Senna isn't listed in the ages of "dominant" cars because it was clear his skill transcended the car. From Toleman, to Lotus, to Mclaren, to Williams, his skill shone through, sometimes despite the car (i.e. Williams not being allowed their active suspension).Nando wrote:First of all, that first sentence makes no sense whatsoever.jdlive wrote:Every domination period in F1 has been in dominant cars since at least the last 30y. Why do we never hear this argument used for Senna and only for Schumacher and Vettel?
Second of all, neither does the second sentence.
Schumacher won with Benneton, and then destroyed the field with Ferrari. Vettel won with Toro Rosso, and then won with Red Bull twice.
That is why senna is always regarded as one of - if not the - best. He did amazing things in every machine he was asked to drive, even as what advantage his cars had began to fade - or his car never had an advantage to begin with.
If Alonso can put more of his weight into car development to make 00's era Ferrari dominance, then we'll get to consider Alonso a grand champion.
Considering we're talking about the odds of him losing the WDC and how the f2012 was a dog earlier this season, taking a direct role in the car's design may be the next vital step for Ferrari red topping all the sheets.
Edited to highlight further Senna qualities.
