Champion of Champions: Ayrton Senna vs Damon Hill

Ayrton Senna vs Damon Hill

Champion of ChampionsPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Champion of Champions: Ayrton Senna vs Damon Hill

Ayrton Senna and Damon Hill’s F1 careers overlapped as Hill’s was beginning and Senna’s was coming to its sadly premature end.

They started just three races as team mates at Williams in 1994 before Senna was killed at Imola.

Senna made his F1 debut in 1984 with the Toleman team. He swiftly made an impression by taking second place at Monaco in the rain – he was catching leader Alain Prost as the race was halted.

He moved to Lotus and scored his maiden win in similar conditions in Portugal. Senna made the team his own, staying there for three years before deciding his best chances of winning the championship would come with a move to McLaren.

That meant sharing a team with Prost and so began one of the most notorious rivalries the sport has ever seen.

Senna claimed the crown in 1988 as the pair won 15 of the 16 races. But unreliability knocked his title defence off-course in 1989 and Prost took the title after controversially colliding with Senna in at Suzuka.

Their feud continued in 1990 after Prost left to join Ferrari. This time the title went to Senna, who returned Prost’s favour from 1989 by crashing into him in Japan.

Senna and McLaren were under attack from a different direction in 1991 – Nigel Mansell and the increasingly formidable Williams-Renault combination. While Senna retained his crown that year he was powerless to stop Mansell dominating the 1992 championship.

Prost took over from Mansell at Williams the following year and the result was much the same – though Senna managed to take five wins.

Prost’s team mate in 1993 was Hill, who landed the seat after a few outings for Brabham the previous year. He made a halting start in the first races of his debut season, but rebounded to win three races in a row later in the year.

Senna’s time with Williams was over all too soon and it was left to Hill to carry the team’s championship chances in a car which was not the dominant force its predecessors had been.

He came close to getting the job done. But at Adelaide it was Hill’s turn to be taken out by a rival in a championship-deciding race – at the hands of Michael Schumacher.

Schumacher defeated Hill even more emphatically in 1995. But in 1996 Hill rebounded, winning the championship after a season-long battle with new team mate Jacques Villeneuve.

Even so Williams decided not to retain his services. Hill joined Arrows for a largely joyless 1997, but after changing teams he gave Jordan their first race win in 1998. He retired after one more season with them.

Which of these drivers should go through to the next round of the Champion of Champions? Vote for which you think was best below and explain who you voted for and why in the comments.

Ayrton Senna Damon Hill
Ayrton Senna, Williams, 1994 Damon Hill, Williams, 1994
Titles 1988, 1990, 1991 1996
Second in title year/s Alain Prost, Alain Prost, Nigel Mansell Jacques Villeneuve
Teams Toleman, Lotus, McLaren, Williams Brabham, Williams, Arrows, Jordan
Notable team mates Alain Prost, Gerhard Berger, Mika Hakkinen Alain Prost, David Coulthard, Jacques Villeneuve
Starts 161 115
Wins 41 (25.47%) 22 (19.13%)
Poles 65 (40.37%) 20 (17.39%)
Modern points per start1 11.68 9.49
% car failures2 20.50 14.78
Modern points per finish3 14.70 11.13
Notes Won three titles in four years with McLaren Narrowly missed 1994 title after collision with Schumacher
Controversial clash with Prost sealed second title Clinched championship in 1996 after year-long battle with Jacques Villeneuve
Killed in third race for Williams in 1994 Nearly gave Arrows their first win at Hungary in 1997, did give Jordan their first win at Belgium the following year
Bio Ayrton Senna Damon Hill

1 How many points they scored in their career, adjusted to the 2010 points system, divided by the number of races they started
2 The percentage of races in which they were not classified due to a mechanical failure
3 How many points they scored in their career, adjusted to the 2010 points system, divided by the number of starts in which they did not suffer a race-ending mechanical failure

Which was the better world champion driver?

  • Ayrton Senna (94%)
  • Damon Hill (7%)

Total Voters: 686

Loading ... Loading ...

You need an F1 Fanatic account to vote. Register an account here or read more about registering here.

Read the F1 Fanatic Champion of Champions introduction for more information and remember to check back tomorrow for the next round.

Have you voted in the previous rounds of Champion of Champions yet? Find them all here:

Champion of Champions

Browse all Champion of Champions articles

Images ?é?® Williams/Sutton

188 comments on “Ayrton Senna vs Damon Hill”

  1. Hi Keith,

    This seems to have pulled through the poll from Raikkonen vs Vettel

    1. For the record my vote goes to Senna, hands down.

    2. Sorry that should be fixed now.

      1. Thanks Keith :D

      2. Keith can you make the log in button more prominent please? Like put it at the top of the page and make it bigger. Every time I’m lost when I come to the page.

        1. It’s already at the top of the page…

  2. Oh this one’s hardly fair! Sorry Damon, much as I love ya’.

    1. Agreed… love Damon think he could have been a 3 or 4 times World Champion if things had gone slightly differently for him (not being crashed into), but when compared to Senna there is only one way I am voting.

      1. In what dream world would Hill have won more than one championship? Just not good enough, therefore before clicking on Senna I was wondering if Hill had a vote at all or if I’d see a big fat 0 behind his name.

        1. He is, after all, famous for association to the number ‘0’

        2. Well, in one where some German didn’t punt him off the road for starters.

      2. miguelF1O (@)
        14th January 2011, 4:30

        ohooho so funny damon was rubbish.

        1. that’s right, he’s rubbish, so how many world championships have you won miguelf10? Of course, none… who’s more rubbish now.

        2. Rubbish? He finished 3rd in his first meaningful year, and had 4 straight years in the top 3, and when his car held out and didn’t fall to pieces, he usually finished on the podium, more often than not, in 1st place.

          A Rubbish driver! Is someone who has a great car, and fails to do anything with it… mm, like Luca Badoer for example. He put’s the Bad, in Badoer. ;)

    2. @ajokay

      I fully agree. I fully supported Damon while he was battling against the Evil in Schumacher’s body. And I always was a Proster. But man, Senna was THE DRIVER. Absolutely.

      @Andy W

      The only ONE who put Damon out of the champions race was DAMON himself. He recently said that on an F1Racing interview, when he told us how he failed to understand Williams will never ever pay him more than he was paid, even if he was the WDC. So he had to move on, and close his bid to run multiply drivers championships.

      1. I think Andy W was referring to a cheating german rammer

    3. Same here Ajokay, Hill was a good racer but surely there is no comparison

    4. Agreed with ajokay. This is an unfortunate lineup for Hill – because he is an underrated champion, a great driver and a great sportsman. His statistics are also a lot better than I had thought and his drive in 1997 for Arrows at hungary is the stuff of legend that Senna could also do.

      However, Senna was faster than Hill in 1994 before the accident and I think that seals it for me. Really apt lineup, quite a lot of similarities between the two – and we all know that Damon should have been a double world champion rather than a single.

    5. Yeah, I was hoping Damon would be faced off against easier opponents and make it at least to the second round, I still maintain he is better than Schumacher.

      1. You must be the only one…

      2. better than schumacher. At chess, but not as a driver. I hope you agree on this.

      3. Not sure he was as good as Schumacher – perhaps because he didn’t have the same racing ruthlessness as Schumacher did. However, racing aside, on pure pace I would agree that they were evenly matched.

        *I am in no way advocating that Schumachers ruthlessness is a good thing I might add..!

      4. James Whiteley
        13th January 2011, 20:46

        he’s a better guitarist. Not a better driver!

      5. I still maintain he is better than Schumacher.

        Yeah, that’s why he lost the 1995 championship in the best car, despite ramming Schumacher twice…

      6. I think in those rare moments he could match Schumacher.

        What I think held Damon back a great deal was not having Williams behind him when he needed his team the most, plus Damon wasn’t always very good under pressure.

        If you removed those two disadvantages he’d have bothered Schumacher a lot more than he managed to.

        Despite always having had a huge bias towards Damon and despite him being the only driver I’ve been a fan of. I’d rate Senna over him when it comes to track skill and craft.

    6. I never thought Hill would manage so well against Senna. Their statistics aren’t very different.
      Despite Hill could have been a 3 times WDC, Senna could have been a 6 times WDC, so the comparison is fair enough for me to vote Senna.

      1. How could Hill have been a 3 Times WDC? Although it’s possible to contend that he was robbed in 1994, Schumacher was simply leagues better than him in 1995, winning 5 more races and beating him by 33 points. Hill’s season was error strewn that year, and it would be hard to claim that he was even close to winning.

        Had he stayed on at Williams in 1997, I’m still not sure he would have won another title, because even if he’d beaten Villeneuve again, it would have made Schumacher’s task easier, as they would be taking points off each other, and Schumacher came pretty close to beating Villeneuve that year anyway.

    7. Second in championship year.

      Senna: Alain Prost, Alain Prost, Nigel Mansell Hill: Jacques Villeneuve

      No contest really is there?

  3. Poor Damon. What an unfair pairing. He doesn’t stand a chance, much as I like him.

    1. Yeah, I liked him at the time, first having to play second fiddle to Prost, then Senna, losing him, but never really gaining the 1st driver status with Williams; that 1994 championship ending, and the brave but sad attempt with Arrows, almost winning, but not quite. I think he is a pretty nice guy.

      But Senna has to win and go through, clearly.

      1. Perhaps we could have some kind of special “gong” for him to recognise how hard he’s worked for F1 since retiring.

  4. jsw11984 (@jarred-walmsley)
    13th January 2011, 9:03

    Keith, the poll on this one is the Raikkonen/Vettel poll,

    1. jsw11984 (@jarred-walmsley)
      13th January 2011, 9:04

      Never mind :D

  5. Haha poor Damon.

    As much as I dislike Senna this is an easy one.

    1. Can you elaborate on why you dislike Senna? Not criticising… just intrigued! :)

      1. Its Hammer time
        13th January 2011, 10:39

        Because some people actually remember what Senna was like to share a track/ race meeting with before he died:

        Bolshy, Arrogant, Self Promoting, uterly ruthless on track. He died at the top of his game and people today only remember/ romanticise about the ‘legend’.

        I was an enormous fan, just i am an enormous fan of Hamilton. Both men are very similar in their approach and execution of their participation of the sport. Senna is remebered as the best, Hamilton (currently) receives widespread criticism for his over confidence and aggressive style.

        Lewis for WDC 2011 …

        1. The fact that you have turned a story about Senna and Hill to Lewis Hamilton really says a lot about you.

          Don’t expect many Xmas card this year from the readers of f1fanatic

          1. Its Hammer time
            13th January 2011, 14:21

            Correct, it does speak volumes about me. I support exciting, attacking drivers. I watched Senna race and he was enormously exciting, I was/ am a big fan.

            Ben N posed the question “why anyone would dislike Senna” and I gave an answer for the benefit of those who perhaps won’t around back then to watch him race, to give a balanced view of him.

            That you picked up on me mentioning Hamilton in this thread and discredit my comments as a result, says alot about you.

            Try drinking your lager through a straw, you won’t spill as much of it down your shirt…Simpleton

          2. Hammer time does have a point, especially about their off track attitudes, only I think that Senna was more brash and maybe more interesting. I think Hamilton has a long way to go to even come close to being compared to Senna. I’m not saying he won’t get there, but at this point his aggressive driving seems to cause too many mistakes (compared to Senna) to be considered masterful.

          3. Wow Hamish, that is a bit harsh isn’t it? Will I come under similar levels of criticism if I make a comparison? And! indicating this is a character flaw is quite underhanded… don’t you think?

            Why not just decomplile his argument concerning Ayrton… if indeed you deem it necessary to undermine him, rather than attack him personally.

          4. Not harsh at all. If you can’t take feedback from someone on the net (therefore someone you have never met, will never meet) you are a very very complex individual.

            I stand by what I say, and a lot will agree that the quality of posts went seriously downhill with the arrival of Hamilton. I mean seriously, this is Senna vs Hill and we start talking about Hamilton for the 2011 title…..and people wonder why there are complaints about this being a British site.

            Hes nothing special, hes never not been in a fast car so of course hes going to look quick.

            Jesus rested on the 7th day, he didn’t create Lewis Hamilton.

          5. Actually you are turning this into a thread about Hamilton with your personal attack. The other guy was just making a comparison to illustrate his point, which is far more appropriate in this context.

        2. I am brazilian and I totally agree.

      2. yes. how can you dislike senna?!!! were you a f1 follower when he was racing, or just saw him and read about him afterwards?

        1. Senna has his faults. He was not the saint that everyone nowadays makes him out to be and is likely also to be overrated – but on the basis of this pairing, he is still the greater driver than Hill.

          1. overrated?!!
            Alonso could be overrated, but not senna.
            If you had seen a qualy lap live, and still get goosebumps after 25 years. That i wouldn’t consider to be overrated.

          2. well, stating that Senna cannot be overrated is rather a sign of a Senna fan. Objectively, anyone can be overrated – and i’m approaching the subject in this way.

            It’s Hammer time actually posted a really good summary of why people might dislike Senna – but also of why people idolise him. I’m not really sure where I stand. I never got to see him race, but I have watched videos etc. They are great – and the man himself clearly was as well – but I can see his flaws as well. He was not a gentleman racer in the same was as Hill for example.

    2. prost fan? i am!

  6. Hmm, no question. I’m 18 and have only been into F1 for a couple of years but what I’ve seen of Senna – the guy is a legend. Spend some time with youtube yesterday – man, that 1994 Donnington GP just wow!

    1. Sorry to be a fact freak… it was ’93!

      But you’re right! The man was a genius, such a shame he went before his time!

  7. SennaNmbr1 (@)
    13th January 2011, 9:07

    Sorry Damon :D

  8. Why you do this to Damon ;_;

  9. 40% of poles, in those years, fighting with Prost, Mansell, Piquet, spending at least 4 seasons without the best car is unbelivable!
    I think the fastest driver ever

    1. sorry.
      but senna only won championships when he had the best car. that’s the truth!

      1. But to be able to maintain a pole average that high, despite spending 4 years in cars that were not good enough to win the championship (and in some cases simply outclassed), is very impressive.

      2. Only in 1988 he had the best cars, but Prost as teammate.
        in 1990 and 91 Mclaren wasn’t better than Ferrari (90) and Williams (91)

        Anyway I was talking about the pole average that means he was the fastest on a single lap and able to find always the right set-up

  10. I think the story that Prost crashed into Senna intentionally in ’89, and Senna was merely returning the favour in ’90, is at least half myth.

    The collision in ’89 looked, at the time, like a racing incident, and one for which Senna had more of the blame (it was an impossible overtake). Senna, of course, as good as admitted that the crash in ’90 was intentional, but the factor that drove him to it was Balestre’s pig-headed governance, not anything Prost had done.

    The myth makes an attractive story, having a mirror-image, yin-yan quality to it that makes for a satisfying narrative. I’m just not convinced it’s true.

    (That aside, sorry Damon, it’s Ayrton all the way!)

    1. 1) Senna is hit before he even reaches the apex of the chicane, yet he is to blame? If someone is hit before an apex this clearly shows someone turned into someone. Have a look at the in car footage.

      2) Where did Prost go straight after the accident? Well at least in one of the two versions to come out of his mouth.

      3) Given points 1 & 2 Prost had done something. Yes Balestre didn’t help the situation at all but if you were in Senna’s position, what would you do to achieve victory given what the man in front of you did the previous year to deprive you of victory? If anything I saw it as natural justice and put Balestre in a position he previously never was in regards to Senna – powerless. The precedent had been set.

      1. Hamish, Senna had established himself as having an incredibly ruthless reputation. He would dive down gaps and it was up to you whether you wanted to crash or not. Not lose position, crash.

        Prost was tired of Senna’s antics when they were racing wheel to wheel. He very publicly said before the race that if Senna tried to dive on the inside like that again, he would not yield. If you look at the replay of the incident, Senna did indeed come from a long way behind in the hope Prost would yield, as so many other had done. He did not know his man that day and it was his own fault for leaving himself there and believing he could bully Prost.

        1. Um, read what I wrote, then read what you wrote.

          I can see what your trying to say but you’ve basically supported what I’ve said in point one, albeit probably unintentionally.

          1. Actually, I think you’re above post is wrong and Icthyes is right. It was Prost that was hit by Senna, not the other way around. Prost was hit as he turned in – Senna looked like he was going to overshoot the corner.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOOgfsc5wc4

        2. If you continue the line of Prost (Suzuka 89) this goes well before the apex of the chicane. Prost hit Senna on purpose, that time, as Senna did the year after.
          I think both was even worse than what most of you use to address to Schumacher incorrect driving habits.
          I mean, all the three have been great champions, doesn’t mean they didn’t play dirty, at some points.

          1. On a side note, 4 most successful drivers of all time:

            – Schumacher
            – Fangio
            – Prost
            – Senna

            How many of these guys won a championship through taking out the opposition?

          2. Yep antifia, Schumacher and Senna.

            Prost ’89 was a racing incident.

        3. you are right. But senna never complained about prost’s driving that day. He regained the track and went on to win the race. By the way, prost’s engine was still on and he didn’t have the front wing broken, but he didn’t continue. The race win would have been his for sure if he had.
          It was balestre the one that messed up the hole race and the championship.
          Balestre was so full of himself that didn’t care about the fans, the same as mosley.

    2. …how many points would Prost make had he finished 2nd in Suzuka 1989?

      you don’t have to answer i ll do it for you…0 POINTS!!!

      is it motiv enough for you?

      why should Senna take Prost out ?

      give me a good reason please

      1. i am not realy sure what you mean. You either used a 0 instead of a 6, or you are talking about the points system, that dicarded the worst results.
        Let’s not forget that prost, as senna did, said that he collided with senna, because he wasn’t going to yield again, like always used to do. It was in a slow corner, because he was very afraid of having a fast accident having seen the one villeneuve had at zolder, when he was in an internal war with his teammate.

    3. Watch the film- Prost looks at Senna, then turns into him…

  11. I’m going to vote for Damon Hill. Because … well, somebody has to.

    1. that will make two of us… Purely on emotional grounds and because Senna will win anyway. I was watching not too long ago the “Driven” BBC program on Graham Hill and to see the young Damon next top his dad and Graham saying that he wouldn’t like his son to become a racing driver; I am a very emotional guy…

      1. Good to see Damon has some support. For me, I liked him and he was pretty good to be the first 2nd generation of a F1 WDC family to get the title himself.

        That said, I do think Senna was a lot closer to being THE champion of champoins, so my vote goes to him.

        1. i voted senna but i really don’t think he should win overall. it’s very hard to highly rate a driver who was so over-aggresive with others. if he’d been racing 10 or 20 years earlier he would have killed people. you can say the same thing about schumacher but aside from the incident with barrichello at hungary, his antics have been nowhere near as ruthless and downright dangerous as some of senna’s.

          it’s hard to say if damon is a deserving champion. he got destroyed by coulthard in the second half of 1995 (that Williams was clearly the fastest car) and again by villeneuve in the second part of 1996. i think if williams had kept clothead for ’96 we would have a different champion now. you could say 1994 was his best year but he was aided by schumacher forfeiting at least 40 points in penalties.

          1. You must be kidding. What passes for normal defending behaviour these days would probably have a driver banned in the 80’s and beginning of the 90’s. Compared to what is ok today, those guys were absolut getlemen. Compare Schumacher move in Hungary this year with Senna’s squeeze of Prost in Estoril 88 (you can find both on you tube). The latter is still mentioned as an example how ruthless Senna was. Boy you see these things being done at every race nowadays. By the way: Beating Mansel does not automaticaly qualify as dirty moves, no matter how painful these moves were.

  12. I really like Damon Hill, seems like a great guy and to win the title with the pressure of being a World Champion’s son is a great achievement. Especially after the despair of 94 and getting his head sorted after 95.

    But, unfortunately he’s up against Senna who seemed like he drove in a trance – a pure racer.

    The latter rounds of this comp are going to be very interesting!

  13. Always thought Damon was quick, even if not very quick, brave and…good. And also a bit unlucky.
    This pair confirm he was unlucky! :-)

  14. This choice is easy based on stats alone, but still, to compare both drivers, the best way is when they drive in the same car in the same season, having equal material.

    Then only one race is enough for me to choose Senna. The first race of 1994. In this race he crushed Hill. He managed to stay close to Schumacher in a (then) difficult to drive Williams (only later that year the Williams became the best car of the season), while Damon was lapped by both of them, before Senna drove his car over the limit to keep up with Schumacher and spun.

    A shame that the next race ended the life of a legend, which he already was in his lifetime. For me he was one of the best ever.

  15. I voted for Senna because… well… I don’t need to explain!

    But i’d just like to make a small case for Hill…

    Although Senna was not always in the best car, he was never in a car as poor as the ’97 Arrows or ’98 Jordan, yet Hill won (nearly!) in both of these cars. Desperately unlucky in Hungary ’97, he made amends in Spa ’98, which many say was a lucky win! The guy started in 3rd place, in a car which should’ve been around 11th/12th, and still won, not lucky at all, Hill didn’t drive into Coulthard.

    We all know he had the best car in ’96, but he deserved the title having been denied after a stunning fightback in ’94.

    Although Hill definitely wouldn’t have got past round 2, if he was against weaker opposition in Round 1, I think he might have got my vote!

    1. The ’98 Jordan was not a bad car at all.In fact, it was a good car!

      1. It was by no means a bad car, but it was not good! No points were scored by it in the first 8 races! It took the Spa 1-2 to pull it up the rankings!

        You may be thinking of the ’99 Jordan, which Hill was actually nowhere in, but Frentzen went for the WDC!

        1. No points in the first half of the season, thrn everything changed. I rate it as a good car which started to have results late in the season. No great car, but a good one. As I remember, it had some other good results too, Spa wasn’t an one-off.

          1. Of course! I don’t think it was dreadful, and you are right, Spa was not a one off and they did score good points in other races, but I think the 1-2 was in total 50% of all their points that year.

            My point was that Senna never drove a car as bad (or not good, depending on your perspective) at the ’98 Jordan!

          2. Senna drove for Toleman.

          3. Touche, I confess I forgot about that! But in response, Hill had a spell at failing Brabham…

            You are right though, Senna was crushing in the Toleman… well… as crushing as he could be in a car like that! Monaco ’84 was amazing!

          4. and he got several podiums that year. At brands hatch and estoril. And may be another that i don’t remember.

    2. Stunning fightback in ’94? Schumacher had at least 30-40 points taken away from him and Hill just won the races that Schumacher didn’t attend, when in the second half of the season the Williams was clearly the better car.

    3. Damon Hill a deserving champ in 94? Come on, give me a break!

    4. Hill didn’t drive into Coulthard.

      Nor did he have someone slam on the brakes on the racing line in the wet.

      1. Neither did Schumacher. We all know the story so lying makes you look rather…well childish.

  16. Oh Damon, you had no chance. This is a shame because Damon Hill was a great champion in my mind, he was a great person for the sport and was a great driver. I reckon he could have been a back to back champion if Williams had kept him and beaten Villeneuve again.

    As for Senna, no one really needs to explain why he’s won, its a little obvious.

  17. Poor Damon, Sasquatch summed it up, these 2guys were teammates in the same car and Senna thrashed him. Pity though as I did like Damon’s driving

    1. Well to be fair to Damon, they only had 3 starts together as team mates. The stats for those 3 races are:

      Poles: Senna 3 Damon 0
      Points: Senna 0 Damon 7
      Retirements: Senna 3 Damon 1

      Not really a thrashing. But that said, Senna would probably have taken the WDC in 94, so Damon would have to comfort himself with being beaten by one of the best ever.

      1. I am convinced Schumacher would have been right there and might very possibly have won it against Senna as well.

  18. If Hill was against someone not so good I would put him through but I feel Senna was just brilliant especially in qualifying.

  19. Actually think Damon stands up pretty well in the stats but it has to be Senna.

  20. Was afraid of this combination… Hill unfortunately doesn’t stand a chance.

    Btw, why they don’t have each other as notable teammates?

  21. The stats actually show that Damon did rather well. He has around the same percentage of wins and poles as Lewis Hamilton. Yes, he had a great car most of the time, but not always the best. The Hungary race in 1997 in an Arrows was brilliant.

    But up against Senna there can only be one conclusion. My vote goes to Senna. Even though he drove rather noughty at times, he is one of the all time greats. I started watching F1 in 1993, and after playing Senna GP he was my selected driver. That he managed five wins in that season really impressed me.

  22. To be honest I don’t really understand this compraison. Why has Ayrton gone up against Damon Hill. I would have paired Hill against Vilnurve (he always got on my last one)

    Surely Ayrton Senna Vs Alain Prost would have been a better comparison.

    1. The idea is to save heavyweight clashes such as Senna vs Prost and Fangio vs Schumacher and Stewart vs Clark etc until the latter rounds… makes it more exciting!

      1. Ahhhh! I seeeeeeee!

      2. And they races in the same car, the best opportunity for a straight comparison between 2 drivers.

  23. As much as I like Damon, theres no doubt about this one.

  24. In his day, Hill was reckoned to be the best developement driver around. In fact it was a combination of his testing and Mancell’s driveing that won Mancell his championship. Typically, when people started talking about the man rather than the machine, Frank williams got rid of them.

    Still, Senna was the better racer.

  25. I had to vote for Damon, just to give him a vote!

    Senna was obviously my boyhood hero (see the avatar) but I really did support Damon in his duels with MSC.

  26. Oh dear, oh dear. I had little hope Hill would get through but this is it for him. So I might as well go down fighting.

    Yeh, Hill was nowhere near as good as Senna. However, I’m basing this one purely on the name itself: champion of champions. And purely in this regard, I genuinely believe Hill to be the better champion.

    Why? Let’s take Hill himself. Son of a world champion, his life was thrown into chaos when Graham died and suddenly, not yet a teenager, he was man of the house in a period of British social history when that sort of thing still mattered. His mother held the family together, but Damon knew that when he was old enough it would have to be him; a huge responsibility.

    Damon also didn’t grow up in the world of cars; bikes have always been his first love. He didn’t do Formula Ford until he was 24 and quite late to the game. He finally caught the eye of Frank Williams, whose eye for talent (when he doesn’t have to secure sources of funding) is one of the best in the business. As Williams test driver, he also drove for Brabham on weekends in the team’s dying days and though there were no Vettel-like results, he did more with that car than should have been done (see later the 1997 Hungarian Grand Prix for proof of this ability).

    In 1993 he finished third behind Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna. The car was dominant, but only the very top drivers could have managed a better result in their first full year of F1.

    Then in 1994, he actually started to beat Senna. It probably wouldn’t have lasted, but I didn’t see Hill making a rookie mistake to spin himself out of the Brazilian Grand Prix. When Senna was killed, suddenly he became the team’s only hope of championship victory; yet another burden placed on his shoulders. Yes, he was aided by Benetton’s numerous penalties, but when everyone suspected their car was illegal I think that rather balances the equation. His win at the Japanese Grand Prix was one of the best of the decade, which is partially the reason it’s my gravatar. In the end he lost to the only man who could be as ruthless as Senna in winning. I’ve never believed Schumacher moved on purpose, but few others would have tried to defend their position in that situation.

    His 1995 season was poor and he made a bit of a hash of his 1996 season, but he was facing a better Schumacher in an equal Benetton and at times it seemed like the Williams team were against him. Let’s not forget Hill probably guessed he was racing for his seat at the time, only to find out that nothing he did would have mattered. In 1996 he also had few genuinely scrappy races; his starts were often the thing that let him down, mostly because he was still using a three-pedal system with a foot clutch.

    Compare this to Senna. He had talent, but few hard times. He was born to a wealthy family and was preparing for a racing career from early on. Those aren’t reasons to vote against him. But reading Malcolm Folley’s book shocked me; I knew Senna had been a controversial driver, but the things I read he did astounded me. I had no real idea how dangerous his many stunts were. He was out for nothing less than the world championship and to mentally destroy Alain Prost’s career. Yet when a young Mansell showed him as little respect as he had shown Prost, that was somehow less okay. I’m sure quite a few people would like to punch Eddie Irvine, but from a fellow competitor that kind of thing is inexcusable. And then there’s the famous 1990 Japanese Grand Prix. The way he actually justified it to himself was appalling and what’s more he was actually quite lucky Balestre – if we believe the caricature – didn’t manage to disqualify him somehow and make him lose anyway.

    So Hill may have not been the faster, more talented or the more successful champion. But at least he wasn’t prepared to put other people in danger for the sake of being one. I reckon a few Senna voters here will be of the “Schumacher’s titles are tainted” camp. Well I’m sorry, but your idol’s the same if you want to play by those rules. Jackie Stewart spoke on this very site about champions being good ambassadors so in that sense Hill was far more of a champion than Ayrton ever was. The one thing I fell sorry about is that after Prost’s retirement Senna seemed to have calmed down and we could have seen him be that kind of champion. Alas, the thing that secured his legendary status forever has also cemented the villainous side of his nature too.

    1. I felt I should take the time to reply to his comment but after reading all you’ve said I’ve got nothing left to type! :P

      I completely agree about Hill being the better ambassador and rep for the sport than Senna was.

      Senna did seem to lose that sense of desperation he had when Alain disappeared and maybe he would have endeared himself a lot more to people like Schumi has done this year.

    2. A very good pledge for Hill.

      That shows all of those who talk about undeserving champions to look a bit closer before showing their ill judgement.

  27. At least the site won’t get accused of english bias with this pairing. A shame, Hill was my second F1 idol (after Prost).

  28. The only surprise is that Damon still managed to get 9 votes so far!

  29. Incidentally, on a side note, watch out for Damon’s son Josh, I watched him destroy the rest of the Formula Ford field at Brands Hatch in November, I was very impressed by him. He’s still young as well!

    1. It seems talent is evident every 2nd generation then huh?

      Damon Hill, the Jenson Button of the 90’s. Right car, right time. If he wasn’t British, talk of him would have disappeared a long time ago like a fart in the wind.

    2. I really hope to see him one day in F1.

    3. Imagine, three consecutive generations of F1 champ, it would be remarkable.

      1. It really would be remarkable to have 3 generations of WDC and then there would be 4 men with the surname of Hill to have won a championship! Best of luck to him.

  30. That one was easy, who would put Damon Hill in front of Ayrton Senna da Silva? ;p

  31. Damon was good, but not great, senna was senna, enough said

  32. Michael Griffin
    13th January 2011, 10:50

    Probably the most stupid pairing yet. Best driver ever, vs. Damon Hill.

    Nice.

    I voted for Damon, somebody had to.

  33. Senna, no contest. Although Damon always was one of my favorites. Simply like the guy.

  34. It has to be Senna but one very small point on Hill.

    It is a shame that Keith has written ‘Hill joined Arrows for a largely joyless 1997’. It was indeed a poor season but I remember the Hungarian GP. Even though he had a Bridgestone advantage, Hill was the class of the field in a poor car. This was the day I considered Hill to be driver of note. Qualifying his woeful Arrows in 3rd, he passed Schumacher out on track into the first corner and only lost the lead when his hydraulics issue arose nursing his car to second behind JV.

    Damon was a true champion and it is shame he has been paired against one of the greats.

  35. I love Hill and I love Senna.
    But when you still have vivid memories of onboard footage of Senna’s qualifying laps years later, that’s something else.

  36. No disrespect to Damon Hill, but I laughed when I saw the competition for Senna.

    Well that was easy.

    Next ;-)

  37. One of the most anticipated poll I was waiting for as who will Senna pair up with? Feels bad for Damon.As far I have seen F1 Senna have set the benchmark of Ruthless driving a feat that we see from current champions like Schumacher, Alonso & Hamilton & asked them where did they learned all this? There will be one answer.He was a legend,before I used to hear about him I thought that because his dead was so fatal people overrated him but for the last 2 years after seeing some old GP from the 90’s I have to eat my words.He was the best driver of his time alongside Prost,surely we will never know where would have been his F1 career would have ended if not he have died.For many people including me he is one of the Top 3 F1 drivers of all time.

    1. I was born in Spain in 1985, so i was a kid when Senna died. I remember the announcement of his dead perfectly. I knew nothing about F1 then and my family, friends, almost everybody in Spain knew nothing about F1 in 1994. But his death was a shock in a country with zero F1 tradition like Spain. The fact that a 9 years old spanish kid can remember that day in 2010 is the proof that he was a legend when he was still alive and become bigger then. And I am not not fan of Senna but I can´t deny he is one of the best racers ever. As i wrote down this post in my opinion he was the fastest even he was not the best racer. 65 poles. The record is 68. Woa! O_O

  38. Aww the Senna vs. Damon. I told you so. ;)

    1. To contribute something to the actual question as well: Senna’s pole ratio is unbelievably impressive. 40% means he almost started every second race from pole position. Nobody was quicker than him on one lap. Often beat the opposition by a second or so. He somehow managed to concentrate so hard that every inch of those laps were perfect.

      Senna was aiming for perfection in every moment of his racing career – including his team changes – and personally I think he was one of the few (four?) who came closest.

      1. To be fair, a lot of the time Prost knew he would be at least second so concentrated on the race ahead, Senna wanted the glory of pole. It just so helped he was so bloody brilliant at getting it.

        1. As far as I know at that time you could change setups after quali and before race therefore developing AND using individual setups for them. So I can’t even think Prost would set up his car for race during qualifying as a mean of ‘concentrating on the race’.

          Of course mental concentration is another thing…

          One thing I could say was probably Senna’s weak spot was actually setting up his car. At least in his early years. It stems from the mentioned setting up procedure: I read in Christopher Hilton’s book he often copied setups of Alain – and went quicker with them. He had an acute sense of getting the very best out of a given car (like Fangio, or Clark), but may have had problems finding that particular best car setup.

          Probably this argument would fit better into a Senna-Prost Champion of Champions final – they could only meet there – but whatever. Maybe they won’t.

    2. Indeed you did! :-)

  39. Strange choice of comparison! Senna vs Anyone would be pretty one-sided, but to choose Hill?

    Oh well, it’s up to Keith!

  40. First of all, disappointing to see that father and son Hill were not paired. Then, I would have paired Senna with Rindt, both being drivers who died prematurely.

    In this battle, there’s no contest really. Senna takes this one easily, and I don’t think I need explaining why.

  41. Speckled Jim (@)
    13th January 2011, 12:39

    Imagine if you will Senna and Hill in.. say two equally slow road going cars. Both sat on an empty grid side by side at any circuit of your choice. Green light…. I like Hill but he is not on the same page as Senna in terms of talent. Hell of a guy though, and I have to say worthy of his championship.

  42. I personally think Damon Hill was underrated, but this is only going one way.

  43. Damon. Hugely underrated.

    In his defence, when pointed out that Senna mullered him in Brazil ’94, remember Senna was in his 11th F1 season, Damon had one year in a Williams and about two races in a bathtub on wheels they were calling a Brabham. Plus he would have been a lot closer to the ’93 title if he hadn’t blown up at Silverstone and got the puncture in Germany.

    Never understood why he gets such a bad press in the UK, 22 wins and a World Championship says he’s no mug.

    1. To put it in perspective, Alonso has only won 4 more. Hill is in fact the 11th most successful race winner. It’s true he was often only competing against one other driver for wins in every season, but Schumacher and Villeneuve were no slouches.

      1. Furthermore, he spent the same amount of time in competitive machinery as Mika Hakkinen and won two more races than him.

  44. One more thing although everybody seems to agree on Senna being better.

    As they were teammates for three races we can compare them directly. In Hill’s favour there’s the fact that he had ony one year of experience when settled into an uncomfortable FW16 while Senna had ten.

    Even then what Senna did with THAT car on the first three race was magnificient although the results does not reflect it. Snatched pole all three times – I spoke about his one lap performances earlier. He was chasing Schumacher by 5 seconds when almost everyone else was going to be lapped including his teammate Hill – in the same nervous car in Brazil. Even led the German before the pit stops and he did so in Imola.

    Just imagine what would have he done after the FW16 became REALLY competitive – say from Spain, Canada, or France. I think he would have been world champion in 1994 no matter how big his point deficit was after Imola.

    1. I’m not too sure, for one reason: after Prost retired, Senna seemed to seriously lose motivation. He would call Alain begging for him to come back. Maybe he would have done a Raikkonen?

      1. Maybe. :D:D

  45. i really feel sick reading all these comments from people who never lived his era how he could have killed people the way he was driving…

    Ayrton Senna da Silva is the only driver-athlete-sportsman on this planet who has saved a life on track…Eric Comas life…. here is what Eric has to say about this…no other athlete has the privilege to be thanked for saving a life.!!!!

    Ayrton saved my life!!! is the title of the video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUyXHG55xQ8

    1. i agree. It’s just the way society has turned into. It sucks but that’s the way it is. The same people that use this argument, are the ones that don’t say anything against f1 going to 4 cilinder engines, with 600 bhp. Real fans should scream about it.
      They don’t have a way to compare, because the weren’t there in the 80’s and 90’s.
      Senna was the best pilot that i have seen, and a much better person than prost. He was very concerned about kids in brazil, and created an ong to help.
      Prost on the other hand, when he was the owner of the f1 team, had the chance to sell it to a middle east millioner, and save the worker’s jobs, but he let it go bankrupt, because it suited him better.

    2. i’m afraid thats just not true, nor remotely close to being true. Drivers dragged their compatriots free from wreckages throughout the 50’s until the 90’s when cars become safe and there were proper marshals. Yes, Senna saved Eric Comas, but he was not the only one who saved lives like this.

      Roger Williamson died in his accident, but just look at what David Purley did to try to save him. Youtube it, its a slightly shocking video so be warned, but it shows how ridiculous your statement is.

      Now had you clarified it to the modern era, you’d probably be right, but even then I’m not so sure. What is true is that while Senna did save a life, he also caused accidents. No-one was seriously hurt from those however.

      1. And on the subject of saving lives, Stewart almost certainly saved more lives than anyone else in F1 by introducing all the safety measures that we now take for granted.

      2. you are another of those fans that try to take away merit where it’s due.
        The fact that in the earlier decades there was camaradery between drivers, doesn’t take anything away from senna saving a fellow driver. He was very human outside the cockpit, and ruthless inside. That’s the way we liked him.
        And that’s the problem with contemporary fans. They judge him with todays mentality, because they weren’t there. And history has to be judged knowing the circumstances at the time.

        1. I never said merit wasn’t due – far from it. I struggle to understand how you read that into my post at all. What I said, plainly, was that the original comment of Senna being the only driver to save someones life is false. And i’m right about that, because its fact that other drivers were saved. Thus calling me ‘one of those fans’ i.e. name calling seems rather ironic.

          1. lol, one of those guys again…mr SW6569 i would like to inform you that Senna’s death is the reason for the safety measures in F1 and not Stewart…he saved lives dead or alive…

            he never caused an accident except Suzuka 1990, one colission in 10 years is fair enough.

            isn’t it a bit ironic that the only example of a saved life that comes in your mind is when the driver (Roger Williamson) died ?!!! i mean think about it

          2. isn’t it a bit ironic that the only example of a saved life that comes in your mind is when the driver (Roger Williamson) died ?!!! i mean think about it

            The fact that Williamson didn’t survive doesn’t make Purley’s efforts to try and save him any less brave for risking his life to save a fellow driver. And how about Guy Edwards and Brett Lunger saving Niki Lauda from the flames at the Nurburgring? Or even your friend Michael Schumacher helping to save James Courtney?

            You’ve just got to accept that like me and everyone else, that not everything you say, type or think is correct.

    3. There were a lot more accounts of drivers saving others or trying to do so on track in the history of F1.

      Have a look at this article and the links included. That is about guys knowing a far more dangerous time in F1.
      http://www.grandprix.com/columns/maurice-hamilton/champions-forever.html
      http://vimeo.com/17632646

    4. Seriously mate, Ayrton was not the only person to save a fellow drivers life, and his death is not the sole reson for improved saftey standars. Ratzenberger also died the day before Senna.

      And Jackie Stewart, who did so much for safety in F1, had his life saved by Graham Hill and Bob Bondurant. He was stuck in a in an overturned car in Spa in 1966, and was lucky he was extracted before the car could set alight.

  46. Senna was ruthless, but he was one of the best, here in battling prost in the bercy kart race

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Sg8it4ZbY

  47. I can’t say that I was ever in awe of Damon Hill’s talent, but as an F1 champion with 22 wins to his credit, he was certainly no slouch. Not in the same league as Senna, though.

  48. Contrary to popular belief I think Damon Hill was a brilliant driver, but you’ve put him up against the best legend in the history of the sport, so there is only one way my vote can go.

    Aryton Senna was the most exciting driver to watch ever, and I’ve only seen snippets of him on youtube and the old races on BBC. He was pure talent and his death was the biggest tragedy ever in F1, his death was unfortunately in the first ever f1 race I watched so sadly I missed alot of his career.

    I can’t wait to see the Senna movie as I’ve read so much about him.

    Damon Hill continues to be a fantastic ambassador for British Motorsport.

  49. i was at jerez in 1986. i remember watching qualy at the last, very fast right hander where martin donelly had the career ending crash. It was the last minutes of the qualifying, and i saw senna flat out with the lotus, totaly commited on that corner, and was hard to believe how fast he was going.
    Years later i read a book when his chief mechanic, bob dance, was talking about that day. And he did two qualy laps good for pole. The second was not necesary, but he did it because he knew he could improve two tenths. he came back with those two tenths in the pocket. I don’t know wich of those laps it was, but i am sure i saw one of them.

  50. I am also of the opinion (like djdave) that Hill is a largely underatted driver. I think he was far better that people tend to give him credit for, and I often think this is because of his character back then (as he has come on leaps and bounds from the demure individual of 15,20 years ago) rather than his abilities.

    I also think that Manu’s point about these ‘Jonhnny come latelys’ not having lived in Ayrton’s era is unfortunate but irrelevant.

    It is always prudent to have some knowledge of the past in the area of interest you choose to devote your fanatisism, but it is not mandatory to do so. I think it will always give you a better appreciation of your sport, and in particular, ‘what exists in your sport now!’ if you have a knowledge of the history, but it should never be a requirement to have this knowledge before you get your training wheels removed.

    My son is not interested in what came before the IPOD, his Mac/PC and downloadable content. His appreciation is based soley on what facilities it delivers today,and that is how his comaparisons are made. For the most part that is very much in line with my own opinions and expectations being 26 years older. It is futile to compare one era to another in such a linear manner without making allowances for developments – technological, cultural, and principled. I will simply say that 20 years ago we could not have the grid we have today, and leave it at that. I love F1 even more for the progres it has made.

    Having come from the vynyl cassette tape era, I have a good appreciation for MP3 & FLAC as they stand today. It is enough for me to appreciate that there were no washing machines during my parents era, to appreciate the combo unit in my kitchen.

  51. I am a big fan of Damon Hill, but this one is no-brainer.(shy)

  52. East Londoner
    13th January 2011, 16:18

    Oh, flip! Hill is one of my favourite drivers, but I’m afraid it just has to be Senna going through.

  53. Would rather have seen Damon Hill against Alan Jones.

  54. Comparing Hill to Senna to me is like comparing Chandhok to Vettel. Senna was a great man. No driver before or since has been able to push their car to the limits Senna did. His qualifying performances were nothing short of outstanding as proven by his 65 poles. He managed to outqualify Prost by over a second at Monaco ’88 in an identical Mclaren. And his most amazing performances really sum up his career. Monaco ’84, Estoril ’85 and of course Donington ’93 where he beat the rest of the field by a lap(except Hill who was behind by over a minute) in an underpowered Mclaren. Damon Hill is a great driver but Ayrton Senna was a master of motor racing comparable to Fangio.

  55. People voted for Hill?

  56. No match off course. I like Damon, but Ayrton was in a different league.

  57. Although Aryton Senna achieved more during his career, I always felt that Damon Hill was underrated as a champion. The way he carried the Williams team through 1994, in the aftermath of Senna getting killed, impressed the hell out of me. It made the events of Adelaide that year all the more harder to take, but Hill walked away with the prize in 1996 and it was deserved.
    Senna had achieved legendary status even before his death at Imola, but the events of that afternoon really were a nadir for the sport. The great era of Mansell, Prost, and Senna was gone forever to be replaced by Schumacher, Villeneuve, Hakkinen and others. But with Senna gone, everybody looked to any driver that could seriously take on Schumacher. For a few years, Damon Hill had a awfull lot resting on his shoulders in terms of expectation, but he handled himself always in an admirable way.
    I have always believed that if the events of Imola had not have happened, then it would have been Aryton taking the fight to Schumacher in 1994, 1995, and 1996. When we look at those three seasons, they were all seasons in which Williams had drivers in positions to win championships. 1996 and 1997 aswell, were both years inwhich the Williams cars were very dominant, circumstances I am sure that would have suited Senna to a T. Alas, sadly we will never know will we!

  58. Why Senna vs Hill? Don’t you like “our” Damon?

  59. The stats between the two drivers are closer than I expected. Still and easy choice though.

  60. Have little time for Hill and Senna was one of the best, Easyest so far!

  61. There can be only one way to vote for this one, Senna. But it’s a pity to have to pair Hill up against such a legend so early, because I would have loved to have seen how Hill would have scored against a more middle ranking champion.

    For me Hill was the biggest enigma in F1. There have been dozens of drivers that were great in lower formula, but were hopeless when they reached F1. But Hill is the only driver that I can think of that was nothing particularly special in the lower formulas but who shone in an F1 car. Like many other people at the time, I thought that was more down to the car than the driver. But as time wore on and you saw how his team mates fared against other drivers, it became apparent that he actually was a wonderful F1 driver.

    Since his retirement the more I have thought about it the better I think Hill was. In fact if he had quit after leaving Williams rather than driving a series of bad cars just for the money, his statistics would have been up with the greatest (mind you that could be said of others)…… even so, I continue to wonder how could he be so good in an F1 car when although quite reasonable, he never really shone earlier.

  62. JohnGreen (@)
    13th January 2011, 19:49

    Senna hands down.

  63. Damon was at the top of the line when he was driving for Williams but other than that he performed poorly. Maybe he needed a car that suited his driving style. A little bit like Jenson Button.

  64. Only an idiot would vote for Damon Hill.

  65. Thats like asking, who made the better Prime Minister, Silvio Berlesconi, or Winston Churchill, there’s no comparison :)

    1. this is a lot like top trumps.. but which driver is the Yoda card?

    2. Silvio far better XDDD.

  66. I think that Senna is the fastest driver ever. But for me best driver ever is Schumacher, then Prost, Stewart, Senna, Lauda,etc.. Clark died so early, and Fangio era was too far in time. F1 and racing is about winning the race, not only the qualifying. However Sennas´s 65 poles are impressive, think about Schumacher´s 68 poles. About Hill I think he´s an underrated champion and yes, the change to Arrows was a huge fail in his career. Hugest.

  67. That was the easiest choice for me. One of the greatest drivers of all time Ayrton Senna versus one of the poorest world champions of all time Damon Hill. Only once I had respect for Hill. It was in Hungaroring 1997 when he drove his Arrows.

    In my opinion his ’98 win in Spa-Francorchamps was a gift from Eddie Jordan. Ralf was faster and I’m sure he could catch him.

  68. ANYBODY who voted for Hill is stupid. Senna walked all over him.

  69. My vote is for Damon Hill all the way…I wouldn’t let Senna wash the mud off my boots.Still over rated after all of these years. His lack of driving skills ruined all of the great tracks that F1 had become known for.
    Fifteen years on and nobody can pass anybody due to the need to make events safer. How much money has been spent in the pursuit of change in both race tracks and racecars due to one mans chase of racing glory ??Look at the damage that Senna did to Formula One.

    1. To say senna lacked driving skills surely demonstrates your lack of F1 fanaticism, precise details of the accident are debated but it is generally accepted that it was not a driver error.

      Watching Senna’s qualifying laps was surely the peak in F1 entertainment value the car attitude visibly different to everyone else. Senna was F1 for a few years he did not damage F1 come on!!

    2. Are you living in some other dimension where things aren’t quite as they are here? Or just trying to stir things up a bit…?

      1. Kenny, I admit to maybe stirring things up a bit, but truth be told Senna often crossed the line where you either lived or died and I agree that the williams did have a mechanical failure but who knows whether his driving style was the cause of the steering column failure or was it just going to far with the car. His death did infact call for many changes in the sport and many of the greatest corners were ruined by chicanes and what not. This also opened the floodgates of spending so that the sport wouldn’t fall out of favor with the general public as it being too dangerous. Senna in a single moment, a horrific moment not only killed himself but also put to the end of places so very special to Formula One and its history

  70. Hill was a great Champion and a great guy. He was not the fastest, Senna was, but Hill winning was the ultimate “last guys don’t always finish last” example in F1. He was 36 when he won too. Not easy winning the WDC that age, and got into F1 very late, so he was probably already past before he started. He was also a very good development driver.
    Senna was better though, if that needed to be pointed out to anybody.

  71. Hill could have won 2 championships if not for a certain MSC not-so-accidentally taking him out in Adelaide 1994. But still, Senna wins this by lapping the field at first thought. Though I was surprised how close the statistics were. OK, there’s a factor of 2 in wins but not in points per start.

  72. Ah, Damon Hill – a world champion that couldn’t overtake…

    I used to really like the guy when he was racing – plucky underdog up against Von Schumacher, the evil German cheat. However, when i heard Hill’s comments mid season this year on how he thought Button would beat Hamilton in the championship – what a joke – I’ve started to question his judgement. Maybe he empathises more with Button – plucky Brit that’s not quite world class, much like himself.

    Anyway, that aside obviously it’s Senna. Keith, what a cruel throw of the dice!

  73. Never thought Damon really deserved to be WDC.

  74. WOW, what a terrible pairing….. The most deserving world champion (Senna) vs. The most undeserving world champion (Hill jnr.) I cant believe Hill got even 1 vote!!

    You should rather compare 2 undeserving world champions like Hill jnr. vs. Villenuve jnr. – Both only won a WC because of their cars and Frank Williams proved it t them by dropping them both!

  75. Which was the better world champion driver?

    Ayrton Senna ……. (VOTE)
    ALL the other drivers in the past and coming….( )

  76. Damn! Despite all I know and love about Damon it isn’t enough for me to select him :(

    If this was a contest for most Gentlemanly driver it would definitely be Hill.

  77. Could this be the most one sided of any of the polls?

    I class myself as a Damon Hill fan but I will still be voting for Senna.

  78. Gregg_Is_God (@)
    16th January 2011, 12:51

    I’m a Hill fan and if it was against anyone else I would probably have gone for Hill…but SENNA?? Really?? You cant expect me to vote Hill over Senna.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.