Fangio vs Senna vs Schumacher

[Furinkazen]

it is impossible to make this comparison.

but you can't ignore that senna was someone extra special, the laps he did sometimes...

By that logic you can say Fangio was extra special for winning 5 world titles at a time when if you made a mistake in a gruelling 2hr race at 200mph you would be dead, and Schumacher was able to be ruthlessly quick and determined and the almost perfect racer - strategic, clinical, and capable of whatever a race required.

So yes it is impossible to make a comparison.

 

[gamer111]

Some of you say you never saw Fangio so i decided to look for a race:

 

[Monatsende]

Some say Stefan Bellof, born 1957, died 1985 at Spa Franchorchamps (Eau Rouge). He was considered of being one of the most talented race drivers. Only the good die young...

Thread title is very limited. And I hope this will not end flamewar-ish.

 

[DK]

It's unfortunate Bellof never got much of a chance in F1.

 

[Dotini]

So there you have it. Nuvolari. Fangio. Clark. Senna. Schumacher. The giants of the sport, and to say that any one of them was better than the other 4 would perhaps be doing a great disservice. They were regarded as the best of their times, so from my point of view, they were all equally great.

I agree in general with this. But these giants must always be seen in the context of their closest competitors who measured their greatness.

For instance, Jim Clark was defined by his clear domination of Dan Gurney, John Surtees, Graham Hill, Jack Brabham and the rising Jackie Stewart. And it didn't hurt that he saw off AJ Foyt at Milwaukee and Indy.

 

[mister dog]

It's unfortunate Bellof never got much of a chance in F1.

He was equally as impressive as Senna in Monaco '84.

Here's my top 5 of drivers i actually saw racing since '92 (on the telly):

1: Senna

2: Alonso
3: Raikkonen
4: Schumacher
5: Montoya

 

[Chris123]

Different times different types of driving, fundamentally the same in that they all drove fast but other than that you really can't compare different eras. I think they all have their own strengths. Senna was a god when it came to one super perfect qualifying lap, he was determined and had a unique intriguing character. Schumacher was the master of pure racing and the best out of the 3 in terms of race craft in my opinion. His demoralising high race pace, lap after lap, like a machine, pin point accuracy. He was like a mix of Senna's speed and aggressiveness, and Prost's cunning and smart race tactics. He would be just as able to race flat out at the end of the race as he was at the beginning, making him the benchmark in modern F1 for driver conditioning and ability.

Finally I mean, what more can you say about Fangio other than he was a ballsy b******, made driving look like poetry, won 5 world championship's in a time where you would expect to see at least 5 deaths in one season I imagine. The most talented driver ever? I'm not so sure, but what he did in the circumstances in which he did surely make him a top 5 of all time. All 3 kings of their respective era's.

 

[doblocruiser]

Difficult to say. Never saw a lot of Fangio (will do some research). I think every F1 Championship has something that makes him great. It all depends if you like the caracter as well/or not. Technically briliant or emotional brilliant.

I prefer the ones like Villeneuve or Montoya.


Talking about great drivers: George Boillot

 

[FormulaKimball]

It's funny, after watching "Senna" I actually gained more respect for Prost - I didn't think the movie was overly negative about him, maybe in '89 and '90 but that passed and after a while it was clear Prost had become an old friend (hence pallbearer). All respect to Senna, I think he is amazing (goes without saying), but in the same amount of time that Senna got his 3 championships plus 2 second places in the same team, Prost got 3 championships plus 4 second places in 3 different teams. Plus a fourth championship in a fourth team. All I'm getting at is "The Professor" should be up there with Senna and Fangio and Schumi and Clark.

Schumacher though I think is in his own league no matter how you look at it. His sheer pace and strength and endurance at qualifying speeds is something few other greats could have handled (certainly not Fangio, again with all due respect). Coulthard is known to be one of the fittest drivers yet even he said that sometimes he was about to cough up a lung and/or crash if Schumi didn't slow down. When you consider that not only did Schumi get 7 championships and 2 second places, but he never finished a complete season lower than 5th (due to missing *6* of the GPs in '99), apart from his 1997 DQ and apart from his return to what was a really crappy Mercedes team... pretty astonishing results when you're talking well over 200 races.

Fangio is a legend, and what he achieved took great talent, finesse, and courage over his amazing run of seven complete seasons for a total of 50 or 60 races. Finishing every season first or second, unbelievable. He's also an original, so that balances out the relative brevity of those seasons. Apparently he even broke his neck in 1952 (the season he was out of completely). Four of his championships were *after* that.

So for me, the differences in the eras kind of even things out, and ultimately the results speak for themselves. Senna and Clark certainly would have achieved more had they lived... so it's hard for me to put them in any particular order along with Prost. But Schumacher and Fangio belong at the top.

 

[HKS racer]

Scumi won 5 championships with Ferrari.
Winning with Ferrari is always more difficoult than winning with other teams for several reasons.
Ask Alonso if you need further informations.

 

[SpeedyishOlly]

Scumi won 5 championships with Ferrari.
Winning with Ferrari is always more difficoult than winning with other teams for several reasons.
Ask Alonso if you need further informations.

Michael Schumacher's Ferrari team was pretty much a dream team though.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Scumi won 5 championships with Ferrari.
Winning with Ferrari is always more difficoult than winning with other teams for several reasons.
Ask Alonso if you need further informations.

Alonso wasn't at Ferrari when Schumacher was, what's your point?

 

[mirial]

No mention of Gilles Villeneuve? Some pundits reckon he was as fast as Senna.

All great drivers seem to have a similar level of raw talent, but that only manifests itself in F1 with application, depth, intellect and technical understanding which Senna and Schumacher had in bucket loads.

Mister Dog mentions Raikkonen and Montoya (whose name always ruffles feathers for some reason). These two have great raw talent especially Montoya, but I think they lack the other facets that Schumacher and Senna were well equipped with.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

It's nigh impossible to compare F1 drivers across more than a decade, especially drivers around before the 80s.

So leaving anyone out prior to 1980... it's still bloody impossible to choose, but for me it's either Alonso or Senna. Prost, Button, Gilles, Schumacher, Hakkinen, and maybe Raikkonen and are all elites to me, but Alonso and Senna stand above all else. I desperately want to see Alonso in something other than a Ferrari, because I honestly believe he's a tiny bit better than Senna.

Dear lord I'm going to get ravaged for this post

 

[Spurgy 777]

It's nigh impossible to compare F1 drivers across more than a decade, especially drivers around before the 80s.

So leaving anyone out prior to 1980... it's still bloody impossible to choose, but for me it's either Alonso or Senna. Prost, Button, Gilles, Schumacher, Hakkinen, and maybe Raikkonen and are all elites to me, but Alonso and Senna stand above all else. I desperately want to see Alonso in something other than a Ferrari, because I honestly believe he's a tiny bit better than Senna.

Dear lord I'm going to get ravaged for this post

I haven't seen anything from Alonso or Senna that would put them above all the other top drivers.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm going to stick my neck out about Senna. Here goes...

Of all the drivers I've ever seen he was one of (if not the) most talented in terms of finding the maximum grip wherever it was on the track. Unfortunately his belief in his invincibility and his sometimes-angry impetuousness was a serious serious flaw. Some blame his strong religious sense for that but I think that even if he'd been atheist he would have still considered himself invincible.

Watching Ron Dennis speak the other day about Senna's regret after he crashed into Prost (a saga that the Senna film dramatised beautifully if very one-sidedly) spoke, to me at least, of Senna's internal torment between his feelings as a man and his feelings as a driver.

So... what makes a good driver in the context of this thread? Charisma, ultimate skill corner-by-corner or the ability to plan, manage, and to know when to cede?

For me Fangio had all those things AND could light a cigarette one-handed around Spa. 'Nuff said

And WHERE is Nuvolari?!

 

[Saidur_Ali]

Ayrton Senna.

 

[Peasantslayer]

It would be interesting to see where the best F1 drivers would stand if it was as easy to get into as football for example, I'd say Alonso simply because I think he is the most complete driver at a point in the sport when drivers are trained from such a young age and the demands are so high, in the old days (50s/60s) all you needed was money, balls and a bit of practice.

 

[HKS racer]

Alonso wasn't at Ferrari when Schumacher was, what's your point?

What's the point of your question? I don't get it.
Regarding Ferrari results what I see is Schumi with 5 titles, Raikkonen 1, Alonso 0 of 2, Prost 0 of 4, Massa 0 Alesi 0 etc...

Who will ever win 5 titles with Ferrari again? Not even Jesus if you ask me.

 

[Hun200kmh]

And WHERE is Nuvolari?!

Doing cloud races in Heaven against Gilles, while Senna, Fangio and Clark try to explain to newly arrived Brabham that Alfa Romeo versus Ferrari is the only kind of red mist allowed up there

 

[Chris123]

What's the point of your question? I don't get it.
Regarding Ferrari results what I see is Schumi with 5 titles, Raikkonen 1, Alonso 0 of 2, Prost 0 of 4, Massa 0 Alesi 0 etc...

Who will ever win 5 titles with Ferrari again? Not even Jesus if you ask me.

I think his point is that between 2001-2004 the Ferrari was pretty much unstoppable. That's not taking anything away from Schumacher as he was the best all round driver at that point. But when talking about that period I think most people overlook the fact that Schumacher did something that pretty much what no other top driver in history did. He moved to a inferior team when he could have taken better options, spent 5 years working his ass off, getting people to join the team and make it a title winning force. It was a huge gamble and many don't credit the guy enough in my opinion, he spent 5 years never knowing whether he would even make it to 3 WC's, that takes a lot of courage. I couldn't imagine Senna staying with Ferrari that long and doing what Schumacher did.

 

[Peasantslayer]

It was a huge gamble and many don't credit the guy enough in my opinion, he spent 5 years never knowing whether he would even make it to 3 WC's, that takes a lot of courage. I couldn't imagine Senna staying with Ferrari that long and doing what Schumacher did.

You just reminded me of a Senna fanboy comment that I saw, if Senna had walked away from the crash he would have won a couple of titles with Williams then moved to Mclaren and won a couple and finally onto Ferrari to dominate in the early 2000s... "9 WDCs were definitely on the cards."

 

[HKS racer]

I think his point is that between 2001-2004 the Ferrari was pretty much unstoppable. That's not taking anything away from Schumacher as he was the best all round driver at that point. But when talking about that period I think most people overlook the fact that Schumacher did something that pretty much what no other top driver in history did. He moved to a inferior team when he could have taken better options, spent 5 years working his ass off, getting people to join the team and make it a title winning force. It was a huge gamble and many don't credit the guy enough in my opinion, he spent 5 years never knowing whether he would even make it to 3 WC's, that takes a lot of courage. I couldn't imagine Senna staying with Ferrari that long and doing what Schumacher did.

Exactly, it's 100% his merit building a winning team out of nothing. I remember 1996 when Newey made a super Williams but Micheal was able to win 3 races, than 1997 final drama, 1998 a great year ruined by Spa episode, 1999 Silverstone crash and finally 2000. The rest is history. No other driver achieved similar results with Ferrari, which is, with all the due respect for british teams, the most iconic team in the world.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Lauda did.



Lasted less, because:

a) Lauda can be a PITA at times;

b) Enzo was alive and was no pushover;

 

[HKS racer]

Lauda did.



Lasted less, because:

a) Lauda can be a PITA at times;

b) Enzo was alive and was no pushover;

Lauda is lucky to be alive so I don't blame him of being a PITA. Lauda was a very good driver but not at the level of Senna/Schumacher which are for me the best drivers ever. I can't comment on Fangio since I never seen him and he drove completely different cars, basically he made a different sport.

 

[Hun200kmh]

Hummm ... I don't know about that. The way I see it and regardless of the rewriting of history in Rush, during his prime Lauda had no equal. Just the fact that he goes away and returns to win his 3rd championship almost 10 years later is mindblowing. And with the almighty Alain Prost (also in his prime, wasn't a rookie) as his teammate. Lauda isn't a likeable chap, but he is one of the all time greatest. and he brought Ferrari from the irrelevancy of the late 60's to their glorious 70's.

So yeah, I'd put my money on Lauda if Schumacher and Senna did show up to race him in the seventies. Besides, ruthless drivers as both were I suspect they wouldn't live to see the end of a full season.

 

[Chris123]

You just reminded me of a Senna fanboy comment that I saw, if Senna had walked away from the crash he would have won a couple of titles with Williams then moved to Mclaren and won a couple and finally onto Ferrari to dominate in the early 2000s... "9 WDCs were definitely on the cards."

Senna fanboy? Not getting you there, but 9 world championships? Senna was great but your kidding yourself there, he had one, maybe two world championships left in him at best. He was 34 years old at the time of his death, past his best. He was also losing the motivation to race in F1. He would have retired by around 98 I reckon, but we'll never know for sure I guess.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Senna fanboy? Not getting you there, but 9 world championships? Senna was great but your kidding yourself there, he had one, maybe two world championships left in him at best. He was 34 years old at the time of his death, past his best. He was also losing the motivation to race in F1. He would have retired by around 98 I reckon, but we'll never know for sure I guess.

No need to be sniffy, just because there was no semi-colon I'm sure you knew what he was saying.

EDIT: I was being just as sniffy, sorry Semi-colon added for max effect

You just reminded me of a Senna fanboy comment that I saw; if Senna had walked away from the crash he would have won a couple of titles with Williams then moved to Mclaren and won a couple and finally onto Ferrari to dominate in the early 2000s... "9 WDCs were definitely on the cards."

Is that better?

@Peasantslayer I've seen similar claims, it's hard to disprove (obviously) because one could presume that Senna had a good chance of getting himself into most of the Championship-winning teams from 95 to his retirement. I could genuinely imagine he'd have won another couple for Williams if he'd stayed although, so Jakobi tells us, a move to Ferrari was already on the cards at a record $22M per-season. History doesn't tell us what Flavio Briatore might have made of that or what money Benetton might have found. They'd already "piranha-ed" Eddie Jordan on Schumacher in order to build a genuine dream-team. Surely Flavio would have wanted Senna too. My own opinion is that Senna would still have gone to Ferrari and raced against Schumacher. Schumacher would therefore not have been allowed to join Ferrari (by Senna).

That possibly precludes Williams from then being able to take their later championships as Senna would, in my opinion, have moved on after failing to take the '94 championship, even Williams themselves admitted the car wasn't as strong as previous years under the new regulations. Some observers say that was the reason that Senna was pushing as hard as he did through '94.

So... Senna would have taken more championships, almost certainly... but Schumacher would still have taken some others.

For so many reasons I wish Senna had lived, not least to see his Ferrari wheel to wheel with Schumacher, the Benetton driver who never got the Ferrari deal.

 

[sems4arsenal]

And WHERE is Nuvolari?!

This

 

[Chris123]

No need to be sniffy, just because there was no semi-colon I'm sure you knew what he was saying.

No I just genuinely didn't know he was meaning to quote someone else. That's usually it works, when you quote someone you use them. It came across as if he meant what he was saying from his opinion.