Ayrton Senna: The Battle Against Prost Quiz

Answer: San Marino Grand Prix

It looked like there was nothing special about Senna's overtaking move on Prost in Tosa corner, on the restart of the San Marino Grand Prix. It seemed the race would be remembered for Gerhard Berger's fiery crash in Tamburello corner. Senna would win that Grand Prix with a 40 second lead over Prost, who didn't show up for the post-race press conference. Apparently there had been some sort of agreement between the two drivers not to overtake each other in the first corners of the race. An odd story, since the agreement was made without involvement from the McLaren management. The race would later be remembered as the first step of the Prost-Senna feud. There are many interpretations as to what exactly had been agreed. There could have been a misunderstanding concerning which corner they were not supposed to overtake each other. Another version says Senna felt the agreement was no longer valid on a restart, since the race was run on aggregate timing.

From then on the gloves were off. They stopped sharing data, there were mutual accusations of preferential treatment by the team, and at a certain point they were no longer speaking to each other.

It seems odd that a miscommunication or different interpretation of a shady agreement can lead to such a conflict. I think the whole Senna-Prost conflict was inevitable. There were two champions in the same team, who had a competitive car and both desperately wanted to win. Senna was usually the fastest of the two, and Prost had difficulty coping with the fact that a younger, faster guy had come along. But that's just a personal opinion.

Answer: He retired four times

The good start of the season was followed by an unlucky period. In four consecutive races (USA, Canada, France and Britain) Senna had to retire because of technical failures. In the French Grand Prix his car already broke down on the restart. In the three other races while he was in the lead. Prost took full advantage of Senna's misfortune to win three of those races. Only in Canada Prost's car had broken down before Senna's. It was the only time during the whole season Prost had technical problems. In Canada Senna had a commanding lead until his car had engine trouble two laps from the finish (he was classified seventh). Thierry Boutsen (Williams) won that race.

Senna's bad run meant he now had a considerable points deficit. Prost was leading the championship with 47 points, Senna had 27 points. In the following races Senna managed to reduce the gap a bit. He won in Germany and Belgium (Prost finished second), and came second in Hungary (Prost fourth). Then fate struck again in the Italian Grand Prix. Again he was hit by engine failure, nine laps from the end. Prost won the Italian Grand Prix. Now the points gap was back to 20 points (Prost 71 - Senna 51).

Answer: Mansell was already excluded but didn't abandon the race

For a change the McLaren cars didn't dominate the race. This times the Ferraris were in the lead. Mansell was leading from Berger, with Senna third and Prost fourth. Mansell was the last to come in the pits to change tyres. He entered too fast and overshot his pit box. He then reversed to the correct spot. After the botched pit stop Mansell re-entered the track behind Berger and Senna. Since reversing on track, of which the pits is considered a part, is illegal Mansell was excluded from the race and shown the black flag. However, Mansell didn't come to the pits to abandon the race. He kept going, and on lap 49 he tried to overtake Senna. It was during that overtake both cars collided and were taken out of the race. It was very unfortunate for Senna to collide with a car that shouldn't have been there in the first place. Berger went on to win the Portuguese Grand Prix, Prost came second extending his lead in the championship.

Formula 1 wouldn't be Formula 1 without a good conspiracy theory. Some suggest that Mansell deliberately ignored the black flag. Mansell insisted he hadn't seen it. The governing board suspended Mansell for the next race (Spain) because of the incident.

Answer: Jean-Marie Balestre

FISA was an autonomous committee within FIA (International Automobile Federation), responsible for organising and governing motor races. Balestre was president of FISA from 1978 till 1991, and also of FIA from 1985 till 1993. This position gave him great power in the world of motor races, and Formula 1 in particular. Balestre was a controversial figure who ran both organisations like a dictator. He often seemed to show favouritism towards the big constructor teams.

This led to a conflict with Bernie Ecclestone's FOCA (Formula One Constructors Organisation) in the early 80s. In the so called FISA-FOCA wars both organisations rivalled for control over the sporting and technical regulations and the commercial rights. The dispute reached a climax before the 1982 San Marino Grand Prix, boycotted by the FOCA affiliated teams. Eventually both parties settled in the first Concorde Agreement where the commercial rights of F1 were granted to FOCA and FISA kept control over the sporting and technical regulations.

Balestre was also a close personal friend of Prost, who was very astute at playing the political game, an aspect of the sport Senna didn't concern himself with. Balestre would play a pivotal role in the outcome of the 1989 season.

Answer: True

This may seem as a quaint rule but it had its purpose. In those days the reliability of most cars was quite poor. The rule was there to protect fast but unreliable cars. It usually didn't play an important role anyway. Only in two cases did this rule have an effect on the outcome of the world championship. In 1964 Graham Hill scored 41 points but two were deducted because he had exceeded the allowed number of scores. John Surtees had scored 40 points and won the world championship. In 1988 Senna had already taken advantage of this rule. He had scored 94 points of which he could keep 90. Prost had scored 105 points of which only 87 counted. This made Senna the 1988 world champion.

Because of the superior speed and almost spotless reliability of the McLaren (or at least one of them) the rule could come into play for the 1989 season. We'll have to do some number crunching to understand the consequences:
The points a driver could score in one race were as follows: win - 9 points; second - 6 points; third - 4 points; fourth - 3 points; fifth - 2 points; sixth - 1 point.

The Japanese Grand Prix was the 14th race of 16. Before Japan Senna had scored 60 points. These came from six victories (6 x 9) plus one second place (1 x 6). Prost had scored 81 points of which only 76 counted. Without the rule Prost would already have been world champion. Let's look at Prost's points before the Japanese Grand Prix:

4 wins: 4 x 9 = 36
6 second places: 6 x 6 = 36
1 third, 1 fourth and 1 fifth place: 4 + 3 + 2 = 9
makes a total of 81 points, scoring 13 times (plus one retirement)

Because of the 11 scores rule the two worst results had to be deducted, 81 - 2 - 3 = 76 points.

Senna had only scored seven times so he could keep all the points he would score in the last two races. This means he could still win the world championship if he won the last two races. He then would score 60 + 9 + 9 = 78 points. In that case Prost could potentially score 12 points with two second places. However, Prost would then lose his next two lowest scores (4 and 6 points). Theoretically Prost would then score 76 + 12 - 4 - 6 = 78 points. Both drivers then would have equal points in which case Senna would win the title because he would have more wins.

The consequence of this complicated system is that Prost's results for the last two races were irrelevant. If Senna won them both Prost couldn't beat his point tally no matter where he finished. If Senna didn't win Prost didn't need more points as he would have been out of reach for Senna. This makes the objective for Prost in the Japanese Grand Prix pretty clear: he only had to make sure Senna didn't win.

Answer: Senna continued and won the race but was disqualified

Senna started from pole position but it was Prost who took the lead of the race. Senna stayed in second position for most of the race, but started closing in on Prost from lap 40. It is notoriously difficult to overtake on the Suzuka circuit. The only realistic chance was coming out of turn 130R and passing your opponent before entering the chicane. On lap 47 Prost left some space on the right side of the track, and Senna went for it. What then happened is history. The two cars collided just before the chicane. Senna's front wing was damaged but the marshals gave him a push so he could continue. He drove back on the track via the escape road. He then went into the pits to change the front wing. When he left the pits Alessandro Nannini (Benetton) had taken the lead. Prost had retired although his car wasn't damaged. When he noticed that Senna was able continue the race he went straight to the office of the race directors. There were only six laps left for Senna to overtake Nannini. He managed to close the gap and overtook him, again before entering the chicane. Senna crossed the finish line first for what should have been an epic victory. However, the podium ceremony was postponed. After about half an hour Nannini was pronounced the winner. Senna was disqualified for cutting the chicane. This meant that Prost had won the world championship.

A lot has been said about those events, and still people can't agree as to who did what to whom. Ultimately, everyone must decide for himself what had happened. But, if you look closely at the images you will see that car number two turned to the right long before the chicane.

Obviously McLaren appealed against the disqualification. In a press conference McLaren boss Ron Dennis showed footage of several incidents with drivers using the escape road to cut a chicane. There were never any exclusions, penalties or disqualifications. The rules also say that drivers can cut a chicane when their car is in a dangerous position. Was Senna's car in a dangerous position? Almost every other driver seemed to think so, almost.

Answer: Senna was fined $ 100,000 and given a six-month license suspension

McLaren's appeal was heard five days after the race. Although the appeal was only supposed to pronounce judgement on Senna's disqualification from the Japanese Grand Prix it soon turned into more than that. The Court of Appeal didn't pass a verdict that day but postponed the case. Ron Dennis gave the press copies of a rapport FISA had presented before the Court of Appeal condemning Senna as 'a driver who endangers the safety of the other drivers'. On Tuesday, October 31 the Court of Appeal revealed their judgement. Not only was the disqualification from the Japanese Grand Prix confirmed, Senna was also fined $ 100,000 and given a six-month licence suspension. The license suspension was suspended for six months.

This verdict was generally met with outrage. Most F1 followers believed the hearing of the Court of Appeal had been farcical. Dennis claimed that the report made by the stewards after the Japanese Grand Prix was changed when it was presented before the Court of Appeal. It is also very remarkable that Senna was blamed for a number of incidents that had happened before the Japanese Grand Prix, when there were never any official complaints from other drivers or other teams, and there were no reports from marshals blaming Senna for those incidents.

Answer: No, he had to retire after a collision with Martin Brundle

The Australian Grand Prix started under a bad atmosphere with the incidents of the Japanese Grand Prix looming over the event. McLaren's threat to challenge FISA and the verdict of the Court of Appeal before an independent civil court meant Senna still had an outside chance to win the world championship. Senna had openly defied FISA by accusing its president, Jean-Marie Balestre, of meddling in the Japanese affair and abusing his power to have him disqualified.

On race day it was raining heavily. Senna started from pole position and took the lead on the first lap. The race had to be stopped after the first lap because several cars had spun off and were blocking the road. Several drivers, including Prost, found the conditions too dangerous and argued that the restart should be postponed, or even cancelled. Senna didn't take part in this improvised driver meeting and stayed in his car the whole time. If the race was cancelled he would lose his last chance at the title. The race officials decided that the race would be restarted. Prost refused to take part in the restart and withdrew from the race.

At the restart Senna immediately pulled away and was already nine seconds ahead after one lap. After a couple of laps he was already lapping other cars. When trying to lap Martin Brundle he smashed into the back of his Brabham and had to retire. This meant his last chance had gone and Prost's victory in the 1989 world championship was certain. The race was won by Thierry Boutsen. There would be no court case against FISA since the result of the Australian Grand Prix had made that useless.

The 1989 season had ended but the controversy would continue the whole winter. Balestre revoked Senna's licence unless he would publicly withdraw the statements he made about the world championship being manipulated. In the end Senna apologised to Balestre, probably under much pressure from Dennis and Honda. The suspension of his licence would never be implemented, so he was free to compete in the 1990 world championship. Senna later denied having apologised to Balestre.

Answer: Pole position was situated on the wrong side of the track

Senna had pole position but he felt it should be on the left side of the track, not the right. The left side of the track was the racing line. There is a layer of rubber on the racing line which gives more grip. There was less grip on the right side of the track. Senna thought the pole position should confer the advantage it implied.

Before qualifying Senna and teammate Gerhard Berger had gone to the officials and asked them to change the pole position to the other side of the track because they felt it was in the wrong place. The officials agreed. After Senna got pole position Balestre had given the order not to change the pole position after all.

Answer: Senna and Prost collided in the first turn

The 1990 season was again decided by a collision between the two protagonists. As predicted Prost had the better start and took the lead. He left a bit of space going into the first corner. Senna went for the gap and the two cars touched each other. Both cars were taken out in the incident. Prost's retirement meant Senna was the 1990 world champion. The race was won by Nelson Piquet, but nobody really cared about that.

In stark contrast with the incident the year before there were no disqualifications, trials, fines or suspensions. The shenanigans after the 1989 Japanese Grand Prix had further damaged Balestre's already bad reputation. In 1991 he failed to be reelected as chairman of FISA. Max Mosley had beaten him with 43 votes to 29. After Senna had won the 1991 world championship, again in Japan, he was free to speak about the events that had marred the previous two championships. He repeated his accusation that Balestre had manipulated the 1989 world championship, and spoke at length about the collisions, his suspension, the alleged apology, and the decision not to change the pole position in 1990. It would lead us too far to repeat everything here, but it makes some interesting reading, and if you're interested in the matter the whole content of the press-conference is available on the internet.