VIDEO: Clash of the Titans - Stewart interviews Senna
Formula One drivers get interviewed all the time, so their media skills have to be as honed as their driving aptitude. But it's not often you see one of the greatest, most legendary drivers of all time being interviewed by another one of the greatest, most legendary drivers of all time. The few times that does happen, it's good entertainment, giving us an inside glimpse into the paddock dynamics.
Here we bring you the late, great Ayrton Senna being interviewed by F1 guru Sir Jackie Stewart. Watch as old Jackie puts the screws to young Ayrton about race collisions, and check out Ayrton's most patronizing response to his knighted elder.
[Source: F1 Racing]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Billy 1:02PM (1/02/2007)
You can call it patronizing, but I see it as just defensive, and Senna had good reason to be defensive, much of his on-track behavior was inexcusable.
It's nice to see him get called on it by someone whose expertise you can't question.
Reply
Ian 1:22PM (1/02/2007)
It all proves there's more than one way to "skin a cat".
Stewart won because he had incredible driving talent, but he also sometimes settled for a 2nd, or even 3rd place finish, rather than tangle with a perhaps faster car for the one extra position and take home no points for that race.
Senna by comparison could never pull back from any physical challenge on any track at any time. He would therefore rather take home extra points by physically challenging a faster car and staying, or getting ahead, on the bsais of his talent and a clear "if you want to fnish in front of me you and I will crash" attitiude. It worked for him most times, as other drivers ultimately backed off. But sometimes he crashed out.
Both ways worked to get both men many WDCs. And it's personal opinion which attitude is "right or wrong". However from a fan perspective most people enjoyed watching Senna's races rather than Stewarts. Clearly Senna scorned Stewart's approach to racing and Stewart couldn't understand why winning a WDC wasn't more improtant top Senna than an individual race!
There have been many such conflicts of style in F1. There was often incredibly exciting (and dangerous) racing between Senna and Mansell. Neither man would back of.
Hill (Damon) versus Schumacher (Michael) is another expample of one very fast driver against another who would do almost anything to win.
As far as I can recall Jim Clark is the only driver who was incredible fair, yet had the talent to drive around people, w/o the "physical" challenge associated with say a Senna. That's why, for me, Jim Clark still is such a standout driver in the history of GP/F1 racing.
Reply
Billy 1:43PM (1/02/2007)
Good points there, agree with everything you say, but that's exactly why I think Senna is just wrong, no moral relativity here at all. You said his attitude was that he was going to crash both cars if the other guy didn't give way. Imagine two people out there like that, they both crash out in every race. Obviously, he could count on other drivers letting him get away with it often enough, but unfortunately, that is just a contest of who can be more childish, not who can be braver. Basically, when a spoiled child keeps insisting on having his way, the adults have to put their foot down at some point, and, in my opinion, that is what Prost did at their first Suzuka collision - Prost decided he had had enough of being intimidated by his younger, greener teammate. Someone had to do it. Compare Prost's own more respectful behavior when he was the younger, greener, more aggressive teammate of Nikki Lauda.
Also, the more I learn of Fangio and Moss, the more impressed I am by their ability to win races while setting a great example of gentlemanly behavior. Jim Clark wasn't the only one.
I would be interested in hearing about Nuvolari's behavior, as he was just as crazy about winning as Senna or anyone else in history. I don't know anything about how he was seen by other drivers, other than that he and Varzi were great friends.
Reply
Racing videos 2:34PM (1/02/2007)
Both awesome drivers, One more aggressive then the other.
Reply
Opposite Lock 2:53PM (1/02/2007)
I think it was a function of the times. When all those other drivers were racing, if they crashed, they'd be dead. But by the time senna was racing, the cars had become safe enough that one could be aggressive while still being safer than a cautious Stewart was in his time.
Reply
Billy 3:00PM (1/02/2007)
Very true, that's why I am particularly interested in Nuvolari and Varzi et al. Those cars were even more dangerous than the ones Fangio, or Stewart, drove. The Auto Unions were especially impressive - rear wheelspin at over 100mph!!!!!!!!!!!
Racing videos says that both of those 1930's drivers were very aggressive, not sure if that means the same kind of childish egomania that characterized Senna for me. If anyone has any stories about this, please share.
Reply
opposite lock 6:34PM (1/02/2007)
I think racing videos was referring to stewart and senna, not nuvolari.
Reply
Manfredo 7:10PM (1/02/2007)
F1 lately has become rather insuferable. The only moment of exciting racing happens in the first few laps, when one actually sees drivers taking risks to gain a position(s). Thereafter, if you are leading and you do not have some kind of mechanical failure or a tire blow up, odds are you'll win the race. Most F1 drivers seem to be paycheck drivers with little inner drive. That is what made Senna the greatest. He could not stand seeing another driver in front of him. Finishing secong meant that he failed. I wish more drivers had that kind of attitude. Even when he drove with an inferior car, one could always expect Senna to put on a show. If F1 drivers had this kind of mentality, the sport would not be the bore that it has become.
Reply
New Yorker 10:31PM (1/02/2007)
No morals, huh. Put in a YouTube search for "Ayrton Senna rescues Erik Comas". The man gets out of his car in Qualifying in Belgium to help his fellow driver.
What does that mean to those who say no moral relativity? If a race car driver doesn't win what is he? The sole reason to race or even play a sport professionally, is to win. Go Senna.
Reply
istvan varga 2:45AM (1/03/2007)
The RACING DRIVER for me is Ayrton Senna. He was very stricktly with himself, just accepted to be the fastest and the first. He didn't talk much and about other drivers, just concentrated on to be the best in every moment on the track. He made wonders so many times, for example victories with faulty and uncompetitive cars. A lot of people dont know that otherwise he was very human.
Reply
Olivier in Israel 10:06AM (1/03/2007)
Call formula one a sport if you want but it breaks down to entertainment. Senna was the best there ever was. The last records Shumi broke were Senna's and Senna did it in much less races then Shumi did. He was dangerous, he was reckless but he was skilled like none other and Formula One is what it is today as a result. People loved to watch formula one back then because of the show. Today I can't watch a whole race for the life of me. It's sad. Formula One is sad. Nascar, Cart even Lemans all better shows than the sad sight of F1.
Jackie Stewart was jealous of never having been able to compare, all the while hiding behind being a gentleman on the track. He never had the skill to compare himself to The Greatest ever.
Reply