34 replies to this topic

[Megatron]

I heard the other day that Jim Clark really won the 1966 Indy 500 but a scoring miscount had him a lap down.

Can anyone confirm this?

[Ray Bell]

The George Stefanoff report in RCN talks about it, and about Chapman asking to check official timesheets after the race.

Clark, in fact, drove towards Victory Lane after the race, convinced he had won and that Hill had been credited with an extra lap.

But Clark had three spins during the race, and one was followed by a long pit stop. Chapman ultimately agreed that there was no error, but because there was a blow-up in the local press after this was mentioned in the press conference, the memory of all of this has been blown out of proportion.

I'm sure that, with all the money at stake (much more than was ever seen at a GP), Chapman would have pressed the issue if he thought he could win...

[quintin cloud]

megatron
1966 Graham Hill won the indy 500 with Lola/Ford
, Jim Clark was 2nd in Lotus/Ford and Jim McElreath with a Brabham/Ford

Fin St. Car # Driver Car Name/Entrant* CET Running/Out Laps Led Prize $
1 15 24 Graham Hill American Red Ball/Mecom Lola/Ford Running 200 10 $156,297
2 2 19 Jim Clark STP Gas Treatment Lotus/Ford Running 200 66 $76,992
3 7 3 Jim McElreath Zink-Urschel-Slick Brabham/Ford Running 200 0 $42,586
4 6 72 Gordon Johncock Weinberger Homes Gerhardt/Ford Running 200 0 $26,381
5 17 94 Mel Kenyon Gerhardt Offy Gerhardt/Offy Flagged 198 0 $21,987
6 11 43 Jackie Stewart Bowes Seal Fast/Mecom Lola/Ford Oil Pressure 190 40 $25,767

Leader summary (5)
Lloyd Ruby 68
Jim Clark 66
Jackie Stewart 40
Mario Andretti 16
Graham Hill 10

But in 1965 Jim Clark won the indy 500

Fin St. Car # Driver Car Name/Entrant* CET Running/Out Laps Led Prize $
1 2 82 Jim Clark Lotus powered by Ford Lotus/Ford Running 200 190 $166,621
2 5 98 Parnelli Jones Agajanian/Hurst Kuzma-Lotus/Ford Running 200 0 $64,661
3 4 12 Mario Andretti Dean Van Lines/Auto Technics Brawner/Ford Running 200 0 $42,551

Leader summary (2)
Jim Clark 190
A.J. Foyt Jr. 10

[Joe Fan]

Ray Bell has it like I heard it too. I heard somewhere that Graham Hill said that there was no controversy in the victory, because no matter what he had in fact won Indy "Because he drank the milk" or something along that lines.

[david_martin]

And if the story I heard is true, he did not wait all that long before spending his sizeable winners check, either. He apparently hot footed straight from Indianapolis down to the Cessna factory (which is in Witchita, KA IIRC) and plonked down a large cash deposit on a brand new Cessna 206.

[fines]

Originally posted by Joe Fan
Ray Bell has it like I heard it too. I heard somewhere that Graham Hill said that there was no controversy in the victory, because no matter what he had in fact won Indy "Because he drank the milk" or something along that lines.

And judging from the grimace as he downed that pint of milk he must have thought this the hardest part of winning the 500! No wonder he wasn't inclined to give it away again...

[Ray Bell]

Nearly $100,000 difference in prizemoney between first and second places - that was more than the total first prizes for the whole year in WDC races, I'm sure - would have helped the digestion.

[FlagMan]

I seem to recall seeing an interview with Hill where he was talking about the race, and said that 'the hardest part was drinking the milk';)

[Don Capps]

At one point I would have been eager to forward the opinion that Clark did win. I had that suspicion for years & years. However, after doing some closer looks into what happened I am now of the opinion that Clark was indeed second. Clark spun twice -- without smoting any hard surface a mighty blow which got him Big Thumbs Up from those not usually inclined to thing
k much of the "funny car" crowd -- and on the last one, the STP Lotus scoring crew goofed and missed Hill slipping by into the lead -- from what I recall they thought he was a lap down later on when he was actually in the lead. The 38 that year was possessed by some sort of demon and gave Clark reason to be happy to settle for walking away unharmed.

[FlatFoot]

Originally posted by david_martin
And if the story I heard is true, he did not wait all that long before spending his sizeable winners check, either. He apparently hot footed straight from Indianapolis down to the Cessna factory (which is in Witchita, KA IIRC) and plonked down a large cash deposit on a brand new Cessna 206.

ha ha...I just happen to be posting from about three blocks away from the Cessna Aircraft plant. Sorry to stray off topic. Interesting to know though that Graham Hill was once in our fair city (Wichita, KS)

[Pete Stanley]

I have read differently. It goes something like this:

Clark's teammate was Al Unser. The livery on the cars were identical. Unser crashed in turn four on Lap 161. But the PA announced that Clark had crashed, not Unser, and Clark wasn't scored that lap. Someone realized that it was Unser, not Clark, who had crashed. Of course they began scoring Clark again. However, he lost a lap in the process.

I don't know if the story is true. But it could explain why Clark's crew thought Hill was a lap down. Clark's crew never stopped counting. After all, who can hear the PA system in the pits? I don't even remember where I read it. Probably on another internet forum, likely the SpeedNet IRL forum.

At last, I contibute something useful to TNF!

[Ray Bell]

Clark's car had very obvious whitewall tyres to avoid this confusion...

That's not to say it didn't happen. But I still don't think Chunky would give up that easily on a hundred grand... he'd have repossessed the Cessna if necessary!

Remember, it wasn't a lotus that was given the win.

[fines]

That's another revisionist thing, isn't it? As far as I am concerned, I tend to accept race results at face value, even if it means swallowing rather large frogs like Malaysia '99. There were other contentious issues, like the Ralph Mulford/Ray Harroun case in Indy in 1911 or like Horace Gould/Stan Jones at the NZGP in '54, but what's the benefit of arguing those results? If there's no proof it only serves to devalue the efforts of those who were declared winner, and I don't think that's fair on them!

[Jaxs]

Could I possible suggest that this matter be deemed worthy of the attention of our esteemed and valued Court, the relatives merits could be assessed and deliberated over in due course.

Well, It's a thought.

Jack.

[David J Jones]

I remember watching this via TELSTAR (or something or other live in 1966) and there is no doubt in my mind that Hill was the victor

Since then I have been addicted to live broadcasts of the Indy 500 and NASCAR. I wish F1 was as captivating nowadays .. when is Bernie going ??

[Ray Bell]

Well, there's a case to be put, apparently, for Stan Jones having been robbed in the Australian GP of 1957, and don't ever ask David McKay who won it in 1961!

Maybe this latter one could go to court, that would be interesting.... but let's gather some evidence first.

[oldtimer]

Like David, I watched the broadcast of the 1966 Indy 500, and enthralling it was. Graham Hill may not have made much of a meal of the traditional milk, but I seem to remember him making quite a meal of the traditional kiss with the Miss Indianapolis, or whatever her title.

Other highlights were:

The complaints about European drivers only coming over for the Indy. This when Clark, Stewart and Hill were in the first 3 positions.

The commentator's astonishment at Clark spinning without hitting the wall

How much closer Stewart would slip-stream Clark than the American drivers

One of the owners complaining that his fuel rig had been sabotaged by someone stuffing a rag into it.

It all made for an entertaining first 'visit' to the Indy 500, and Graham winning topped it off. There was absolutely no doubt in his demeanour that he was the winner

[McRonalds]

It's not my way to rank up by-gones but during a BB search I came across this (1 year) old thread - and found an interesting 'what if'-story to add for those who think Gordon Johncock won the 1966 Indianapolis 500.

WHAT?

Remember the first lap crash and poor Gordie sitting in the pits with a sick car, waiting for repairs, when the race began. Gordie rejoined the race two laps down when he finally got started and not only made the two laps up during the race, for he finished in fourth place; the last car to complete the full 200 laps. His actual driving time for the 500 miles was possibly less than Graham Hills's.

So Gordie probably is the real winner...

[Joe Fan]

Originally posted by McRonalds
So Gordie probably is the real winner...

Especially if the officials were French.....ACO (not IOC) that is.

[McRonalds]

Originally posted by Joe Fan


Especially if the officials were French.....ACO (not IOC) that is.

;)

I rather think the Americans don't care whether Clark or Hill has won - because both are NOT Americans...

[AdrianM]

Especially if the officials were French.....ACO (not IOC) that is.

[Buford]

I don't remember the exact qoutes but in the Colin Chapman book by Crombac it says Chapman was satisfied after a review of the official scoring. I was there that day and I was rooting for Clark but I personally was convinced Hill had won and was surprised to see Clark park outside of Victory Lane.

[BRG]

Uncertainty over race results was not so rare in thise days. One of Peter Revson's GP wins (I think it was Canada 1973?) has always been controversial and I think there was a British GP (1972?) where there was great confusion over the results, and Fittipaldi got the win whilst in the pits. (I do not have any references with me, so apologies if there are wrong)

In the days of hand written scoring charts, mistakes were bound to creep in, especially where (as in both cases above) there was wet weather leading to frequent pit-stops and/or time-consuming spins and offs for various cars. Now we have got so used to transponders and instantaneous electronic timing, it is hard to imagine how difficult it must have been to keep track of a wet GP running for two hours. How much harder then to deal with an Indy 500 with more cars, running many more laps and with many more pit-stops. If anything, it is a surprise that there not MORE doubtful or contentious results.

[McRonalds]

Originally posted by BRG
Uncertainty over race results was not so rare in thise days. One of Peter Revson's GP wins (I think it was Canada 1973?) has always been controversial and I think there was a British GP (1972?) where there was great confusion over the results, and Fittipaldi got the win whilst in the pits. (I do not have any references with me, so apologies if there are wrong)

If anything, it is a surprise that there not MORE doubtful or contentious results.

I think it was the British GP '75, when Fittipaldi won in the pitlane. And don't forget MS beating Mika Häkkinen in the pitlane, British GP '98.

[Godin de B.]

Indy 500 1966

lap 82 Jim Clark back in front ,after Lloyd Ruby pits, spins for the second time, this time in Turn 3. He does three complete spins, miraculously avoids contact, and pits for fresh tires. Ruby regains the lead. Clark and Jacky Stewrt persue.

lap 147 Ruby leads by nearly a lap when smoke starts pouring from the enigine. Ruby pits and his crew spends eight minutes stopping the oil leak, giving the lead to Stewart and putting Clark second.

lap 192 Stewart leads by more than a lap and has victory in sight whwn his Ford V-8 suddenly loses oil pressure. Stewart immediately shuts down the engine and coasts to a halt on the grass in Turn 4. Surprised teammate Graham Hill flashes by and takes the lead.

Finish Hill faces no challenges in the final lap and wins by 41 seconds over Clark's Lotus-Ford.
Vince Granatelli claims Clark's STP Lotus is ahead at the finish, but the protest is thrown down

(from Indianapolis 500 Chronicle by Rick Popely)

[stevew]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
Nearly $100,000 difference in prizemoney between first and second places - that was more than the total first prizes for the whole year in WDC races, I'm sure - would have helped the digestion.

Here's a quote from the 1966-1967 Automobile Year regarding the 1966 USGP:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For 1966 the organizers put up the largest purse ever in a road race, over $100,000! The first prize of $20,000 exceeded the combined first prizes in all the other 1966 Grand Prix."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Don Capps]

As I said sometime ago, for awhile there was some confusion -- real or imagined -- on my part about whether it was Clark or Hill in first place. At first, I tended to think it was Clark, but after the week following and better information became available, I was thinking that, "Gee, it really was Hill." Off and on I would mull it over, but as time as gone on the evidence seems to be clearly that Hill was first.

I think that part of the reason for the continued thoughts about the race is that Clark did his spin routine several times and didn't hit any walls -- something as akin to a Miracle that you can get in racing, in my opinion. I think I just wanted Clark to win, especially after those spins.

Scoring errors at that time in racing were not uncommon, but as likely as not there was usually a review which sorted out the results in a manner which more likely than not arrived at the correct result.

[McRonalds]

There was a similar (or even worse) case in '81 when there was a long debate about whether Bobby Unser or Mario Andretti has won. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I remember Stewart Tom Binford penalized Unser a lap for incorrectly exciting the pits and Mario Andretti was declared the winner (see picture below - a happy Andretti, but not for long!), but in court it turned out Mario had made the same mistake and was penalized a lap too! Unser was fined 40.000 Dollar and declared the winner. Any more info about this? I wonder if the crowd knew that day who was the winner...

[Doug Nye]

BELIEVE me - if Chunky (Colin Chapman) was sufficiently convinced NOT to raise a continuing ruckus over the 1966 '500' result then he'd seen clear evidence - as in CLEAR evidence - that Jimmy had indeed been headed to the line by Graham Hill in the Mecom Red Ball Lola. I'm somewhat surprised that nobody has yet mentioned the immediate postrace line - about the Lotus sponsor STP's initials standing for 'Spinning Takes Practice'...

DCN

[Bernd]

Both Clark & Chapman were totally convinced in the end that Hills win was perfectly legit. I have a series of photos of the party at Hills house back in England to celebrate the win & Jimmy is certainly enjoying himself not to mention bouncing a young Damon on his knee!
Personally I think that fact that he managed to finish the race at all is a miracle, you do not spin like that at Indy and get away with it............unless your name is Jim Clark.

Now the 500 with Jones and the non existant Black Flag! Clark won that one in my mind without a shadow of a doubt.

[Buford]

It was a typical USAC incompetence botch up. When Unser left the pits he was supposed to merge into traffic which was on the yellow and passing by the pit exit, at the point he crossed the end line. Instead of ducking into line, he passed about 7 cars before he suddenly realized what he was doing and ducked into line. Mario was also leaving the pit behind Bobby. Mario was set to tuck into line but when Unser kept going ahead, he instinctively began to follow, then realized that was illegal and Bobby was cheating, so Mario tucked into line letting Bobby continue ahead. But Mario had passed two cars before he stopped moving ahead of his proper position.

The ABC TV cameras had it totally. The announcers were all over it and saying Bobby had cheated. USAC had no TV replay to look at and though their observers reported Bobby's cheating, they were reluctant to black flag the leader, or the leader before the yellow and pit stops anyway. But the whole world had seen it and everybody in turn one saw it. Only USAC didn't see it.

After the race, the **** hit the fan, everybody was asking USAC why they did not enforce their own rules, and they said.... uuummm. We had better look at the tape. When they did, they realized this was a big deal so they announced the winner was Andretti. Several months later, the appeal court took it up. They ruled that Andretti had also improved his position improperly but not as bad. But the reason they reversed it was USAC should have made the call at the time, black flagged Unser, and maybe also Andretti too. That would have given them a chance to catch back up after the penalty. Doing it after the race gave him. or them no chance to make up on the track any amount of penalty that should have been given while the race was in progress.

[Buford]

Originally posted by Bernd
[B, you do not spin like that at Indy and get away with it............unless your name is Jim Clark.

Now the 500 with Jones and the non existant Black Flag! Clark won that one in my mind without a shadow of a doubt. [/B]

Unless your name is Danny Sullivan who spun and won. But he only spun once, not twice. As for 1963, yes that was a total cheat by USAC.

[Bernd]

Right you are Buford. I'd forgotten about that. What was the cause of Danny's spin? was it bad tyres like Jimmy?

[Liam]

This race ('66 Indy) is covered in this months MotorSport.
After his spins, Jimmy redefined STP as "Spinning Takes Practise"
Stewart was all set to lap Hill, but as they were teamates at BRM, Hill was having none of it, and upped his pace (he wasn't exactly flying before). Ego's won, and Jackie went after Hill, with his team frantically trying to get him to ease up, when his engine gave up.
Apparently the big score tower had Jimmy winning, which was why the whole STP/Lotus crew tried to take thw winners circle.

Graham's dinner quote "I'm very impressed with the size of this cheque, I'm not used to this, but I did bring along a couple of scottish accountants to handle it" Jimmy and Jackie no doubt.

[Joe in LA]

Originally posted by Bernd
Right you are Buford. I'd forgotten about that. What was the cause of Danny's spin? was it bad tyres like Jimmy?

Sullivan just plain lost it while in a heated duel with Mario. Was amazing to watch.