Half points

When did the rules about awarding half points for a stopped race come in? I think the first one was Spain 1975, but I'm wondering whether the Indy 500 of 1950 would have qualified?

At least 1972 - it is dealt with in paragraph 21 of the General Prescriptions section of the International Championship Regulations in the FIA Yellow Book: this of course means the rule does not apply just to the WDC, but to all FIA championships.

The oldest copy I have is from 1972 but I seem to remember from the thread on Graded Drivers that we have a fair number of Yellow Books between us .....

Full points were awarded for indy in 1950 even although it was stopped early.

in 75 there were two races stopped early,spain after stommelen crash and austria due to rain.

both jochen mass and vittorio brambilla won there only gp in these shortend races.

isnt the rule something to do with the amount of the race that has been run?

I think it's 66%, but it may be 75%... it certainly does have to do with distance.

There is also a distance where it is declared no race, isn't there, like a minimum distance?

Currently in F1 (and probably all other FIA-sanctioned events), I think they can stop the race before the leader crosses the line to start the second lap and declare a complete restart (e.g. Australia 1989). If the race is stopped after the second lap, then they split the race into two parts and take the aggregate times for the result (e.g. Japan 1994).

If the race is red-flagged before 75% of the original distance is completed, the race can be restarted. However, if it isn't restarted, half-points are awarded (e.g. Austria and Spain 1975, Monaco 1984, Australia 1991). If the race is red-flagged after 75% of the original distance is completed, the race cannot be restarted and full points are awarded.

Just bumping this, from thinking about Indy. I suppose it is strange that there were no "part-races" between 1950 and 1975, but then again there weren't that many races stopped early at all, even the Reg Parnell defeat of the Alfas was scrubbed as a non-event technically...any advance on 1972? Was the whole race-stopping-and-not-restarting thing part of the Stewart crusade?

I don't know when the "half-points" rule was introduced.

However...

From what I've read in Mike Lang's "Grand Prix!", the Spanish and Austrian GPs of 1975 were awarded half-points because those races were stopped before 60% of the scheduled distance. The 1984 Monaco GP was awarded half points because the race was stopped before 75% of the scheduled distance.

IF that rule was in effect for the 1950 Indy 500, and IF it was still 60%, there wouldn't have been half-points awarded because 138 laps of 200 is 69%.

Originally posted by Vitesse2
At least 1972 - it is dealt with in paragraph 21 of the General Prescriptions section of the International Championship Regulations in the FIA Yellow Book: this of course means the rule does not apply just to the WDC, but to all FIA championships.

The oldest copy I have is from 1972 but I seem to remember from the thread on Graded Drivers that we have a fair number of Yellow Books between us .....

I can't find anything in the 1969 Yellow Book, but the 1970 edition have this under General Prescriptions:

17-Stopping in an event counting for a Championship, Trophy or Cup in a case of force majeure
In a case of force majeure, the decision to stop an event may only be taken by the Sporting Stewards present at the meeting and by a majority.

The following cases should be noted:
-up to 30% of the total distance of the race has been covered:
the event shall be run on the same day or later on, unless the organizers choose to cancel the race altogether. The new date must be fixed in compliance with the usual procedure for late entry.

-30 to 60% of the total distance has been covered:
the race may be resumed, if possible, on the same day, and the final classification will then be based on the addition of the times recorded.
Should it be impossible to resume the race on the same day, the event will be considered as finished and will lead to a granting of 50% of the normal scale of points.

-more than 60% of the total distance of the race has been covered:
the race will be considered as finished.

The signalling procedure used to stop a race in such a case must be clearly indicated in the supplementary regulation of the event.


1971: the same

1972 - 1975: the same, now as article 21

1976 - 1978 (the last I have) : the same, now as article 23, with additional text setting out the signalling procedures in detail.

The dividing point is, some of you may have guessed it, 1981, the first year of the new FIA Formula 1 World Championship. The old rule still exists, still as point 23 of the International Championship Regulations and still specifying the 30 and 60 % scenarios, but explicitly excluding the F1 World Championships! Those have an extra set of rules, specifying two full laps and 75 % of the full distance, respectively! So, theoretically at least, a Grand Prix stopped after two laps would pay half points!

Spain 1975
Austria 1975
Monaco 1984
Australia 1991
Malaysia 2009

1975 was a pretty strange year all round - the statistical odds on two of the races in one year being stopped before full points could be awarded must be quite low,but in addition to that we have:

monaco gp - race stopped on the 2 hr. mark due to heavy rain
dutch gp - race started in the wet, interrupted by mass pitstop action when it dried out at a time when normally stopping for tyres would loose you the GP and then ran on to the end in the dry
british gp - race red flagged after 56 laps (1h 20min) due to a malaysian style downpour
german gp - field decimated by punctures from trackside debris and stones - 9 of 24 starters suffered 12 punctures and 6 retirements

meaning that after the opening south american races and the south african gp, and leading up to the season ending u.s gp at watkins glen, of the european season only the belgian, swedish , french and italian gp's had a sense or normality about them.

oh, and the candian gp was a late cancellation after commercial squabbles...

and the odd thing is, i remember it as being a warm, hot, dry summer...

peter

Originally posted by William Dale Jr
Currently in F1 (and probably all other FIA-sanctioned events), I think they can stop the race before the leader crosses the line to start the second lap and declare a complete restart (e.g. Australia 1989). If the race is stopped after the second lap, then they split the race into two parts and take the aggregate times for the result (e.g. Japan 1994).

If the race is red-flagged before 75% of the original distance is completed, the race can be restarted. However, if it isn't restarted, half-points are awarded (e.g. Austria and Spain 1975, Monaco 1984, Australia 1991). If the race is red-flagged after 75% of the original distance is completed, the race cannot be restarted and full points are awarded.

I think that is all pretty-much correct. If the race is red-flagged before 2 laps they re-start as if it is a new race completely, but after that, unless 75% has been achieved they only award half points.

Originally posted by William Dale Jr
Currently in F1 (and probably all other FIA-sanctioned events), I think they can stop the race before the leader crosses the line to start the second lap and declare a complete restart (e.g. Australia 1989). If the race is stopped after the second lap, then they split the race into two parts and take the aggregate times for the result (e.g. Japan 1994).

This no longer applies in F1. The race is basically determined by the second part alone. So, had there been a 1 lap shootout at Malaysia this past weekend, and Glock had got past Button, he would have won, despite being well behind on aggregate time. The rule had changed by 2001, Spa that year was 4 laps short after the Burti/Irvine crash.

Originally posted by seldo
I think that is all pretty-much correct. If the race is red-flagged before 2 laps they re-start as if it is a new race completely, but after that, unless 75% has been achieved they only award half points.

Just a question RE Brands Hatch 1986...

Did Jacques Laffite suffer career-ending injuries in a race in which he never "officially" participated?

Originally posted by stevewf1


Just a question RE Brands Hatch 1986...

Did Jacques Laffite suffer career-ending injuries in a race in which he never "officially" participated?

It's worse than that if you look at Canada 1982...

And it means that, in theory, had Malaysia restarted, drivers like Vettel would have spent an hour at the wheel in a DNS.

As far as I'm concerned, if you're there when the flag drops, you're in the race. Regardless of what happens afterwards.

Originally posted by ensign14
As far as I'm concerned, if you're there when the flag drops, you're in the race. Regardless of what happens afterwards.

A stance which I agree with one that seems to send the Statsboyz into spasmz..... which is, of course, a great point in its favor.

Originally posted by HDonaldCapps
A stance which I agree with one that seems to send the Statsboyz into spasmz..... which is, of course, a great point in its favor.

Some try to make sense of things that confuses...

Did Michael Schumacher "start" the French GP in 1996? Prost at Imola in 1991?

I'm getting OT (yet again), so I'll shut up lest I get banned...

They weren't there when the flag dropped, so no. DNS.

... and neither was Laffite when the flag dropped for the 1986 British Grand Prix!;)

Originally posted by stevewf1


Some try to make sense of things that confuses...

Did Michael Schumacher "start" the French GP in 1996? Prost at Imola in 1991?

I'm getting OT (yet again), so I'll shut up lest I get banned...

I think you'll be OK this is TNF and not Ten Tenths!

Originally posted by fines
... and neither was Laffite when the flag dropped for the 1986 British Grand Prix!;)

He was first time around. So, yes. After all, it's just as much part of the race, even if stopped, as it had a bearing on the race. If only because it rendered one car hors de combat before the restart.

And so was Hans Heyer.

Originally posted by ensign14

He was first time around.

In a practical sense, yes, but the FIA needed a legal mechanism to effect a complete "redo from start", and thus introduced the aborted start scenario, in which such an attempt at a start is declared "null and void" - very much an after-effect of the 1976 British Grand Prix, and thus giving in to popular demand instead of rational thinking and logic, I'm afraid, as it certainly has led to a number of brainless actions on part of the drivers, and a lot of unneccessary damage to cars and people! :

It's a stupid concept, I know, but there's no ignoring that Laffite didn't start the 1986 British Grand Prix. And the question "Did Jacques Laffite suffer career-ending injuries in a race in which he never 'officially' participated?" doesn't really make sense - Laffite didn't receive his injuries during the running of the British GP race, but rather during the event, and more specifically during an aborted attempt at the start of the race. It's actually quite simple once you accept the "fine print", but I realise some of us don't want to accept that, based on principles or whatever, but it doesn't change reality, I'm afraid. It's more like burying your head in the sand, ostrich style.

Originally posted by ensign14
After all, it's just as much part of the race, even if stopped, as it had a bearing on the race. If only because it rendered one car hors de combat before the restart.

That's not an argument - practice has also a bearing on the race, does that make it part of the race?

You can argue that practice and an aborted start are part of the event, and that Laffite took part in the 1986 British Grand Prix event - actually, I had already stopped counting GP starts long ago, and instead added up GP "appearances", meaning entries that were honoured. I don't know my F1/GP statistics by heart these days, but I believe I had Patrese with 260 Grands Prix instead of the 255 or whatever that he actually started, and similarly with Hill, Laffite et al. After all, it's not really that important if you take the start or not, like in the example with Prost at Imola, or Bruce McLaren at Watkins Glen etc., it's just like arguing red hot about someone retiring on lap 62 or lap 63 - who actually cares?

Perhaps we could use the word 'participate' instead. A sprinter in a 100 metre race disqualified for a false start is still listed as a participant in the race, even if she/he didn't actually take the valid race start. So Laffite participated in the 1986 British GP, even though he didn't take the valid race start.

But even the subsequently-invalided race start is a "start". It's like Henry VIII's marriages, technically you have to discount the annulled ones but at the time everyone thought they were marriages. Anything voiding a start is retconning.

Practice doesn't really have a bearing on the race, it's a convention to get everyone in a starting order, but it could easily be scrapped without any bother. Once people are lined up, though, it's race on.

Originally posted by ensign14
Practice doesn't really have a bearing on the race, it's a convention to get everyone in a starting order, but it could easily be scrapped without any bother. Once people are lined up, though, it's race on.

Pardon me? How many occasions a driver crashed in practice, disabling himself or the car? Just like Laffite participating (very good!) in the British Grand Prix...

Originally posted by fines
It's a stupid concept, I know, but there's no ignoring that Laffite didn't start the 1986 British Grand Prix. And the question "Did Jacques Laffite suffer career-ending injuries in a race in which he never 'officially' participated?" doesn't really make sense - Laffite didn't receive his injuries during the running of the British GP race, but rather during the event, and more specifically during an aborted attempt at the start of the race. It's actually quite simple once you accept the "fine print", but I realise some of us don't want to accept that, based on principles or whatever, but it doesn't change reality, I'm afraid. It's more like burying your head in the sand, ostrich style.

I am quite happy to agree with it being "a stupid concept" while ignoring all the rest of it -- Lafitte started the race in my book and others disagree, well, so be it, I will go with my "reality."

Very good job of laying it out, by the way, even if I have my own notions.

Originally posted by fines
Pardon me? How many occasions a driver crashed in practice, disabling himself or the car? Just like Laffite participating (very good!) in the British Grand Prix...

Practice is practice, it's a method of sorting the start out. Once you're AT the start, different fish of kettles.

Hovering on the borders of this topic. Why does the clock continue running when the race is red flagged? I don't believe for one minute TV schedules are really such a problem as they (TV stations) seem to have no problem devoting four whole days to a game of golf or adding half an hour to a Football match if the result is tied at full time.

Malaysia would have been a particular problem because beyond that two hours there would not have been enough daylight left to run the race. The race start I believe was calaculated to the point at which the sun would by so low as to be useless.

Additionally while TV networks in countries where F1 is already popular might not have a lot of qualms (certainly some) about shifting their schedules, its the countries where F1 is attempting to be established where networks allocate two hours for a low rating sports channel then cut to higher rating news/soap/bigger local sport.

Bearing in mind that late afternoon feed directly into primetime in local markets, you over-run at all and your cutting into a TV network's juiciest advertising time slots.

TV is a business like any other and there are times when F1 has to meet its own commitments.

From the FIA's 2009 Formula One Sporting Regulations:
Pertinent clauses:

"5.3 The distance of all races, from the start signal referred to in Article 38.9 to the chequered flag, shall be equal to the least number of complete laps which exceed a distance of 305 km (Monaco 260km). However, should two hours elapse before the scheduled race distance is completed, the leader will be shown the chequered flag when he crosses the control line (the Line) at the end of the lap during which the two hour period ended. However, should the race be suspended (see Article 41) the length of the suspension will be added to this period."
"41.4 Whilst the race is suspended :
- neither the race nor the timekeeping system will stop ;"
"42.8 If the race cannot be resumed the results will be taken at the end of the penultimate lap before the lap
during which the signal to suspend the race was given."

Originally posted by ensign14

Practice is practice, it's a method of sorting the start out. Once you're AT the start, different fish of kettles.

So, tell me, did Mansell retire on the first lap?;)