26 replies to this topic

[kapow]

I've just been reading the September 1969 issue of Motor Sport.

Does anyone know quite why there were oly 13 starters in the F1 race? I notice that Ferrari are listed as a non-starter but no details are given as to why - it looks like they didn't show up at all. Surtees is mentioned as withdrawing before the start, again without reason.

There was an F2 race run concurrently - was this always planned or was it to just fill out the field?

Quite shockingly by modern standards there's a very brief mention that Mitter was killed in practice - this isn't mentioned until the 5th paragraph and gets 6 lines!

[Tim Murray]

1969 was a year of low entries in World Championship GPs. The French GP also had only 13 starters, and the average during the year was no more than 15 or 16, with the highest being 20 at the Canadian GP. Ferrari had temporarily withdrawn as the car was felt to be uncompetitive, and Surtees is listed as withdrawing after 'suspension problems' in practice. He was so pissed off with the BRM organisation at this stage, however, that this may have been a convenient excuse.

There had been a concurrent F2 race in 1967 as well, so it wasn't just a one-off for 1969.

[bschenker]

Yes when you with such few cars still refuses registrations that are logical.

 

One advantage was that the costs were so lower and yet they had a bigger field.

 

..

[john winfield]

I've just been reading the September 1969 issue of Motor Sport.

...................................

Quite shockingly by modern standards there's a very brief mention that Mitter was killed in practice - this isn't mentioned until the 5th paragraph and gets 6 lines!

 

Kapow, yes, I notice this more and more as I read old copies of Motor Sport, particularly with reports written by DSJ, and with articles by Bill Boddy. Great these two may have been, and, some will say, '....times were different then.....death was accepted as part of the sport.....' but I do think Jenks and the Bod did have a problem writing about driver deaths.  

I think it was David Tremayne who, in a short, rather critical piece on DSJ, found he couldn't forgive him for baling out of an appreciation of Jim Clark by writing something along the lines of ' mere words can't express.....'.  Tremayne felt, as DSJ was a professional motor racing journalist, it was his job to try! The loss of other notable drivers was sometimes followed by a picture and a couple of lines '.....it would be trite to write more...' or similar.  I didn't know DSJ, or how deeply he felt about drivers ( as opposed to racing, cars and engineering) and, even though I love some of DSJ's writing, I tend to agree with David Tremayne.

 

Perhaps at that time it was just Motor Sport policy not to bother too much with the personal side of modern racing; I felt that the magazine became a good deal more human when Andy Marriott and Alan Henry became involved.  Bill Boddy I can't work out.  As editor he didn't insist on appropriate appreciations or obituaries for current drivers, yet always seemed willing to write heartfelt, and sometimes lengthy, tributes to characters he had known in the 1930s, now passing away in their eighties or nineties!

 

Sadly, I'm not surprised at the almost fleeting reference to Gerhard Mitter's death. Many other fatalities, including those of established Grand Prix drivers, were handled by Motor Sport in a very low key manner.  And that's putting it mildly.

Edited by john winfield, 26 July 2015 - 20:12.

[Vitesse2]

I think part of that may be that they simply felt that it was more the job of the weeklies, John. By the time Motor Sport published it could be five or six weeks after the event.

 

As a notable example Motor Sport - as such - never published an obituary for Dick Seaman: there was a personal appreciation by Earl Howe in the August 1939 edition, but it was on the BRDC Bulletin page, which was something they'd agreed to carry when they absorbed Speed. I don't think they actually had editorial control over that. Even more surprisingly, they didn't publish a report of the race either.

 

They had done a bit more for Rosemeyer the year before, but even then it wasn't a separate obituary - just a section of their report on the speed runs. At the time I believe Motor Sport was published on about the 10th of the month, so Rosemeyer's death on January 28th was then still 'news' when the February issue hit the newsstands,.

[john winfield]

I take your point Richard, but I'm not sure I agree!  One could argue that a monthly like Motor Sport, not faced with the rushed deadlines of the weeklies, would often have more of the time necessary to compile a thorough, fitting tribute to a lost racer.  I think it was just a low priority for Jenks and Boddy.

 

Taking, say, Motor Sport 1960 - 1972, perhaps the lack of extensive obituaries or tributes mirrors the relatively few (modern) driver profiles run in the magazine compared to Autosport or Motoring News. Boddy was happy to write about characters from the Brooklands era, and Jenks wrote some brilliant reports, and interesting articles on the racing scene, circuits, teams, engineers and cars. I can't recall many long pieces on drivers.  He certainly loved a racer - for example singing Pedro's praises after his drives at Spa in 1970 and at the Oesterrichring the following year (in the 917) - but I can't imagine him writing a full page Pedro profile.  And I don't think he or the Bod wrote Pedro much of an obituary did they?  Did Jenks think writing about drivers to be cissy?  Did he find it boring, or perhaps too difficult? 

Edited by john winfield, 26 July 2015 - 21:46.

[Roger Clark]

I thought then, and I still do, that many thousands of words over the previous six years made it clear how Denis Jenkinson felt about Jim Clark.  There was surely no need for a summary of his career.  The brief paragraph in Continental Notes and the photograph in Matters of Moment said everything that needed to be said at that time.

 

That is not to say that Motor Sport did not sometimes seem very callous at times of tragedy.

[kapow]

Was there any difference in how Autosport handled fatalities?

Another point I forgot to mention is that the race report begins by talking about the challenge and danger of the 'ring and that it's for men! Rather callous.

[john winfield]

I thought then, and I still do, that many thousands of words over the previous six years made it clear how Denis Jenkinson felt about Jim Clark.  There was surely no need for a summary of his career.  The brief paragraph in Continental Notes and the photograph in Matters of Moment said everything that needed to be said at that time.

 

 

Fair point Roger.  I suppose part of the charm of Motor Sport being, at the time, a bit of a Boddy/Jenks private indulgence was their self-confidence.  Who cares about new or young readers?  This young reader became a bit cheesed off with, aside from the callousness, reports headed 'A Dead Loss' (Le Mans 1970) or 'Uninspiring' (British GP 1972).  Broadly Jenks seemed to do what he liked, which perhaps fits in with your point - 'look back through what I wrote earlier in the decade and you'll know what I think about x or y'.

But I still think David Tremayne is right. Jim Clark deserved more. And so, probably, did Gerhard Mitter.

[Alan Baker]

In the pre-Bernie roadshow era, teams were not obliged to enter every event and it was not unusual for Ferrari to pull out if their cars looked like being uncompetitive (the usual excuse was metal workers strikes in Italy). 1969 was a poor year for entries, with just six regular works teams  (Lotus, McLaren, Brabham, Matra, BRM and Ferrari). Of these Ferrari were usually running only one car. Remember that both Honda and Cooper had pulled out of Grand Prix racing at the end of 1968. Also missing from the German race was Jack Brabham, who was still recovering from his testing accident. Surtees' withdrawal after practice was due to him believeing the car to be unraceworthy, but also partly perhaps because he had been slower in practice (on a circuit on which he was considered a master) than Johnny Servoz-Gavin's F2 Matra!

 

Motor Sport's antipathy to the personal side of motor racing was well known. Having said that, they did often run features on up and coming drivers in the early sixties. Both WB and DSJ were fighting a rearguard action against a changing world. WB's opposition to speed limits and seat belts are examples of this, while DSJ as late as 1968 was seriously suggesting that the RAC should run a championship sports car race on the Isle of Man TT course. In truth, both knew they were fighting a losing battle.  In the fifties the chance of dying in a racing accident was probably less than had been the chance of dying in the recent war and was accepted as part of the game (as it was in the case of test pilots).  As attitudes changed during the sixties it was natural for WB and DSJ to downplay the dangers and , of course, DSJ was famously disparaging of Jackie Stewart's safety crusade (milk and water etc.). Neither were callous individuals, but both were thoroughly steeped in motoring and motor racing and loath to accept the growing restrictions and regulations that the modern world was imposing.

[Roger Clark]

I think that Cosworth must bear responsibility for the generally small fields in 1969 - for being so good. Rival engine manufacturers had either withdrawn (Honda, Eagle, Matra) or were in disarray BRM and Ferrari). In 1970, Matra engines returned and BRM and Ferrari sorted themselves out.

The cost of running a DFV-engined car was much greater than, say, a BRM V8 of a few years earlier and sponsorship was still in its infancy. In 1969, Ford still controlled who got the DFV and Cosworth's ability to build and service the engines was limited. It wasn't until 1973 that Cosworth allowed other companies to service the DFV.

[wolf sun]

More info (in German only), and more importantly some fantastic pictures, here:

 

http://pro-steilstre...chland_1969.php

[opplock]

One factor, alluded to in post 3, is that the German GP organisers refused to accept F1 entries from non-graded drivers. Silvio Moser competed in most of the European GPs (missing Spain, UK and Germany) and the 3 North American races.   

 

Autocourse attributed Ferrari's absence to "making new cars for Monza" (the flat 12).    

[pete53]

Was there any difference in how Autosport handled fatalities?

Another point I forgot to mention is that the race report begins by talking about the challenge and danger of the 'ring and that it's for men! Rather callous.

Autosport nearly always printed an obituary on the death of any driver (even if their death wasn't related to a racing accident). Even club racers were invariably given this respect.

 

Others have surmised as to why Motor Sport didn't, as a matter of course, print an obituary. It has been mentioned that being a monthly meant that by the time of publication events being reported on could be as much as 5/6 weeks in the past. I am not sure if this alone was a good enough reason not to issue an obituary. I am sure I recall reading the 1970 issue of Motor Sport that had the report for that year's Italian GP, in which Jocehn Rindt perished in practice. I am pretty sure the only mention of Rindt in the whole issue was, as part of the race report,  a brief description of his accident in practice.

 

Looking back though, even the British weeklies Autosport & Motoring News, who both would have paid tribute to a driver on his death, still tended to pass over fatal accidents fairly quickly. I often wondered whether this was a conscious action designed as an antidote to the national press, who, on the whole, tended to ignore motor racing, except for when there was a death. They would then happily give sensational front page coverage to the tragedy . I do recall motor sport journalists, particularly in the 60s, being highly irked by this and, as a result, perhaps edged in the other direction, down-playing fatalities, to avoid being seen party to any form of the lurid sensationalism practiced by the Daily papers.

 

Apologies for veering a bit off topic here.

[Vitesse2]

Others have surmised as to why Motor Sport didn't, as a matter of course, print an obituary. It has been mentioned that being a monthly meant that by the time of publication events being reported on could be as much as 5/6 weeks in the past. I am not sure if this alone was a good enough reason not to issue an obituary. I am sure I recall reading the 1970 issue of Motor Sport that had the report for that year's Italian GP, in which Jocehn Rindt perished in practice. I am pretty sure the only mention of Rindt in the whole issue was, as part of the race report,  a brief description of his accident in practice.

 

Apologies for veering a bit off topic here.

Well, DSJ wasn't renowned as a particular admirer of Jochen. "I'll bet my beard .."

 

Getting back to 1969, another factor - partly allied to Roger's point about sponsors - is the sheer lack of even vaguely competitive available second-hand chassis for privateers to use. Ferraris, Hondas and Eagles were out of the question, the Matra MS10s had presumably gone back to France and a few old Coopers and the two Lotus 43s - together with all sorts of other unlikely machinery like the Shannon, the Kincraft and various chassis from the 1.5 litre formula - were destined for the first season of F5000. Frank Williams had bought the one available Brabham BT26, returning the BRM P126 he'd had in 1968 to Bourne, who used it occasionally in 1969. Colin Crabbe had bought the one available McLaren M7A, while Bonnier had already given up on his M5A and hung it on the wall of his lounge. Lotus then sold him a 49, only to take it back in exchange for a useless 63. Rob Walker was still running the 49 he'd bought in 1968, Moser a 1967 Brabham BT24. Cooper announced a 1969 Cosworth-engined car, which they were prepared to sell to privateers, but there were no takers. And that's yer lot!

[Gary Davies]

Without either condoning or condemning DJS's views - known well to most here - this from Continental Notes September 1958 sums up quite well a reasonably common line of thinking six decades ago: "The last two months have been sad ones for Grand Prix racing, for first Luigi Musso is killed and then Peter Collins, while earlier in the year Archie Scott-Brown lost his life. In each case the driver was in second position in a hotly-contested race and was trying very hard to challenge for the lead; all three made a mistake and paid for it with their lives. That is an unfortunate thing indeed, but it is one of the calculable risks that a racing driver must be prepared to take if he is going to get into the top class of drivers. On each occasion a post-mortem of the accident suggested that the actual death was caused by a definite object; with Scott-Brown it was a signpost, with Musso a ditch, with Collins a tree; and after each accident there have been people who have suggested that it was careless, and even criminal, to have left these objects on the edge of the circuit. If you suggested to Duncan-Hamilton that all ditches should be filled in I am sure he would disagree, for it was a ditch that saved him from being crushed when his Jaguar turned over at Le Mans, for it rolled across the the ditch so that his head and shoulders did not touch the ground. If you suggested that every tree be removed I personally would object, for it was a lone tree that prevented Stirling Moss and myself from going end-over-end down into a rocky valley when we crashed in the 1956 Mille Miglia. Perhaps I am a fatalist, but I feel that once an accident has started, or, in other words, the driver has really lost control, there is little that can he done to direct the consequences; it is a matter of sheer luck whether you get killed or not.

[Alan Baker]

Well, DSJ wasn't renowned as a particular admirer of Jochen. "I'll bet my beard .."

 

Getting back to 1969, another factor - partly allied to Roger's point about sponsors - is the sheer lack of even vaguely competitive available second-hand chassis for privateers to use. Ferraris, Hondas and Eagles were out of the question, the Matra MS10s had presumably gone back to France and a few old Coopers and the two Lotus 43s - together with all sorts of other unlikely machinery like the Shannon, the Kincraft and various chassis from the 1.5 litre formula - were destined for the first season of F5000. Frank Williams had bought the one available Brabham BT26, returning the BRM P126 he'd had in 1968 to Bourne, who used it occasionally in 1969. Colin Crabbe had bought the one available McLaren M7A, while Bonnier had already given up on his M5A and hung it on the wall of his lounge. Lotus then sold him a 49, only to take it back in exchange for a useless 63. Rob Walker was still running the 49 he'd bought in 1968, Moser a 1967 Brabham BT24. Cooper announced a 1969 Cosworth-engined car, which they were prepared to sell to privateers, but there were no takers. And that's yer lot!

Frank Williams had a lot of cars, but never a BRM P126! Moser's Brabham BT24 was the one that Frank had fitted with a Cosworth DFW for the 1969 Tasman series.

[Vitesse2]

Frank Williams had a lot of cars, but never a BRM P126!

Brain fade. For Frank Williams read Tim Parnell!

[bschenker]

Do you know where Force India is at home?

 

I was with our BT24-03 Cosworth in the workshop of Bill Lacey on 19 July 1969 who was about 50 ~ 100m south of where Force India is. But also the British GP did not accept our registration.

 

If there were no World Championship points in the current year, an organizer did not have to accept us.

 

A year later, for all the organizers were too many cars in circulation, so it took the Monte Carlo system and sets the number of participants arbitrarily.

 

Those who are not qualified went home without receiving a dime.

 

.

[fuzzi]

I was a regular reader of Motor Sport from 1962 to 1993. I still recall turning to the Editorial page with the photo of Jim Clark, it summed up how I felt perfectly.

 

If you want to know what DSJ thought of racing drivers see his book "The Racing Driver" published by Batsford. It shows he was by no means disinterested, rather he put a lot of thought into what made them tick.

 

For his behind the scenes look at racing drivers off duty see his "A Story of Formula One" published by Grenville in 1960.

 

Finally, as a suggestion, a year or so after Jim Clark's death he wrote an article "When did you lose interest?" Worth seeking out for his views on the loss of an outstanding driver. 

[funformula]

@ Vitesse2

@ bschenker

 

Sorry for getting slightly off topic here but the thread relation to Gerhard Mitter made me ask you about your recollections of that particular era.

It´s not widely known that Gerhard Mitter planned to race in F1 in his privately entered team in 1970 backed by Ford Germany and therefore using a Cosworth engine.

According to his son he was in England shortly before his fatal accident to sign a deal for buying a F1 car.

Unfortunately there is no more documentation left to prove witch chassis he wanted to race with.

Brabham and McLaren are the most obvious choices but Ron Tauranac had no recollections about an enquiry of Gerhard Mitter buying a car.

 

Do you have recollections about what car Gerhard Mitter may have bought back then?

[john winfield]

Funfo, until you mentioned Ron Tauranac having no recollection of Gerhard Mitter planning to buy, I was going to suggest Brabham, possibly the car that Rolf Stommelen drove.  The German connection may however just be coincidence, and I don't know when in 1969 or early 1970 Rolf and Brabham confirmed their deal.

[Roger Clark]

I was a regular reader of Motor Sport from 1962 to 1993. I still recall turning to the Editorial page with the photo of Jim Clark, it summed up how I felt perfectly.

 

If you want to know what DSJ thought of racing drivers see his book "The Racing Driver" published by Batsford. It shows he was by no means disinterested, rather he put a lot of thought into what made them tick.

 

For his behind the scenes look at racing drivers off duty see his "A Story of Formula One" published by Grenville in 1960.

 

Finally, as a suggestion, a year or so after Jim Clark's death he wrote an article "When did you lose interest?" Worth seeking out for his views on the loss of an outstanding driver. 

I totally agree.  I particularly recommend the chapter In Memorium from A Story of Formula 1.  Heartfelt reminiscences of genuine friends.

[john winfield]

These are interesting points, suggesting a real interest in the drivers as well as the cars they raced. In terms of what DSJ wrote in Motor Sport though, perhaps Pete is right, maybe the somewhat detached approach following fatalities was to contrast with the sensationalism in the general press.  Bill Boddy is certainly damning of the dailies' obsession with drama, accidents and death.

 

Fuzzi, the DSJ 'When did you lose interest?' feature that I know is from March 1973. There are pictures of Jim Clark within it but it's a fairly detached piece in which DSJ plays devil's advocate, teasing those who now claimed to be bored by it all, showing his clear enthusiasm for the then current scene.  In his view '..the Cooper/Brabham era was a bore, but the rise of Jim Clark and Lotus was refreshing..'. That's all I can see relating to Jim.

[kapow]

Thanks for the replies. It's been really interesting reading your thoughts and it's great to get some new knowledge.

[D-Type]

In the fifties and sixties The Motor and The Autocar included race reports.  Did they also print obituaries?

[funformula]

Funfo, until you mentioned Ron Tauranac having no recollection of Gerhard Mitter planning to buy, I was going to suggest Brabham, possibly the car that Rolf Stommelen drove.  The German connection may however just be coincidence, and I don't know when in 1969 or early 1970 Rolf and Brabham confirmed their deal.

 

John,

thank you for your post.

 

Yes, the Stommelen/Brabham connection made the Brabham the most obvious choice at first sight.

But wasn´t the Stommelen drive a Brabham/MRD-works entry?

Mitter planned to enter his own team based in Germany in his own workshop.

 

McLaren may have been Mitters choice, maybe the chassis that Surtees used in 1970 before having his own TS1 race ready.