Jump to content


Photo

1957 French GP Rouen


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#51 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,699 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 14 April 2003 - 23:21

Can I revive this please?

The original question regarding the Rouen result appears to have been resolved in favour of Harry Schell.

But what of the 1 point for sixth place question?

Until I read this thread I had always understood that it only came in for 1960 when the point for FL was dropped.

After the elapse of time, does anybody know for sure?

Advertisement

#52 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 80,052 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 14 April 2003 - 23:32

That all came out on another thread yesterday...

The thread about different point systems.

#53 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,699 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 15 April 2003 - 00:30

Ray,

I agree that the question came out on the "Different point systems" thread. But it was not resolved. In particular Mattijs of Racer.Demon asked if the issue had been finally resolved.

To avoid dragging Oleksij's thread off line, Vitesse 2 suggested reviving this one. I have done so because I feel we should get to the bottom of this particular issue.

I suppose the real question is "Does anybody have access to the FIA regulations of the time?"

#54 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 80,052 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 15 April 2003 - 00:35

Sorry, I thought the scan of the page from Autosport kind of put it beyond doubt...

#55 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,776 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 15 April 2003 - 13:48

Earlier in this thread the Dechenaux books were quoted as possibly having "set the myth", if I can put it like that. I've just dug out my very dog-eared, much-used and much amended copy of Stephen Hirst's "Grand Prix Chronology", which was published back in 1972: in a note below the 1958 table, he says -

Several journals give slight variations to the placings, and give points to drivers finishing in sixth place in Championship events. The point for sixth place was not actually awarded by the FIA until 1960.

So Hirst had spotted this thirty years ago .... but did he get it right?

A point which hasn't yet been made here is that 1960 was the year that the point for 6th place was introduced for the Manufacturers Championship: in 1958 and 1959 it had only been scored 8-6-4-3-2. Comments anyone?

#56 roger_valentine

roger_valentine
  • Member

  • 208 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 15 April 2003 - 22:00

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 positions; in 1980 it was the best five in each half



In particular

When there was an odd number of races, the first part of the year included more races



I'd never noticed before, but this is true of every year with an odd number of races EXCEPT 1979, when the split was 7-8.

And if the split had been 8-7, as usual, then Villeneuve, not Scheckter, would have been champion.

#57 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,776 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 15 April 2003 - 22:08

Originally posted by roger_valentine


In particular



I'd never noticed before, but this is true of every year with an odd number of races EXCEPT 1979, when the split was 7-8.

And if the split had been 8-7, as usual, then Villeneuve, not Scheckter, would have been champion.


So it could be said that the deaths of Ronnie Peterson and Gunnar Nilsson caused Gilles to miss out on the title, since the eighth race in part one was supposed to be the cancelled Swedish GP on June 1st.

#58 roger_valentine

roger_valentine
  • Member

  • 208 posts
  • Joined: October 02

Posted 15 April 2003 - 22:39

I'm not sure that the reason for the cancellation of the Swedish GP is particularly relevant. Fact is it was cancelled, which made France the 8th round, and last of the ‘longer half’.

So presumably the ‘half way split’ must have been determined pre-season?

c.f 1955 when four WC rounds were cancelled: the points were ‘best 5 from 7’ – surely they were never intended to be ‘best 5 from 11’ (fewer than half the races counting). So, the points system then must have been based on races actually held, not on those planned but cancelled.

#59 Ray Bell

Ray Bell
  • Member

  • 80,052 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 15 April 2003 - 23:00

There was a formula, IIRC, for the number of races to be dropped...

5 out of 7, 6 out of 8 or 9 (not sure if that's right) and so on. Actually, it would have been '5 races, drop 1, 6 to 8 races drop 2, 9 to 11 races drop 3' etc... something like that.

Strange that 1955 had so many races scheduled, so many more than any previous year... or subsequent years for over a decade.

Advertisement

#60 d.c.a. mulcahy

d.c.a. mulcahy
  • New Member

  • 16 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 16 April 2003 - 05:39

1955 was not really any different that any other year in terms of the number of races scheduled nor were the number of races scheduled greater than other years:

1953 (10) Races held (9) Arg, Ind, Dutch, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, Swi, It. Cancelled (1) Sp

1954 (10) Races held (9) Arg, Ind, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, Swi, It, Sp. Cancelled (1) Dut

1955 (11) Races held (7) Arg, Mon, Ind, Bel, Dut, GB, It. Cancelled (4) Fr, Ger, Swi, Sp

1956 (8) Races held (8) Arg, Mon, Ind, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, It

1957 (11) Races held (8) Arg, Mon, Ind, Fr, GB, Ger, Pes, It. Cancelled (3) Bel, Dut, Sp

1958 (11) Races held (11) Arg, Mon, Dut, Ind, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, Por, It, Mor

1959 (12) Races held (9) Mon, Ind, Dut, Fr, GB, Ger, Por, It, US. Cancelled (3) Arg, Bel, Mor.

In looking at the above list 1955 was not an unusual year. In 1956 the number of races scheduled was down presumably as a result of the 1955 Le Mans disaster. the Swiss GP never did return to the calendar.

regards

d.c.a. (declan) mulcahy

#61 humphries

humphries
  • Member

  • 931 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 03 May 2003 - 15:36

British GP Aintree race programme 20 July 1957

"....where drivers share a car, the number of points is divided between them."

Position/ Points:-
1st 8
2nd 6
3rd 4
4th 3
5th 2
6th 1
Fastest Lap 1 point



British GP Aintree race programme 18 July 1959

Position/ Points:-
1st 8
2nd 6
3rd 4
4th 3
5th 2

"In the case of the driver's championship only, the driver making fastest lap is awarded one point, irrespective of his position at the end of the race. This point is divided into a half point ( or a third of a point, etc.) if two ( or three, etc ) drivers make the same time on the fastest lap. Except for the fastest lap, no points are awarded to a driver unless he has driven the car throughout the whole of the race.

In the manufacturers' championship, no points are awarded for fastest lap and only the highest placed car of any one marque scores points for the constructor of that car, but more than one driver could drive a car to score points for a constructor."

Hope this is of use.


John H

#62 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,776 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 03 May 2003 - 22:50

So, it would appear that Frank's quote from Cohin was right on the money ....

Originally posted by 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


By my reckoning that means we have one more WDC points scorer: Jimmy Reece, who came 6th at Indy in 1958.

And, IIRC, there's a statement in Graham Hill's "Life at the Limit" saying one of the reasons he left Lotus was because he'd scored just one WDC point in three seasons. That would be Italy 1958 - I'd always dismissed this as faulty memory on Graham's part (there are some howlers in that book!) as he had no points in all the published tables (see above!) but it looks like he was right all along.

#63 F1Fanatic.co.uk

F1Fanatic.co.uk
  • Member

  • 1,725 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 08 May 2005 - 21:18

I realise this is an old post I'm replying to (I found it via the AtlasF1 court "rejected cases" thread), and I'm not sure if anyone who originally posted in it is still interested in any further details on it, but here goes. I don't believe the point below has been made elsewhere in the thread.

Anyway, my understanding of the 1957 French GP results is that Behra and Schell crossed the line in fifth and sixth places respectively. However Behra fell foul of a local rule stating that a driver could not take more than 7m 30s to complete a lap. This he did on his final (70th) lap owing to car problems (as described above). Therefore, the lap did not count, and he was relegated to sixth place.

Does this shed some light on the matter, or have I overlooked something in the original post and just patronised you all very badly?

#64 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,756 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 18 February 2008 - 09:28

Originally posted by Vitesse2
By my reckoning that means we have one more WDC points scorer: Jimmy Reece, who came 6th at Indy in 1958.

Bob Gerard, British GP 1957.

Actually, that gives another possible way of working out whether there was a point for 6th...anyone got the list of A Licence (or whatever it was called) drivers for 1958? I remember seeing Eddie Johnson included for 1961 because of his Indy point in 1960.

#65 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 18 February 2008 - 10:09

I don't think these Graded Driver lists had anything to do with Championship points; in the seventies for example the requirement was to finish in the top 6 of a WDC event or in the top 3 of a WCM event twice within two years.

#66 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,756 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 18 February 2008 - 10:19

But did they pick top 6 of the WDC because they were points-scoring positions?

I tend to think the references to 1 point for 6 in the 50s were caused because someone assumed that, with the 8-6-4-3-2 model, it must logically continue to 1.

I need to check the Hill autobiogs, but I think he said elsewhere that his first points finish came at Monza, when he came 5th...on the assumption that the Gregory/Shelby car was excluded for an illegitimate driver change that would be correct. But of course they were re-instated. Although it's hardly surprising that even at the time people were not bothered about these minor placings, I suppose so long as the £$ were correct...

#67 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,776 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 05 October 2008 - 21:55

In the November 2008 issue of Motor Sport, Nigel Roebuck quotes an 8-6-4-3-2-1 (plus 1 for FL) scoring system for 1958.

I think I feel a letter coming on ....;)

#68 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 11 July 2009 - 10:56

On page 7 of the 17 January 1959 issue of Competition Press, there is a sidebar entitled "World Driving Championship" which gives the first six places for each event in the CSI championship, excluding the US Memorial Day event as was the usual in such publications, and since there a championship point for Edgar Barth for sixth in the Germany race, one can assume that the the points go from first to sixth place.

#69 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,502 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 11 July 2009 - 11:13

On page 7 of the 17 January 1959 issue of Competition Press, there is a sidebar entitled "World Driving Championship" which gives the first six places for each event in the CSI championship, excluding the US Memorial Day event as was the usual in such publications, and since there a championship point for Edgar Barth for sixth in the Germany race, one can assume that the the points go from first to sixth place.

I thought he was in the separate, but concurrent frmula 2 race and not eligible for points. Hasven't we discussed this in relation to Bruce McLaren? Does it say anything about other sixth places?

Would it be a good idea to rename this thread to somethng like World Championship Points in the 1950s? It's moved a long from from the original subject.

#70 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 11 July 2009 - 12:00

There might be another thread that touched on this, but I ended up finding this one.

As you mention, Roger, the Barth result being included in the points table shows that there continued to be some confusion about this for awhile within the journalistic community.

And, yes, Rouen seems to have dropped by the wayside....

#71 RA Historian

RA Historian
  • Member

  • 3,833 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 11 July 2009 - 12:54

My understanding is that (assuming of course that sixth place paid points) that if you placed in the top six you got points, regardless of whether you were in an F-1 or F-2 car. Of course, I may be wrong....
Tom

#72 Rob29

Rob29
  • Member

  • 3,582 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 11 July 2009 - 15:45

1955 was not really any different that any other year in terms of the number of races scheduled nor were the number of races scheduled greater than other years:

1953 (10) Races held (9) Arg, Ind, Dutch, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, Swi, It. Cancelled (1) Sp

1954 (10) Races held (9) Arg, Ind, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, Swi, It, Sp. Cancelled (1) Dut

1955 (11) Races held (7) Arg, Mon, Ind, Bel, Dut, GB, It. Cancelled (4) Fr, Ger, Swi, Sp

1956 (8) Races held (8) Arg, Mon, Ind, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, It

1957 (11) Races held (8) Arg, Mon, Ind, Fr, GB, Ger, Pes, It. Cancelled (3) Bel, Dut, Sp

1958 (11) Races held (11) Arg, Mon, Dut, Ind, Bel, Fr, GB, Ger, Por, It, Mor

1959 (12) Races held (9) Mon, Ind, Dut, Fr, GB, Ger, Por, It, US. Cancelled (3) Arg, Bel, Mor.

In looking at the above list 1955 was not an unusual year. In 1956 the number of races scheduled was down presumably as a result of the 1955 Le Mans disaster. the Swiss GP never did return to the calendar.

regards

d.c.a. (declan) mulcahy

Fairly sure 1956 Dutch,Swiss & Spanish GPs were listed on International calendar published in Autosport Oct 55.Pescara 57 was down as a non-championship race on 57 calendar-upgraded to championship status to become the first replacement race added after start of season to make up the numbers.


#73 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,699 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 11 July 2009 - 16:19

My understanding is that (assuming of course that sixth place paid points) that if you placed in the top six you got points, regardless of whether you were in an F-1 or F-2 car. Of course, I may be wrong....
Tom

At the time nobody really cared about such subtleties. The points system was only a tool for determining who was champion. The remaining places were considered irrelevant by most. The only significance they had was as a totally unofficial ranking of the "losers".

When FOCA came along the points assumed more significance as they determined who got places on the FOCA charter aircraft. Later, I suspect, under the various Concord[e] Agreements they may have affected a team's share of the money

But to come back to the F1/F2 points question: this varied with the individual race regulations. As there were no regulations about minimum weight or minimum capacity prior to 1961. Formula 2 car in the fifties would also comply with Formula 1 as it would be below the maximum engine capacity. Individual race regulations could have a minimum capacity, for example the 1955 British GP reportedly had a minimum capacity of 2 litres to exclude the many old grand prix cars from the 1952-53 that were around which was why Brabham entered his Cooper-Bristol as a 2.2 litre car. A further problem arises if there was a separate Formula 2 class as the way the regulations treated this could vary: it could be a separate class but a part of the grand prix, possibly with its own prize fund, or it could be a totally separate race that was being run at the same time so the spectators had more cars to watch, in which case, strictly speaking, the Formula 2 cars were not competing in the Grand Prix and eligible for points. In the first case the cars would be eligible for points, but in the second they would not. At this distance in time we don't know the precise regulations for a particular race. It is highly likely that a journalist writing a report didn't know either and with a deadline to meet simply guessed.

#74 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 11 July 2009 - 16:19

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.

Posted Image


Posted Image

MotoRacing, 15-22 November 1957, page 2

#75 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 11 July 2009 - 17:29

Since both tables contain the same continuity mistake, I think we can safely assume that one copied the other... ;)

#76 fines

fines
  • Member

  • 9,647 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 11 July 2009 - 17:37

At the time nobody really cared about such subtleties. The points system was only a tool for determining who was champion. The remaining places were considered irrelevant by most. The only significance they had was as a totally unofficial ranking of the "losers".

When FOCA came along the points assumed more significance as they determined who got places on the FOCA charter aircraft. Later, I suspect, under the various Concord[e] Agreements they may have affected a team's share of the money

But to come back to the F1/F2 points question: this varied with the individual race regulations. As there were no regulations about minimum weight or minimum capacity prior to 1961. Formula 2 car in the fifties would also comply with Formula 1 as it would be below the maximum engine capacity. Individual race regulations could have a minimum capacity, for example the 1955 British GP reportedly had a minimum capacity of 2 litres to exclude the many old grand prix cars from the 1952-53 that were around which was why Brabham entered his Cooper-Bristol as a 2.2 litre car. A further problem arises if there was a separate Formula 2 class as the way the regulations treated this could vary: it could be a separate class but a part of the grand prix, possibly with its own prize fund, or it could be a totally separate race that was being run at the same time so the spectators had more cars to watch, in which case, strictly speaking, the Formula 2 cars were not competing in the Grand Prix and eligible for points. In the first case the cars would be eligible for points, but in the second they would not. At this distance in time we don't know the precise regulations for a particular race. It is highly likely that a journalist writing a report didn't know either and with a deadline to meet simply guessed.


Not sure about that - I believe that on about a handful of occasions, the rules were made very clear that the Formula 2 cars and drivers had their own race, and weren't eligible for World Championship points. From memory, the 1957, '58, '66, '67 and '69 German Grands Prix, as well as the 1959 British Grand Prix. Not sure about the 1959 Monaco Grand Prix. Also, I believe Formula 2 cars, even if competing in F1, were not eligible for Constructors Championship points, as weren't the Indy Cars! It was expressly an "F1 Constructors Championship", as far as I understood it!

#77 D-Type

D-Type
  • Member

  • 9,699 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 11 July 2009 - 19:16

As far as I can ascertain, the Formula 2 cars in the 1959 British GP were not competing in a separate simultaneous race on the Nurburgring and Monaco pattern but were competing in the Grand Prix itself. I am not sure whether there was a separate Formula 2 class award

#78 HDonaldCapps

HDonaldCapps
  • Member

  • 2,482 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 06 April 2010 - 10:41

MotoRacing 15-22 November 1957, page 4, has the Final 1957 World Championship Sports Car Standings, which awarded points through sixth place on the basis of 8-6-4-3-2-1 points.

I would suggest that somehow those in the yellow press perhaps were a bit befuddled as to the scoring systems, there not being any other notion that seems to make much sense.



#79 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,756 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 26 February 2012 - 20:43

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!

From the BP Sporting Achievements yearbook for 1957:

Posted Image

Another contemporaneous source for 1 point for 6th in 1957...and Schell ahead of Behra at Rouen.

Advertisement

#80 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,502 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 26 February 2012 - 22:54

The BP table looks similar to the Autosport one I posted earlier, including the misplacement of the Rouen column.

#81 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,756 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 27 August 2020 - 15:45

Just checking LatL...

 

And, IIRC, there's a statement in Graham Hill's "Life at the Limit" saying one of the reasons he left Lotus was because he'd scored just one WDC point in three seasons. That would be Italy 1958 - I'd always dismissed this as faulty memory on Graham's part (there are some howlers in that book!) as he had no points in all the published tables (see above!) but it looks like he was right all along.

 

..NGH says he was delighted to have scored his first point for fifth place (presumably on the original result which disqualified the Gregory/Shelby Maserati).

 

By the time he wrote Graham, he had amended this to his first two points.
 

And I think now he's on zero for that one.



#82 Doug Nye

Doug Nye
  • Member

  • 11,524 posts
  • Joined: February 02

Posted 27 August 2020 - 18:43

Back to the core subject of this thread - just study the state that Behra was in as he stopped before the line at Rouen...

 

https://library.revs...ion=p17257coll1

 

DCN



#83 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,151 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 28 August 2020 - 08:02

Baignant dans l'huile, indeed!

Another thing I wondered about, re-reading this thread - if Behra's last lap didn't count because it took too long, then he wouldn't have been classified as a finisher at all, would he? At the time, only cars running at the finish were classified, irrespective of distance covered.

#84 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 24,592 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 28 August 2020 - 08:39

My theory is that he would have been classified as a finisher as he crossed the line after Fangio. However, his last lap would have been discounted as too slow, so he would have been credited with 69 laps and 6th place. Only a theory ...

#85 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,756 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 28 August 2020 - 08:51

Salvadori got 5th at the British GP despite having a long final lap...



#86 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,151 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 28 August 2020 - 08:51

But, if his last lap didn't count, then he didn't cross the line after Fangio, did he? Interesting conundrum...



#87 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,151 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 28 August 2020 - 08:52

Salvadori got 5th at the British GP despite having a long final lap...


Yes, I understand it was a local rule. Pushing over was by no means rare, and it underlines the folly of the "running at finish" rule - if you were lucky enough to retire near the starting line, you still figured as a "finisher"!


Edited by Michael Ferner, 28 August 2020 - 08:54.


#88 Tim Murray

Tim Murray
  • Moderator

  • 24,592 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 28 August 2020 - 09:07

I regard it rather like dropped points in final championship standings. The driver doesn’t lose either his finishing position or the actual points, they just don’t count in the final standings thanks to an arbitrary rule. Here Behra completed 70 laps and finished the race behind Fangio, but due to an arbitrary rule he was (allegedly) only credited with 69 of those laps.  ;)

#89 Michael Ferner

Michael Ferner
  • Member

  • 7,151 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 28 August 2020 - 09:10

Ahh, dropped laps! What a fabulous idea!! Only the fastest 50 laps in a 60-lap race count! :D :love: :love: