferable. McLaren chose him over Prost (by favouring Senna and letting Prost go), Williams took Senna in 1994, knowing that would make Prost leave. However, I would suspect that they did so in part because Senna was more popular, not because he brought better results on the track. Senna's popularity brought money from sponsors and glued the team together. If we look at performance, I think that the way Prost beat Senna was amazing. In any sport, the young talents focus on the champion, trying to emulate every move that he makes and trying to surpass him. Almost always, the young talent finds an edge over the older champion and surpasses him (which is how the sport evolves to a higher level from generation to generation). The notable exceptions are Ali beating Foreman in boxing and Prost beating Senna in F1. These competitors were so high above their rivals that they managed to find ressources to even beat the next generation. Senna developed as a F1 driver by trying to surpass Prost (whom he considered the best). And he hasn't managed to do so. Senna was getting beaten by Schumacher, Schumacher got beaten by Alonso, Alonso got beaten by Hamilton. But Prost did not get beaten by Senna.
Fantastic video! I'm a Senna fan but Prost was a brilliant driver too
I was close to making a video on this before I saw it - great video
Couldn’t agree with you more mate. I don’t know how to write my opinion without the keyboard warriors coming for me, but you covered most of my points very well!
Why I'd pick Prost over Senna.
Because Senna has 65 Pole Positions and 41 victories
Whilst Prost has 33 Pole Positions and 51 victories.
It would be a fair comparison if taking into account just their McLaren years as teammates.
Do you know the stats in those years ?
"Senna documentary"
Fuck no, that's a "Senna bias hype film"
Excuse me? You have an opinion? DISLIKE, UNSUBSCRIBE, REPORT
You should do a video where you list best drivers with only one world championship
Kimi will be on top no need every one knows
Senna is the best by a lot of people and that's no coincidence. Was he a bit reckless? A bit dirty driver? Raw skill? Instinct racing? A bit to proud maybe? We are talking about a Formula 1 driver and Senna just sounds like he has all the characteristics that you would expect from THE best Formula 1 driver of all time.
For me it's Schumacher and Hamilton because they are basically the love children of Senna and Prost. All their great qualities are personified in Schumi and Lewis.
"Why I'd pick Prost over Senna..."
Cuz Prost lived longer?
And made more points than Senna in 1988 and 1989.
@@ziguigui22 in the old system it happened
Senna died for driving overly agressive and request exotic changes on the car steering and suspension, don't go around like it was just bad luck.
As much as it pisses me off the fact that you don't like Alonso, I really rate you as the best F1 youtuber out there for videos like this one. You don't always go for the typically popular opinions and the points that you give are quite solid, even though my opinion about Alain Prost hasn't changed much due to his well-known friendship with "mafia boss" Jean Marie Balestre (video suggestion right here), which helped him clinch the '89 title. But at least this debate made me think about giving more credit to Prost, so keep it up! :)
9:02. Using the senna documentary is not really fair, because they painted Prost as a villain which he most certainly wasn't. And also before Senna there was Fittipaldi and Carlos Pace.
If I was a team boss, I would much rather have a driver with Prost's philosophy of winning at the slowest possible speed. If the car is dominant, the driver won't push the car beyond its limits to win, conserving tires, fuel and parts in the process. If the car isn't dominant, the driver can pick up the pace as needed. Prost was an expert at this style of driving and was thus able to perform with remarkable consistency. That all being said, Senna's raw speed and ability is also very enticing for a team boss. I just see Prost as a safer pair of hands.
loved how you predicted the Sainz move to Ferrari, pure genius, I must say I echoed your opinion to my mates saying you were right, well done mate, completely respect and understand your opinion on Prost over Senna but however disagree a little bit, probably biased from the senna documentary
Prost said he'd close the door well before the race, and yes, Senna's move at the chicane was from waaay too far back.
Senna did admit that he crashed on purpose in 1990
Karma for 89. Prost deserved it.
Prost let the gap open, he knew Ayrton would go.
Senna, Schumacher Both have forgotten that F1 Racing is a sport and not a crusade.
Both lacked sportsmanship.
I however pick Prost by far for his hard work, efficiency, talent, intelligence and sportsmanship.
I also like Nigel Mansell even though he is not as scientific as Prost.
I liked Senna a lot up until Suzuka, I just don’t like that toxic attitude he always had.
I see the same combo of talent, ego and personality in max verstappen, a great talent but too aggressive on track and too selfish for the team chemistry.
Personally i think that Max-Charles will be the new Senna-Prost
Senna was "faster" than Prost... a lot of people will say but based on what? Prost 1986 title on a completely outclassed McLaren is what defined Prost: fast, intelligent, methodical.... The fact that we are still discussing today who was the better driver says a lot. Both were - and it was the biggest rivalry in F1 history, we should be glad to have witnessed that (I did). From the start, Senna wanted to beat the best , and that was Alain Prost. He managed to do that many times, but not without difficulty and at times, questionable tactics. In the end, the two became great friends and both had immense respect for each other.
I think that senna would have won world titles and improve even more as a driver but I still can’t decide between them but Prost was the more mature driver and senna was more daring it’s a difficult choice to make tommo!
Bellof was driving faster than Senna at Monaco 1984.
I think that using the word BETTER to compare these two is unfair for both sides... As Tommo said Prost has been a very good team player and, in my opinion, he has given McLaren a fundamental help to reach the level of dominance they have have achieved during the late '80s and the early '90s . But, as we seen, Senna has been a dominant driver himself... Thanks to his amazing talent and determination to reach his goals. I think that neither of the two were "better" and they have contributed in different ways to the success of the team, pushing each other to the limit.
Of course they were fighting for the championship in the same car in '88 and '89 and, of course, they had those famous crashes in Japan...
In 1989, even if the Senna's overtake was maybe a little bit ambitious, I think that Prost was looking for the contact for ending the title fight right there. But then, after winning the race (because he was so fucking amazing) and the title he has been penalized by Jean-Marie Balrstre for cutting the chicane (just bullshit in my opinion).
And the following year (even if he shouldn't have done what he has done) he had the right to give Prost and Balestre what they gave him the year before...
(English is not my first language, I apologize for eventual mistakes...)
Amen.
Same with me dude. Prost actually beat Senna both times. He scored more points over Senna in both 88' and 89' but stupid rule gave Senna the title. If you look at Prost's career its actually better than Senna's. Not only did Prost beat every single teammate in his career including Senna who he beat in both 88' and 89' he actually had far better and more challenging teammates. People always bash Prost how he was a coward but he was the one who suggested Senna to Ron Dennis meanwhile Senna didn't want Derek Warwick in Lotus because he knew he was quick and vetoed it saying the team didn't have enough resources for two drivers which is bs... Alain won against so many teammates who were highly regarded and world champions. Rene Arnoux, Niki Lauda, Keke Rosberg, Stefan Johannson, Nigel Mansell, Jean Alesi, Damon Hill. Out of 7 drivers I mentioned, 4 of them were either already champions when he beat them or went on to win their titles later. The only champion Senna faced was Prost himself and later Mika for last 3 races in 93". And people call Prost a coward can you believe? Pole positions are majority of the debate of when it comes to rating Senna as a driver yet they don't mean anything. Pole/win ratio matters and out of the two Prost has a far better one which means he was better on Sundays than Senna. Senna 65/41, Prost 33/51. Also every team he worked with said he would bring the car back in top condition whilst Senna would bring it destroyed with crunched gears. It takes skill to win titles and save your car as many people should know. Prost was competitive in F1 from 1981 right until the end of his career. That is a 12 season span of competitivness. Majority of drivers are lucky if they get two seasons. The only year I would take out was 91' where he didn't win a single race but got podiums because the car was bad. The man lost out to being a 7 time WDC by 2.5 points + the stupid rule where he actually scored more points in 88' than Ayrton. Alain Prost without a doubt is the greatest all-round driver of all time and I would pick him over Senna in my team any day. Senna was a more charismatic figure and bigger personality without a doubt. He was lightining fast aswell the fastest qualifier of all time but lets face it his death brought him the status he has today.
Prost also nearly beat Senna in a Ferrari
There's another point that should be added, Prost had very few racing accidents and I can't recall any unforced racing error. Senna's accidents, gosh I think people lost count. Driving at the limit and not getting into accidents is an important factor to consider who is GOAT.
@@mohshinaziz5983 Alain Prost pole win conversion pretty much puts him near the top of my list. The man was immaculate. The only reason why he loses out to my GOAT is because he was nothing special in the wet. Its his only weakness. But then again he explains why. When you have a friend crashing into you and flying over you because of rain flashbacks will always be there.
@@harroldinab he also had no poles that year and won from 13th on the grid in Mexico. Superior racecraft.
Prost won 51 GP's,
Senna won 41 GP's
Tough Decision!
Pole positions
Senna: 65
Prost: 33
Which means Senna lost out 24 victories and Prost gained 18 of them. Prost shone when it mattered. He didn't bother over some one lap...
@@srxt6758 not only that...
Fastest laps: Prost 41
Senna 19
When they were both at McLaren:
Prost 12, Senna 6
Senna was faster in qualifying, Prost was faster during the race
I know i'm about to get murdered i the comments... but it annoys me slightly when people consider Senna better than Shumi or Hamilton. Hes a brilliant driver and one of the best of all time but look both Michael an Lewis are better and that's just a fact. Don't call me a Senna hater cause I love Senna but facts are facts.
Just waiting for the fanboys
Anything wrong with being a fanboy?
@@areebsiddiqui758 as long as your not a Schumacher fanboy
@@harryjs2000 No I'm not, but that's irrelevant. You people treat being a fan as some sort of disdainful thing. Imagine how boring F1 would be if the drivers had no fan support. And there's nothing wrong with being biased towards your favourite driver. All part and parcel of the game and really adds to the fun. But some people, the fun police as you might call them are bent on ruining it for all of us.
@@areebsiddiqui758 i mean the salty ones
I'm a senna fan, but i recognise prost's immense skills, and i also know that senna sometimes took stupid risks overtaking other drivers
In isolation, the 1990 Japanese GP seems very out of character for Senna and looks pretty bad, but I think with context it makes more sense. Senna hated the political side of F1. Watching clips of him arguing with Balestre, it's clear that that side of it frustrated Senna and really took a lot out of him. Prost "the professor," on the other hand was brilliant at dealing with the political side and had Balestre firmly in his corner. In the 1989 Japanese GP, where Senna needed to win to be in contention for the championship, Prost crashed into him. Despite winning the race anyway, Senna was given a bogus penalty that meant he was out of the championship. So, in his eyes, the previous year he'd been robbed of the chance to beat Prost fairly by political nonsense and favoritism, and the incident that caused that was Prost hitting him. In 1990, having qualified on poll, he (and the other drivers in a vote) disagreed with which side of the track pole position was on. However, yet again, he got screwed by Balestre. Knowing that if Prost didn't finish he would be world champion, knowing that his pole position spot would put him on the inside for the first corner, and knowing what had happened to him last year, I think he saw the opportunity to get his revenge against Prost and Balestre by playing their game just this once. And so, he did what he did. It was petty, calculating, and dangerous, but I can see where he was coming from.
Many things make him the legend he is today, the incredible pace, his unique driving style, how beloved he was in Brazil, and his tragic death being among them. I think one of the main things that makes him such a legend though is the exact character that you take issue with. He was one of the most emotional drivers in F1. His passion for racing was unmatched, but he was also a lot more hot-headed than Prost, a lot more sensitive. The fact that he hated the numbers games and the politics and that he would get so upset about that stuff and about losing may have made him a less good team player, for sure, but I think a lot of us share his frustrations with the politics and the biases and the press and the gap between the teams and all the other things that get in the way of pure racing, just cars and drivers on a track. Being able to better cope with that stuff would have made him a better team player, but his singular focus made him relatable for all the fans who want to see pure racing. It also gives him this elevated aura, a man with a singular focus, there to do one thing, and better than anybody else in the world at it.
I'd take Prost over Senna too even though Senna was the more exciting driver.
I agree with you I think id have Prost mainly cause Senna pushed it too much which would end in crashes and if I needed consistent points scored and also race wins I feel Prost was just ahead. No disregard to Senna I just prefer Prost
It's not a hot take really, two of the greatest F1 drivers ever 🤷🏻♂️
Let us face it. People idolize Senna. He is God. Jesus. The chosen one. He died. Therefore he is immortal. This is psychology here. Gilles Villeneuve is a similar story. He died racing too. Also Prost is very humble. He is alive. He never risked his life too much to score points. He was clever. Thoughtful. Calculating. He did not like the rain. Senna and Villeneuve did not seem too worried by rain. It never really bothered them so much somehow. Everyone likes the big tough super hero. Prost isn't that guy.
I’ll give you that but Hamilton is better than Vettel END OF
Thought you were a McLaren fanboy do you should like Lewis Hamilton don’t have to agree
I just had a stroke reading the last sentence
The Video is called Why Vettel is better h to an Hamilton