You are right, but the rules were known at the time. 1988, in particular, was exceptional because both drivers came close to scoring the maximum number of points possible under those rules. If all races had always counted towards the Championship, Prost would have seven titles, not four.
@@WhenF1WasRealI would offer that it would have been 8 titles - especially if today’s point system was always in place. Prost would have clinched ‘88 before Suzuka, so he would never have needed to shut the door at the chicane. He would have taken the ‘89 title too…the Ferrari would probably have won in Suzuka because 1) he was on a hot streak, and 2) Senna would not have been pissed off. Imagine Prost with 8 titles and Senna with only 1.
Prost beat five world champion teammates. Senna (actually outscored Senna both 88 and 89) K.Rosberg Hill Lauda Mansell (totally destroyed him at Ferrari and Mansell threatened to quit F1) But they never made a Hollywood movie of him. That makes the difference.
Seems a stretch. Senna was clearly faster when the two were at McLaren. Rosberg was unable to drive a car which had been developed for Prost and Lauda and was handed his backside by Prost Hill was a newbie and contractual number two in the team Lauda beat Prost to the title in 84, despite Prost being marginally faster, in 1985 Lauda had lost interest for the most part and was just collecting his pay cheque Mansell was generally beaten by all of his team mates across a season, although I'll give you Prost had the clearest margin. As I said in the video, he deserves more credit than he is given, but I would suggest that if Hollywood were to make a blockbuster called 'Prost' its byline would be 'Good guy gone bad'
@@WhenF1WasReal The two years they were at McLaren Prost outscored Senna by 13 points. Sure Senna was faster because he was always driving on the limit. Prost never did that. His driving approach was completely different. Never took the start very hard, drove the first three laps very conservatively, was a master of saving the car from tech.issues, rarely made any mistakes. This kind of thing is almost like someone said after they lost the football game 0-1 that "hey, they made so many more beautiful dribbles on the field... they deserved to win". The fact is that Prost OUTSCORED Senna. That's how drivers are measured in this sport... by points. The rest is just fanboy speculation. Sure I agree that Senna had more pure speed and he was more heroic, looked better, was taller, etc. But he never, ever beat Prost when they were teammates. That is a fact. You're right about K.Rosberg though. I've watched his 1985 drives and he was insanely fast. 5 tech. DNF's from 1st place in 1985. Kyalami 1985 charge is amazing. But he couldn't adapt to a understeery car. But still... Prost beat him too, there's no denying this fact.
@@detonator2112 Rosberg said during 1986 that he believed himself to be the fastest driver in the world before he came to McLaren and after the season ended expressed the view that he was privately amazed how Prost had managed to win a championship in that car. Rosberg's swansong in the final race at Adelaide is a fitting tribute to his memory.
@@jameshogan6142 Rosberg is probably the most underrated champ in F1 history. Won the title with 200hp underpowered car. Sure, with reliability and consistency. But what impresses me the most is that he managed to get 4 wins in the next 3 years with those total sh*tbox cars. Even Patrick Head admitted that the 1984 chassis was a disaster. And the 1983 car was seriously underpowered while the turbos got more reliable. Made Mansell look like total amateur in 1985 too. People say he was a "street circuit specialist". Nope. Those were the only circuits he was competitive with those cars. 1985 is different. The car was fast but not reliable. It was very bad career move from him to go to McLaren. He wasn't adaptive and was just as hard on cars as Mansell was. Rarely made any mistakes though (except for Long Beach 1983 which he would have won without attempting way too cocky overtake on Tambay). Keke was one hell of a driver. Watch the 1978 Silverstone non-GP race which he won in a crappy Theodore in torrential rain. That car was basically a F2 car which didn't even qualify to the races in dry. Kyalami charge 1985 after he hit the oil spot is totally insane as well. Frank Williams said he was the most spectacular driver he ever had. Totally underrated.
Prost had a divisor in his career which was 1984 season where Lauda taught him to be effective without taking unnecessary risks. Before he was super fast but committed mistakes. From 1985 on he became “the Professor” and he was able to outscore the Williams in 1986 season which I consider his most brilliant title. He outscored Senna twice driving the same car, without being the fastest. This shows how smart he is. For those who followed F1 in the 80s, we know Alain Prost was the greatest of all drivers.
I think you make a very good point. In 1984 Prost was the Senna to Lauda's Prost (if you see what I mean) despite being faster he lost the title battle. Learning from the old master undoubtedly made a difference to the way he approached racing thereafter
Lauda beat him to the title by the tiniest margin possible: less than a point! But Prost learned a lesson the hard way. And he applied that lesson through his entire career. He truly is one of the Greats.
A very one sided view. Complete nonsense to blame the "don't overtake me or we crash" syndrome on Prost, who merely tried to clumsily effectuate his threat not to give in to Senna's bullying tactics, such as Senna's attempts at Estoril in 1988, when he squeezed Prost nearly into a wall. To blame the current misery in F1 sportsmanship on Prost is at best misguided, but particularly since the Senna documentary it seems Prost's legacy is tainted. In any case, the Senna documentary unjustly didn't do Prost any favours by being very much a one sided, black-and-white story, failing to unravel the true roots of the conflict and completely missing Senna's darker side. Strangely the documentary also didn't pay much attention to their budding friendship after Prost's last season in '93, which I find the most intriguing part of their relationship. The footage was absolutely stunning though.
Given that the whole video was to prove the Prost is unfairly overlooked because of one poor decision, I'm not sure where this is one-sided. By being the first to wipe out a rival deliberately, Prost started a trend which Senna and Schumacher in particular, ramped up to the levels we see today. As you're probably already aware, Senna's Estoril squeeze on Prost was payback for a similar move Prost had pulled earlier in the weekend. Yes, they had on track battles, but go back through the video footage and you'll find very little which is contentious - never mind bullying. The real falling out came not over bullying, but at San Marino that year, when Senna passed Prost into Tosa after the restart, despite the two having an agreement not to battle into turn one. That whole disagreement almost merits another video of its own though.
First of all "Senna the movie" is exactly what it's named. It's a movie, not a documentary. It follows the rule and logic of a drama with a protagonist and an antagonist. The good has to fight the evil. This movie, made by Senna fans, has had a very cruel intention and succeded well in fullfilling it. What a shame. I'm 100 % sure, if Senna still lived, he wouldn't aprove this dirty flick.I'm also quite sure, Senna loved and needed Prost. Prost was the only one he could compete with, who was on his level, and Senna seemed to be addicted to competition and winning.
1. Your tale completely overlooks that Honda were not giving equal engines to Prost, this was even publicly denounced by Ron Dennis at the time 2. You fail to mention that both in 1988 and 1989 Prost actually outscored Senna; it was only after applying the "best 11 results" rule that Senna wins on points the 1988 championship. 3. Prost did not "intentionally crashed into senna" in 1989. This is oversimplifying what is a legitimate defensive manouver against a legitimate overtaking manouver. In other words, a RACING INCIDENT. Biased video. 4. You conveniently forget to mention that in 1990 Alain Prost totally outscored and outperformed Nigel Mansell. Biased video. 5. The action that tarnished the reputations of the sport and were blamed by Jackie Stewart and the other legends was Senna's 1990 crash into Prost, not 1989 which was not seen in the same light. Biased video. Your bias detracts from the quality of your videos.
Prost also beat four other world champions. K.Rosberg (who was insanely fast in previous year at Williams and made Mansell look like an amateur), Lauda, Hill and Mansell. No other driver has such record in F1, not even close. Well Mansell had six world champion teammates (Mario Andretti, Prost, Hakkinen, Hill, Piquet) and HE LOST TO ALL OF THEM.
I have yet to forgive Mansell for running across the Atlantic so he didn't have to face Prost in the SAME car. I wished it happened: Prost and Mansell at Williams. I think they would have pulled a "McLaren sweep" winning all but one race on the schedule.
1) 8:08 - Prost had indeed outperformed Senna both in 1988 and 1989. Senna got the 1988 championship while scoring LESS points (94 to 105) than Prost. However only the best 11 results counted for the championship. 2) To be crowned 1989 Driver's Champion Senna needed to win both Japanese and Australian Grand Prix WHILE Prost had to score worse than 4th place (which happened to be his worst finishing place throughout the whole season) in both of the races. Therefore, despite his disqualification, Senna's hopes were at least doubtful. 3) The assessment that Prost unlawfully block a legitimate overtake attempt by Senna is at least dishonest. Every camera take shows Senna could not possibly go through Casio Triangle carrying his speed. And Prost had the position to take a defensive line to cover his position.
the part where honda were favoring senna was also confirmed by ron dennis, not that it wasn't evident from races such as the mexican gp, which, ironically, might have contributed to senna having more mechanical failures that season. prost was definitely the better driver, and the fact that a year later he fought for the title at all despite having a far slower car than the mclaren proves it
1) The points system was known before the season ran, and it didn''t take either driver long to realise that they whoever won the most races would take the 1988 championship - Prost said as much before the Monza race. Senna prevailed because he won eight races to Prost's seven, both maxed out their second places to come within 9 and 12 points, respectively, of the season's theoretical maximum score. Senna outperformed Prost in 1988, even if the margins were fine. 2) In 1989 Senna would have been champion if he won the last two races irrespective of where Prost finished, because Prost would need to drop a third and second place if he had finished second each time. They would have finished on equal points and Senna would have taken the title by virtue of winning more races. As he didn't win in Adelaide, Prost's foul in Suzuka was actually irrelevant to the championship result. However, Senna lost three races from winning positions as a result of mechanical failure that year (US, Canada and Italy) which was what actually cost him the title.
1) Every driver should play by the rules of the sport. The rules stated that the worst results would be dropped, therefore, wins would matter most, so they were both racing for wins. Consistency didn't matter as much, therefore the drivers shouldn't be prioritizing consistency over wins. Senna did outperform Prost in 1988, albeit by a very small margin. 2) There was 1 Race in the entire 1989 season where Prost finished ahead of Senna by his own merit - the French Grand Prix. In all other races that Prost finished in front of Ayrton, either his car broke, or someone else crashed into him, when he was ahead of Alain. 3) Even If Senna wasn't going to make the corner, that only makes his intentional crash look even less necessary.
People chose Senna's side and never heard Prost's. Also, remember 1990. Senna crashed into Prost on purpose. How come Senna's legacy wasn't tainted? Because Senna died and became a legend. Prost lived and, so, people still want to insult him.
anZiesemer-ev5uy 0 seconds ago Everybody just bringing up point systems (not fair 11 best results in 80s), his consistency, fast laps….as to justification for Prost been remembered as one of the genius. Here is a few facts to say he is not: 1- didn’t run well on rain 2- not good on qualifying 3-had to have the perfect car to perform. Look his embarrassment in 91 when he was fired from Ferrari and spun on warm up lap. 4- average on street circuits 5- most important- he had a weight and size advantage over senna and Mansell. 8kg is a big difference. Nowadays people remove paint and until 1995 weight of the driver was not counted. This is a huge and unfair advantage, but like the 11 best results. Rules are rules. He was a great driver but not Genius level.
As you said, Senna and Prost both had different approaches. What find wild is how many poles Senna had, but Prost would rack up fastest race laps. Senna only had 11 FL in his career while Prost had 41.
I think Mexico 1990 best exemplifies this. Prost realised his style would never get enough heat into qualifying tyres to get him towards the front of the grid, so concentrated exclusively on race setup. He started from 13th on the grid, but by virtue of his perfect racing setup he blew past everyone and won the race by a country mile. A stunning drive which was somewhat overshadowed by Mansell's monstrous pass on Berger around the outside of Peraltada to reclaim second place at the death
The sport is called "racing" and not "qualifying." Senna has long been my favorite. I bought my last motorcycle to justify buying a Senna replica helmet to wear. He was the most exciting driver I ever saw. Prost is the driver I'd hire to lead my race team, and is, IMHO, the best driver of all time. That exact stat you mentioned is what convinced me.
One of the former Engineers at McLaren during that era stated that if you put Prost in a car that was perfectly set up for Prost, and you put Senna in a car that was perfectly set up for Senna, Prost wins EVERY TIME, and it is not close. Of course dialing a set up perfectly rarely happens. Senna had a superior ability to adjust and adapt. When "in the zone" Prost was just phenomenal when in his best groove. They were very different drivers. Senna had the best ability to adjust. This is why he was so good in qualifying, and in the rain. He could get up to an unknown limit almost instantly, while other drivers have to spend multiple laps to progressively work up to the limit. Prost was faster in race trim when everything was working for him, but he did not have as much ability to work around issues, and driver around and beyond limitations of the car. The reality is driving around car problems, even minor, is more the norm, than not, hence Sennas success. If I could pick a driver in the modern era to extract the most from a modern car (where setups are much more optimal and consistent) I would pick Prost every time. He would be the superior driver.
@@shooter7a Can't disagree with anything you said. Is there a debate about the adjustments made during a race vs. qualifying? Especially back then, you could do a few laps, come in, do a few more, come in again, wait until the last minute and do a legendary lap. Whereas in the race, you either get it right beforehand, or you drive around it. Prost's race success leads me to believe he was plenty good at driving around problems, and other drivers. Prost was excellent in the wet as well, but obviously, Senna was mythical in the rain. Really, either driver is the correct choice for your #1, and very few #1's can be teammates, if any.
@@flugplatz21 I am talking about how you find the limit. Most drivers work their way up to the limit progressively. Even a top level driver, when he is faced with new conditions (say a radically new set up..a new formula, a new track) might take 4-8 laps to find his limit. Senna could literally do a few corners, and by turn 3 was at his limit. It was inexplicable. But his ultimate limit was not as fast as people think. Where Senna won a lot of races was when conditions changed (say a new set of tires, a change in weather...Qualifying where the whole car acted differently)...Senna could instantly be at speed. Look at the lap time data from Donnington Park in 93. You will see that eventually.....other drivers went FASTER than Senna...even in the rain. But Senna was at HIS max....within a lap. In the time other drivers took to work up to their limit...Senna build a huge lead, and the race was over.
Alain Prost was the man who broke Ayrton Senna's heart by retiring from Formula One . The reason was, on any given race day, no matter what all the other drivers did, to win the race, Ayrton would have to beat Alain last to win. Ayrton had massive respect for the World Champion he knew Alain Prost was. And truly appreciated the challenge that Alain presented to him every race. That is the greatest compliment any Formula One driver could ever have.
You are right, I think Senna fought hard with Mansell, but never believed he was of the same calibre (probably nobody but Mansell did). Prost on the other hand was the benchmark and was the one who had to be beaten. Prost said he often felt like Senna set out to destroy him, perhaps not realising what a compliment he was being paid
This video is clearly biased towards Senna when it comes to Prost vs Senna. The head of Honda even admitted that the engineers favoured Senna and there was far more treatment being given when it came to Sennas car/engine than Prosts
Neither of your statements are correct. The whole point of the video is to say Prost doesn't get the credit he deserves. Secondly the claim about the head of Honda is nonsense. Jo Ramirez said that Senna spent time listening and working with the Honda engineers and adapted his driving style to the needs of the engine - the famous fluttering accelerator technique - Prost tried and was unable to drive the same way, hence the disparity in performance. Honda chairman Kawamoto told Prost the Honda engineers preferred Senna's 'samurai' attitude to Prost's calculating one. Also consider Prost's refusal to have Senna in the Williams team in 1993. If he really believed the difference between them was just that Senna had better Honda engines, why would he not expect to win on a level playing field, or even one which might have tilted in his favour as Renault were also French?
@@WhenF1WasReal The claim of the Honda not giving equal engines is on print, on newspapers, claimed by Ron Dennis himself, not just Alain Prost. You have NOT researched 1988 and 1989 enough. Do your homework if you want to create a great F1 channel. This video shows how superficial your knowledge is. And by the way, Jo Ramirez - if you are so keen on citing Jo - is on video saying the fastest driver was Prost, with the only condition that he got his setup right first.
Direct quote from Ron Dennis: “We will give you equality. I will ensure, Alain, that you will get equality from Honda, because that is one of your concerns, and Ayrton you’ll get equality of car and everything. But your behaviour is critical, I’m a great believer in what is the behaviour of people, how do they think they should perform inside the team.” “There would be three engines, the Honda engineers would say ‘these are the two engines we think we should race’. And then it was again a good old coin [toss] who got the engine. “Two people had to witness it, it was an internal drama in engine selection but it was clearly the easiest way to make sure there was no favouritism on engines.” Explain to me how it would be even possible to rig engines in that circumstance? Or do you believe the coin was rigged too?
prost never crashed in to anybody he was a clean racer. but he was not prepared to sit back and give way anymore to a guy who thought he had the right to bully his way past like he did before. tell the correct story.
He was the most underrated champion too. He was more successful then Senna and people forget he was just as fast as Senna when he wanted to be ( Japan 89 for example). But he liked to win at the slowest pace possible which is arguably more skilful than winning it flat out. He’s definitely up there with Senna and Schumacher, Lewis and Max. But no one talks about him like this. Great video by the way you’ve done a great job 👍🏻.
Thank you Yes, saving the car and himself by winning by the smallest margins was one of Prost's strengths, whereas Senna wanted to destroy the competition and lost race wins because he made mistakes as a result of always being flat out. Two very different characters, two different driving styles...
Only driver I'm aware of that lost the Championship while scoring the most points. He out scored Senna 105 to 94 but because of the scoring rules he had to drop. Each driver had 2 races where they did not score point. Senna had to drop a 10th, a 6th and a4th. Prost had to drop three 2nd place finishes. As far as I'm concerned, Prost won that season easily . The final results made F1 look like a joke.
@@thearsenalmisfit2414 Oh yeah that’s a very good point. I forgot about that. He even lost a championship by half a point too one year and before that lost by one point and another by 2 points etc. He came so close to being an 8 time world champion. I remember listening to a Podcast with Patrick Head on there. He said Prost’s qualifying lap of Barcelona 93 was one of the greatest performances he had ever seen. When I hated him when I was a kid as I blamed him for Mansell going to Indy cars. It’s not until I’ve gotten older that I’ve been able to appreciate just how good he actually was.
@@sandordomonkos8351 True, but if you compare the time they were team mates at McLaren then Prost scored more points than Senna. Which is what I’m getting at he was the master of points over a season. He technically should of won 1988 too as he scored more points than Senna but had to drop results as they had a stupid rule at the time about only the best 11 races counted. Who’s the greatest driver of all time is personal opinion. But what I’m saying is no one will mention him when doing these lists of doing all time greatest drivers when I think he is in that category that’s all.
Hope that's not how it came across, my intention was to say that Prost is under appreciated for his achievements. Also see my video on Francois Cevert... no belittlement of any nation's achievements
@@WhenF1WasReal you came across as completely biased. You took time and effort to make this video, you could have done a great video but you blew it. Everyone who has closely followed and read everything about the 1988 and 1989 seasons (and this is about... 80% of hardcore 'golden F1 era' nerds) will eventually point out your bias.
@@thedorianmode8087 thanks man. It's so sad to see people overlook this very interesting part of F1 history. Both Senna and Prost were superb drivers, to think Prost only won due to cheating is downright silly.
Well, he was my hero. Prost is why I would get up at 4 in the morning to watch races live on CBC. He proved that it was not just balls, but smarts and vision, patience, that would win races. To hell with bravado, clean driving won race after race. Thank you for a great video.
Prost was my favourite driver when I was a kid. I saw Senna as an absolute villain at the time. Over the years I have grown to respect them both as two of the best. If they made a movie about Prost vs Senna like Rush they would portray Prost as the villain because Senna is more popular.
Agreed, I think Alain would not be portrayed in a flattering manner. I, too, came to appreciate them equally, and would prefer to enjoy a drink with Senna over Prost :-)
Each had their virtues and also their issues. Things were never as black and white as either driver's fans would have had you believe at the time. Senna would not be Senna without Prost - and Prost would not be Prost without Senna. I hope they never create a Hollywood epic of their story because it would inevitably paint one or the other in a bad light.
@@WhenF1WasReal well before Senna Prost already had Lauda - and it was like with Prost/Senna, but Prost was Senna in that case - came new to the team with winning car developed with the current driver, and started to challenge him for the world title - Lauda managed it the first year, 1984, by only half a point - but in 1985 Prost crashed him, and then won again in 1986 still with evolution of the Lauda co-developed car :) So it's kinda pitty Mercedes wasn't any good after the regulations change, because otherwise we could have had similar battle on, between Russell and Hamilton :)
@@WhenF1WasReal But it's also the opposite: Senna wouldn't be who he was without Prost. And who said that? Senna himself. That's why he was saddened the day Prost retired from the sport. Some people at Williams say he was never exactly the same again up to the day he tragically died.
Strange for me to hear Alain is not remembered as much. I know people mention Senna a whole bunch but one can't talk about him without including Prost in the same breath. Alain refused to be bullied by Senna's tactics. He seemed very methodical in his approach to racing. One of the best individual sporting rivalries ever in sport.
Indeed and whether you favour Senna or Prost, it's obvious that the margins between them were super thin. I don't think Senna bullied Prost so much as wanted to demonstrate complete superiority over him. The need to prove himself faster than the man he considered second fastest affected their interactions. Contentious on track battles were rarer that some would have you believe.
Definitely more consistent and less prone to errors. Senna was faster in raw speed and also suffered terrible luck in 1989, losing three wins to mechanical failures
I think Bernie Ecclestone is absolutely right. Given the facts and stats Prost was the greatest of all time. No doubt about it. Just check a list of his teammates. With Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, Mansell and Hill there were 5 world champions. In the end he did beat them all. If he would have had number 2 drivers like Schumacher or Hamilton did, he be a 7 time world champion with 100 wins easily.
Regarding that controversial crash at Suzuka... Senna used to do that. He left a door open and then closed it at the last second so that his rival could burn tires. I think Prost wanted to pay him in the same dime but it went wrong. Also if Senna would overtake Prost in that chicane he couldnt turn the car witout forced the other driver out of the track in the second turn
I think Senna would have got through the chicane fine - he performed a similar manoeuvre on Nannini after rejoining the race and there was no issue. Also, watch the video of Senna backing up Mansell at Suzuka in 1991 - remember that he was trying to drive as slowly as possible to allow Berger to build a lead. At no time did he give Mansell a sniff of an open door, even though a collision between the two would have won Senna the championship.
Una gran diferencia entre Senna y Prost fueron los compañeros de equipo que tuvieron a lo largo de su trayectoria en la Fórmula Uno. Alain Prost, sin sumar las estadísticas de Senna que también fue su compañero de equipo, compitió contra compañeros de equipo que, entre todos ellos, suman las siguientes estadísticas (John Watson, René Arnoux, Eddie Cheever, Niki Lauda, Keke Rosberg, Stefan Johansson, Nigel Mansell, Jean Alesi y Damon Hill): 6 campeonatos del mundo de Fórmula Uno, 1 campeonato de Indycar (Mansell), 96 victorias, 103 poles, 97 récords de vuelta, 267 podios y una victoria en las 500 millas de Indianápolis (Eddie Cheever). Mientras que Ayrton Senna, sin sumar las estadísticas de Prost que fue su compañero de equipo, compitió contra compañeros de equipo que entre todos ellos sumaban las siguientes estadísticas, sin sumar tampoco a los compañeros de equipo de Senna que solamente lo fueron en 2 carreras como Stefan Johansson, o Mika Hakkinen y Damon Hill que solo fueron compañeros de equipo de Senna en 3 carreras cada uno apenas (Johnny Cecotto, Elio De Angelis, Johnny Dumfries, Satoru Nakajima, Gerhard Berger y Michael Andretti): 0 (CERO) campeonatos del mundo de Fórmula Uno, 12 victorias, 3 poles, 22 récords de vuelta y 58 podios. LA DIFERENCIA ES TOTALMENTE ABISMAL Y OBSCENA.
Far from the fastest corner on the track, but I understand what you are saying. There's a saying - you live by the sword, you die by the sword - that applies here. Prost chose to take Senna off in 1989, did anyone doubt for a moment that Senna would take the first opportunity to pay him back in kind? Turn one at Suzuka was the first opportunity and Senna's resolve was hardened by pole being placed on the wrong side of the track. No lesser person than James Hunt blamed Prost entirely for the Suzuka accident, because he squeezed Senna into turn one, knowing that any collision would cost him the title. The video (Hunt and Murray Walker talking about the accident) is on RUclips somewhere if you want to seek it out.
@@WhenF1WasReal Prost in a recent interview admits turning in early at the Casio chicane after seeing Senna in his mirror but had no intentions of colliding. Don't take his word for it, it's absolutely unlike Prost to ever do such a thing in his career, and if you watch the incident from an aerial angle , helicopter view, it is consistent with Prost taking a racing line that would be enough to complete the corner and defend it (while Senna's is a divebomb). If you watch the race Prost dominated Senna for 50 laps and was even 5 seconds ahead and Senna (I'm a fan of both) just got desperate at the end.
Also you say that Prost's actions in Suzuka are reprehensible for putting another driver at risk and it is true. But Senna's movement in 1990 on the same track against Prost was much more dangerous and deliberate than what happened in 1989.
What a great channel and another wonderful video. Every hero needs a villan to complete the story, Senna and Prost played those parts to perfection. The Senna biopic indicated that, in the final analysis Senna felt he needed the motivation of Prost on the grid to realise his full potential. The scenes showing Prost at Senna's funeral, whilst we learn that the Senna family asked Prost to be involved with Senna's charity, always move me to tears. Keep up the videos please, they're far more entertaining than modern F1...
I was an avid F1 fan from 1983 through the 1990s and saw the rivalry from beginning to end. For me, Prost is the GOAT. Prost did his move at the slowest corner in all F1 with no one else around whereas Senna pulled his move at a fast corner with 24 raging cars directly behind. Sure, Senna was fastest of all but Prost was far more calculating and concerned with his mortality.
Senna's move was incredibly dangerous because literally anything could have happened when those two cars collided - both he and Prost could have been killed, but also it could have put either car in the path of the oncoming field. I think at that point though, Senna was so determined that Prost would not have that first corner he didn't care about the consequences
Alain Prost is, no doubt, one of the best drivers of all time. He always had his team mates under control. He sent 2 world champions in retirement (Lauda in 85 and Rosberg in 86). Mansell was always in his shadow. Lauda won the title in 1984, but thanks to lots of breakdowns in Prost's car during the season and the interrupted race in Monaco. In 1988 Senna won the title but only because of the regulation that year which obliged him to throw away 18 points!!, (corresponding to 2 wins!) At end of that year he had 105 points against only 94 of Senna!). He also lost titles with Renault because the car just was not reliable. He also rarely commited mistakes. But somehow he just seem not to have the Charisma of Senna and even Gilles Villeneuve with his lots of mishaps.
If you know what you're talking about, you'll come to the conclusion Alain Prost is the best driver. The quintessential driver. Everybody else just has "relative strengths". The only time the most wins stat has been accurate.
Agree that he was one of the greatest, however it is Prost himself who has been asking why he is under-appreciated, suggesting that the approval of others is important to him
He wasn't even popular in France-- They called him "Le Nain"" or Ugly Dwarf. He never got the respect he deserved, considered by many to be a points gathering accountant. The fans love a spectacular driver, not one who prefers an understeering car. But his calm, win at the lowest speed is both easier on the equipment and usually the best way to win championships. I believe Prost outscored Senna in both of Senna's championships when they were teammates because of the since banned best of seven scoring system. I'll admit Senna was faster over one lap but Prost was best at gathering points, the way to win championships if not the loyalty of the fans.
@@scottdelong1 This is a sport, not demolition derby or UFC. People like fighting, because they are uneducated and at it's root, human is an animal, thirsty for blood. That's why they like Hamilton, Schumacher, Verstappen, Senna, etc. Senna was considered one of the best. Yet, he was ruthless, no respect for the others, considered himself as he has the right to win, he was terrible at setting up the car and did driving mistakes at times. Myself, I liked him, because I was young when he was driving. As I grew older, I realized there are other drivers, very good, calculated. Being impulsive doesn't make you the best.
Many years later I still see the 1988 McLaren campaign as the F1 magnum opus, the masterpiece. He should be proud of being part of that even though is not the best campaign of all time
I grew up watching in the 80's and always considered Prost as the Benchmark of Greatness. Senna came along and Prost will be remembered more for his political shenanigans than his outright racing ability..
@@WhenF1WasReal Prost was a pallbearer at Senna's funeral. Alain is 69 and he is looking old... He has had the decency to come out and admit he drove in to Senna in '89. He stopped deliberately at Monaco in '84 as Senna was about to take the lead..... Enjoy your later years Alain.. Plenty of time to reflect..
Those retired drivers claiming "such behavior would not be accepted in their time." How quickly they forgot about Villeneuve vs Arnoux at Dijon. The two were banging wheels on the last lap...
@@WhenF1WasReal in your opinion it might, but that's all you're ever going to have, because with no admissions of claimed intent there is no way to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, and i doubt intent was there.
As I saw the television coverage on the day that particular race took place, Prost was ahead of Senna as they approached the chicane and was on the correct racing line for that sequence of corners. Senna had pushed on alongside Prost in a move that looked like he would be continuing straight ahead. As Prost steered to the right, Senna's front wheels were next to him. As the driver coming from behind, it was Senna's responsibility to find a way around Prost, without causing a collision, not the other way around. Where I do blame Prost, is that his car didn't look to be damaged by the encounter, to the extent that he couldn't have made it back to the pits. In my personal opinion, Senna's car should have been more damaged, yet Senna continued the race and Prost ran to the officials to argue for Senna's disqualification.
Prost was very offputting. In post race interviews he would whinge about something being difficult, I remember an interview after his 4th title in a rocket ship Williams where he just had to finish a race to win he would say that the whole season was a struggle. "This race is no good for me" I wanted to like him but i just cant.
Prost is without doubt a driving god - but he cannot help himself from regularly being quoted as being upset more people don't talk about him. That's not exactly an endearing quality.
Prost didn’t take Senna out in 1989. He simply took his racing line as he was ahead. In 1990 Senna tried to kill Prost. You don’t have a fucking clue what ur talking about 😂
It's funny how Prost doing what he did at Suzuka is held against him yet Senna and Schumacher doing the same is not. A lot of world champions drive aggressively in what some might call an unfair manner. Just this weekend Verstappen did it to Norris. The champions do what they need to do to win and that is why they become champions. I guess people assumed Prost was above using such tactics compared to the others. You also have plenty of wins and disqualifications cheesed by drivers and teams playing on technicalities in rules on and off the track. In the end they will all do what they have to for the win.
I think I called out both Senna and Schumacher in the video - as well as most of the drivers which have plied their trade in the last decade or so. I think the accident at Suzuka in 1989 was shocking because it was the first time such a thing had been done, but also because of the air of premediation.
When Prost went from Ferrari to Williams Senna called him (( coward)) Then after 1 year Senna did the same!!! Acording to Senna he was not a ((coward))???
What utter toss! Clearly a massive Senna fan boy. The reason I was never a fan of Senna or Schumacher in period was because they would take massive risks with other peoples lives and do dangerous things, in spite of their obvious talent. Prost, despite what you say, was never like that. A political maneuverer, yes for sure, but never a dangerous fanatic like Senna. Who absolutely DID believe he had some god given RIGHT to win . . . which he obviously didn't. I never could stand Senna in period, I thought he was a very talented twat. Some of us do care that the Professor was and still is a laconic legend.
Everybody just bringing up point systems (not fair 11 best results in 80s), his consistency, fast laps….as to justification for Prost been remembered as one of the genius. Here is a few facts to say he is not: 1- didn’t run well on rain 2- not good on qualifying 3-had to have the perfect car to perform. Look his embarrassment in 91 when he was fired from Ferrari and spun on warm up lap. 4- average on street circuits 5- most important- he had a weight and size advantage over senna and Mansell. 8kg is a big difference. Nowadays people remove paint and until 1995 weight of the driver was not counted. This is a huge and unfair advantage, but like the 11 best results. Rules are rules. He was a great driver but not Genius level.
Strange take given that the whole point of the video is to say that Prost is unfairly overlooked because of one error of judgement. Also neither a Senna or Prost fan, so just stating the facts as I see them without bias.
That's OK, no problem at all I did just find the that from a neutral perspective up to that, it was suddenly a very lopsided view on the senna Prost years. I personally rate Prost a better competitior than senna, with senna undoubtedly being faster overall. But certainly felt that the view on 89 wasn't quite as.cut and dry as you made out. While Prost could have done more to avoid the incident, it was desperate and overambitious. I will say though, his eventual dsq wasn't justified and senna should have kept the win that he actually took as I deem the mclaren incident a racing incident between two drivers who wouldn't back down. Keep up the good work! I really enjoyed your villenueve video too.
I stg it hurts that all people can talk about in the late 80s and early 90s is Senna. Prost shouldn't be "underrated" but yet for some reason it seems that way, just unfair.
this is very one sided, no multiperspectivity like the Senna documentary and TV-Show just black and white. Prost heel and Senna babyface, no shades of grey. The truth is, Prost isnt the bad guy. Both, Prost and Senna, had their dark sides and demons in this rivalry.
One of the greats drivers ever for sure, the problem is he was up against Senna . Prost was as good a driver as Senna, but Senna was more ambitious and wanted it more, to a point where Senna was not in normal frame of mined.
The problem with his attempt was that it was so clumsy and the retribution he received the year after was violent, but you could see why it was done. I would agree though that it's this pattern of bloody-mindedness or bastardry as I like to call it that came in at this time and while it was spectacular to me as a child when they showed replays of it years after it was done, we see this glorification of the World Championship that belies any sense of sporting fair play - everything is by fair means or foul and I suppose in a way it's why I've fallen out of love - I can't hear the words "we want a clean race" by any team director without thinking it's code for "we will exert the necessary pressure to get our way off track" both from Williams and from Mercedes a few years back. As soon as I start thinking that, I can't enjoy a race anymore. In a way 2021 destroyed me as a fan and I'm speaking not as a fan of either team. The revealing team radios to Masi showed shockingly bad sportsmanship and while I know it's all about trying to find incremental gains any way you can, it's the nature of it - yeah I can expect a bit of argy-bargy with racers, that's normal but Abu Dhabi '21 was absolutely criminal. Then again what am I supposed to expect with the actions of these people who could piss money away in a matter of seconds.
I think most people hate prost bc he is french or maybe bc hollywood hates the french and always like to view the french as villians and considering that most new f1 fans only know about prost through the senna movie or series where he is viewed as the villian and i think thats why most people hate him
As much as you want to defend Prost, he was given races and championships, and as well as Michael, those kind of help and dirty political tactics damage their reputation and their badges as legends.
I remember when he left Renault, there was a French lynch mob out to kill him. I think that I read in Car and Driver or Road and Track that tgis was the reason for his relocation to Switzerland.
Your video is heavily biased against Prost. Again continue to proliferate the idea that Prost is a violent driver who resorts to questionable ways to ensure a win . Prost is the most COMPLETE F1 driver EVER!
His large french nose created a whine in his voice that people just did not like. And the fact he went running to his counrtyman to get Senna disqualified. Thats a B!tch move.
Could I interest you in a guest appearance on the DRS Train Podcast with Peter Brook, NavF1, and Ciaron Smith? I'm the producer/creator. We cover both current and historic F1.
If you wanted a bunch of gearhead troll to call you out for click baiting mfs with blasphemy you succeed. Was the Iceman to senna’s Maverick. Only equal possibly by Senna.
Prost legacy unfortunately aged badly, but for who like f1 and saw him racing realise who great he is, one of best of all time. Personally I put him on my top 3 with Senna and Clark. Alain Prost the Professor 🏆
You forget Fangio, he won with different teams and retired alive in the 50's. Far more impresive than all cheap titles of Hamilton with always the best car. Even in 2016 , sir powered by Mercedes failed against his teammate Rosberg jr. Fangio was the original king.
I had a great deal of respect for Prost, back when I was glued to the television on each grand prix sunday that featured Mansell in the line-up. In the duels between Senna and Prost, I used to root for the frenchman. The reason being that I saw in him an intelligent competitor versus Sanna's talent for raw speed. That respect started to fade in 1990 when I was initially excited with anticipation about seeing Prost go head to head with Mansell in equal equipment, but soon came to learn about Prost's demands and manipulations for number 1 status at Ferrari, despite Nigel preceding him there for a year. He repeated the same political shenanigans for 1992, which left him without a contract, and then for 1993 when he managed to strong arm Frank Williams with his teammate prohibition demands, which in part cost Mansell his ability to defend his championship title (which was another thing I had been desperately looking forward to). I will not deny Alain's brilliance on the track: he was extremely fast but also excelled in taking care of his equipment. Ultimately, as a result of his manipulations, I'm left with a feeling of disappointment and that is generally not how you want to remember a champion.
Sena always have better engines!!! I remember u was in Germany and Prost was asked How you can say that Sena have better car While you have pol position! Prost replay's if you lock on all the curves I was faster then Sena But in the strait his car is 8 km/h faster then me!!! If Sena was so Goooood like you claim Why he can't beat Schumacher with a car that win 4 world titles in a row? And Schumacher was a Less experienced and inferior car? Yes Sena was good but u can't says he is the Greatest!!!!
I believe this is the best and most logical analysis about Prost that l have ever seen. Congrats for that. I would never have spotted that link but it seems logical and true.
Pointing to Prost's corruption takes nothing away from Senna, in fact it highlights how Senna overcame stacked odds and wickedness without losing his integrity. THAT's a true champion, not someone who can drive clinically and throw all common decency out the window. In sports like Tennis and Snooker being a gentleman and upholding fair play are seen as higher virtues than winning, unfortunately that's rarely the case in F1.
He was a weasel/rat who more so won by using the political machine within teams/the sport to try and get advantages… he would just throw hissy fits when a teammate wouldn’t give him their position. Prost made himself unloveable by his own actions.
won 51 F1 races. nothing more to be said. Started 200 races. Won 1 out of 4 races he was in. Incredible.
@ronmurray7349 and outscored all of those legends. in the same car. (Senna, fortunately, won 1988 thanks to the "best 11 results" rule.)
51 F1 victories and most so boring that I can't remember a single one of them.
...during an era in which it was almost a miracle to finish a race. With a reliable car, he would have won a lot more
Prost actually outscored Senna over their 2 seasons together, Prost didn't win in 1988 due to the scoring rules
You are right, but the rules were known at the time. 1988, in particular, was exceptional because both drivers came close to scoring the maximum number of points possible under those rules. If all races had always counted towards the Championship, Prost would have seven titles, not four.
@@WhenF1WasRealI would offer that it would have been 8 titles - especially if today’s point system was always in place. Prost would have clinched ‘88 before Suzuka, so he would never have needed to shut the door at the chicane. He would have taken the ‘89 title too…the Ferrari would probably have won in Suzuka because 1) he was on a hot streak, and 2) Senna would not have been pissed off. Imagine Prost with 8 titles and Senna with only 1.
ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
@@andrewschuster4772 little correction, first Suzuka incident was in '89 not '88. And he won in 1989 anyway.
100% correct
Prost beat five world champion teammates.
Senna (actually outscored Senna both 88 and 89)
K.Rosberg
Hill
Lauda
Mansell (totally destroyed him at Ferrari and Mansell threatened to quit F1)
But they never made a Hollywood movie of him. That makes the difference.
Seems a stretch. Senna was clearly faster when the two were at McLaren.
Rosberg was unable to drive a car which had been developed for Prost and Lauda and was handed his backside by Prost
Hill was a newbie and contractual number two in the team
Lauda beat Prost to the title in 84, despite Prost being marginally faster, in 1985 Lauda had lost interest for the most part and was just collecting his pay cheque
Mansell was generally beaten by all of his team mates across a season, although I'll give you Prost had the clearest margin.
As I said in the video, he deserves more credit than he is given, but I would suggest that if Hollywood were to make a blockbuster called 'Prost' its byline would be 'Good guy gone bad'
@@WhenF1WasReal The two years they were at McLaren Prost outscored Senna by 13 points. Sure Senna was faster because he was always driving on the limit. Prost never did that. His driving approach was completely different. Never took the start very hard, drove the first three laps very conservatively, was a master of saving the car from tech.issues, rarely made any mistakes.
This kind of thing is almost like someone said after they lost the football game 0-1 that "hey, they made so many more beautiful dribbles on the field... they deserved to win".
The fact is that Prost OUTSCORED Senna. That's how drivers are measured in this sport... by points.
The rest is just fanboy speculation. Sure I agree that Senna had more pure speed and he was more heroic, looked better, was taller, etc. But he never, ever beat Prost when they were teammates. That is a fact.
You're right about K.Rosberg though. I've watched his 1985 drives and he was insanely fast. 5 tech. DNF's from 1st place in 1985. Kyalami 1985 charge is amazing. But he couldn't adapt to a understeery car. But still... Prost beat him too, there's no denying this fact.
@@detonator2112 Rosberg said during 1986 that he believed himself to be the fastest driver in the world before he came to McLaren and after the season ended expressed the view that he was privately amazed how Prost had managed to win a championship in that car. Rosberg's swansong in the final race at Adelaide is a fitting tribute to his memory.
@@detonator2112 True words. Well said.
@@jameshogan6142 Rosberg is probably the most underrated champ in F1 history. Won the title with 200hp underpowered car. Sure, with reliability and consistency.
But what impresses me the most is that he managed to get 4 wins in the next 3 years with those total sh*tbox cars. Even Patrick Head admitted that the 1984 chassis was a disaster. And the 1983 car was seriously underpowered while the turbos got more reliable.
Made Mansell look like total amateur in 1985 too.
People say he was a "street circuit specialist". Nope. Those were the only circuits he was competitive with those cars.
1985 is different. The car was fast but not reliable. It was very bad career move from him to go to McLaren. He wasn't adaptive and was just as hard on cars as Mansell was. Rarely made any mistakes though (except for Long Beach 1983 which he would have won without attempting way too cocky overtake on Tambay).
Keke was one hell of a driver. Watch the 1978 Silverstone non-GP race which he won in a crappy Theodore in torrential rain. That car was basically a F2 car which didn't even qualify to the races in dry. Kyalami charge 1985 after he hit the oil spot is totally insane as well. Frank Williams said he was the most spectacular driver he ever had. Totally underrated.
Prost had a divisor in his career which was 1984 season where Lauda taught him to be effective without taking unnecessary risks. Before he was super fast but committed mistakes. From 1985 on he became “the Professor” and he was able to outscore the Williams in 1986 season which I consider his most brilliant title. He outscored Senna twice driving the same car, without being the fastest. This shows how smart he is. For those who followed F1 in the 80s, we know Alain Prost was the greatest of all drivers.
I think you make a very good point. In 1984 Prost was the Senna to Lauda's Prost (if you see what I mean) despite being faster he lost the title battle. Learning from the old master undoubtedly made a difference to the way he approached racing thereafter
100% correct.
Lauda beat him to the title by the tiniest margin possible: less than a point! But Prost learned a lesson the hard way. And he applied that lesson through his entire career. He truly is one of the Greats.
A very one sided view. Complete nonsense to blame the "don't overtake me or we crash" syndrome on Prost, who merely tried to clumsily effectuate his threat not to give in to Senna's bullying tactics, such as Senna's attempts at Estoril in 1988, when he squeezed Prost nearly into a wall. To blame the current misery in F1 sportsmanship on Prost is at best misguided, but particularly since the Senna documentary it seems Prost's legacy is tainted. In any case, the Senna documentary unjustly didn't do Prost any favours by being very much a one sided, black-and-white story, failing to unravel the true roots of the conflict and completely missing Senna's darker side. Strangely the documentary also didn't pay much attention to their budding friendship after Prost's last season in '93, which I find the most intriguing part of their relationship. The footage was absolutely stunning though.
The aggressive "you can crash into me or back off" driving styles we see in drivers like Hamilton and Verstappen is a lot more like Senna than Prost.
Given that the whole video was to prove the Prost is unfairly overlooked because of one poor decision, I'm not sure where this is one-sided. By being the first to wipe out a rival deliberately, Prost started a trend which Senna and Schumacher in particular, ramped up to the levels we see today.
As you're probably already aware, Senna's Estoril squeeze on Prost was payback for a similar move Prost had pulled earlier in the weekend. Yes, they had on track battles, but go back through the video footage and you'll find very little which is contentious - never mind bullying. The real falling out came not over bullying, but at San Marino that year, when Senna passed Prost into Tosa after the restart, despite the two having an agreement not to battle into turn one. That whole disagreement almost merits another video of its own though.
Well said. Video creator "WhenF1WasReal" is ridiculously biased. Very difficult to take his videos seriously from now on.
Prost didn't deliberately drive into Senna. Senna came from too far back, it was Prost's corner.@@WhenF1WasReal
First of all "Senna the movie" is exactly what it's named. It's a movie, not a documentary. It follows the rule and logic of a drama with a protagonist and an antagonist. The good has to fight the evil. This movie, made by Senna fans, has had a very cruel intention and succeded well in fullfilling it. What a shame.
I'm 100 % sure, if Senna still lived, he wouldn't aprove this dirty flick.I'm also quite sure, Senna loved and needed Prost. Prost was the only one he could compete with, who was on his level, and Senna seemed to be addicted to competition and winning.
1. Your tale completely overlooks that Honda were not giving equal engines to Prost, this was even publicly denounced by Ron Dennis at the time
2. You fail to mention that both in 1988 and 1989 Prost actually outscored Senna; it was only after applying the "best 11 results" rule that Senna wins on points the 1988 championship.
3. Prost did not "intentionally crashed into senna" in 1989. This is oversimplifying what is a legitimate defensive manouver against a legitimate overtaking manouver. In other words, a RACING INCIDENT. Biased video.
4. You conveniently forget to mention that in 1990 Alain Prost totally outscored and outperformed Nigel Mansell. Biased video.
5. The action that tarnished the reputations of the sport and were blamed by Jackie Stewart and the other legends was Senna's 1990 crash into Prost, not 1989 which was not seen in the same light. Biased video.
Your bias detracts from the quality of your videos.
Prost also beat four other world champions. K.Rosberg (who was insanely fast in previous year at Williams and made Mansell look like an amateur), Lauda, Hill and Mansell. No other driver has such record in F1, not even close. Well Mansell had six world champion teammates (Mario Andretti, Prost, Hakkinen, Hill, Piquet) and HE LOST TO ALL OF THEM.
I have yet to forgive Mansell for running across the Atlantic so he didn't have to face Prost in the SAME car. I wished it happened: Prost and Mansell at Williams. I think they would have pulled a "McLaren sweep" winning all but one race on the schedule.
1) 8:08 - Prost had indeed outperformed Senna both in 1988 and 1989. Senna got the 1988 championship while scoring LESS points (94 to 105) than Prost. However only the best 11 results counted for the championship.
2) To be crowned 1989 Driver's Champion Senna needed to win both Japanese and Australian Grand Prix WHILE Prost had to score worse than 4th place (which happened to be his worst finishing place throughout the whole season) in both of the races. Therefore, despite his disqualification, Senna's hopes were at least doubtful.
3) The assessment that Prost unlawfully block a legitimate overtake attempt by Senna is at least dishonest. Every camera take shows Senna could not possibly go through Casio Triangle carrying his speed. And Prost had the position to take a defensive line to cover his position.
the part where honda were favoring senna was also confirmed by ron dennis, not that it wasn't evident from races such as the mexican gp, which, ironically, might have contributed to senna having more mechanical failures that season. prost was definitely the better driver, and the fact that a year later he fought for the title at all despite having a far slower car than the mclaren proves it
1) The points system was known before the season ran, and it didn''t take either driver long to realise that they whoever won the most races would take the 1988 championship - Prost said as much before the Monza race. Senna prevailed because he won eight races to Prost's seven, both maxed out their second places to come within 9 and 12 points, respectively, of the season's theoretical maximum score. Senna outperformed Prost in 1988, even if the margins were fine.
2) In 1989 Senna would have been champion if he won the last two races irrespective of where Prost finished, because Prost would need to drop a third and second place if he had finished second each time. They would have finished on equal points and Senna would have taken the title by virtue of winning more races.
As he didn't win in Adelaide, Prost's foul in Suzuka was actually irrelevant to the championship result. However, Senna lost three races from winning positions as a result of mechanical failure that year (US, Canada and Italy) which was what actually cost him the title.
1) Every driver should play by the rules of the sport. The rules stated that the worst results would be dropped, therefore, wins would matter most, so they were both racing for wins. Consistency didn't matter as much, therefore the drivers shouldn't be prioritizing consistency over wins. Senna did outperform Prost in 1988, albeit by a very small margin.
2) There was 1 Race in the entire 1989 season where Prost finished ahead of Senna by his own merit - the French Grand Prix. In all other races that Prost finished in front of Ayrton, either his car broke, or someone else crashed into him, when he was ahead of Alain.
3) Even If Senna wasn't going to make the corner, that only makes his intentional crash look even less necessary.
People chose Senna's side and never heard Prost's. Also, remember 1990. Senna crashed into Prost on purpose. How come Senna's legacy wasn't tainted?
Because Senna died and became a legend. Prost lived and, so, people still want to insult him.
In 1989, Prost didn’t “ram” into Senna. He was in front, and that coming together was Senna’s choice.
Castigating Prost is a poor misjudgment.
Prost turned into the chicane about a mile early.
@ he absolutely didn’t.
@@petermitchelmore2592 Okay buddy. Just please don't ever go near a race track 🤣
anZiesemer-ev5uy
0 seconds ago
Everybody just bringing up point systems (not fair 11 best results in 80s), his consistency, fast laps….as to justification for Prost been remembered as one of the genius. Here is a few facts to say he is not:
1- didn’t run well on rain
2- not good on qualifying
3-had to have the perfect car to perform. Look his embarrassment in 91 when he was fired from Ferrari and spun on warm up lap.
4- average on street circuits
5- most important- he had a weight and size advantage over senna and Mansell. 8kg is a big difference. Nowadays people remove paint and until 1995 weight of the driver was not counted. This is a huge and unfair advantage, but like the 11 best results. Rules are rules. He was a great driver but not Genius level.
As you said, Senna and Prost both had different approaches. What find wild is how many poles Senna had, but Prost would rack up fastest race laps. Senna only had 11 FL in his career while Prost had 41.
I think Mexico 1990 best exemplifies this. Prost realised his style would never get enough heat into qualifying tyres to get him towards the front of the grid, so concentrated exclusively on race setup. He started from 13th on the grid, but by virtue of his perfect racing setup he blew past everyone and won the race by a country mile. A stunning drive which was somewhat overshadowed by Mansell's monstrous pass on Berger around the outside of Peraltada to reclaim second place at the death
The sport is called "racing" and not "qualifying."
Senna has long been my favorite. I bought my last motorcycle to justify buying a Senna replica helmet to wear. He was the most exciting driver I ever saw.
Prost is the driver I'd hire to lead my race team, and is, IMHO, the best driver of all time. That exact stat you mentioned is what convinced me.
One of the former Engineers at McLaren during that era stated that if you put Prost in a car that was perfectly set up for Prost, and you put Senna in a car that was perfectly set up for Senna, Prost wins EVERY TIME, and it is not close. Of course dialing a set up perfectly rarely happens. Senna had a superior ability to adjust and adapt. When "in the zone" Prost was just phenomenal when in his best groove. They were very different drivers. Senna had the best ability to adjust. This is why he was so good in qualifying, and in the rain. He could get up to an unknown limit almost instantly, while other drivers have to spend multiple laps to progressively work up to the limit. Prost was faster in race trim when everything was working for him, but he did not have as much ability to work around issues, and driver around and beyond limitations of the car. The reality is driving around car problems, even minor, is more the norm, than not, hence Sennas success. If I could pick a driver in the modern era to extract the most from a modern car (where setups are much more optimal and consistent) I would pick Prost every time. He would be the superior driver.
@@shooter7a Can't disagree with anything you said. Is there a debate about the adjustments made during a race vs. qualifying? Especially back then, you could do a few laps, come in, do a few more, come in again, wait until the last minute and do a legendary lap. Whereas in the race, you either get it right beforehand, or you drive around it. Prost's race success leads me to believe he was plenty good at driving around problems, and other drivers. Prost was excellent in the wet as well, but obviously, Senna was mythical in the rain. Really, either driver is the correct choice for your #1, and very few #1's can be teammates, if any.
@@flugplatz21 I am talking about how you find the limit. Most drivers work their way up to the limit progressively. Even a top level driver, when he is faced with new conditions (say a radically new set up..a new formula, a new track) might take 4-8 laps to find his limit. Senna could literally do a few corners, and by turn 3 was at his limit. It was inexplicable. But his ultimate limit was not as fast as people think. Where Senna won a lot of races was when conditions changed (say a new set of tires, a change in weather...Qualifying where the whole car acted differently)...Senna could instantly be at speed.
Look at the lap time data from Donnington Park in 93. You will see that eventually.....other drivers went FASTER than Senna...even in the rain. But Senna was at HIS max....within a lap. In the time other drivers took to work up to their limit...Senna build a huge lead, and the race was over.
Alain Prost was the man who broke Ayrton Senna's heart by retiring from Formula One . The reason was, on any given race day, no matter what all the other drivers did, to win the race, Ayrton would have to beat Alain last to win. Ayrton had massive respect for the World Champion he knew Alain Prost was. And truly appreciated the challenge that Alain presented to him every race. That is the greatest compliment any Formula One driver could ever have.
You are right, I think Senna fought hard with Mansell, but never believed he was of the same calibre (probably nobody but Mansell did). Prost on the other hand was the benchmark and was the one who had to be beaten. Prost said he often felt like Senna set out to destroy him, perhaps not realising what a compliment he was being paid
@@WhenF1WasReal
I would understand Prost back then because of how it was showed
This video is clearly biased towards Senna when it comes to Prost vs Senna.
The head of Honda even admitted that the engineers favoured Senna and there was far more treatment being given when it came to Sennas car/engine than Prosts
Neither of your statements are correct. The whole point of the video is to say Prost doesn't get the credit he deserves.
Secondly the claim about the head of Honda is nonsense. Jo Ramirez said that Senna spent time listening and working with the Honda engineers and adapted his driving style to the needs of the engine - the famous fluttering accelerator technique - Prost tried and was unable to drive the same way, hence the disparity in performance. Honda chairman Kawamoto told Prost the Honda engineers preferred Senna's 'samurai' attitude to Prost's calculating one.
Also consider Prost's refusal to have Senna in the Williams team in 1993. If he really believed the difference between them was just that Senna had better Honda engines, why would he not expect to win on a level playing field, or even one which might have tilted in his favour as Renault were also French?
@@WhenF1WasReal Some of the engines had "for Ayrton" written on them, even though they were all meant to be the same. Lol.
@@WhenF1WasReal The claim of the Honda not giving equal engines is on print, on newspapers, claimed by Ron Dennis himself, not just Alain Prost. You have NOT researched 1988 and 1989 enough. Do your homework if you want to create a great F1 channel. This video shows how superficial your knowledge is. And by the way, Jo Ramirez - if you are so keen on citing Jo - is on video saying the fastest driver was Prost, with the only condition that he got his setup right first.
Exactly. This video is horribly biased.
Direct quote from Ron Dennis:
“We will give you equality. I will ensure, Alain, that you will get equality from Honda, because that is one of your concerns, and Ayrton you’ll get equality of car and everything. But your behaviour is critical, I’m a great believer in what is the behaviour of people, how do they think they should perform inside the team.”
“There would be three engines, the Honda engineers would say ‘these are the two engines we think we should race’. And then it was again a good old coin [toss] who got the engine.
“Two people had to witness it, it was an internal drama in engine selection but it was clearly the easiest way to make sure there was no favouritism on engines.”
Explain to me how it would be even possible to rig engines in that circumstance? Or do you believe the coin was rigged too?
As a British commentator you refused to state that Prost dominated Mansell at Ferrari
He did indeed, and I will talk about that relationship more in an upcoming video on Nigel Mansell.
Totally biased video! Prost not just dominated Mansell, he did it while also being more gentle with the cars, as reported by ferrari mechanics.
prost never crashed in to anybody he was a clean racer. but he was not prepared to sit back and give way anymore to a guy who thought he had the right to bully his way past like he did before. tell the correct story.
I personally have a love for the drivers that have a more clinical, academic like approach to racing, which means Prost is a driver I personally like.
Prost was my all time favourite driver
A surprisingly small number of people feel the same way, considering his achievements.
That's a shame.
He was the most underrated champion too. He was more successful then Senna and people forget he was just as fast as Senna when he wanted to be ( Japan 89 for example). But he liked to win at the slowest pace possible which is arguably more skilful than winning it flat out. He’s definitely up there with Senna and Schumacher, Lewis and Max. But no one talks about him like this. Great video by the way you’ve done a great job 👍🏻.
Thank you
Yes, saving the car and himself by winning by the smallest margins was one of Prost's strengths, whereas Senna wanted to destroy the competition and lost race wins because he made mistakes as a result of always being flat out. Two very different characters, two different driving styles...
Because drive more years lol
Only driver I'm aware of that lost the Championship while scoring the most points. He out scored Senna 105 to 94 but because of the scoring rules he had to drop. Each driver had 2 races where they did not score point. Senna had to drop a 10th, a 6th and a4th. Prost had to drop three 2nd place finishes. As far as I'm concerned, Prost won that season easily . The final results made F1 look like a joke.
@@thearsenalmisfit2414 Oh yeah that’s a very good point. I forgot about that. He even lost a championship by half a point too one year and before that lost by one point and another by 2 points etc. He came so close to being an 8 time world champion. I remember listening to a Podcast with Patrick Head on there. He said Prost’s qualifying lap of Barcelona 93 was one of the greatest performances he had ever seen. When I hated him when I was a kid as I blamed him for Mansell going to Indy cars. It’s not until I’ve gotten older that I’ve been able to appreciate just how good he actually was.
@@sandordomonkos8351 True, but if you compare the time they were team mates at McLaren then Prost scored more points than Senna. Which is what I’m getting at he was the master of points over a season. He technically should of won 1988 too as he scored more points than Senna but had to drop results as they had a stupid rule at the time about only the best 11 races counted. Who’s the greatest driver of all time is personal opinion. But what I’m saying is no one will mention him when doing these lists of doing all time greatest drivers when I think he is in that category that’s all.
French f1 is always belittled by the English, but I love it's rich and vibrant history
Hope that's not how it came across, my intention was to say that Prost is under appreciated for his achievements. Also see my video on Francois Cevert... no belittlement of any nation's achievements
@@WhenF1WasReal you came across as completely biased. You took time and effort to make this video, you could have done a great video but you blew it. Everyone who has closely followed and read everything about the 1988 and 1989 seasons (and this is about... 80% of hardcore 'golden F1 era' nerds) will eventually point out your bias.
@@thedorianmode8087 thanks man. It's so sad to see people overlook this very interesting part of F1 history. Both Senna and Prost were superb drivers, to think Prost only won due to cheating is downright silly.
Both Suzuka incidents were Senna's fault.
Well, he was my hero. Prost is why I would get up at 4 in the morning to watch races live on CBC. He proved that it was not just balls, but smarts and vision, patience, that would win races. To hell with bravado, clean driving won race after race.
Thank you for a great video.
Prost was my favourite driver when I was a kid. I saw Senna as an absolute villain at the time. Over the years I have grown to respect them both as two of the best. If they made a movie about Prost vs Senna like Rush they would portray Prost as the villain because Senna is more popular.
Agreed, I think Alain would not be portrayed in a flattering manner.
I, too, came to appreciate them equally, and would prefer to enjoy a drink with Senna over Prost :-)
Each had their virtues and also their issues. Things were never as black and white as either driver's fans would have had you believe at the time. Senna would not be Senna without Prost - and Prost would not be Prost without Senna. I hope they never create a Hollywood epic of their story because it would inevitably paint one or the other in a bad light.
@@WhenF1WasReal well before Senna Prost already had Lauda - and it was like with Prost/Senna, but Prost was Senna in that case - came new to the team with winning car developed with the current driver, and started to challenge him for the world title - Lauda managed it the first year, 1984, by only half a point - but in 1985 Prost crashed him, and then won again in 1986 still with evolution of the Lauda co-developed car :)
So it's kinda pitty Mercedes wasn't any good after the regulations change, because otherwise we could have had similar battle on, between Russell and Hamilton :)
@@WhenF1WasReal But it's also the opposite: Senna wouldn't be who he was without Prost. And who said that? Senna himself. That's why he was saddened the day Prost retired from the sport. Some people at Williams say he was never exactly the same again up to the day he tragically died.
Strange for me to hear Alain is not remembered as much. I know people mention Senna a whole bunch but one can't talk about him without including Prost in the same breath. Alain refused to be bullied by Senna's tactics. He seemed very methodical in his approach to racing. One of the best individual sporting rivalries ever in sport.
Indeed and whether you favour Senna or Prost, it's obvious that the margins between them were super thin. I don't think Senna bullied Prost so much as wanted to demonstrate complete superiority over him. The need to prove himself faster than the man he considered second fastest affected their interactions. Contentious on track battles were rarer that some would have you believe.
Prost was always a favourite and in many respects the better driver than Senna over those 3 years
Definitely more consistent and less prone to errors. Senna was faster in raw speed and also suffered terrible luck in 1989, losing three wins to mechanical failures
I think Bernie Ecclestone is absolutely right. Given the facts and stats Prost was the greatest of all time. No doubt about it. Just check a list of his teammates. With Lauda, Rosberg, Senna, Mansell and Hill there were 5 world champions. In the end he did beat them all. If he would have had number 2 drivers like Schumacher or Hamilton did, he be a 7 time world champion with 100 wins easily.
Hardly forgotten! Great driver and followed in the footsteps of Clark and Stewart. Smooth, intelligent and fast. One of the absolute greats.
Regarding that controversial crash at Suzuka... Senna used to do that. He left a door open and then closed it at the last second so that his rival could burn tires. I think Prost wanted to pay him in the same dime but it went wrong. Also if Senna would overtake Prost in that chicane he couldnt turn the car witout forced the other driver out of the track in the second turn
I think Senna would have got through the chicane fine - he performed a similar manoeuvre on Nannini after rejoining the race and there was no issue. Also, watch the video of Senna backing up Mansell at Suzuka in 1991 - remember that he was trying to drive as slowly as possible to allow Berger to build a lead. At no time did he give Mansell a sniff of an open door, even though a collision between the two would have won Senna the championship.
Una gran diferencia entre Senna y Prost fueron los compañeros de equipo que tuvieron a lo largo de su trayectoria en la Fórmula Uno. Alain Prost, sin sumar las estadísticas de Senna que también fue su compañero de equipo, compitió contra compañeros de equipo que, entre todos ellos, suman las siguientes estadísticas (John Watson, René Arnoux, Eddie Cheever, Niki Lauda, Keke Rosberg, Stefan Johansson, Nigel Mansell, Jean Alesi y Damon Hill): 6 campeonatos del mundo de Fórmula Uno, 1 campeonato de Indycar (Mansell), 96 victorias, 103 poles, 97 récords de vuelta, 267 podios y una victoria en las 500 millas de Indianápolis (Eddie Cheever).
Mientras que Ayrton Senna, sin sumar las estadísticas de Prost que fue su compañero de equipo, compitió contra compañeros de equipo que entre todos ellos sumaban las siguientes estadísticas, sin sumar tampoco a los compañeros de equipo de Senna que solamente lo fueron en 2 carreras como Stefan Johansson, o Mika Hakkinen y Damon Hill que solo fueron compañeros de equipo de Senna en 3 carreras cada uno apenas (Johnny Cecotto, Elio De Angelis, Johnny Dumfries, Satoru Nakajima, Gerhard Berger y Michael Andretti): 0 (CERO) campeonatos del mundo de Fórmula Uno, 12 victorias, 3 poles, 22 récords de vuelta y 58 podios.
LA DIFERENCIA ES TOTALMENTE ABISMAL Y OBSCENA.
Big difference between Suzuka 89 & 90 is Prost did it at the slowest corner on the track while Senna did it at the fastest corner on the track
Far from the fastest corner on the track, but I understand what you are saying.
There's a saying - you live by the sword, you die by the sword - that applies here. Prost chose to take Senna off in 1989, did anyone doubt for a moment that Senna would take the first opportunity to pay him back in kind? Turn one at Suzuka was the first opportunity and Senna's resolve was hardened by pole being placed on the wrong side of the track.
No lesser person than James Hunt blamed Prost entirely for the Suzuka accident, because he squeezed Senna into turn one, knowing that any collision would cost him the title. The video (Hunt and Murray Walker talking about the accident) is on RUclips somewhere if you want to seek it out.
If you look at the 1987 and 88 races then pole wasn't moved, senna believed it should have been, biggest urban myth started by senna himself
@@WhenF1WasReal Prost in a recent interview admits turning in early at the Casio chicane after seeing Senna in his mirror but had no intentions of colliding. Don't take his word for it, it's absolutely unlike Prost to ever do such a thing in his career, and if you watch the incident from an aerial angle , helicopter view, it is consistent with Prost taking a racing line that would be enough to complete the corner and defend it (while Senna's is a divebomb).
If you watch the race Prost dominated Senna for 50 laps and was even 5 seconds ahead and Senna (I'm a fan of both) just got desperate at the end.
Also you say that Prost's actions in Suzuka are reprehensible for putting another driver at risk and it is true. But Senna's movement in 1990 on the same track against Prost was much more dangerous and deliberate than what happened in 1989.
Completely agree that it was more dangerous - and I did call out Senna and Schumacher in the video. I think both were equally deliberate though
What a great channel and another wonderful video. Every hero needs a villan to complete the story, Senna and Prost played those parts to perfection. The Senna biopic indicated that, in the final analysis Senna felt he needed the motivation of Prost on the grid to realise his full potential. The scenes showing Prost at Senna's funeral, whilst we learn that the Senna family asked Prost to be involved with Senna's charity, always move me to tears. Keep up the videos please, they're far more entertaining than modern F1...
Thanks so much for you kind words and support. I am glad they had put the past behind them before Senna's death
I was an avid F1 fan from 1983 through the 1990s and saw the rivalry from beginning to end. For me, Prost is the GOAT. Prost did his move at the slowest corner in all F1 with no one else around whereas Senna pulled his move at a fast corner with 24 raging cars directly behind. Sure, Senna was fastest of all but Prost was far more calculating and concerned with his mortality.
Senna's move was incredibly dangerous because literally anything could have happened when those two cars collided - both he and Prost could have been killed, but also it could have put either car in the path of the oncoming field. I think at that point though, Senna was so determined that Prost would not have that first corner he didn't care about the consequences
He was up against Senna's charisma and Mansell's gutsiness. Still beat both.
No question he was an amazing driver who took being usurped by Senna very badly, leading to some poor decision making on and off the track
Alain Prost is, no doubt, one of the best drivers of all time. He always had his team mates under control. He sent 2 world champions in retirement (Lauda in 85 and Rosberg in 86). Mansell was always in his shadow. Lauda won the title in 1984, but thanks to lots of breakdowns in Prost's car during the season and the interrupted race in Monaco. In 1988 Senna won the title but only because of the regulation that year which obliged him to throw away 18 points!!, (corresponding to 2 wins!) At end of that year he had 105 points against only 94 of Senna!). He also lost titles with Renault because the car just was not reliable. He also rarely commited mistakes. But somehow he just seem not to have the Charisma of Senna and even Gilles Villeneuve with his lots of mishaps.
If you know what you're talking about, you'll come to the conclusion Alain Prost is the best driver. The quintessential driver. Everybody else just has "relative strengths". The only time the most wins stat has been accurate.
Loved or unloved, it doesn't matter. He raced for himself and he was one of the greatest drivers of all time. Le Professeur.
Agree that he was one of the greatest, however it is Prost himself who has been asking why he is under-appreciated, suggesting that the approval of others is important to him
He wasn't even popular in France-- They called him "Le Nain"" or Ugly Dwarf. He never got the respect he deserved, considered by many to be a points gathering accountant. The fans love a spectacular driver, not one who prefers an understeering car. But his calm, win at the lowest speed is both easier on the equipment and usually the best way to win championships. I believe Prost outscored Senna in both of Senna's championships when they were teammates because of the since banned best of seven scoring system. I'll admit Senna was faster over one lap but Prost was best at gathering points, the way to win championships if not the loyalty of the fans.
@@scottdelong1 This is a sport, not demolition derby or UFC. People like fighting, because they are uneducated and at it's root, human is an animal, thirsty for blood. That's why they like Hamilton, Schumacher, Verstappen, Senna, etc. Senna was considered one of the best. Yet, he was ruthless, no respect for the others, considered himself as he has the right to win, he was terrible at setting up the car and did driving mistakes at times. Myself, I liked him, because I was young when he was driving. As I grew older, I realized there are other drivers, very good, calculated. Being impulsive doesn't make you the best.
Sure, nobody cares about Alain Prost, but he is the only one who makes Lionel Messi uncomfortable when talking about The GOAT of Sports status.
Many years later I still see the 1988 McLaren campaign as the F1 magnum opus, the masterpiece. He should be proud of being part of that even though is not the best campaign of all time
I grew up watching in the 80's and always considered Prost as the Benchmark of Greatness. Senna came along and Prost will be remembered more for his political shenanigans than his outright racing ability..
I agree, and it is a shame that his achievements are overshadowed by some of his personality triats
@@WhenF1WasReal Prost was a pallbearer at Senna's funeral. Alain is 69 and he is looking old... He has had the decency to come out and admit he drove in to Senna in '89. He stopped deliberately at Monaco in '84 as Senna was about to take the lead..... Enjoy your later years Alain.. Plenty of time to reflect..
Those retired drivers claiming "such behavior would not be accepted in their time." How quickly they forgot about Villeneuve vs Arnoux at Dijon. The two were banging wheels on the last lap...
Prost did not intentionally hit Senna...
The head on video clearly establishes intention
@@WhenF1WasReal in your opinion it might, but that's all you're ever going to have, because with no admissions of claimed intent there is no way to prove it beyond reasonable doubt, and i doubt intent was there.
As I saw the television coverage on the day that particular race took place, Prost was ahead of Senna as they approached the chicane and was on the correct racing line for that sequence of corners. Senna had pushed on alongside Prost in a move that looked like he would be continuing straight ahead. As Prost steered to the right, Senna's front wheels were next to him. As the driver coming from behind, it was Senna's responsibility to find a way around Prost, without causing a collision, not the other way around.
Where I do blame Prost, is that his car didn't look to be damaged by the encounter, to the extent that he couldn't have made it back to the pits. In my personal opinion, Senna's car should have been more damaged, yet Senna continued the race and Prost ran to the officials to argue for Senna's disqualification.
Oh he did!
Prost was very offputting. In post race interviews he would whinge about something being difficult, I remember an interview after his 4th title in a rocket ship Williams where he just had to finish a race to win he would say that the whole season was a struggle. "This race is no good for me" I wanted to like him but i just cant.
I remember after a particular whiny Prost press conference Senna offering to trade cars with him, much to the amusement of the assembled press corps
Prost is kinda like piquet where they are incredible drivers but unlikeable people.
A very good comparison - Piquet's three World Championships have been largely overshadowed by a mouth which keeps getting him into trouble
@@WhenF1WasReal Will you be doing a video on Piquet, or have you already?
Prost is without doubt a driving god - but he cannot help himself from regularly being quoted as being upset more people don't talk about him. That's not exactly an endearing quality.
Prost didn’t take Senna out in 1989. He simply took his racing line as he was ahead. In 1990 Senna tried to kill Prost. You don’t have a fucking clue what ur talking about 😂
The head on video feed clearly disagrees with you
@@WhenF1WasReal ok so prost should have driven straight on up the escape road and missed the chicane then?
@ivanboggs7238 Senna completed a almost identical pass on Alessandro Nannini a few laps later. No crash or escape road needed. Don't talk nonsense.
Not exactly Mr Personality tho.
It's funny how Prost doing what he did at Suzuka is held against him yet Senna and Schumacher doing the same is not. A lot of world champions drive aggressively in what some might call an unfair manner. Just this weekend Verstappen did it to Norris. The champions do what they need to do to win and that is why they become champions. I guess people assumed Prost was above using such tactics compared to the others.
You also have plenty of wins and disqualifications cheesed by drivers and teams playing on technicalities in rules on and off the track. In the end they will all do what they have to for the win.
I think I called out both Senna and Schumacher in the video - as well as most of the drivers which have plied their trade in the last decade or so. I think the accident at Suzuka in 1989 was shocking because it was the first time such a thing had been done, but also because of the air of premediation.
When Prost went from Ferrari to Williams Senna called him (( coward)) Then after 1 year Senna did the same!!! Acording to Senna he was not a ((coward))???
What utter toss! Clearly a massive Senna fan boy. The reason I was never a fan of Senna or Schumacher in period was because they would take massive risks with other peoples lives and do dangerous things, in spite of their obvious talent. Prost, despite what you say, was never like that. A political maneuverer, yes for sure, but never a dangerous fanatic like Senna. Who absolutely DID believe he had some god given RIGHT to win . . . which he obviously didn't. I never could stand Senna in period, I thought he was a very talented twat. Some of us do care that the Professor was and still is a laconic legend.
Everybody just bringing up point systems (not fair 11 best results in 80s), his consistency, fast laps….as to justification for Prost been remembered as one of the genius. Here is a few facts to say he is not:
1- didn’t run well on rain
2- not good on qualifying
3-had to have the perfect car to perform. Look his embarrassment in 91 when he was fired from Ferrari and spun on warm up lap.
4- average on street circuits
5- most important- he had a weight and size advantage over senna and Mansell. 8kg is a big difference. Nowadays people remove paint and until 1995 weight of the driver was not counted. This is a huge and unfair advantage, but like the 11 best results. Rules are rules. He was a great driver but not Genius level.
Only a slightly biased overview of 88-90... I was actually enjoying it up until this video became a Senna fans put down of Prost.
Indeed, to the point I wasn't really sure whether the narrator was just being ironic. It seems he wasn't.
Strange take given that the whole point of the video is to say that Prost is unfairly overlooked because of one error of judgement.
Also neither a Senna or Prost fan, so just stating the facts as I see them without bias.
That's OK, no problem at all
I did just find the that from a neutral perspective up to that, it was suddenly a very lopsided view on the senna Prost years.
I personally rate Prost a better competitior than senna, with senna undoubtedly being faster overall. But certainly felt that the view on 89 wasn't quite as.cut and dry as you made out.
While Prost could have done more to avoid the incident, it was desperate and overambitious. I will say though, his eventual dsq wasn't justified and senna should have kept the win that he actually took as I deem the mclaren incident a racing incident between two drivers who wouldn't back down.
Keep up the good work! I really enjoyed your villenueve video too.
indeed. a shame.
I stg it hurts that all people can talk about in the late 80s and early 90s is Senna. Prost shouldn't be "underrated" but yet for some reason it seems that way, just unfair.
Glad to see this one got under the radar
this is very one sided, no multiperspectivity like the Senna documentary and TV-Show just black and white. Prost heel and Senna babyface, no shades of grey. The truth is, Prost isnt the bad guy. Both, Prost and Senna, had their dark sides and demons in this rivalry.
One of the greats drivers ever for sure, the problem is he was up against Senna . Prost was as good a driver as Senna, but Senna was more ambitious and wanted it more, to a point where Senna was not in normal frame of mined.
The problem with his attempt was that it was so clumsy and the retribution he received the year after was violent, but you could see why it was done. I would agree though that it's this pattern of bloody-mindedness or bastardry as I like to call it that came in at this time and while it was spectacular to me as a child when they showed replays of it years after it was done, we see this glorification of the World Championship that belies any sense of sporting fair play - everything is by fair means or foul and I suppose in a way it's why I've fallen out of love - I can't hear the words "we want a clean race" by any team director without thinking it's code for "we will exert the necessary pressure to get our way off track" both from Williams and from Mercedes a few years back. As soon as I start thinking that, I can't enjoy a race anymore. In a way 2021 destroyed me as a fan and I'm speaking not as a fan of either team. The revealing team radios to Masi showed shockingly bad sportsmanship and while I know it's all about trying to find incremental gains any way you can, it's the nature of it - yeah I can expect a bit of argy-bargy with racers, that's normal but Abu Dhabi '21 was absolutely criminal. Then again what am I supposed to expect with the actions of these people who could piss money away in a matter of seconds.
I think most people hate prost bc he is french or maybe bc hollywood hates the french and always like to view the french as villians and considering that most new f1 fans only know about prost through the senna movie or series where he is viewed as the villian and i think thats why most people hate him
As much as you want to defend Prost, he was given races and championships, and as well as Michael, those kind of help and dirty political tactics damage their reputation and their badges as legends.
I remember when he left Renault, there was a French lynch mob out to kill him. I think that I read in Car and Driver or Road and Track that tgis was the reason for his relocation to Switzerland.
Your video is heavily biased against Prost. Again continue to proliferate the idea that Prost is a violent driver who resorts to questionable ways to ensure a win . Prost is the most COMPLETE F1 driver EVER!
excuse me ?? forgotten ...... hardly
Prost's own words
Mate who loves cowards use underhanded tactics at every corner.
His large french nose created a whine in his voice that people just did not like. And the fact he went running to his counrtyman to get Senna disqualified. Thats a B!tch move.
It's alleged that after Prost visited Balestre he told the stewards to find a rule which allowed Senna to be disqualified.
Could I interest you in a guest appearance on the DRS Train Podcast with Peter Brook, NavF1, and Ciaron Smith? I'm the producer/creator. We cover both current and historic F1.
Yes, would certainly be up for that
@@WhenF1WasReal Sent another comment here to make that happen, which RUclips apparently autofiltered...
If you wanted a bunch of gearhead troll to call you out for click baiting mfs with blasphemy you succeed. Was the Iceman to senna’s Maverick. Only equal possibly by Senna.
Too smart for the people !
Prost legacy unfortunately aged badly, but for who like f1 and saw him racing realise who great he is, one of best of all time. Personally I put him on my top 3 with Senna and Clark. Alain Prost the Professor 🏆
You forget Fangio, he won with different teams and retired alive in the 50's. Far more impresive than all cheap titles of Hamilton with always the best car. Even in 2016 , sir powered by Mercedes failed against his teammate Rosberg jr.
Fangio was the original king.
Smarties are not popular. Ce la vie.
I had a great deal of respect for Prost, back when I was glued to the television on each grand prix sunday that featured Mansell in the line-up.
In the duels between Senna and Prost, I used to root for the frenchman. The reason being that I saw in him an intelligent competitor versus Sanna's talent for raw speed.
That respect started to fade in 1990 when I was initially excited with anticipation about seeing Prost go head to head with Mansell in equal equipment, but soon came to learn about Prost's demands and manipulations for number 1 status at Ferrari, despite Nigel preceding him there for a year.
He repeated the same political shenanigans for 1992, which left him without a contract, and then for 1993 when he managed to strong arm Frank Williams with his teammate prohibition demands, which in part cost Mansell his ability to defend his championship title (which was another thing I had been desperately looking forward to).
I will not deny Alain's brilliance on the track: he was extremely fast but also excelled in taking care of his equipment.
Ultimately, as a result of his manipulations, I'm left with a feeling of disappointment and that is generally not how you want to remember a champion.
Sena always have better engines!!! I remember u was in Germany and Prost was asked How you can say that Sena have better car While you have pol position! Prost replay's if you lock on all the curves I was faster then Sena But in the strait his car is 8 km/h faster then me!!! If Sena was so Goooood like you claim Why he can't beat Schumacher with a car that win 4 world titles in a row? And Schumacher was a Less experienced and inferior car? Yes Sena was good but u can't says he is the Greatest!!!!
Amazing driver but incredibly dull and quite annoying to listen to - much like Lewis Hamilton.
The Professor
Prost is remembered for his failed F1 team than the championships he won.
He is unloved because he is French
He was boring af and had 0 personality. Nelson Piquet is unloved too, but at least he was bold and fun to watch.
Lauda, giant of F1.
unloved? bot guy........
I believe this is the best and most logical analysis about Prost that l have ever seen. Congrats for that. I would never have spotted that link but it seems logical and true.
Thanks so much, appreciate your support
Pointing to Prost's corruption takes nothing away from Senna, in fact it highlights how Senna overcame stacked odds and wickedness without losing his integrity. THAT's a true champion, not someone who can drive clinically and throw all common decency out the window.
In sports like Tennis and Snooker being a gentleman and upholding fair play are seen as higher virtues than winning, unfortunately that's rarely the case in F1.
you obviously never seen his other crashes he caused. he was a dirty driver
Senna was the much better driver
He was only fast in a fast car, Whined and cried too much.
Funny, considering he won the championship in 86 despite the Williams being faster than the McLaren…🫠
He was a weasel/rat who more so won by using the political machine within teams/the sport to try and get advantages… he would just throw hissy fits when a teammate wouldn’t give him their position. Prost made himself unloveable by his own actions.
he won 50 out of 200 races he was in. no matter what theres no denying massive skill there. hes one of the legends
Mclaren and Honda favored senna more than prost in 1989. yet senna still would have lost with a superior car to prost. massive cope