Jump to content


Photo

First driver to win the World Championship for Ferrari?


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#51 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 5,911 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:00

What about 1982? Would that not have been Ferrari's first victory in the 'Formula 1 World Constructors' Championship'?

Aren't you forgetting the 1982 and '83 titles? The correct answer might actually be: Mario Andretti!

I thought I'd check out the 1982 case. In fact, it's not Andretti that took Ferrari's title winning points, but Tambay.

Patrick Tambay came second in the 1982 Italian Grand Prix, claiming 6 points for Ferrari, with which the team totalled 70 points. This was eventually enough for Ferrari to take the Formula One World (Constructors’) Championship, since McLaren, which was then still in contention, scored too few points in the final race.

Mario Andretti, of course, came third in the same race, claiming another 4 points for Ferrari, but even without those points, Ferrari would have been champion, with 70 points to McLaren's 69.

So that adds up to 7 potentially right answers, or 8 potentially wrong ones. :)

Advertisement

#52 my_own_shadow

my_own_shadow
  • Member

  • 216 posts
  • Joined: August 03

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:15

Good point. I had discarded the pre-WW2 European Drivers' Championship, but was too much in a hurry writing my post, that I hadn't thought of the 1925-1927 Scuderia Ferrari-run Alfa Romeos.


Not yet Scuderia Ferrari-run (which was officially formed on 1 December 1929), but Ferrari-involved.  ;)

#53 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,993 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:24

Patrick Tambay came second in the 1982 Italian Grand Prix, claiming 6 points for Ferrari, with which the team totalled 70 points. This was eventually enough for Ferrari to take the Formula One World (Constructors’) Championship, since McLaren, which was then still in contention, scored too few points in the final race.

Mario Andretti, of course, came third in the same race, claiming another 4 points for Ferrari, but even without those points, Ferrari would have been champion, with 70 points to McLaren's 69.

So that adds up to 7 potentially right answers, or 8 potentially wrong ones. :)

But if Andretti hadn't come third, then John Watson would have done... ;)

#54 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 24,605 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:34

... and McLaren would have won any tie-break, with four wins to Ferrari's three.

#55 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 5,911 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 17 November 2011 - 08:40

But if Andretti hadn't come third, then John Watson would have done...;)

... and McLaren would have won any tie-break, with four wins to Ferrari's three.

My goodness... how difficult can this be?! :lol:

#56 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 09:37

My goodness... how difficult can this be?!

Being a simple soul without an ounce of guile in my body, my initial query was merely to ascertain whether many people would agree with my opinion that Mike Hawthorn was the first person to become Formula 1 World Champion driving a 'Ferrari'.
Anyone who knows the sport would instantly discount Alberto Ascari's 1952/53 wins because of the swap to Formula 2 cars in those years, but when Fangio took the title in 1956 he was entered by SEFAC in a modified Lancia, and therefore not strickly speaking a 'Ferrari', whereas Hawthorn's win was in a 'proper' Ferrari. I think Enzo would have discounted the 1956 title somewhat.

This interpretation is open do question, and is just one humble man's opinion. So far so good?

Subsequent posts have produced a wide variety of answers demonstrating the huge intellect of many of the contributors, and the statistical equations that can prove almost anything when applied by the labyrinthine minds of TNF. How else to explain; Nuvolari, Brilli Peri, Schumacher, Von Trips, Irvine etc.?

Some have called into question my sanity, my motives, my morals even, when answering what I thought of a simple query. Still one must be prepared to suffer the slings and arrows when searching for the truth.

I can only attempt to assure my detractors that my motives are as pure as the driven slush.

Many thanks to all who have honoured me by contributing to my little post.

Kind regards,

Bauble.

#57 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,826 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 17 November 2011 - 09:53

Just to muddy the waters even further, I wonder how (say) McLaren compares with Ferrari in terms of Formula 1/Grands Prix results. In my opinion not well at all ...................!

??????????????????? Is the man nuts?????????????????

Bauble.

Well, to make the comparison fair, I reckon you would have to begin in 1966, when McLaren entered their first F1 Grand Prix.

From 1966 to date, Ferrari have won 173 F1 World Championship Grands Prix, whereas McLaren have won 177.

Looking at World Drivers Championships since 1966, 9 have been won in a Ferrari, 12 have been won in a McLaren.

However, these figures are (nearly) reversed for World Constructors Championships: since 1966 Ferrari have won 12, McLaren only 8.

#58 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 24,605 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 17 November 2011 - 10:11

However, these figures are (nearly) reversed for World Constructors Championships: since 1966 Ferrari have won 12, McLaren only 8.

I make it 14 for Ferrari.

#59 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,508 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 17 November 2011 - 10:20

Anyone who knows the sport would instantly discount Alberto Ascari's 1952/53 wins because of the swap to Formula 2 cars in those years, but when Fangio took the title in 1956 he was entered by SEFAC in a modified Lancia, and therefore not strickly speaking a 'Ferrari', whereas Hawthorn's win was in a 'proper' Ferrari. I think Enzo would have discounted the 1956 title somewhat.


Kind regards,

Bauble.

When did the works Ferraris start to be entered by SEFAC?

Advertisement

#60 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,826 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 17 November 2011 - 10:38

I make it 14 for Ferrari.

Quite right - my apologies.

#61 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 11:15

When did the works Ferraris start to be entered by SEFAC?


1960, prior to that I believe they showed in programmes as Scuderia Ferrari, the change to SEFAC was made because Ferrari feared lawsuits arising from De Portago's crash in the Mille Miglia of 1957. Previously the company was known as Auto-Avio Costruzioni.

bauble.

Edited by Bauble, 17 November 2011 - 11:15.


#62 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,705 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 17 November 2011 - 11:33

Being a simple soul without an ounce of guile in my body, my initial query was merely to ascertain whether many people would agree with my opinion that Mike Hawthorn was the first person to become Formula 1 World Champion driving a 'Ferrari'.
Anyone who knows the sport would instantly discount Alberto Ascari's 1952/53 wins because of the swap to Formula 2 cars in those years, but when Fangio took the title in 1956 he was entered by SEFAC in a modified Lancia, and therefore not strickly speaking a 'Ferrari', whereas Hawthorn's win was in a 'proper' Ferrari. I think Enzo would have discounted the 1956 title somewhat.

This interpretation is open do question, and is just one humble man's opinion. So far so good?

Subsequent posts have produced a wide variety of answers demonstrating the huge intellect of many of the contributors, and the statistical equations that can prove almost anything when applied by the labyrinthine minds of TNF. How else to explain; Nuvolari, Brilli Peri, Schumacher, Von Trips, Irvine etc.?

Some have called into question my sanity, my motives, my morals even, when answering what I thought of a simple query. Still one must be prepared to suffer the slings and arrows when searching for the truth.

I can only attempt to assure my detractors that my motives are as pure as the driven slush.

Many thanks to all who have honoured me by contributing to my little post.

Kind regards,

Bauble.

But that was not the question you asked was it?



#63 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,508 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 17 November 2011 - 11:35

1960, prior to that I believe they showed in programmes as Scuderia Ferrari, the change to SEFAC was made because Ferrari feared lawsuits arising from De Portago's crash in the Mille Miglia of 1957. Previously the company was known as Auto-Avio Costruzioni.

bauble.

That's what I thought.

#64 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 15,583 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 17 November 2011 - 11:48

Being a simple soul without an ounce of guile in my body ...

Bauble.


:rotfl:

#65 Arjan de Roos

Arjan de Roos
  • Member

  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 17 November 2011 - 15:21

..., but when Fangio took the title in 1956 he was entered by SEFAC in a modified Lancia, and therefore not strickly speaking a 'Ferrari', whereas Hawthorn's win was in a 'proper' Ferrari. I think Enzo would have discounted the 1956 title somewhat.

Ferrari did not discount the 1956 title in any way. Ferrari had won the 1956 drivers championship, a win for the team, the man, the factory, the nation. Ferrari was in it for the competition. His cars should win or at least battle for second, they should compete. How he did it was of lesser concern.

#66 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 15:24

"But that was not the question you asked was it?"

My question was simply meant to see whether Fangio's win in 1956, could fairly be considered to have been in a 'Ferrari', or if the car might be better described as a Lancia.
If the latter, I would say that Mike Hawthorn was the first person to become World Champion driiving a Formula 1 Ferrari.
I never reckoned on the convoluted thinking of my fellow enthusiasts, who have presented a raft of conflicting scenarios, that might be adjudged to answer the question differently.

Basically it was a pub quiz/Trivial Pursuit type question.

I must get out more.

Bauble.

#67 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 15:26

:rotfl:


Really Stephen! What is so funny?

#68 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,993 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 17 November 2011 - 15:55

My question was simply meant to see whether Fangio's win in 1956, could fairly be considered to have been in a 'Ferrari', or if the car might be better described as a Lancia.

So why not ask that question then?

#69 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,202 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 16:23

If that was the question, then the answer is simple: of course, it was a Ferrari. It is only sometimes called a "Lancia-Ferrari" to identify the model. It certainly wasn't a Lancia.

Edited by Michael Ferner, 17 November 2011 - 16:24.


#70 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 1,892 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 17 November 2011 - 17:03

The original question was "... for Ferrari," which could be taken to mean "for Enzo Ferrari" in which case the Lancia/Ferrari chassis debate is irrelevant; or it could mean, "for Ferrari the constructor," in which case the debate is back on.

#71 RStock

RStock
  • Member

  • 2,276 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 17 November 2011 - 17:42

Well, to make the comparison fair, I reckon you would have to begin in 1966, when McLaren entered their first F1 Grand Prix.


You mean to give McLaren any sort of chance.

By including the term "Grand Prix" the pedants would argue that should include any race referred to as a "Grand Prix" which would give the win to Ferrari, McLaren not even being close. Especially if you go back to the start of Scuderia Ferrari pre-war and count those "Grand Prix" wins.

Yet, McLaren still have a chance here. If you go by wins by Bruce McLaren and Enzo Ferrari, and by that I mean wins by those men as drivers, which the wording of the question also would allow, then Bruce would be the winner.


#72 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 19:21

Does the phrase "Deliberately obtuse" mean anything to use guys?

:mad:

#73 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 19:24

So why not ask that question then?


I thought you might like the opportunity to exercise your brain a little, and give the matter some consideration, as far too many others have done, with such catastrohic consequences for my reputation as a peace loving man.

:(

#74 RStock

RStock
  • Member

  • 2,276 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 17 November 2011 - 19:25

Does the phrase "Deliberately obtuse" mean anything to use guys?

:mad:


Yeah, it means something was intentionally rounded at the free end.

#75 RStock

RStock
  • Member

  • 2,276 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 17 November 2011 - 19:26

I thought you might like the opportunity to exercise your brain a little, and give the matter some consideration, as far too many others have done, with such catastrohic consequences for my reputation as a peace loving man.

:(


I think it's been a great thread. I also still think you are a troublemaker. :)

#76 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 November 2011 - 19:32

I think it's been a great thread. I also still think you are a troublemaker. :)


Red, how does one pronounce the last part of your name is it sounded as sod ya? :kiss:

#77 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,705 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 17 November 2011 - 21:02

Allow me to get back to the first topic of this thread, the first driver to win the World Championship (F1) for Ferrari.

  • Alberto Ascari won the World Drivers’ Championship (WDC) in 1952, in a Ferrari, but this was to Formula 2 specifications.
  • Juan Manuel Fangio won the WDC in 1956, in a Ferrari, but this was developed, built and raced by Lancia in (the) previous season(s), and sold to Ferrari.
  • Fangio was effectively gifted the 1956 title by teammate Peter Collins, who, in the final race, handed his car to Fangio, who had retired with his own car. In doing so, gave up his own shot at the title.
  • Mike Hawthorn won the World Drivers’ Championship in 1958, in a Ferrari, but it the championship was not specified as a ‘Formula 1 World Championship’.
  • It was argued that either Wolfgang von Trips or Phil Hill won Ferrari its first constructors’ title in 1961 by winning the British and Italian Grands Prix respectively, but the constructors’ title wasn’t specified as a world championship, since it was the ‘International Cup for F1 Manufacturers’.
  • Eddie Irvine came third in the 1999 Japanese Grand Prix, claiming 4 points for Ferrari, which earned the team the Formula One World (Constructors’) Championship. (Michael Schumacher could be argued to have done so, too, since he came second in the same race, but without Irvine’s points, McLaren would’ve won the title with 7 victories to Ferrari’s 6.)
  • Schumacher was the first driver to win the Formula One World (Drivers’) Championship for Ferrari, in 2000.
So I reckon there's six potentially correct answers to the original question. Or 7 wrong answers, whichever way you look at it. :stoned:



I thought I'd check out the 1982 case. In fact, it's not Andretti that took Ferrari's title winning points, but Tambay.

Patrick Tambay came second in the 1982 Italian Grand Prix, claiming 6 points for Ferrari, with which the team totalled 70 points. This was eventually enough for Ferrari to take the Formula One World (Constructors’) Championship, since McLaren, which was then still in contention, scored too few points in the final race.

Mario Andretti, of course, came third in the same race, claiming another 4 points for Ferrari, but even without those points, Ferrari would have been champion, with 70 points to McLaren's 69.

So that adds up to 7 potentially right answers, or 8 potentially wrong ones. :)

Can I add a 9th esoteric possibility?

If we accept Bauble's contention that Ascari's two world drivers' championships don't count because the championship was held for Formula 2 cars, and work to the thread title which made no mention of F1, then the first World Championship that Ferrari won would then be the 1953 World Sports Car Championship.
Because of the best 4 results rule it is hard to determine exactly when Ferrari clinched the championship. At least one Jaguar was entered in the Carrera Panamericana. So, if a Jaguar had won the Carrera Panamericana, and a Ferrari finished no higher than 4th or if a Jaguar was 2nd and a Ferrari was no higher than 5th, then Jaguar would win the championship. The highest placed Jaguar was 9th and Guido Mancini drove a Ferrari to 4th place confirming the championship for Ferrari. However, as the race was run in stages the Jaguar of Guillerno Giron may have crossed the finishing line first or failed to do so in time to finish 2nd so he might have won the championship for Ferrari by failing to beat them.

It's all a silly statistical argument that depends what the question meant. My suspicion is that our friend Bauble didn't know himself and deliberately asked an ambiguous question and later decided what he might have meant.

Edited by D-Type, 17 November 2011 - 21:03.


#78 RStock

RStock
  • Member

  • 2,276 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 17 November 2011 - 21:15

Red, how does one pronounce the last part of your name is it sounded as sod ya? :kiss:


So'Ja, which according to the kids, is a way of saying soldier in slang. Also an acronym, but that's another story.

#79 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 November 2011 - 08:09

Dear D-T,
I am being pictured in this thread as a somewhat Machiavellian character, sly, cunning, devious and possibly deranged, all because I ask a simple question that boils down to was the car that Fangio drove in the 1956 World Formula 1 Championship (or whatever it was called then) a Ferrari or a Lancia or possibly a Ferrari Lancia or a Lancia Ferrari.

If I am as portrayed ...................where does that leave you?

Convoluted, labyrinthine do not begin to describe your last post. What on earth do you eat for breakfast?

Kindest regards,

The Bauble ):

Edited by Bauble, 18 November 2011 - 08:47.


Advertisement

#80 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 24,605 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 18 November 2011 - 09:14

... all because I ask a simple question that boils down to was the car that Fangio drove in the 1956 World Formula 1 Championship (or whatever it was called then) a Ferrari or a Lancia or possibly a Ferrari Lancia or a Lancia Ferrari.

If only that had been the question you asked. :p :lol:

Anyway, here are some earlier threads which discuss nomenclature, the mods made by Ferrari to the Lancia D50s, etc.

Lancia – Ferrari

Hotchpotch -- Scuderia Ferrari & the Lancia D.50's in the Argentine, 1956

Ferrari chassis with different power

and here is a listing by Don Capps of the competition history of each chassis:

http://8w.forix.com/d50.html

#81 Stephen W

Stephen W
  • Member

  • 15,583 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 18 November 2011 - 09:41

Really Stephen! What is so funny?


You are!

Does the phrase "Deliberately obtuse" mean anything to use guys?

:mad:


:up:

#82 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,826 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 18 November 2011 - 11:51

Just to muddy the waters even further, I wonder how (say) McLaren compares with Ferrari in terms of Formula 1/Grands Prix results. In my opinion not well at all ...................!

??????????????????? Is the man nuts?????????????????

Bauble.

Another way of comparing Ferrari and McLaren is to look at "strike-rate" - the number of World Championship races won as a percentage of those entered. By my calculations, for Ferrari it is 25.56% for McLaren it is 24.44%.

I think this method of comparison is only valid if the teams concerned have been active for several years - otherwise both Ferrari and McLaren are blown away by Brawn GP's 47% strike rate in their sole year as a constructor. Of course, it drops pretty dramatically (to 14.81%), if you consider Mercedes GP to be simply a continuation of Brawn GP.

#83 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 November 2011 - 12:19

Another way of comparing Ferrari and McLaren is to look at "strike-rate" - the number of World Championship races won as a percentage of those entered. By my calculations, for Ferrari it is 25.56% for McLaren it is 24.44%.

I think this method of comparison is only valid if the teams concerned have been active for several years - otherwise both Ferrari and McLaren are blown away by Brawn GP's 47% strike rate in their sole year as a constructor. Of course, it drops pretty dramatically (to 14.81%), if you consider Mercedes GP to be simply a continuation of Brawn GP.


Morning Amps,
I have been trying to figure out what sort of profession you follow, I think that it is probably lecturing on Hard Sums or maybe you are an actuary! Perhaps your specialist subject is Advanced Trigonometry? I can't work it out so I am left with the impression you may just be a;

Normally Uluating Type :well:


#84 Amphicar

Amphicar
  • Member

  • 2,826 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 18 November 2011 - 13:48

Morning Amps,
I have been trying to figure out what sort of profession you follow, I think that it is probably lecturing on Hard Sums or maybe you are an actuary! Perhaps your specialist subject is Advanced Trigonometry? I can't work it out so I am left with the impression you may just be a;

Normally Uluating Type :well:

Dear Bauble, I think you mean ululating. If so, sorry to disappoint you but I haven't done this for ages!

p.s. many thanks for your posts on TNF - no malice but plenty of mischief. Just right!

#85 Bauble

Bauble
  • Member

  • 1,040 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 November 2011 - 14:13

Dear Bauble, I think you mean ululating. If so, sorry to disappoint you but I haven't done this for ages!

p.s. many thanks for your posts on TNF - no malice but plenty of mischief. Just right!



See?
I knew you were clever! Of course I meant ululating, however, fading eye sight failed to spot the missing l. Quite a howler I'm sure you will agree.

NO Malice!! I must try harder.