277 replies to this topic

[7MGTEsup]

But that said, even though they knew DC had a McLaren contract for '96 they actually went to the CRB to get him for '95, so it seems like from what they'd seen he was the better prospect.

 

Or the much cheaper option?

[Beri]

What if Clark hadnt died?
Then he would have been the '68 champion, nicking it away from Hill Sr. before needing to hand the crown over to a dominant Stewart in '69. This all is before he permanently goes herding sheep from '70 onwards.
Hill Sr., in turn, would have stayed on at Lotus to be able to fight for the tile. In that way Fittipaldi would have never joined Lotus and since Rindt still would have perished in this alternate universe as well, considering that Hill was the better driver over Rindt, Hill would have taken the title of '70 instead of Rindt. Thus resulting in Hill signing up for '71 and '72 as well. Getting his third ('72) title, signing up for another year and clinching his fourth title ('73) in the process. Before retiring a happy man and not needing to die in a plane crash by flying back from a F1 test. Fittipaldi would not have been champion and thus not joining McLaren, who wanted a big star name in their car. Instead he would have moved to the States early on in his career and handing the '74 championship title over to Regazzoni. In '75 a dominant Lauda would still clinch his first title.

The result by the end of 1975:
- Clark and Hill would still be alive
- 7 titles for Lotus
- 3 titles for Clark
- 4 titles for Hill
- 2 titles for Ferrari
- 1 title for Regazzoni
- 1 title for Lauda
- No title for McLaren
- No title for Fittipaldi

Edited by Beri, 22 August 2018 - 11:34.

[Collombin]

Hill better than Rindt in 1970?? Wow, that is alternative! Check out their 1969 performances as team-mates, let alone what happened to Hill at Watkins Glen at the end of the season.

[Passive]

Or the much cheaper option?

Knowing Mansell he probably gave Frank Williams like 16 million reasons to chose DC.

[sopa]

Hill better than Rindt in 1970?? Wow, that is alternative! 

 

 

Can we change driver performances in an alternative universe?

 

I reckon Narain Karthikeyan would have become 5-times Formula One World Champion.

[Myrvold]

What if Clark hadnt died?
Then he would have been the '68 champion, nicking it away from Hill Sr. before needing to hand the crown over to a dominant Stewart in '69. This all is before he permanently goes herding sheep from '70 onwards.
Hill Sr., in turn, would have stayed on at Lotus to be able to fight for the tile. In that way Fittipaldi would have never joined Lotus and since Rindt still would have perished in this alternate universe as well, considering that Hill was the better driver over Rindt, Hill would have taken the title of '70 instead of Rindt. Thus resulting in Hill signing up for '71 and '72 as well. Getting his third ('72) title, signing up for another year and clinching his fourth title ('73) in the process. Before retiring a happy man and not needing to die in a plane crash by flying back from a F1 test. Fittipaldi would not have been champion and thus not joining McLaren, who wanted a big star name in their car. Instead he would have moved to the States early on in his career and handing the '74 championship title over to Regazzoni. In '75 a dominant Lauda would still clinch his first title.

The result by the end of 1975:
- Clark and Hill would still be alive
- 7 titles for Lotus
- 3 titles for Clark
- 4 titles for Hill
- 2 titles for Ferrari
- 1 title for Regazzoni
- 1 title for Lauda
- No title for McLaren
- No title for Fittipaldi

 

Would all this mean that Damon Hill gets to follow his MC passion, or would he debut in F1 10 years earlier instead (before he actually started racing on 4 wheels in real history)?

[Beri]

Hill better than Rindt in 1970?? Wow, that is alternative! Check out their 1969 performances as team-mates, let alone what happened to Hill at Watkins Glen at the end of the season.

I get what you are saying. But reality is that Hill brought that Lotus home more often than Rindt. Despite Rindt' great run in grabbing pole positions that season. He dropped out once because of his own failure when he was feeling ill at the French GP. The rest were technical issues. But despite this, I cant say that I find Rindt was that much better than Hill to be honest.
 

Would all this mean that Damon Hill gets to follow his MC passion, or would he debut in F1 10 years earlier instead (before he actually started racing on 4 wheels in real history)?

Its an alternate universe. So, sure.. why not?

Edited by Beri, 23 August 2018 - 07:40.

[Nemo1965]

What if Gilles had not tried to pass Mass on the right is one thing, but what if Pironi had not been a backstabbing asshole at San Marino?


Apart from that, lotsa well-conceived posts.
Great idea for a thread, Marklar.

And yeah, powerfull...

 

I think personally that if the Imola-accident would not have happened, Gilles most probably would have had a deadly accident in F1 or another sort. Read Gerald Donaldson' biography of Gilles, and you read about a man who just took idiotic risks, on the track, with his helicopter, with private cars on the road, with his boats. In the book there's just incident after incident where Gilles made it appear he survived by his considerable skills, but if you are sane person you realize: if you take gambles like this, all the time, one day they will catch up on you. Gilles could have had a Pironi-like accident in Germany, could have crashed his helicopter on a market full of people, perished with his whole family at a boatcrash in the water around Monaco...

[sopa]

I think personally that if the Imola-accident would not have happened, Gilles most probably would have had a deadly accident in F1 or another sort. Read Gerald Donaldson' biography of Gilles, and you read about a man who just took idiotic risks, on the track, with his helicopter, with private cars on the road, with his boats. In the book there's just incident after incident where Gilles made it appear he survived by his considerable skills, but if you are sane person you realize: if you take gambles like this, all the time, one day they will catch up on you. Gilles could have had a Pironi-like accident in Germany, could have crashed his helicopter on a market full of people, perished with his whole family at a boatcrash in the water around Monaco...

 

Yeah.

 

Well, in the end the issue with deaths is that... even if you assume some accident didn't happen like mentioned here. Racing back then was dangerous. And something was bound to happen anyway sooner or later. Maybe if Clark or Rindt didn't die, somebody else would have been caught out instead. That's the way it was. There were some incredibly close calls too. What if Stewart didn't escape that leaky car in 1966? What if Lauda didn't escape that burning car in 1976? Etc, etc.

 

A true alternative universe would be if racing indeed was safer back then and we had almost no fatalities. Which careers would we have seen then?

Edited by sopa, 23 August 2018 - 08:01.

[Collombin]

What if Fittipaldi hadn't crashed at Parabolica in practice at Monza in 1970?

[Beri]

Yeah.
 
Well, in the end the issue with deaths is that... even if you assume some accident didn't happen like mentioned here. Racing back then was dangerous. And something was bound to happen anyway sooner or later. Maybe if Clark or Rindt didn't die, somebody else would have been caught out instead. That's the way it was. There were some incredibly close calls too. What if Stewart didn't escape that leaky car in 1966? What if Lauda didn't escape that burning car in 1976? Etc, etc.
 
A true alternative universe would be if racing indeed was safer back then and we had almost no fatalities. Which careers would we have seen then?

Cevert being the hero of the 70s?

What if Fittipaldi hadn't crashed at Parabolica in practice at Monza in 1970?

Then he..?

[Collombin]

Then he..?

I don't know, hence the question!

Clearly Rindt would have survived, but would Emerson have been killed instead? Depending on his opinion of crotch straps, possibly not.

[BuddyHolly]

..considering that Hill was the better driver over Rindt.

I have a lot of admiration and respect for Graham Hill (after all, he was WDC in my birth year) but I disagree, Rindt was the better driver.

Edited by BuddyHolly, 23 August 2018 - 09:16.

[Beri]

I don't know, hence the question!

Clearly Rindt would have survived, but would Emerson have been killed instead? Depending on his opinion of crotch straps, possibly not.

He didnt hit any trees, Emmo did have a lot of luck during his crash. All the luck in the world to be fair.

I have a lot of admiration and respect for Graham Hill (after all, he was WDC in my birth year) but I disagree, Rindt was the better driver.

Fair enough!

[Collombin]

And by his own high standards Hill was pretty lacklustre in 1969.

[Collombin]

He didnt hit any trees, Emmo did have a lot of luck during his crash. All the luck in the world to be fair.

The point is that the car that killed Rindt would have been being driven by Emerson, had Emmo not wiped out Rindt's intended car on the previous day.

[Beri]

I get your angle. But the cause of the crash was never officially revealed now was it? A brake shaft failure is the issue that many believe is what happened why Rindt veered of the course?
But could it have been a driver failure? In that case, it wouldnt have mattered in what car he was in.

I just read an article about Rindt' death. Having your torso slammed into the steering wheel, your main artery severed due to your windscreen breaking off, having a top of the line medical center at the circuit not being used to save your life due to politics, having your ambulance losing sight of the motorcade and even (rumored tho never confirmed) have the ambulance run out of gas, doesnt bode well to your chances on survival. If I were to believe in a heavenly father, I would seriously think he had a piss on Rindt that day.

[Nemo1965]

Pironi and Jabouille are the two champs of the two F1's

Monday, October 15th, 1980. Didier Pironi (Ligier) and Jean-Pierre Jabouille (Renault) are the champions of the two competing F1-championships of 1980, one organized by the commercial entity FOCA (led by Bernie Ecclestone) and the other by the international motorsport-bureaucracy FISA (headed by Jean-Marie Balestre). Pironi secured the title by winning the last race on the parkinglot/streetcircuit of Las Vegas. Jabouille had already secured his title by placing sixth in the Italian Grand Prix at Monza, two weeks ago. He did not finish in Japan, where the last race was held at Fuji-raceway.

The lead of this story will probably draw the ire of FISA-official Balestre, who has tried to sue at least twenty newspapers and other news outlets for having the audacity calling the 'illegal pirate-championship' (as he mandates to have it called) anything like 'the other F1'. This apart from all the efforts Ballestre put in trying to convince television-companies all around the world not to broadcast footage of the FOCA-races. To no avail. Combined, the two F1-championships booked a record number of viewers: 1 billion people worldwide watched one or more F1-races this season.
It appears that the viewers enjoyed both series about as much. According to F1-legend Jacky Stewart (see the separate article in which Stewart and Ken Tyrrel discuss the merits of the two championships) the viewers appreciated that both championships looked alike but still were distinguishable. Stewart: 'The FOCA championship was more about the drivers, the FISA about the cars. I think that few viewers are going to forget the fight between Piquet, Jones and Reutemann in Las Vegas. The way Pironi stole the lead in the last ten laps, after being invisible for much of the race, was the stuff of legends. The FISA championship was great because the FISA gave so much room for the teams to bring new technology and also allowed the teams to help each other. Thanks to the help of Renault, Ferrari could debut the turbo much earlier. And who will forget the Ferrari-eight-wheeler driving around Monza? Okay, it blew up in a grand way, but what a car!'
Perhaps Balestre was perhaps too busy harassing journalists, TV-corporations and track-owners to meddle too much in F1-rules? Stewart: 'Aye, that is funny and perhaps partly true. But Balestre and the FISA showed admirable flexibility this year. Also regarding the rules. The weight-penalty system would never have worked in the combined championship, but it really draw the teams close together in the last races of the championship.'
According to Ken Tyrrel the variety of the tracks made the two competing championships interesting. Tyrrel: 'The FOCA "stole" Imola in Italy, the Circuit Île Notre-Dame in Canada, Watkins Glen in the United States. But they also introduced new tracks in Dallas, Las Vegas and Russia. You could say FISA was forced to use Monza again, or Fuji in Japan. But you have to admit that giving the renovated Rouen-track the French Grand-Prix was a masterstroke!'
For both the Ligier-team and the Renault-team the split of the two F1-championships was perhaps the key in their respective championships. Ligier - declared illegal by the FISA by participating in the first 'pirate'-race in Jarama, lost their contract with the Michelin-tyre company, which meant they had to race on Pirelli's. The Pirelli's were slower, says Guy Ligier, but it cured the constant problems with the rims on the wheels of the Ligier, which kept bursting with the Michelin-tyres, resulting in tyre-failures.
The cooperation of Renault with Ferrari on aspects of the turbo (which would have been unacceptable in the combined championship) not only helped Ferrari to debut their turbo-car (and win the last race of the season and of Jody Scheckter's career) but also solved the reliability-problems of the Renault-engine. Gerard Larousse, teamleader of Renault: 'It is very funny that Ferrari, who really had very little experience with turbo-engines, had solutions for problems we never would have dreamed of being problems! Until they happened, of course.'
The same Larousse feels the split is perhaps, in the long run, the saving of F1. 'Half a year ago, I kind of steeled myself for ten years of political wranglings in F1. Perhaps if these two championships can have a few years next to another, people like Balestre, Ecclestone and example Ferrari can act for the benefit of F1 and have real, open talks and negotiations. The way F1 was, those talks would also have been too political. It was just a swamp. Now F1 is more like two roads running next to each other. It is easier to converge two roads than to drain a swamp.'

Edited by Nemo1965, 23 August 2018 - 11:30.

[Beri]

In that universe, France would have gone baguettenas over a French garlic eater winning the championship in that yellow teapot.

Nice piece of writing!

[DarthWillie]

What if Hakkinen hadn't crashed in Australia? He lost hearing in one ear.and had other problems. Would he have been a better driver?

Edited by DarthWillie, 23 August 2018 - 09:47.

[Collombin]

Brake shaft failure is believed to be the cause of Rindt's crash, I can't see it being driver error. Inadequate armco supports and Jochen's hatred of crotch straps made the outcome much worse.

[Beri]

Somewhat ironic since he just started using seatbelts during the '70 season if Im not mistaking.

[sopa]

Nice story, Nemo. Though I couldn't imagine a universe in which Renault and Ferrari co-operate and help each other to get a better cars. Now that sounds like a dreamland.

 

Impressive for Jabouille to become a champion though considering he normally retired from (almost) all races.

 

Also F1 split would be like IRL-CART split. I think in the end one of those F1 series would die out. And I'd wager a guess Ecclestone's series would have been in a healthier state. For a simple reason - many more teams participating.

 

Though an interesting question is that in the following seasons we were going to have the influx of lots of engine manufacturers. BMW, Honda, TAG Porsche, etc. Which series would they have joined, which teams would they have teamed? Provided, of course, the FISA championship of Renault/Ferrari would have lasted that long...

[Nemo1965]

Nice story, Nemo. Though I couldn't imagine a universe in which Renault and Ferrari co-operate and help each other to get a better cars. Now that sounds like a dreamland.

 

Impressive for Jabouille to become a champion though considering he normally retired from (almost) all races.

 

Also F1 split would be like IRL-CART split. I think in the end one of those F1 series would die out. And I'd wager a guess Ecclestone's series would have been in a healthier state. For a simple reason - many more teams participating.

 

Though an interesting question is that in the following seasons we were going to have the influx of lots of engine manufacturers. BMW, Honda, TAG Porsche, etc. Which series would they have joined, which teams would they have teamed? Provided, of course, the FISA championship of Renault/Ferrari would have lasted that long...

 

Perhaps. But if I would have told anyone in 1980 that Ferrari was going to supply engines to another F1 team and allow them to be badged as Alfa Romeo, they would have laughed hysterically.

 

On top of that: when in 1968, Colin Chapman had the newest, experimental super-engine (the Ford Cosworth) he could have easily monopolized it and cleaned out the competition. But he asked (or allowed) Ford to make the engine available to anyone who could buy it. In other words: Chapman acted for the greater good of F1, because at that moment F1-teams still felt they were all part of the same brotherhood. I think that a split of F1 in 1980 or later would have been a chance to get that spirit back. My idea was that if the two F1's were competing, they would have been desperate to give the best show possible, meaning a lot of equality between cars. And Jabouille, well... I think an outside view would perhaps have helped them very much, even have solved their dramatic reliability.

[Atreiu]

Here's a juicy one... what if the top motorcycle racing class was the 250cc? Imagine 500cc and MotoGP would have falen under WSBK's umbrella and naturally become less desirable/luring.

 

Who would have had more success? 2008 would have been bonkers, Lorenzo, Rossi, Stoner, Pedrosa, Simoncelli...

Edited by Atreiu, 25 August 2018 - 18:20.

[Atreiu]

What if Stoner had never retired in 2012?

 

Stoner vs Marquez at Repsol Honda in 2013... Pedrosa at Ducati, I think.

[BiggestBuddyLazierFan]

So you assume Monza goes exactly as it did, yet for some reason you cast doubt as to whether Nurburgring would go as it did.

Seems like you are being very selective and extremely vague with your reasoning.

Topic is called "what if" and the term "extremly vague" is deeply encoded in "what if" reasoning

[BiggestBuddyLazierFan]

Dude, it's a what if. We are literally guessing what could have happened - and we'll never know.
In this scenario I guess Senna, McLaren and Honda would have stuck together. And I think 1994 might have been fascinating instead of tragic in all aspects.

You do not need Senna in Mclaren for 1994 if you want to keep him alive. You only need suspension arm to bounce at his helmet for just a few degree different angle. And he is alive and well on monday May 2nd 1994