What if Senna had lived?

Today is the sixteenth anniversary of the blackest day in motorsport history: May 1 1994. For those unaware of what it did to deserve that label, it was the day the F1 fraternity, and indeed the world sporting fraternity was robbed of one its greatest ever stars – Ayrton Senna. Moreover, it occured just 24 hours after Roland Ratzenberger was also cruelly taken from us after a horrific accident in qualifying. But, rather than writing an appreciation of Senna or bemoaning the loss of the man, I’ve rewritten F1 history to reflect a scenario where the Brazilian survived his 135mph encounter with an unprotected concrete barrier at Imola.

So, I begin with the 1994 season that in reality was a showdown between a then-uncrowned Michael Schumacher and our very own Damon Hill. Given the fact the latter lost by a mere point, you’d be forgiven for thinking that Ayrton would’ve had no problems preventing the former taking his first of seven crowns. However, I disagree, and let me tell you why: Schumacher was disqualified or excluded for three events in 1994 as a result of playing petty mind games on Hill, something he would’ve never tried on Senna whom he had great respect for. Combine that with the fact Senna would’ve already been thirty points down on Schumacher after three races; I personally think that Schumacher would’ve been able to hang on. 

In 1995, the superiority of the Williams that year combined with Senna’s imperious pace and ability to read a race would see him take his fourth title, despite Schumacher’s mighty 43 point margin in reality. With four titles in the bag, it would be him and not the German who Ferrari would be hankering over for their ’96 line-up, leaving the business end of the grid looking something like this:

Ferrari: Senna, Berger (who’d have stayed to be with his long-time pal)

Williams: Hill, Villeneuve (who would’ve still made the leap from IndyCar)

Benetton: Schumacher (who’d be inclined to continue with Benetton), Alesi

McLaren: Hakkinen, Irvine (placed by sponsor Marlboro with Coulthard out of the picture)

Of course, it was Ayrton’s death that allowed Coulthard to debut with Williams and subsequently progress to McLaren: it's more than possible that, with no Formula 3000 budget in place for the remainder of 1994, that the amicable Scotsman would have never had the chance to be a regular F1 driver if not for Senna's passing.

For the ’96 season, with the Ferrari still uncompetitive, the way would be clear for the Schumacher-Hill battle to finally commence, albeit with a wildcard in the form of Villeneuve to complicate the matter. The Williams was again vastly superior to anything, and given the doddering form of the Benetton that year, my verdict goes to Hill. As per what actually happened though, he’d still be swept aside by Sir Frank to make way for Heinz Harald Frentzen, forced to take his number-one plate to the tiny Arrows squad.

Another three-way fight would’ve presented itself for 1997, this time between Schumacher, Villeneuve and a resurgent Senna for Ferrari. The Williams was still the best car, but given how close Schumacher came in the Ferrari, Ayrton just gets the nod for title number five. Having been beaten into third (or maybe even fourth?) thanks to his substandard Benetton, and more than aware of the pending pull out of works Renault support, the time would’ve been right for Schumacher to jump ship to McLaren for ‘98, who would have been courting him for some years thanks in no small part to engine partner Mercedes-Benz:-

Ferrari: Senna, Fisichella (A fast, young Italian to replace the retiring Berger)

Williams: Villeneuve, Frentzen

Benetton: Irvine (swapping with Schumacher), Hill (a better offer than Jordan)

McLaren: Hakkinen, Schumacher

This would’ve been in all likelihood the final year for Ayrton, now aged 38 and on par with Fangio (who he greatly admired) and ahead of Prost (who he detested) for titles, he would be focused on helping to prepare Ferrari and Fisichella for the future. The considerably younger Hakkinen and Schumacher would’ve probably by now surpassed the Brazilian for raw speed, thus slinging it out for the crown in the dominant McLarens. It’s an incredibly tight call, but I feel the honours would’ve fallen to the Finn.

1999 then would’ve been the first post-Senna year, and a repeat of the previous year’s showdown would’ve certainly been on the cards. With the McLaren still the finest thing on the grid, and Ferrari drivers (Fisichella and Alexander Wurz by my estimates) being no match for Hakkinen and Schumacher in the McLarens, there would be little reason for the pair to do anything but stay put in the West-backed, Mercedes-powered, Newey-designed rockets and trade more titles. Meanwhile, Senna may have found the allure of the famous 24 Hours of Le Mans race too much to resist, and may have joined Toyota to pilot their devastating GT-One. Or, perhaps ‘Senna F1’ would’ve been founded as a direct rival to the Prost team, which of course bore the name of his arch-nemesis. Either way there’s little doubt he would go on to oversee the progress of his nephew Bruno, who finally graduated to F1 this season with Hispania Racing.

Alas, we can only speculate. It’s possible that he would have stayed put at Williams rather than jump to Ferrari, or maybe have ‘done a Mansell’ and crossed the pond in order to compete against his childhood hero Emerson Fittipaldi in IndyCar. Nobody will ever know for definite, but it certainly can be fascinating to explore the consequences of a significant event not happening. For example, how may F1 have looked if it hadn’t lost Wolfgang von Trips, François Cevert, Ronnie Peterson or Gilles Villeneuve? Tales for another post, I think...