prost had already signed to ferrari to this time, so the crowd were on prost's side. in fact mclaren was in senna's side, remember during practice senna's car covered by tech and mechanics and prost let alone in the box, the commentetor said early in this race that the max speed of senna during practice and qualify was 10km faster then prost just for the love of the truth
What a shame. Ayrton drove a dominating race. He had some bad luck in 89. Portugal was a mistake, even with Mansell under black flag, but Monza and Canada were just bad breaks. Prost lost at Hockenheim when he lost top gear, BUT Senna lost the lead with a slower pit stop. They were lapping at almost same speed there.
Senna was tremendously unlucky in 89. He should have won in Detroit, in Montreal, in Silverstone, in Monza, and in Estoril. If you watch all the races, it's clear he was even better in 89 than in 88 compared to Prost.
i didn't write well, but you can't read!! i ever said that Prost was faster or better than Senna, at this stages of their own careers?? NO!!! t's obvious the opposite. mclaren was happier if the WC become Senna, the future of the f1 and of the team, or Prost who was already gone to ferrari??? and Honda, wich had a special relation with Senna, in fact Prost wanted Ayrton as teammate because in this way mclaren was sure to have honda's engines?? nothing scandalous about all that....continue
5:37 Após o abandono de Senna, Murray Walker: "Fico imaginando o que Alain Prost vai falar sobre favorecimento [a Senna, por parte da Honda e da McLaren] porque o carro dele está certamente andando perfeitamente". Prost reclamou muito nessa temporada sobre favorecimento, mas foi Senna o arrebentado por problemas mecânicos na metade da temporada.
this things were, and are, the normality in f1. only to say that this 22 sec MAYBE weren't all in the right foot difference. so Senna's engine was more fragile? come on, don't write this things, people are reading it, so mecca or honda was helping Prost by define the "fragility" of the engines?? it is what you say? the more failure on Senna's engine were probably only casuality, or maybe Prost was a little more gentle with the car (notorious fact), or maybe the engines were different. who knows?
For the 'love of truth' Senna is 22 seconds ahead of Prost at round 50. ONLY because Senna's engine problems enabled Prost to win this race! Take your Prost fanboy earplugs out! The commentator says that Senna has won 5 out of last 6 races and that this Italian GP would have been Prost's FIFTH second. Second place is first for losers! Senna's engine was more fragile than Prost's therefore he retired more in 89 and thus Prost could snatch the title from him.
mad at you??? i'm having fun!!! you have understood the point kid, as you said "senna had a more powerful engine"...so in this situation mecca and honda had obviously favored senna...who was by the way faster then alain, but not su much as people think. clear??
Then you continue that I should not write 'this' things (excuse me it is 'these') because 'people are reading it'. Do you seriously think anybody cares? No I am not saying they were not helping Prost, that is your interpretation, I mean Senna had a more powerful, yet vulnerable engine. That is why he retired more, not because Senna wrecked the engine all the time. is what Prost fanboys keep arguing.
Actually it IS sometimes very hard to understand what point you are making, your comments contain a lot of convoluted, inconsistent garbage that hardly makes sense to anybody. 22 seconds maybe weren't all blahblah what are you blathering? Then you continue to say that I am not supposed to write anything on a more fragile engine, yet you confirm that their engines may have been different. THAT is what I am saying!
senna wasn't DSQ at any belgian gp hakkinen didn't win at 37 you do that stupid 88-93 victory count, and then say that other comparison than 88-89 is bullshit. you swear at who says that mecca had favored senna, and then say that senna had a more powerful engine (why they gave him more HP, genius?) so good grammar, but confused ideas.
prost had already signed to ferrari to this time, so the crowd were on prost's side.
in fact mclaren was in senna's side, remember during practice senna's car covered by tech and mechanics and prost let alone in the box, the commentetor said early in this race that the max speed of senna during practice and qualify was 10km faster then prost
just for the love of the truth
What a shame. Ayrton drove a dominating race. He had some bad luck in 89. Portugal was a mistake, even with Mansell under black flag, but Monza and Canada were just bad breaks. Prost lost at Hockenheim when he lost top gear, BUT Senna lost the lead with a slower pit stop. They were lapping at almost same speed there.
this race pair the german gp, when prost was ahed of senna all the time and had gearbox problem in the last laps
Senna was tremendously unlucky in 89. He should have won in Detroit, in Montreal, in Silverstone, in Monza, and in Estoril. If you watch all the races, it's clear he was even better in 89 than in 88 compared to Prost.
i didn't write well, but you can't read!!
i ever said that Prost was faster or better than Senna, at this stages of their own careers?? NO!!! t's obvious the opposite.
mclaren was happier if the WC become Senna, the future of the f1 and of the team, or Prost who was already gone to ferrari???
and Honda, wich had a special relation with Senna, in fact Prost wanted Ayrton as teammate because in this way mclaren was sure to have honda's engines?? nothing scandalous about all that....continue
5:37 Após o abandono de Senna, Murray Walker: "Fico imaginando o que Alain Prost vai falar sobre favorecimento [a Senna, por parte da Honda e da McLaren] porque o carro dele está certamente andando perfeitamente".
Prost reclamou muito nessa temporada sobre favorecimento, mas foi Senna o arrebentado por problemas mecânicos na metade da temporada.
this things were, and are, the normality in f1.
only to say that this 22 sec MAYBE weren't all in the right foot difference. so Senna's engine was more fragile? come on, don't write this things, people are reading it, so mecca or honda was helping Prost by define the "fragility" of the engines?? it is what you say?
the more failure on Senna's engine were probably only casuality, or maybe Prost was a little more gentle with the car (notorious fact), or maybe the engines were different. who knows?
For the 'love of truth' Senna is 22 seconds ahead of Prost at round 50. ONLY because Senna's engine problems enabled Prost to win this race!
Take your Prost fanboy earplugs out! The commentator says that Senna has won 5 out of last 6 races and that this Italian GP would have been Prost's FIFTH second.
Second place is first for losers!
Senna's engine was more fragile than Prost's therefore he retired more in 89 and thus Prost could snatch the title from him.
mad at you??? i'm having fun!!!
you have understood the point kid, as you said "senna had a more powerful engine"...so in this situation mecca and honda had obviously favored senna...who was by the way faster then alain, but not su much as people think.
clear??
é...nessa corrida o senna deu azar.....e deu azar em portugal tambem.....
Then you continue that I should not write 'this' things (excuse me it is 'these') because 'people are reading it'.
Do you seriously think anybody cares?
No I am not saying they were not helping Prost, that is your interpretation, I mean Senna had a more powerful, yet vulnerable engine.
That is why he retired more, not because Senna wrecked the engine all the time. is what Prost fanboys keep arguing.
E os "entendidos" dizem que ele perdeu esse campeonato porque "se afobou e errou muito".
Actually it IS sometimes very hard to understand what point you are making, your comments contain a lot of convoluted, inconsistent garbage that hardly makes sense to anybody.
22 seconds maybe weren't all blahblah what are you blathering?
Then you continue to say that I am not supposed to write anything on a more fragile engine, yet you confirm that their engines may have been different. THAT is what I am saying!
senna wasn't DSQ at any belgian gp
hakkinen didn't win at 37
you do that stupid 88-93 victory count, and then say that other comparison than 88-89 is bullshit.
you swear at who says that mecca had favored senna, and then say that senna had a more powerful engine (why they gave him more HP, genius?)
so good grammar, but confused ideas.
erase also this!!!!!!!
ahahahhahaha