13 replies to this topic

[Michael Ferner]

Another myth, ready to be debunked: for years the Mulford conspiracists have claimed that all the records and timing tapes from the first Indy 500 had been destroyed after the race to cover up the conspiracy. So, what's this then?

 

[D-Type]

Nice find Michael! 

 

Where did you find it?

[Jim Thurman]

Michael, could you please send that to Mr. Leerhsen?

[Michael Ferner]

I just found it late last night, while looking for something else (of course!), and already preparing to shut down the computer and go to bed... just enough time and energy left for a quick check of what it is exactly, making copies, including a low-res copy for this post, uploading it, writing a short post and a quick link...

 

I will reveal all in due time, but for the moment I'm keeping this to myself until I have made a proper analysis, and figured out what to do next. This is a bit of a coup, and I intend to keep my eye on the ball... Yes, Mr. Leerhsen (should he still be interested) will be informed, as will be many others... The myth about Ralph Mulford being the true winner of the first five-hundred has had half of a century to manifest itself, so I'm not expecting a cakewalk, but this here destroys one of its most important foundations. It's not groundshaking news for the true historian, just a bit of support to well-known facts, as you can read it all between the lines in period sources - but now it's here in black on white! Yes, the IMS did its (by now) usual survey of the timing tapes, corrected the initial results and published the corrections!!! There's no longer any room left for a conspiracy to have been initiated! Stay tuned...

[Collombin]

Clearly fake - I can find no other report of that race that shows a Mr Brown driving in relief of a Mr Bruce (never heard of either of them, personally???). No wonder a proper investigative journalist and motorsport historian of Leerhsen's calibre saw fit to dismiss this rubbish.

[Michael Ferner]

That's the problem with conspiracy theories - Leerhsen, like Jaslow and Catlin before him, wouldn't have noticed anything even if it was printed on their foreheads!

[Collombin]

Maybe he could include this chart in a revised and updated 2nd edition?? Oh look up there, a pig.

Actually, in all fairness, I found his book quite funny in places - and not always for the wrong reasons.

[robert dick]

From Motor Age, 8 June 1911:

"... The week that has elapsed since Harroun was declared a winner has been replete with incidents, not the least of which was the strenuous session of the checkers and timers, who revised their reports after working about 30 hours on them.
On the revised standing Joe Dawson is ranked fifth instead of being reckoned as not finishing. It was found that the Marmon star had completed his final lap when he had engine trouble, so the judges simply shoved him into fifth place, in between Wishart in the Mercedes and de Palma in the Simplex.
Checking over the times also made some difference and resulted in favor of Mulford in the Lozier in that it brought him much nearer Harroun. Instead of being 4 minutes 43 seconds behind, Mulford, according to the revised count, only was 1 minute 43 seconds to the bad..."
 

[Michael Ferner]

Well, I have now entered the data into my Excel Indy 500 timing analysis spreadsheet , but as everybody can see there's not that much meat on it

 

What one has to realize is that you cannot simply take the data from the source and regard it as gospel, you have to "work" on it first - even if we were to assume that the data emanating from the IMS audit was "perfect" (which is already assuming some!), it still takes several "transformations" before it can be found in the various period sources, and a lot can go wrong in between: basically, we're talking about several thousands of figures that have to be read, typed, copied, typeset and so on, all within a minimum of time, since they are usually published overnight in the dailies, or within a week in the specialized magazines - no one wants to read old news! In both cases, there's no time left to be wasted for more than the most basic accuracy, or even for a simple check of the figures. For those of us old enough to remember the days of handset newspapers, a sentence like "the mayer thon adedrssed the public, adn the meeting was adjuorned" is anything but unusual; it just happened, more or less frequently. Now, imagine a typesetter working late at night, and having to arrange thousands of numbers instead of letters!! Despite all this, I have found the newspaper versions to be usually much more accurate than the ones to be found in the specialized press, for whatever reason.

 

In my personal experience, having analysed timing reports from all but a few of the early Indy 500s (as well as other important races), I have discovered numerous typos by means of several checks the computer performs for me with the aid of the specially programmed spreadsheet - some of them easily, some with quite a bit of effort. The whole process involves going through all the available material, most importantly eye witness accounts in the press, which are indispensable when it comes to specific events like overtaking manoeuvres, or pit stops. At some point, the IMS began publishing seperate pit stop reports, and together with the lap prize information it is usually possible to reconstruct very accurate lap charts from the timing reports, especially if these are issued for ten- or even eight-lap intervals. But, sadly, not in this case.

 

There's no question that the whole process of timing and scoring, plus the relaying of this info via the public address, was quite a bit chaotic during the early 500s, i.e. not only for 1911: anyone looking for a severe test of nerves, try figuring out the 1914 race, even with a complete set of times for twenty-five 8-lap intervals!!! From reading the 1911 race reports, it becomes clear that the PA had messed up the lap count as early as lap 20 (!), and guessed its way pretty much through the whole day. The whole scoring and timing effort was pretty impressive, with several backup systems, but the weak point appears to have been the huge scoring board(s), showing the number of laps completed by each car to the grandstand, as well as the IMS officials who had the task of preparing the standings for the PA! Quite rightly, it was felt that the timing and scoring tower should be off-limits for anyone not involved with the process, so they simply had to take their info from the scoring boards, which were generally manned by "society boys" which appear to have been a bit too excitable for their important duties.

 

As Robert has rightfully pointed out, the audit took "two nights and a day" to be completed, much longer than in subsequent years, and looking at the chart in the first post one can see that it is still incomplete! Obviously, the audit was stopped once the auditors were satisfied that they had established the correct order for the top ten finishing positions, as that was what really only mattered at the time: only those "in the money" counted! That may sound callous or indifferent by today's standards, but you have to see it in the context of the time, like so many other things that appear to be "fishy" to the modern observer - this race was, by many standards, quite a radical departure: it was much, much longer than any other race on a circular track of that length ever attempted so far, it also had many more starters than the usual track race, and the purse was not only huge in size, but also in "depth" as it was highly unusual for more than three or four finishers to get any prize money at all!

 

This "incompleteness" of the audit is probably also the reason why there are only four intermediate standings for us to ponder, although it is also possible that the reason for that was more "profane", i.e. lack of space in the page layout of the newspaper! By the way, I found the chart in a 1912 newspaper - think about that for a minute! Anyway, it all means that there is little chance to reconstruct any reasonable lap chart data, unfortunately - that would've been a real scoop! But still, the available data shows something which I always thought of as a distinct and scintillating possibility, namely that it was actually Cy Patschke who first took the lead for the winning Marmon! I need to examine a few more sources to be sure, but I'm almost positive...

[robert dick]

Patschke in the lead - from Motor Age, 1 June 1911, page 5:

"... At 150 miles Harroun in the Marmon had worked to second place, just ahead of Mulford, but 10 miles farther on Harroun concluded to take a rest, so he turned the wheel over to Cyrus Patschke, his relief driver. Patschke immediately got down to business. He gave relentless chase to Bruce-Brown and before he gave up the car to Harroun after 100 miles he had placed the Marmon in the lead, after which it never was headed..."

page 11:
"... Just how much Cyrus Patschke will get for assisting the Marmon to victory is not known, but certain it is he should not be forgotten when the division of the spoils takes place. Patschke contributed largely to Harroun's success. When he relieved the little fellow the Marmon was chasing Bruce-Brown and when he was ready to step out the Marmon had a good lead..."
 

[Doug Nye]

Fascinating to watch this thread develop...

DCN

[Collombin]

Wasn't it Harroun's plan from the start to run at 75mph pace irrespective of what the opposition were doing, in order to preserve tyres etc and ensure making it to the end? To finish first you must first finish.

Therefore, whilst giving Patschke fair credit for his role in the victory, it could be argued that the question of who was in the car when it took the lead is a little bit of a moot point (albeit an interesting one).

However, from the Motor Age report the implication is that without the burst of speed from Patschke during his stint, the Marmon would not have won. Is that really the case? I am not convinced.

[Michael Ferner]

I don't think that was the case, either. And you're right, with Harroun sticking ardously to his plan of lapping in two minutes flat (which, btw, the published times very nicely illustrate), the point of who it was who actually took the lead first becomes rather moot, if interesting. And, as Robert has pointed out, there are many reports which claim that it was Patschke (or, in a few cases even, the originally assigned relief driver William Studebaker!!) who took the lead for the winning Marmon, so it's not breathtaking news, either. The point is, rather, that someone (and I suspect it may have been Donald Davidson) within the IMS, it seems, at some point in time decided to do an "official" (?) audit of the lead laps in those early races (not only 1911), on the basis of which nowadays some "official" statitics are based, including the information for the Pacemaker Lap Leader Club (or whatever it is called these days), and there Patschke doesn't get any mention. Bear in mind here, that the revised results of the 1911 race docked the winner a lap, and credited Mulford, for example, with an extra one, so that the period reports about Patschke leading are not necessarily relevant - as said, the public address system was very much in the wilderness throughout most of the race due to the issue with the scoring board(s) (I still do not know exactly how many there were in 1911; in later years there was definitely more than one), so that newspaper reports amount to practically zilch in this case, at least without the backup from the scoring and timing information.

 

I have more than enough reason to doubt the accuracy of the "official" IMS lap leader statistics, not only based on the 1911 race. The enormous respect I have for Donald Davidson notwithstanding, I believe he (or, more generally, the person who did it, if it wasn't in fact him) didn't get it right in a number of cases. It may be that he simply wasn't that interested or that inclined to do the necessary legwork to get it done to a tee - be under no illusions, this IS an enormous task! And the paucity of reliable information in period reports, especially for the 1911 event, make it so difficult that I am not even sure that it can be done at all. But I think it's worth giving it a try, not only for the memory of Mr. Cyrus Patschke.

[robert dick]

... without the burst of speed from Patschke during his stint, the Marmon would not have won. Is that really the case? I am not convinced.

 

Motor Age, 1 June 1911:
"Harroun perhaps was wise in taking the rest he did, for he has not the robust constitution some of his rivals have. Indeed, it hardly is likely he could have continued much farther.
On the other hand, Mulford and Bruce-Brown apparently were in prime condition, neither man having suffered from the long grind. Both of them had gone the entire distance and evidently could have kept on for some time. Wishart showed the strain of the long drive and at the end was nervous and inclined to be morose. He, too, went the full route, as did happy go-lucky de Palma.
Although it was within the province of Referee Pardington to order drivers relieved, he did not find it necessary to exercise this right. In fact few of the drivers show any effects of the long race."