Sort of, but I'm not sure I'd quite agree with your history.
Prost and Senna were alone toe-to-toe for 3 years, 1988-90. Senna wasn't a realistic threat before then (neither was Prost in '87), while '86-87 the dominant battle was between Mansell and Piquet at Williams. But, yes, 1988-90, Senna and Prost carved things up between them. After that...
1991, Ferrari (Prost's team) were nowhere, there was a late season challenge to Senna from Mansell's Williams but they'd had too much early season unreliability
1992, Ferrari were worse than nowhere, McLaren were comprehensively trounced too. Mansell walked it for Williams
1993, Prost wins relatively comfortably from Senna with a major car advantage.
1994, Prost retires and Senna dies.
There were then:
* 2 years of Benetton & Schumacher
* 2 years of Williams, Hill then Villeneuve
* 2 years of McLaren & Hakkinen
and we're now a) out of the 10 year window and b) into the Schumacher & Ferrari juggernaut.
Now, I've heard a number of expert commentators suggest that Schumacher's record is flattered by the opposition he faced, I wouldn't disagree that Hakkinen, Hill and in particular Villeneuve are perhaps not the strongest champions F1 ever saw and I'm not sure this period of F1 was necessarily the most competitive. BUT - I definitely don't agree with your characterisation of F1 history there.
Prost and Senna were alone toe-to-toe for 3 years, 1988-90. Senna wasn't a realistic threat before then (neither was Prost in '87), while '86-87 the dominant battle was between Mansell and Piquet at Williams. But, yes, 1988-90, Senna and Prost carved things up between them. After that...
1991, Ferrari (Prost's team) were nowhere, there was a late season challenge to Senna from Mansell's Williams but they'd had too much early season unreliability
1992, Ferrari were worse than nowhere, McLaren were comprehensively trounced too. Mansell walked it for Williams
1993, Prost wins relatively comfortably from Senna with a major car advantage.
1994, Prost retires and Senna dies.
There were then:
* 2 years of Benetton & Schumacher
* 2 years of Williams, Hill then Villeneuve
* 2 years of McLaren & Hakkinen
and we're now a) out of the 10 year window and b) into the Schumacher & Ferrari juggernaut.
Now, I've heard a number of expert commentators suggest that Schumacher's record is flattered by the opposition he faced, I wouldn't disagree that Hakkinen, Hill and in particular Villeneuve are perhaps not the strongest champions F1 ever saw and I'm not sure this period of F1 was necessarily the most competitive. BUT - I definitely don't agree with your characterisation of F1 history there.