[Driver] The GOAT - Semi Final - Schumacher vs Senna

[crmalcolm]

The first Semi Final sees Schumacher take on Senna.

Schumacher was victorious in the Quarter Final 13-8, whilst Senna took a 17-6 victory.

So which of these two drivers do you feel was the greater?

An article on formula1-dictionary.net described the competition as:

Senna vs. Schumacher

"The mind is everything. All the boys in Formula One today have gifts from God and there's 20 of them. Then there's the top six, then the extraordinary three. But the genius is the one who takes it to another level. That is Michael Schumacher today, just as there once was Fangio, Clark, myself if you like, Lauda, Prost, Senna - the absolute multiple champions. And it's always the head that took them there."
Sir Jackie Stewart in an interview 2004.

Who is better and why? Is this still in debate? Yes, it is. BTW this debate has been going since 93, so even when Michael Schumacher was almost a rookie the F1 world was already questioning who was better Senna or Schumacher.
No one would ever know which driver was better, is it Mr. Ayrton Senna da Silva or Mr. Michael Schumacher. We can only look at their achievements and try to draw a conclusion to see if one has an edge over the other.

Senna had more days of inspiration; take Donnington in 1993 for example. The reason people bring up Donnington all the time is because Senna did the impossible in a piece of junk car that had no real chance that year to win the championship. I of course won't deny that was a masterpiece of all times from Senna, but people forget that he had traction control (reportedly the most evolved at the time) where Schumacher didn't have. He gets one only in Monaco some races after. I guess I don't need to explain the importance of that facility, especialy on the wet. But anyway, I find it hard to imagine even Schumacher bettering that performance. On rainy day in Donnington Senna was in forth position after first corner after start. On the end of the first lap he was in first place with four second advantage.

There was a few examples of utter bravery from both drivers.
1990, Martin Donnelly driving a Lotus had a huge accident during qualifying at Jerez in Spain. He lay on the track, still strapped to his seat, with the debris of his wrecked Lotus strewn around him, his legs twisted at hideous angles. Instead of hiding in his motorhome, Ayrton actually came to the trackside and watched his great friend Professor Sid Watkins save Donnelly's life. At that time, no one knew whether Donnelly would live or not, but Ayrton, though visibly moved, went back on track and beat his own pole time by a second. It was beyond brave. For me, it was as if he was telling the track to ****-off. If anything crystallized Ayrton as a hero for me, it was that.

Back in 1991, when Michael Schumacher had just come on the Formula One scene, he had a massive accident at Suzuka during practice for the Japanese Grand Prix at the 130R corner, which was a serious challenge back then. Professor Sid Watkins thought he needed to calm himself down a little and told him: “Michael, you’re a good-looking lad. And if you carry on like this, you’re going to be a good-looking corpse…” Not long afterwards, Schumacher went out in the spare Benetton B191 and went a full second quicker. After shunt like this, I was thinking, WOW, my god, this boy have a big balls, he will be something in few years.

But which was the better driver? That is far harder to answer. Ayrton was capable to perform with everything against him and this was one of his best qualities. In the most difficult moments he grew and could found a way to fight back. His character couldn't let him lose and I think because of that, he pushed to the limit more often and more strongly than Schumacher has ever need to. This is a trace of personality which leads Ayrton to produce the most magic moments in Formula 1 I've ever seen.

In some ways the two are products of their time. In his ability to express a remarkable gift in terms that the ordinary fan could appreciate, Senna was just about unique. Schumacher perfected the art of strategic racing; Senna was a master at street circuits when they were much more common in the sport. I still think only Jim Clark could approach Senna in terms of speed over a single lap. Pole position statistics are proof of that. Schumacher was on pole for 27.2 percent of his career, whereas Senna was on pole for 40.1 percent of his career. That is what separates the two. Senna was regularly brilliant in single lap, but sometimes he surpassed even himself. Most famously, there was Monaco in 1988, when he put his car on pole position, 1.5 seconds quicker than Prost in the same car. He later said he felt as if he was "driving on instinct, watching himself from above".
On other hand, Schumacher was noted throughout his career for his ability to produce series of fast laps at crucial moments in a race, to push his car to the very limit for longer periods of time. Also, he was superb in adapting his driving stile to different conditions, and one of the proofs of that was a Spanish Grand Prix 1994, where he was leading the race before a gearbox failure left him stuck in fifth gear. Thanks to a background in sports car racing he managed to change his driving style round the Circuit de Catalunya, effected a pit-stop and took off from the pits in 5th gear and still managed to finish second in the race. It was an achievement that ranks higher than most of his GP wins, but adversity threw something at Schumi, and he proved what a stellar driver he is.

In the rain and changing conditions they are both in a class of their own. I would put them equal on this side, with maybe Senna with small edge. They are probably the best wet-weather drivers of all time, for their consistent level of excellence in such conditions, and their total superiority over their peers. Impossible to separate them.

Senna has a great moment in Donnington as explained before. It was a victory which Senna himself later rated as one of his very best. In the 2002 book, "Formula 1, The Autobiography", edited by Gerald Donaldson and published by Weidenfeld and Nicolson, he is quoted speaking about the race: "People later said that my win at the wet in Donnington in '93 was my greatest performance - no way! I had traction control! It was a good win, sure, but, compared with Estoril '85, it was nothing, really."

I can not forget Michael Schumacher at the 1996 Spanish GP when he humiliated all field in scrappy Ferrari F310. In qualifying, Michael was third behind the two Williams-Renaults the best cars on the field. Hill was a full second quicker than Ferrari, but considering his massive car advantage. After taking the lead, the reigning world champion started to lap an incredible four seconds a lap faster than anyone else, the gap growing to almost 15 seconds in the next three laps. Despite his engine behaving a bit erratically, down on power most of the time, he still pulled away from the rest as if they were standing. He was so quick that by the time he rejoined after his second pitstop he was a whole minute ahead of the others. It was a day when all Michael’s rivals could do was acknowledge defeat, and admit that the man was way beyond anyone else in Formula 1 at the moment. These are the races when the good racers are separated from the great ones.
And when we already talking about 1996, do you remember Monaco that year? Race day was overcast, with occasional showers. Things started strangely with what seemed to be two Michael Schumachers on the grid: one driving a Ferrari, the other in a McLaren. David Coulthard, second on the grid was wearing Michael helmet. Why? Because Michael have loaned David Coulthard a helmet because the Scotsman was having problems with his own misting up. 1. on grid helping 2. on grid in Monaco? Michael made a poor start from pole in his Ferrari and so Damon Hill took the lead for Williams. Later in the race Schumacher hit a kerb in the curling right-hander after the Loews Hairpin and the Ferrari smacked into the opposite wall. On the end, Coulthard, disguised as Schumacher finished second.

But, for every great moment by Schumacher there seems to be an even bigger controversy. Senna had his incidents but for each controversy there’s a better drive. Let’s get one thing clear: neither driver was above taking off a championship rival in a deciding race.

Senna may have done it less then Shumacher, but his willingness to do it at a speed of around 220kmh (Prost having taken him out at a comparative snail’s pace the year before) shocked and appalled many. Ayrton Senna’s ruthless will to win at all costs and systematic application of controlled violence was no better displayed than in the 1990 Japanese GP. Having secured pole position, the Brazilian was unhappy with the side of the track it was situated on, claiming that pole should always be on the racing line and not the dirtier side of the track. Senna’s request to be moved to the favorable side was rejected, so when his rival Alain Prost passed him at the start, Senna took out Prost on the first corner to secure the world championship. But, Prost did more or less same thing to him year before.
At the Monaco GP 1985. in qualifying Senna in the Lotus set the fastest lap early in the session but Michele Alboreto in the Ferrari was looking to challenge. Senna placed his car in the middle of the track and, seemingly on purpose, held up Alboreto. Blue flags waved but Senna stayed put. The Ferrari driver eventually drew alongside the Brazilian but his lap was ruined.

The penultimate race of the 1993 season in Japan was noted for an incident where Jordan's rookie Eddie Irvine twice unlapped himself nipping back past against Senna. You would have expected a celebration to be Senna's next move, but instead he went about tracking down newcomer Eddie Irvine. Suddenly the door to the Jordan unit swung open and in marched Senna, followed by a flock of McLaren personnel. "What the f**k do you think you were doing?" said Senna. "I was racing," was Irvine's response. After a lengthy and heated discussion, for which Senna had a major sense of humour failure, he punched the Irishman in the face.

All of these individual incidents are worth examination, but the one at the last race of the 1992 season at Adelaide was the last such of Senna’s career. It was the final round of the season, with the championship already taken by Mansell, and decision taken that the Englishman would be leaving for America at the end of the season, removed from his seat with the Williams team by Prost’s subtle backstage manoeuvres. Mansell wanted to end his Formula One career and his championship season with a win, and he jumped straight into the lead, with Senna on his tail. But on lap nineteen something happened, and the McLaren went into the back of the Williams, both cars spinning off the track and out of the race Mansell ran away from the scene, straight across the track towards the pits. Afterwards he told reporters that he’d done it to stop himself punching Senna. But what else did they expect? It was, after all, just like Senna. Remember Spa, when he pushed Mansell off the track, and the burly Nigel grabbed the slight Senna by the throat in the pits afterwards, and had to be dragged away by three mechanics? Or Estoril, when Senna had made his car lunge across the track at Prost (his team mate, for goodness’ sake) while they were both doing 190 mph in their McLarens down the main straight, right in front of the pits? Or Suzuka, where he rammed Prost from behind at 200-plus in the first corner knowing the Frenchman had to win the race to keep alive his hope of the world title? So when Senna crunched his McLaren into the back of Mansell’s Williams at Adelaide, it simply seemed to Mensell like part of the Brazilian’s established pattern of behaviour. The extension of this line of reasoning was a stab at guessing Senna’s motivation. Perhaps he just wanted to deprive Mansell of the satisfaction of ending his world championship season with a win. Perhaps he wanted to hoist a signal for the next season, one announcing that while he might have lost his title, he was nevertheless still not a man to trifle with. As Senna used to say, “It has to be my way or no way.”

And Schumacher had the audacity to try it few times – some with success (in 1994), and some without (in 1997).

Benetton arrived on the 1994 grid ready to race and ready to win. Michael Schumacher won the opening two races, Brazil and the Pacific, only for rivals to accuse Benetton of running illegal traction control. One of those throwing out the accusations was triple World Champion Ayrton Senna. After investigation Motorsport's governing body found that Briatore's team had software "capable of breaching the regulations" but there was no proof that they had used it and therefore no action was taken.

1994 on lap 36 of the last race of the season in Australia Schumacher clipped the guardrail while leading from Hill. With his race over by then, he steered towards Hill's path as the latter was passing him, forcing a crash that took Hill out of the race. As neither he nor Hill scored, Schumacher won a very controversial championship, the first German to do so (Jochen Rindt raced under the Austrian flag).

A lot of controversy about Senna was also confined to his to robust methods of defense, something that Schumacher also got quite a lot of criticism for. I do feel that a lot of what Senna got criticized for in his time seems fairly tame by modern standards – his squeezing of Prost centimeters towards the pit wall at Portugal in 1988 elicited shrieks of outrage at the time but today we would probably consider it a straightforward defense. Perhaps in some time we will come to see some of Schumacher’s defensive moves including the notorious ‘Schuey chop’ (performed on number of drivers including his own brother Ralf) in much the same way?


There was another incident 2002 involving Michael. If you ask me, that was more Ferrari shame then Michael's. But total embarrassment for him. The 2002 Austrian Grand Prix saw Schumacher’s team mate Rubens Barrichello out qualifyed the German and lead virtually the entire race when radio orders came through with eight laps remaining to let Schumi by. Arguments raged over the last few laps until Barrichello moved over on the start/finish straight. And for what? So Schumacher could extend his lead over Juan Pablo Montoya to 27 points rather than 23 points? The crowd booed. Ferrari got fined and criticized. Team orders were banned. And everyone was very embarrassed. Including Michael. Despite he “win” the race, during the ceremony hi put Rubens on top step, and he went to second step of the podium.

But the brazen and transparent stunt he pulled at Monaco in 2006 will surely not be remembered so kindly, nor the arrogance with which he and Ferrari presumed no-one-else-would-figure-out what he was up to. During qualifying for Monaco GP 2006, Schumacher had set the fastest lap and was on pole. However, on Schumacher's last lap before qualifying ended, he was ahead of Alonso on the track, and running a pace off of his best time. Alonso, also on his last lap, was running at a pace that would put him on pole. It's suspected that Schumacher knew this, and entering one of the final corners, a tight 180 degree turn, spun his car 90 degrees, effectively blocking the track and forcing a caution flag, and ruining Alonso's very fast last lap. And to this day Schumacher has not apologised for parking his car in qualifying at Monaco in 2006 to stop Fernando Alonso beating him to pole position.

You can go back to Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost, and go forward to Alonso and Vettel now. These are great drivers and part of their greatness is their absolute belief that what they are doing is the right thing.
Humility is those who recognise that what they have done is wrong. Some have done that and some have left the sport, or even gone to the grave, with a stubbornness never to say sorry.

Senna and Schumacher from the past, who pushed things to the limit and beyond at times in pursuit of glory, neither driver to my knowledge disobeyed a team order. Senna and Prost fell out over violations of agreements between themselves, but not of rules imposed by the team.

So, if they are under pressure I would give Senna the edge, I don't know why. My feeling says that he is better under pressure, but I don't know if I am able to say that. Looks like Senna can control himself better, but not for much. Controversies and number of them for each driver can show as how good they are under pressure.

I think on tactics Schumacher has little bit the edge. Of course he has a team around him, but he was so superb with those things. He was an exceptional racing driver and he worked for a team that gave him all the benefits of being an undisputed number one, and he exploited that. He can perform and transform in a race and can deliver a tactic. Senna, sadly, couldn't show us this in the refueling era (remember, 1994 was the first year).
As a team man Schumacher is few steps higher than Senna, because of his capacity to transform a team, first Benetton then Ferrari, which Senna never did and never had the force and desire to do. Michael criticisms to the team are constructive where Senna’s were destructive. Senna always goes for the better team and when he leaves the team, it is not better than when he arrives. McLaren, Lotus and Williams are an example of this. With Schumacher the opposite happens, he improves the teams. It was not only he, team was better. When he left Benetton, it was still great team. With no so great drivers.
I will quote the words of one of the most respected voices in F1, Sir Jackie Stewart: “Schumacher’s greatest feat was not winning seven world titles, but turning Ferrari into Formula One’s best team. Michael brought Ferrari from 21 years of not winning anything to being champions many times. I put that down much more to him than President Luca di Montezemolo or team boss Jean Todt. Without Michael Schumacher it would not have happened. Generally speaking, I think it’s true to say he re-shaped Ferrari and made the Ferrari the car it is today.“

Alan Henry, a Grand Prix reporter, working in Formula 1 since the early 1970s. He is the Formula One correspondent and was holding the title of Editor at Large of "F1 Racing" magazine. Henry is also the chief editor of the yearly Autocourse Formula One season review books, a position he has held since 1988 and Grand Prix editor of Autocar magazine. In Autocourse 1997-98 Alan Henry wrote:
"Schumacher remains the most complete driver in F1 today. Apart from the dazzling car control, Michael rules his Italian team with a psychological rod of iron, taking as much responsibility for technical decisions as he does for capitalizing on them during the race. . . . Jackie Stewart believes that the man who eventually eclipses Schumacher is not yet even in F1. He could be right."
It is a fact that Schumacher, like stated before, transformed teams into winners and champions. He did it with Benetton and also with Ferrari. He made them better. But one thing must be clear here. To be number one in any team, you have to earn it. You have to perform. No team in the world will give you number one status if you are slow and scrappy driver.

Schumacher could choose to drive for Williams in 1996 but he chose (in this period of time scrappy) Ferrari, which I admire really. He could have won more championships if he went to Williams. But he prefers to be a one who build a team aroud him. And that is not that bad really. It is a way to achieve your goals and goals of the team effectively and if he wouldn't deliver, he never would have achieved that number one status. Especially in Ferrari. You remember that Ferrari axed Prost few years earlier.

Ferrari had suffered a disastrous downturn in the early 1990s, partially as its famous V12 engine was no longer competitive against the smaller, lighter and more fuel efficient V10s of its competitors. Alain Prost had give the vehicles labels such as "truck", "pig", and "accident waiting to happen". The poor performance of the Ferrari pit crews was considered a running joke too. At the end of 1995, though the team had improved into a solid competitor, it was still considered inferior to front-running teams such as Benetton and Williams. During 1996 season, the car had had reliability problems and Schumacher did not finish 6 of the 16 races. But Schumacher never complained really hard on the team, even when it was critical. He was always positive to the team even in bad times. He never slammed the team and this is positive about him. I also admire his “We win as the team, and we lose as the team” attitude.

"His rapture at winning that race (His first win at Spa 1992) is something that he has continued to show with every successive win. Here is a man who delights in winning and takes no win for granted. He understands that to cross the finish-line ahead of all the others involves a massive amount of effort – effort by the whole team, as well as the driver – a simple fact that some other drivers have clearly forgotten.
On the occasion of that first win, as with each of his subsequent wins, Michael's sheer happiness is recognition of all that team effort, from the work of the fabricators, the machinists, the composite specialists, the electricians, the mechanics and the drawing office. The toil of hundreds is reflected in the utter joy of his podium celebrations.
On returning to the garage he shook everyone by the hand, thanking us all individually for our help, another genuine show of appreciation that would continue with each subsequent win. I have never felt such an integral part of a team than when working with Michael and sharing in the pleasure of one of our victories.
Steve Matchett in his book "The Mechanic's Tale: Life in the pit lanes of Formula 1"

Team was always first. But one race that sticks in my mind to proof this was the one he raced hours after his mother died after a tragic accident. San Marino GP 2003. He could have not raced, but he knew the team was desperate for the points. He put aside his grief and won the race. How the hell he managed that with the emotion he was going through is a lasting memory of his heyday. Jean Todt, who attended the post-race news conference in his driver's place, said the decision over whether to compete had been left to Schumacher: "I think it was very important. He decided together with his brother yesterday to go to Germany and definitely he felt in a way more comfortable having been there," said the Frenchman. "Today again Michael has shown the dimension of what he is as a driver and as a man. It's a shame sometimes that people may want not to understand what he is. Today I think he has done a big demonstration and we are very proud of him."

The last race of his first racing period, 2006 Brazilian Grand Prix, Schumacher had one of quickest times during the first session and was fastest in the second session; but a fuel pressure problem prevented him from completing a single lap during the third session, forcing him to start the race in tenth position. Early in the race Schumacher moved up to sixth place. However, in overtaking Alonso's teammate, Giancarlo Fisichella, Schumacher experienced a tyre puncture caused by the front wing of Fisichella's car. Schumacher pitted and consequently fell to 19th place, 70 seconds behind teammate and race leader Felipe Massa. Schumacher recovered and overtook both Fisichella and Räikkönen to secure fourth place. His performance was classified in the press as "heroic" (BBC Sport. 22. October 2006), an "utterly breath-taking drive" (ManipeF1. 22 October 2006) and a "performance that ... sums up his career" (PitPass. 3 November 2006).

Schumacher held every major record in the sport when he hung up his helmet in 2006. With nothing to prove, after three years of "pension", he climbed back into the Mercedes AMG cockpit in 2010. While the Mercedes car was expected to be fast, it flattered to deceive and through his last three seasons, the marque has notched up just a single win. Schumacher, though, continued to race. And race hard. There have increasingly been signs that his abilities have been waning, with clear driving errors in Barcelona - when he drove into the back of Bruno Senna - and Singapore GP 2012 when he drove into the back of Jean-Eric Vergne's Toro Rosso.
By his high standards he has failed in his second stint, but only the finest cynics would hold that against him given that Mercedes have not created the car that they were hoping for in the given period of time. Rather he has driven admirably for a 43-year-old.
So what are we to make of Schumacher's second career then? Well, it may have failed to produce an eighth championship - or a race win - but his three seasons with Mercedes have certainly underscored his reputation as one of the greatest competitors in F1 history.
What has been proven again over the past three years in his second career, is that unlike other great champions such as Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost, the German has never demanded the best machinery when considering his drive.
After winning his first two titles with Benetton in 1994 and 1995, he signed for Ferrari - a team that had managed just two race wins in the previous four seasons.
Schumacher's approach was very different to Prost, for example, who chose to take a sabbatical in 1992 rather than race in uncompetitive machinery. He returned in 1993, to win the title in the best car: Williams Renault. Similarly, Senna had tried his utmost to leave an uncompetitive McLaren team in 1992 and 1993. Both drivers demanded no less than the best. Schumacher, however, was willing to drag a team up from the bottom. Thats why he joined Mercedes in the first place, as the payback to the team which helped him to enter profesional racing and finaly to Formula1. The challenge that Schumacher took on was therefore greater than that of simply winning a few races - he was looking to contribute to a bigger project.
As Ross Brawn, Mercedes team principal, said after Michael announced his final retirement, "I think Michael brought a lot to the Mercedes team in this second period that people don't see. There was a huge contribution behind the scenes. We have not achieved what we wanted to achieve together, and that is frustrating, but I think what we do achieve in the future, Michael will have made a contribution to it. So for me personally, (that is why) he is the greatest racing driver of this century."
Like Stirling Moss before him, Schumacher is different in this regard. And it's something which should be taken into account when history comes to measure his career.

This you can’t say about Senna. You cannot say that he transformed team into a better one. This is also stated before. He always choose the best team, which doesn't mean that it was easy. Let this be clear! He drove against Prost at McLaren. And he realy wanted to be team driver number 1; 1986 De Angelis was replaced at Lotus by Scot Johnny Dumfries after Senna vetoed Derek Warwick from joining the team, saying that Lotus were not able to run competitive cars for two top drivers at the same time. Senna later admitted "It was bad, bad. Until then I had a good relationship with Derek."
One notable incident of the year was at the Monaco Grand Prix 1988 where Senna outqualified Prost by 1.4 seconds and led for most of the race before crashing on lap 67. Instead of returning to the pitlane, Senna went back to his apartment.
Comparing to Schumacher he was not always that positive on the team. He was upset in 1993 while driving for McLaren and said some really bad things about his team. This was his character. Compare this with Schumacher in Ferrari 2005.
Hakkinen was McLaren's test driver back in 1993, but he took the racing seat when American Michael Andretti was dumped by the team with three races to go, becoming Senna's teammate for the rest of the season. That's what he sad about working with Senna:
"I learned a lot from Ayrton. I used to watch Ayrton so closely. I would try to understand what he was doing. Senna and hakkinenI would try to look at him all the time. Ayrton's dedication to racing was incredible, and that was the thing that gave him the ability to do what he did. He wasn't a very easy person to work with. I raced with him three times in '93 – from Estoril onwards – and it was very difficult, extremely difficult.“
Hakkinen was the last driver to outqualify Senna, who lost his life only five races later. One of the best moments of his career, Hakkinen recalled, was outqualifying Senna in his first race for McLaren, at the 1993 Portuguese Grand Prix. He sad about that:
"It was extremely close, but I beat him. It was a great feeling. I wasn't shouting about it – I was just there doing my job. To drive as fast as possible was my job. He and I had a discussion afterwards. He wasn't very happy about my behavior. He was very upset with me."
Senna was visibly ****ed-off for starting behind Mika.

On pure mentality I would give Senna the edge. He had this ability to focus and put more out of his human body. That's very special.... it’s like a form of yoga. Some people are born with that and others not. This ability you cannot learn, he was born with it and it was God given.
I also believe that Senna had more raw natural (God given) talent than Michael, but Michael can compensate that with tactics and race craft and he learns quickly.

When he announced his comeback back in December 2009, he talked about winning the world title. Instead, we can see his return to F1 than as a failure. Especialy at first two years. Third year was like Michael was reborn again. Although Rosberg has taken the team's only win - in China 2012, when he was demonstrably superior all weekend, Schumacher has been the better Mercedes driver this year. Schumacher has suffered by far the worst of the team's frankly unacceptable reliability record and would certainly have been ahead of Rosberg in the championship had that not been the case. And he might even have won in Monaco had not a five-place grid penalty demoted him from pole position.

His struggles since his return have had an unfortunate effect on Schumacher's legacy. People within F1 - people with the highest regard for his achievements - have begun to question what went before. But if you watched him during his first career, though, you know how ridiculous an assertion this is. Schumacher in his pomp was undoubtedly one of the very greatest racing drivers there has ever been, a man who was routinely, on every lap, able to dance on a limit accessible to almost no-one else. Schumacher performed miracles with a racing car that stands comparison with the greatest drives of any era. That, after all, is what Schumacher was, as well as one of the very greatest there has ever been.

What if... Senna survived the Tamburello crashed and simply stepped out of the car unharmed but lost yet another race to Schumacher? Or win it?

Would Senna have set the record straight at Monaco and took another win at his favourite circuit and then take the title from Schumacher? Would he have reached a record breaking 100 pole positions or 100 wins? How many more seasons would Ayrton has done? I believe he could have ended his career as late as 2000-ish. But what will happen if... nobody knows. It's the shame but we can't discus that.

[Aysedasi]

For me, Senna, unquestionably Senna. (But those who know me would only expect that.... ).

[Adam43]

Oh crikey, I don’t know.

[FIRE]

Very, very difficult.

Senna

[Gerard C]

Very, very, very difficult.
Schumacher.

[S griffin]

Again, another two who had similar traits. Both were ruthless drivers, who overstepped the mark of acceptable behaviour on several occasions. Both were also the acknowledged wet weather specialists of their time

I’ll go with Senna. He was quicker over one lap and also wasn’t afraid to go against a superstar team mate, as he did with Prost. Schumi never was put to that test

[FastDB2s]

Senna

[Anyopenroad]

Head says Schumacher, heart says Senna.

Went for heart.

[Gerard C]

Same dilemma here.
Breaks my heart and went for head.

[Aysedasi]

Head and heart for me.....

[Racing Harz]

Senna!

[BTCC frog]

For me the head said Schumacher, and the heart didn't have an opinion. So I went with Schumacher.

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

Head says Schumacher, heart says Senna

I agree. Sooooo difficult. Went for head.