88 replies to this topic

[Egon Thurner]

I wonder, who really finished fifth and scored the two points - Behra or Schell ?

Different sources - different results ...

Who can bring some light to that obscure matter ?

[Kpy]

This all seems to come down to whether Behra completed 70 or 69 laps.
There seems to be no doubt that Schell managed 69.
Schell's finishing time was 3:09'00.9 and Behra's 3:07'50.2

Different sources give Behra's distance covered as 70 or 69 laps.

My own meagre contribution is taken from "Rouen-les-Essarts 1950 - 1993" by Roger Biot, motor racing correspondent for Paris-Normandie, (the Rouen daily paper) during the whole of the circuit's existence. The book is based on his own reports from the paper's archives.

He writes, under the headline

Jean Behra "baignant dans l'huile !"

....Behra, victime d'une rupture de canalisation d'huile, sauvera son 5e place, maculé de la tête aux pieds, en poussant sa voiture !"

roughly translated:

Jean Behra "bathed in oil"

.... Behra, suffering a broken oil pipe, saved his 5th place, covered in oil from head to foot, pushing his car over the line !"

[Vitesse2]

I must confess to having never noticed this discrepancy before reading this thread ...

Pritchard's "Maserati" also mentions Behra pushing his car over the line to finish 5th. Lang and Sheldon both say he "coasted" home but disagree on where he finished (Lang 5th, Sheldon 6th).

Most intriguing is Grand Prix Data Book 2 which gives Behra 5th but says "H Schell and J Behra were originally incorrectly classified 5th and 6th respectively" but gives no source for this correction!!!

[LittleChris]

Kpy,

Is the book still available and what's it like ? I could probably manage to read it if I have a french dictionary at hand, but I'd especially like to see any pictures.

Chris

[Don Capps]

If folks today only realized how much fun they are missing....

[Roger Clark]

Autosport said that Behra was not creditted with his final lap. A race regulation said that a driver's final lap had to be completed in under 7min 30 sec to count and Behra had waited over 10 minutes for Fangio before pushing over the line.

[Kpy]

Originally posted by LittleChris
Kpy,

Is the book still available and what's it like ?
Chris

The book was only published on May 22 this year. The day I bought it !!

It is excellent 192 pages and full of good pictures - hundreds of them - ask Barry Boor and Roger Clark, fellow members of Les Amis des Circuits d'Antan (All are welcome to join), as they saw my copy when we researched the original Dieppe GP circuit - see Roger's recent thread and Barry's Rouen 2001 thread.

Cost is 150frs. If you can find a way of getting money to me I'll find out the postage and do the purchasing and posting for you and anyone else who'd like a copy.

Kpy

[Don Capps]

Autosport said that Behra was not creditted with his final lap. A race regulation said that a driver's final lap had to be completed in under 7min 30 sec to count and Behra had waited over 10 minutes for Fangio before pushing over the line.

Roger brings into play the "Gee, I knew that...." Factor. The race regulations back then often carried the stipulation that the final 'racing' lap posted by a competitor had to be no more than twice (or, I think, usually three times) the time of the race's fastest lap, otherwise it was disallowed. This was one means to discourage the practice of sitting just before the finish line for several laps and rolling over the line after the flag dropped to be flagged a finisher.

Thanks Roger, for nudging my memory for something so obvious.

Having defended Paul Sheldon and crew elsewhere, I have to voice my only real reservation about The Black Books -- the use of the modern rules about classifying finishers. This has probably been my only real quibble about the books -- the chassis numbers are often smoke and mirrors anyway and have tripped up more folks than you can imagine.

Such items as the Schell and Behra classification issue are reminders that attention to detail is often more important than most realize. Heaven knows I goof stuff up enough despite my best efforts at times.

[LittleChris]

Kpy,

Thanks for the offer, but I'm not sure how I' can get the money to you. Any suggestions ?

If the book is generally available, I'm going to be in France on holiday during August so may be able to pick it up then.

Chris

[fines]

Have we established the REAL answer yet? I think not, imho. To me it seems that Behra was originally docked the lap by the ACF, but the results later 'modified', possibly by the CSI? My only contemporary source, "Das Auto", credits Schell with fifth place and two points in their race report, but sadly doesn't provide any championship standings after the German GP. How about "Autosport", "Motor Sport" or "Autocourse"? Or the French, Italian or whatever magazines of the time? Anyone with access to those?

There must be a reason as to why most points tables show Behra credited with the two points!

[Roger Clark]

Motor Sport gave 5th place to Behra and didn't mention a disallowed lap. This would, of course, case many British writers to record that result without further thought. My suspicioon is that this was the first published result, and that a number of magazines, including Motor sport and Das Auto failed to record the correction. I can't find any mention of a second change to the results.

I followed the championship through Autosport; they published a table after each race. They were consistent in giving 5th place to Schell. However, some other interesting points emerged:

1 They gave 1 point for 6th place, as well as 1 for fastest lap. I don't think I've seen that anywhere else.

2 They quoted a rule saying that "in the event of a car being shared, a driver mut complete a minimum of one third distance in the same car as the one in which the other driver (or drivers) finish the race." On this basis, Tony Brooks did not receive any points for his shared win at Aintree.

3 Peter Collins drove four laps in Trintingnant's Ferrari which finished 4th at Aintree. However, on the basis of the rule above, Collins did not score any championship points. I believe that most reference books, including Paul Sheldon, give Trintingnat 3 points for that race; Autosport gives him 1.5.

Paul Sheldon gives Schell 5th, Behra 6th in the French GP, but his championship table gives 2 points to Behra!

[David McKinney]

I can't throw any light on the Rouen race, but I'm glad Roger raised the point about the point for sixth place. I always believed that was awarded from 1950 to 1958, dropped for 1959, then resumed for 1960 (but now without the point for fastest lap).
Later works (starting with Sheldon?) ignore that sixth-place point before 1960, to the extent that I've long wondered if I was mistaken about the earlier points structure. Never bothered to do the research though - it was just one of those little niggles.
Perhaps the qquestion could be the subject of a separate thread?

[Milan Fistonic]

In Gregor Grant's 1959 book "World Championship" he has this to say on the points to be awarded.

A method of scoring was adopted, but this was also open to revision in 1951. Points would be awarded on the following basis: 1, 8 pts.; 2, 6 pts.; 3, 4 pts.; 4, 3 pts.; 5, 2 pts. One point was also to be given for the fastest lap made during the race. The Championship Trophy was to go to the driver who amassed the greatest number of points in the qualifying events, irrespective of the number of starts. At that time there was no provision made for sharing points in the event of a driver handing his car to another. The rather sketchy regulations seemed to indicate that the points would go to the driver who actually crossed the line and received the finishers' flag. It was never made quite clear whether or not the best five, or four, performances would count at the end.

In Anthony Pritchard's book "Formula One" he adds this about the changes in 1958.

From 1958 onwards World Championship points were only given to a driver who handled the same car throughout a race, whereas previously it had been possible for drivers to share a car during a race and split the points. Further changes were made to the system of scoring for 1960. Until then, eight, six, four, three and two points were awarded to the finishers in the first five places with an additional point for the fastest lap. From 1960 no point was given for the fastest lap, but instead the finisher in sixth place was awarded a point. The winner's points were increased to nine in 1961.

[fines]

Originally posted by Roger Clark
1 They gave 1 point for 6th place, as well as 1 for fastest lap. I don't think I've seen that anywhere else.

Interestingly, "Das Auto" did the same in 1957! They never gave full points tables, afair, but Behra had seven points after Rouen and Aintree, and Collins 4 and 1/3! I will definitely need to look at some of the championship standings in the near future!

[Roger Clark]

This is the final championship tabe, as published by autosport in October 1957. note that they have misplaced the rouen column, although the results seem to be alright. Also they have given four points to Brooks for Aintree, despite having said previously that he didn't qualify.

[fines]

Most interesting, Roger! Do you have similar tables of the other championship years?

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by fines
Most interesting, Roger! Do you have similar tables of the other championship years?

Unfortunately not. Autosport did often print a table after each race and it might be interesting to examine those in a separate thread.

[Barry Lake]

Originally posted by David McKinney
I'm glad Roger raised the point about the point for sixth place. I always believed that was awarded from 1950 to 1958, dropped for 1959, then resumed for 1960 (but now without the point for fastest lap).

David

This is an interesting point. I have followed the world championship 'live' from 1954 and I always believed points were awarded only to fifth place (plus one for fastest lap) until the one point was switched from fastest lap to sixth place. I hadn't remembered, though, in which year this change took place.

The Marlboro Grand Prix Guide, which is supposed to contain the official statistics, says this occurred in 1960.

However, I have just looked up this race report in Autocourse, which I usually (but not always) have found to be more accurate than most, and also a subsequent points table showing positions after the British GP. This table agrees with Roger's Autosport table, in awarding one point for sixth place in each race. And it also shows a point being awarded for fastest lap.

So, is it the case that there was an overlap? That is, one point for sixth was awarded for some years in addition to the one point for fastest lap, with the latter finally being dropped after the end of the 1959 season?

I could go back and trace it, year by year, if I didn't want to earn any money this financial year.

Just looking at Autocourse for the 1957 season (a monthly magazine that year - it changed back and forth quite a few times), here is what I see.

The French race results have Behra in fifth place on 70 laps (race distance 77 laps). The winner's time is 3h 07m 46.4s; Behra's time (pushing across the line after the winner crossed) is 3h 07m 50.2s. Schell, also on 70 laps, arrived at 3h 09m 10.9s.

In the following issue, after the British GP report, and without explanation that I have found, Schell is shown as having 2 points for fifth, Behra one point for sixth.

I believe it was realised, after the French GP, that Behra had not officially completed that final lap under the regulation mentioned above - that it had to be completed within a time limit. The results and points have then been adjusted accordingly. However, when future publications have listed results, some have reverted to those published immediately after the race and some even have re-adjusted the points accordingly, not realising the correct story.

The Marlboro Grand Prix Guide, incidentally, has Schell listed as fifth in that Grand Prix de l'ACF in 1957.

What I find most interesting is that the points tables in both Autocourse and Autosport for 1957 have one point for sixth place and one point for fastest lap. This goes against what David remembers and also what I remember, despite our memories differing.

Does someone have the time to go back and look at tables published in those years to confirm when the one point for sixth was introduced and when the one point for fastest lap was dropped?

[Roger Clark]

I have found an Autosport table for the 1955 championship, similar to the one I posted for 1957. It states 2 points for 5th, 1 for fastest lap, but doesn't mention anything for 6th. I can't find a similar table for 1957, but the updates Autosport published after each race imply no points for 6th.

[fines]

I think that what we found here is quite sensational: Three major magazines of two different countries show a different scoring system to the one we all accepted as being correct! Now where are our French, Italian and Spanish friends?

I don't have the time right now, but I'll certainly make sure I'll be going through a pile of 50s magazines in due course!

[Roger Clark]

Autosport implied one point for 6th in 1958

[William Hunt]

That race also intrigued me as I have different sources giving different results for that race (for example Mike Lang placed Behra 5th & Schell in 6th). I believe French journalist Gérard Crombac comes closest to what happened there in his GP history revieuw ;

Jean Behra was in 5th just before the race ended but he had oil problems and couldn't complete his last lap. In those days U had to cross the finish line to have a complete lap added to your classification. Behra did manage to push his car over the line , but what he didn't know is that there was a time limit to do this. The organizers decided that Behra had imposed the time limit and they docked his last lap, this gave Harry Schell that 5th place.

It is very odd though to see that championship table with a point for 6th. place. I always thought that this was only given from 1958.

[Vitesse2]

Another thread reappears from the graveyard!!

Scanning through Cimarosti tonight, I came across this little gem on page 142:

"The [points] system was changed in 1953 when one point was allocated for sixth place, again in 1960 when the point for fastest lap was dropped and in 1961 when the winner's points were increased to nine."

So, we have yet another starting date!! Michael, did you ever go through that pile of old magazines??

[Wolf]

Well, Langs 'Grand prix!' has it as usual:
'50÷'59: 8, 6, 4, 3, 2 & 1 for fastest lap;
'60: 1pt for 6th place and no FL point;
'61: 9pts for first place.

I'll check tables later...

[Vitesse2]

Every published table I've got omits the sixth place point before 1960 - Lang, Sheldon, Hayhoe, Higham.

Odd that Cimarosti doen't mention shared drives ....

[bobbo]

More stuff to confuse and contradict . . .

From Grand Prix Third Edition by Trevor R. Griffiths:

"The points scoring systems for both championships are as follows:

DRIVERS' CHAMPIONSHIP

1950 - 9
8 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 for 1st - 2nd - 3rd - 4th - 5th, with one point (shared if necessary) to the driver setting fastest lap. Until 1957 drivers sharing a car shared the points, although in some cases it was decided that a driver had not driven enough laps to score points. From 1950 to 1953 the best four results counted, from 1954 to 1958 the best six and in 1959, the best five.

1960
9 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 for 1st - 2nd - 3rd - 4th - 5th - 6th. In 1961, 1962 and 1966, the best five results determined the championship; from 1963 to 1965, it was the best six. From 1967 until 1978 the championship was divided into two parts, with the worst result from each part being discarded. When there was an odd number of races, the first part of the year included more races. in 1979, the best four results in each half determined the championship possitions; in 1980 it was the best five in each half. From 1981 to 1990, the best 11 results counted.


1991 - [1997] (my addition, the book only goes through the 1997 season)
10 - 6 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 for 1st - 2nd - 3rd - 4th - 5th - 6th. All races counted

CONSTRUCTORS' CHAMPIONSHIP

Scoring from 1958 to 1978 matched the pattern off the drivers' championship (though there was no point for fastest lap), with points going to the best placed car of each manufacturer. From 1979 all races counted and all cars finishing in the first 6 counted. The points for a winner were increased to 10 in 1991."

Does this help, confuse, contradict or what? THoughts??

Bobbo

[fines]

bobbo's post pretty much summarizes the so far "accepted" view, which was probably initiated by the "Marlboro Grand Prix Guides" of Jacques Deschenaux in the late seventies, early eighties. These carried an official FIA seal, but were rather poorly researched.

I haven't yet had the time to go through my magazines (too many projects, too little time...), but I will soon (sometime? eventually?).

[Vitesse2]

Is it "sometime" yet Michael? This question has raised its ugly head again!!

[fines]

[hides away ashamed]

[Vitesse2]

Originally posted by fines
[hides away ashamed]

tsk! tsk!

[fines]

Originally posted by Vitesse2
tsk

Is that an abbreviation or a sort of sigh?

[oldtimer]

I'm really enjoying this thread, you guys are incredible. But I'd like to throw in a non-historical perspective, which may throw some light on the discrepancies in some of the written accounts and and histories.

Having been brought up by DSJ in matters of GP racing, my focus has tended to be on those who finished first and those who put up a good fight. Those sqabbling over 5th or 6th places were, and still are, rather incidental to me, and IIRC, to many in those times. The focus on the WDC was on those contesting it, rather than on who was collecting this point or that.

With this perspective, the confusion about the points awarded in the 1957 French GP at Rouen is maybe not surprising, but, of course, frustrating for historians. The event sticks in my mind solely because it was one of those occasions when Fangio left others wondering which planet he came from.

I have just remembered that MotorSport used to publish a table of the seasons' results in the January issue. I can't remember when this started. Does the January, 1958 have such a table?

Over to you, Roger

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by oldtimer

I have just remembered that MotorSport used to publish a table of the seasons' results in the January issue. I can't remember when this started. Does the January, 1958 have such a table?

Over to you, Roger

Yes, but it only covered the first three; all that mattered, you see.

[FEV]

Sorry to come so late on this highly interesting topic.
I'd like to add a little French touch to it through Henri Cohin's WDC tables, and by doing so maybe add a little more confusion !

1950-56 : 8-6-4-3-2 for first five finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL or relief in the race.

1957 : 8-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL or relief in the race.

1958 : Same as 1957 except only the FL point could be shared, not relief drives.

1959 : 8-6-4-3-2 for first five finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL, not for relief drives.

1960 : 8-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers. Point for FL dropped. Relief drives do not share points.

1961 : 9-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers.


For the Constructors Cup.

1958-59 : 8-6-4-3-2
1960-61 : 8-6-4-3-2-1
1962 : 9-6-4-3-2-1


I was wondering if the same confusion existed regarding the WSC ? For Cohin it's 8-6-4-3-2-1 from 1953 to 1961 (except for races too short like the 1958 TT - points were divided by two). Could it be that at some point one of our sources made a confusion between the WDC and WSC point systems ?

[Vitesse2]

Originally posted by FEV
...maybe add a little more confusion !

1950-56 : 8-6-4-3-2 for first five finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL or relief in the race.

1957 : 8-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL or relief in the race.

1958 : Same as 1957 except only the FL point could be shared, not relief drives.

1959 : 8-6-4-3-2 for first five finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL, not for relief drives.

1960 : 8-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers. Point for FL dropped. Relief drives do not share points.

1961 : 9-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers.


For the Constructors Cup.

1958-59 : 8-6-4-3-2
1960-61 : 8-6-4-3-2-1
1962 : 9-6-4-3-2-1

Thanks for that Frank - the major discrepancy from the accepted method appears to be this:

1957 : 8-6-4-3-2-1 for first six finishers + 1 pt for FL. Shared points for FL or relief in the race.

Anyone got any 1957 magazines to hand?

And of course it still doesn't tally with the quote from Cimarosti above.

[Roger Clark]

Originally posted by Vitesse2




Anyone got any 1957 magazines to hand?

I think I published what Autosport said earlier in this thread.

[Felix Muelas]

Originally posted by Vitesse2
Scanning through Cimarosti tonight, I came across this little gem on page 142:

"The [points] system was changed in 1953 when one point was allocated for sixth place, again in 1960 when the point for fastest lap was dropped and in 1961 when the winner's points were increased to nine."

Richard,

Please tell me that, in the back of your mind, you are convinced that the mention to 1953 is a typing mistake...;)

Un abrazo

Felix

[Vitesse2]

Felix: I am merely quoting from Cimarosti. 1997 revised edition, Aurum Press, page 142, column 2, paragraph 5 of the chapter for 1950 ... if it's a typo, it's not mine!

I'm willing to believe it's a typo though .... given some evidence from earlier editions! (Or the manuscript!)

Michael told us a couple of days ago he has a 1980s German edition: who has others which we can cross-check?

[Don Capps]

Originally posted by Felix Muelas


Richard,

Please tell me that, in the back of your mind, you are convinced that the mention to 1953 is a typing mistake...;)

Un abrazo

Felix

Felix,

I haven't waded into this discussion lately since I have been distracted with a few other minor items, but I did check on page 142 and there it was, just as Richard said.

I think that what we have here -- with all the confusing and conflicting information from some of the contemporary sources and then those later ones as well -- is a good reason for the "TNF Rangers" to exist.

Going all the back to what bobbo posted from Griffiths, I think ol' Trevor made a few judgment calls -- as many seem to have -- on the reasons that some results seem to vary from one source to another.

The answer is most likely painfully simple -- a combination of carelessness, haste, misunderstandings, and failure to communicate.

The reports on most WDC rounds in American publications was often limited in both the results -- usually only the first several -- and the depth given to the race, especially in the 1950's and into the 1960's. In older R&T's, most WDC rounds get perhaps two pages, which included the space for the pictures. GP/F1 was not quite the Bright Light that attracted the Statistical Moths that it is today obviously.

It is quite remarkable to me how misunderstandings on such basic items as points tables and points systems get so big. However, it is good to know that the First Rule of Scholarship has been taken to heart -- Question Everything.

[Felix Muelas]

Originally posted by Don Capps
...but I did check on page 142 and there it was, just as Richard said.

I guess my English again was not as explicit as I intented...I did check it too before posting, and my words were not aimed at Richard making the typo but at our admired Adriano or any of his proof-reviewers...

Originally posted by Don Capps
I think that what we have here...is a good reason for the "TNF Rangers" to exist.

Olé Don Capps! as we say --in admiration-- chez moi.

On the other hand, it brings a question immediatly: are we all mental?

Because you´ll have to agree that our activity as "Legends Investigators" is bound to end in tears (as life itself OTOH) the majority of the times!

Not that it really matters much, in real terms, but I am concerned at the youngest people who, interested in History (strange as it might sound and only in few numbers, let´s be honest, the majority of them couldn´t care less) will approach us with questions seeking light and we can only report that sorry, we have not yet been able to agree on which were the rules! And, strange as it might sound, it´s not a joke!

Some days I wonder if I am well in the head, spending the amount of time and resources I have to obtain very few, and all provisional, answers. Some other days I tell myself that is exactly what life is all about...just ask the philosophers of all ages or for that matter, the historians!;)

As my wife will put it : What a mess!

Un abrazo

Felix

[Vitesse2]

Re-reading my post I can see it "sounds" offended - that was not my intention. Perhaps I should have added a !

My excuse: three pints of Wadworths 6X Bitter and a pint of Newcastle Brown Ale ...

[Milan Fistonic]

Originally posted by Felix Muelas

I guess my English again was not as explicit as I intented...I did check it too before posting, and my words were not aimed at Richard making the typo but at our admired Adriano or any of his proof-reviewers...

I wonder if David McKinney can shed any light on this, after all he did "rewrite the book from the translation and got an 'editor' credit."

[David McKinney]

Thanks for putting me on the spot, Milan
Can’t really help much, I’m afraid. The German-language version, Autorennen, makes no reference to 1953, so it must have come in Cima’s revision. Any factual doubts I came across I referred to the publishers to clear up, but have to say I cannot now remember whether this question was one of them

[fines]

Originally posted by Vitesse2
Another thread reappears from the graveyard!!

Scanning through Cimarosti tonight, I came across this little gem on page 142:

"The [points] system was changed in 1953 when one point was allocated for sixth place, again in 1960 when the point for fastest lap was dropped and in 1961 when the winner's points were increased to nine."

So, we have yet another starting date!! Michael, did you ever go through that pile of old magazines??

Richard, would you please tell me in which chapter this quote appeared? In my (German) version page 142 deals with the year 1954, and I can't find any reference to the points system.

[Vitesse2]

Originally posted by Vitesse2
Felix: I am merely quoting from Cimarosti. 1997 revised edition, Aurum Press, page 142, column 2, paragraph 5 of the chapter for 1950 ... if it's a typo, it's not mine!

Ahem! ^

[Paul Hartshorne]

Regarding the scoring system:

The 1953 British Grand Prix official programme has this on page 31, by Dennis May:
"Points are awarded on the basis of 8 for a win, 6 for second place, 4 for third, 3 for fourth, 2 for fifth, and 1 for fastest lap."

The 1956 British Grand Prix official programme has on page 39:
"Winner takes 8 points, second placeman 6, third 4, fourth 3, and fifth 2. In addition, fastest lap is worth one point."
This is followed by the following comment by Basil Cardew:
"Some confusion has arisen over the markings in the World Championship and this week I made it my business to straighten out the facts.
"It has been stated that where two or more drivers share a car which finishes inside the scoring range, points are equally divided between them.
"My official inquiries now make it plain that a driver may change from one car to another, but he gets points for driving only one car. That is the way the drivers will be awarded points until the International Sporting Commision next meets in the autumn.
"On what authority do I make this statement?
"Last week, in Paris I spoke to M. Schroeder, secretary of the I.S.C. of the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile, the international body controlling the sport.
"First he gave me the markings of the four leaders so far in the Formula I World Championship as shown on the right. note from Paul; the list shows:Collins, 19 pts., Behra, 14 pts., Fangio, 13 pts., Moss, 12 pts.
"M. Schroeder pointed out that at the Monaco G.P. in May, Fangio drove two cars. Said M. Schroeder, 'I give him his points for the performance of one car only, which to me is logical.
"'If, at the end of the year, the I.S.C. wish to change it, it is up to them. But I contend that points for the performance of a driver in one car only is the more logical calculation.'"

The 1958 British Grand Prix official programme has this passage by Basil Cardew on page 19:
"...when the 75 laps of the British Grand Prix have been completed, the winner will have earned eight more points in the world championship list.
"The man who gets into second place will win six points. The third, fourth, fifth and sixth places earn four, three, two and one points each. An extra point is awarded for the fastest lap."
The same programme contains this statement on page 48:
"Points are scored as follows: 1st-8 pts. 2nd-6 pts. 3rd-4 pts. 4th-3 pts. 5th-2 pts. 6th-1pt. * Fastest lap-1 pt."

Obviously 1953 and 1956 are as accepted by conventional wisdom, but 1958 is the surprise, with the point for sixth place!

Cheers, Paul

[Vitesse2]

Aha! The plot thickens ...

Paul: does the fact that you haven't quoted from 1957 and 1959 mean you don't possess those, or that they say nothing relevant?

And if Paul doesn't have them - does anybody else?

I think this may mean that the Cimarosti quote might be a typo for 1958 - this would just leave 1957 and 1959 to be confirmed I think ....

[Paul Hartshorne]

You guessed it, I'm missing the 1957 and 1959 programmes

Cheers, Paul

[Roger Clark]

If we can regard Paul's information as evidence that there was a 6th place point in 1958, then I would be inclined to give Autosport and others the benefit of the doubt in 1957 too. It seems increasingly probable that there was a point for 6th place in 1957/58, removed in 1959.

[fines]

Originally posted by Vitesse2


Ahem! ^

Sorry, didn't catch that! But unfortunately, my 1986 German edition gives the same scoring for 1950 to 1960 (sic!)