97 replies to this topic

[uechtel]

Regarding the recent concerns of Formula 1 grids getting smaller and smaller and the manoevres to keep the Minardi (Jordan, Sauber etc.) Team in the business I tried to remember how this situation could develop and what restrictions were introduced over the years in order to make it harder for teams / drivers to take part in Formula 1.

Whereas in the old days it seems, that virtually everybody was allowed in (if he came to terms with the organizers of a particular event) today it is completely impossible to get into the business without taking over the license of an already existing team.

The same is also valid for the drivers where today it is quite explicitly ruled, what is required to get a super-license.

While I am aware of the introduction at least of some of those rules I would like to get a more complete list and in particluar also to learn about the actual DATES (years) when they were introduced.

Here is the list of what I am able to recall:

Starting money: In the sixties "independent" teams were admitted but excluded from getting satrting money by some race organizers.

FOCA membership: At some time in the seventies (1978) FOCA members got guaranteed places for practise while the rest had to take part in pre-qualifying sessions

In 1981 (de Villota / Spanish GP) no possibility for a newcomer to get into the field as long as all of the regular teams arrived for a race

Full season participation required: While the Zakspeed team was allowed to do only the European races in 1985 a couple of years later a team had to make a deposit at the beginning of the season in order to make sure that they appeared for every race

Team entries restricted to two cars: While during the seventies it was allowed to enter three or more car teams (March 1976, BRM 1972 etc.) and many teams regularily offered spare cars to local drivers from the mid eighties onwards the number of entries was limited to two cars for every team.

Team entries restricted to two cars II: Still in the late eighties it was possible for a one-car team to bring a second car to some of the races (but without the right to score points: Dalmas 1987, Berger 1984). In 1988 / 89 the number of entries was constant for every team during the whole season

Team entries restricted to two cars III: From 1992 onward only two car teams were admitted.

Production cars prohibited: Somewhere around the mid-eighties a team was required to bring a car OF ITS OWN DESIGN (think of the dispute about the Benetton-copy Ligier). In the seventies it had been possible to buy an ex factory McLaren M23, Lotus 78 or a production March and do the step into Formula 1.

Team ownership: In the early nineties nobody was allowed to own more than one team (again the Briatore-owned Ligier / benetton combination)

Formula 1 franchise: Near the end of the nineties the Formula 1 field was restricted to explicitely named teams. A place was held free for Honda and Toyota and BAR had to buy out the Tyrrell team to get into the business.

Superlicense: In the sixties that restriction seems to have not existed. Or did Frank Dochnal have a superlicense?


Is anybody able to complete the list and fill in the exact dates when these rules became valid?

[petefenelon]

> Somewhere around the mid-eighties a team was required to bring a car OF ITS OWN DESIGN

That's not quite the case - think of Scuderia Italia running Dallaras, or Larrousse running Lolas into the 90s. I'm not sure what form of words was used and don't have a Yellow Book handy, but 'customer cars' were certainly verboten by the time Middlebridge brought their Benetton along in '87. Probably some rule about each constructor only being allowed one team?

Technically, someone was probably breaking rules when Fondmetal and Central Park Venturi Larrousse were both running Fomet designs....

(I'm (slowly) working on an 8w article about designs that turned up under other names - got kind of tangled up in the Ralt RT2/Lola T850/Toleman/Docking-Spitzley/SPA/Roman/assorted Can-Am cars saga and sidetracked from F1....)

[Ray Bell]

Though I can't claim to be an expert, I don't think the situation ever existed where starting money wasn't available to a privateer.

Starting money was always negotiated between the organisers and the entrants independently. I don't know when this ended and a package deal began.

The 'superlicence' definitely didn't exist in the sixties. I'd put late seventies as its starting date, but I'm only working from a rough memory.

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Ray Bell
Though I can't claim to be an expert, I don't think the situation ever existed where starting money wasn't available to a privateer.

Starting money was always negotiated between the organisers and the entrants independently. I don't know when this ended and a package deal began.

The 'superlicence' definitely didn't exist in the sixties. I'd put late seventies as its starting date, but I'm only working from a rough memory.

There's some interesting documents reproduced in DCN's BRM vol 2 about start money at the eve of the 1.5l formula - works teams were originally intended to be on a three-tier system, 'Equipes, Teams and Finance Houses' (iirc) got less than any works team, and Moss was specifically excluded from the tables in the document - presumably because he could ask for more than any works team?

(Or, Doug, did Moss mean Alfred and BRP?;))

At one point the criteria for who was eligible for a superlicence were pretty well-defined in terms of F1, WSPC, F2/3000, CART and sports car achievement) and I'm sure I've seen lists of who was theoretically entitled to have them in the comics during the silly season!

These days it seems that a pot of money and a test run in an F1 car gets you one.

While we're thinking about this, when did the term 'graded drivers' fall out of use? I don't think I've heard it since the late-ish seventies....

[BRG]

And what about the restriction that F1 drivers could not drive in any other category at a GP meeting? That was obviously introduced after the Procar series finished. Another nail in the coffin perhaps..

Didn't the "graded driver" thing mean that these (presumably established F1) drivers couldn't score points in F2 or F3 races? Was that the sole reason for the rule?

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by BRG
And what about the restriction that F1 drivers could not drive in any other category at a GP meeting? That was obviously introduced after the Procar series finished. Another nail in the coffin perhaps..

Didn't the "graded driver" thing mean that these (presumably established F1) drivers couldn't score points in F2 or F3 races? Was that the sole reason for the rule?

From memory, the stuff reproduced in BRM vol 2 also said that Graded Drivers were guaranteed higher start money for their teams than non-graded drivers... so it clearly had financial implications too...

[Vitesse2]

Originally posted by BRG
Didn't the "graded driver" thing mean that these (presumably established F1) drivers couldn't score points in F2 or F3 races? Was that the sole reason for the rule?

I think it was more to avoid "pot-hunting" in lower formulae. They were restricted in the categories they could race in, to stop them turning up at some clubbie and blowing off the opposition in the top-"paying" races.

http://www.atlasf1.c...&threadid=34283

I haven't time to go through the thread, but IIRC Neville Lederle had problems with this rule.

[fines]

Originally posted by uechtel

Full season participation required: While the Zakspeed team was allowed to do only the European races in 1985 a couple of years later a team had to make a deposit at the beginning of the season in order to make sure that they appeared for every race

1981 - there were exceptions due to force majeur, though...

Originally posted by uechtel

Production cars prohibited: Somewhere around the mid-eighties a team was required to bring a car OF ITS OWN DESIGN (think of the dispute about the Benetton-copy Ligier). In the seventies it had been possible to buy an ex factory McLaren M23, Lotus 78 or a production March and do the step into Formula 1.

1981 again

Originally posted by uechtel

Formula 1 franchise: Near the end of the nineties the Formula 1 field was restricted to explicitely named teams. A place was held free for Honda and Toyota and BAR had to buy out the Tyrrell team to get into the business.

1997 I believe

Originally posted by uechtel

Superlicense: In the sixties that restriction seems to have not existed. Or did Frank Dochnal have a superlicense?

Definitely before 1981, but probably not much

[fines]

Originally posted by BRG
And what about the restriction that F1 drivers could not drive in any other category at a GP meeting? That was obviously introduced after the Procar series finished. Another nail in the coffin perhaps..

The rule said that no F1 driver was allowed to race within 24 hours prior to a Grand Prix, so technically anyone could've run on a Friday in whatever race he wanted. This was also introduced in 1981 iirc, a year of big changes.

[Richard Jenkins]

Originally posted by uechtel
Superlicense: In the sixties that restriction seems to have not existed. Or did Frank Dochnal have a superlicense?

No he didn't. He fancied a go, organisers gave the okay & that was it... FJD was a Grand Prix driver!

[ensign14]

Points: when did you have to make every race to get points? In 1984, Gartner and Berger/Osella and ATS were denied points at Italy 1984 because the 2nd entries were not 'full season' entries. Ditto Dalmas in 1987? for Lola.

(As an aside, I wonder why the points did not go to the chaps in 7th and 8th? Osella cut their nose off there, had Gartner not been entered, Ghinzani - who had retired whilst 4th - would have been classified 6th and therefore in the points. Also, IIRC, Gartner sputtered over the line out of fuel, had he not made it he would have been classed 7th.)

Certainly in 1985 Grand Prix International reported that Zakspeed were ineligible for points for missing races at the start of the season.

The last 'one-offer' in the points I can think of was Jarier in the Penske ATS in 1977.

[fines]

Originally posted by ensign14
Points: when did you have to make every race to get points? In 1984, Gartner and Berger/Osella and ATS were denied points at Italy 1984 because the 2nd entries were not 'full season' entries. Ditto Dalmas in 1987? for Lola.

Again, 1981.

[marat]

All was not not perfect in the old days.
In the fifties and sixties organisers could select the entrants and have a race on "invitation".
That was particularly the case for Monaco and Holland.
The best ( ) example being the 1961 Belgian GP where Tony Marsh was excluded and let his
place AND car (painted yellow) to Willy Mairesse; the same happened to Seidel for Bianchi
but he had been slower than the two belgian drivers.

[Holger Merten]

Uechtel, an interesting POV! And a great start for a long, long, long, disuccsion. Thanks for opening this Thread.

[uechtel]

whow, what a fruitful discussion that developed into. But it seems, that I am not the only one who has problems to remember the exact dates. I always wondered why this kind of rules has never received such public attention as changes in the technical reglement?

Originally posted by petefenelon
That's not quite the case - think of Scuderia Italia running Dallaras, or Larrousse running Lolas into the 90s. I'm not sure what form of words was used and don't have a Yellow Book handy, but 'customer cars' were certainly verboten by the time Middlebridge brought their Benetton along in '87. Probably some rule about each constructor only being allowed one team?

I think I can remember the name of the manufacturer was required in the team´s name. This is "BMS Dallara Scuderia Italia" for example. Concerning Larrousse: wasn´t avoiding the word "Lola" in the team´s name the reason for them being taken away all their championship points of 1990?

(I'm (slowly) working on an 8w article about designs that turned up under other names - got kind of tangled up in the Ralt RT2/Lola T850/Toleman/Docking-Spitzley/SPA/Roman/assorted Can-Am cars saga and sidetracked from F1....)

Looking very much forward to that!

At one point the criteria for who was eligible for a superlicence were pretty well-defined in terms of F1, WSPC, F2/3000, CART and sports car achievement) and I'm sure I've seen lists of who was theoretically entitled to have them in the comics during the silly season!

Yes, I think I can remember having read a list of all "available" Formula 1 drivers in a yearbook around 1979

Full season participation:

Originally posted by fines
1981 - there were exceptions due to force majeur, though...

Hm. but what case of force majeur could that have been at Zakspeed in 1985 other than not spending money for travelling to the overseas races? Do you know whether they lost their deposit?

Production cars prohibited:

1981 again

But hadn´t there been two March teams (RAM and Onyx) in 1982 at least trying to get onto the grid?

The rule said that no F1 driver was allowed to race within 24 hours prior to a Grand Prix, so technically anyone could've run on a Friday in whatever race he wanted. This was also introduced in 1981 iirc, a year of big changes.

This must have been much earlier as I think this was the reason why Andretti and Unser were excluded at Monza in 1968. I always thought that rule to have been introduced after Fangios accident already in 1952.

Originally posted by ensign14
(As an aside, I wonder why the points did not go to the chaps in 7th and 8th? Osella cut their nose off there, had Gartner not been entered, Ghinzani - who had retired whilst 4th - would have been classified 6th and therefore in the points. Also, IIRC, Gartner sputtered over the line out of fuel, had he not made it he would have been classed 7th.)

Yes, always wondered about that, too. Maybe the reason was, that Osella was some step away from professionalism at that time?

Certainly in 1985 Grand Prix International reported that Zakspeed were ineligible for points for missing races at the start of the season.

...from which they did not suffer too much...

The last 'one-offer' in the points I can think of was Jarier in the Penske ATS in 1977.

Ligier collected a point in 1987 after having not appeared at the first race. But that could have probably fallen under the force majeur rule...

Originally posted by marat
All was not not perfect in the old days.

Never said that. But it was much richer in variations.

Funny was also when certain drivers were guaranteed a position on the grid when others, who had qualified faster, had to watch from the outside. Usually that was the case for the leading drivers of the works team and former champions of Grand Prix winners in the early seventies. To me the climax of that was at the Swedish GP in 1974 where AFAIK Scandinavian drivers were automatically qualified.

[Ray Bell]

On the subject of 'Graded Drivers'...

They were, IIRC, banned from FJunior altogether, and the ensuing F3. They were permitted to run in F2, of course, but I think there were some series which precluded them from running, or at least from scoring points.

And on the topic of running in other races in the 24 hours, drivers did run in other races on the same day during the fifties, particularly in England.

[Rob29]

Did'nt the ban on racing within 24hrs of a GP arise from the hot Reims of 1959? After finishing the GP in temperatures reported as 104F,several got into their F2 cars for the 'Coupe de Vitesse' despite being in no condition to drive.
Up to 6 'Graded' drivers were allowed to take part in European F2 championship races from 1967,but did not count for points.

[fines]

Originally posted by uechtel
Hm. but what case of force majeur could that have been at Zakspeed in 1985 other than not spending money for travelling to the overseas races? Do you know whether they lost their deposit?

I don't recall an issue about a deposit, maybe they only lost their right to score points?

Originally posted by uechtel
But hadn´t there been two March teams (RAM and Onyx) in 1982 at least trying to get onto the grid?

Yes, you're right! I can't explain that, but do recall that in 1981 Colin Bennett tried to run a team of two Williams FW07Bs and wasn't allowed to, because of this new rule - remember, a year before RAM were doing exactly that!

Originally posted by uechtel
This must have been much earlier as I think this was the reason why Andretti and Unser were excluded at Monza in 1968. I always thought that rule to have been introduced after Fangios accident already in 1952.

Again, you're right! Also, this rule wasn't always strictly adhered to. I recall reminding Manfred Winkelhock of this rule before he was due to run a DRM race on the Saturday afternoon before the 1982 German GP - he'd never even heard of such a rule! Kein Kläger, keine Verhandlung!

[Don Capps]

I think uechtel has opened a can of worms which has pretty much been ignored over the years. Although he is asking some very specific questions about specific situations in many cases, I think that most of us have had to pause for some very long moments and do memory searches concerning the periods in question as well thimb thru some of the periodicals to find information.

Much of what is being asked falls into the big void that seems to be missing in the gazillions of potted "F1 histories" crowding the bookshelves. Much of the whole business being addressed was poorly covered at the time and has not been very well examined in the times since then. INdeed, there seem to have been relatively few efforts to collect this information in any meaningful, coherent way. So what else is new? This is the theme song of TNF it seems.

I fully admit to getting confused at times since the beginning of the Modern F1 era placed some regulations and "guidance" into place that often seemed as arcane as the starting money and other aspects of race organization and promotion that has just abpit been totally ignored outside the circle of folks needing to actually deal with such issues. The history of GP, F1, and more than a few other series are grossly incomplete as uechtel and his questions definitely hammer that point home.

[ensign14]

Originally posted by uechtel
Superlicense: In the sixties that restriction seems to have not existed. Or did Frank Dochnal have a superlicense?

One of the quirks about the 'graded' drivers was that it included drivers who had scored a point the previous season. Which meant that Eddie Johnson (6th at Indy 1960) was a graded driver for 1961. I remember seeing this anomaly mentioned in an article listing the graded drivers in an old magazine, when explaining why this EJ was a graded driver.

[uechtel]

So let me attempt to bring that into chronological order:

between 1952 (1959?) and 1968:
24 h rule: Drivers not allowed to take part in a Grand Prix when having raced elsewhere within the last 24 hours

1967:
graded driver (Formula 2) : Drivers having been "successful" in Formula 1 being not allowed to score points in the Formula 2 championship

between 1960 and 1976?:
Practise partcipation required: A driver is allowd into the race only if he has taken part in practise on a car of the same "make" (consisting of chassis/engine combination turning "Lotus-Climax" into a different "make" than "Lotus-BRM"!). Late victim: De Angelis 1983 (practised a Lotus-Renault while driving a Lotus-Ford in the Brasilian GP) BUT "a Brabham is always a Brabham" said Bernie Ecclestone and Stommelen is into the German GP in the works Brabham-Alfa Romeo after having practised the RAM-Brabham-Ford

around 1974:
Homogenization of entry rules: The acceptance of entries is no longer down to the organizers of the individual races and also the qualifying rules are centrally fixed.

before 1978:
FOCA membership advantage: all FOCA members (plus the "FISA"-teams!) are guaranteed participation in practise. From 1977 onward (Silverstone) if number of the further entrants is bigger than remaining places things are sorted out in a pre-qualifying session.

1979:
Team entries limited to two cars: A team must not field more than two entries for a race. Exceptions only after certain deals, like the Renault camera car, Nürburgring 1985. (Remark: Is this rule still in place? I think I remember deliberations in recent years (about 1998?) to allow three entries per team in order to increase numbers of starters again)

1979?:
Superlicense: Only "experienced" drivers allowed to take part in world championship Grand Prix

1981:
Championship points only for all-season participants: An entry (that is the "cockpit seat", as it was always "legally" possible to exchange the driver during season) is only allowed to score points if it materialises at every race of the season. Exceptions only due to "force majeure" (driver injuries etc.). Earliest victims: Jo Gartner / Gerhard Berger, GP Italy 1984

1981
FOCA members only: All practise places are occupied by FOCA members. Victim: de Villota / GP Spain 1981 (but still he WOULD have been allowed in if any of the FOCA members had failed to appear!)

between 1981 and 1987:
Ban on customer cars: Teams are allowed in only if they bring cars of their "own" design along. First victims: Colin Bennett 1981, Middlebridge 1987. Contradiction: Onyx 1982

between 1980 and 1988 (perhaps 1983?
FOCA membership required: Anybody who wants to get in has to be member of the FOCA

1988:
No "spare car entries" for one car teams allowed anymore: A team has to bring its announced number of cars to every race. No additional second car for one-car teams and no "test seasons" allowed anymore. Last occasions: Larrousse (Dalmas) and Coloni (Larini) 1987

1988:
Limited number of driver changes within a team: The No. 1 driver of a team can be replaced once in a season. The No. 2 driver is allowed to be replaced more often (three times?). Exceptions due to "force majeur" again (I think this rule was later adapted once or twice). Also strict separation between No. 1 and No. 2 driver. First victim: Joachim Winkelhock having to take part in pre-qualifying, Brasil 1989, when No.1 cockpit of the team was vacant

around 1988 / 1989:
Money deposit: Every team wanting to take part in the championship has to make a money deposit at the start of the season in order to appear at every race. Exceptions due to "force majeur" possible?

after 1989:
No sideline jobs for Formula 1 drivers any more: A Formula 1 driver is not allowed to take part in other racing series. Last occasions: Jean Alesi (Formula 3000) 1989, Volker Weidler (DTM) 1989, Johnny Herbert (?) 1991, Nigel Mansell (CART) 1994. So does this rule actually exist???

around 1990:
Ownership limited to only one team: Nobody is allowed to own more than one Formula 1 team. The rule seems to have been dropped recently (I always regarded this as a extremely stupid rule as it is in my eyes impossible to prove a violation of that, just like the current ban on "team orders").

1992:
Two car entries only: Every Formula 1 team has to make two entries for every race. Exceptions due to "force majeur" allowed. First "victim": Perry McCarthy 1992

1992:
Formula 1 worthyness required: A team that turns out to be "unworthy" for Formula 1 can be excluded from further participation in the championship. First victim: Andrea Moda Formula (1992)

before 1997:
Colour scheme freeze: A team is not allowed to run two differently-sponsored cars neither to do major changes towards the colour scheme of their cars during the season. First victim: BAR 1997 (also an extremely stupid rule and I always wonder who could have any advantage of this?)

1997:
Formula 1 franchise: Only Formula 1 franchise holders allowed to take part. Thus number of teams limited to 12 (later down to 10). Newcomers have to buy out existing teams.


That´s all I can recall at the moment. Of course most of these rules became simply necessary because of increasing professionalism in Formula 1, but all in all in my view that is quite a long list of steps towards Formula 1 monotony.

[Holger Merten]

Uechtel, an interesting point of view (through all rules, which doesn't make it easier to understand, what was going on in all those rules.) Sounds very difficult to decide for some drivers, for whom this could be the right championship?

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by uechtel
around 1974:
Homogenization of entry rules: The acceptance of entries is no longer down to the organizers of the individual races and also the qualifying rules are centrally fixed.

Would that be after Spain '73? The next race is the first one with fixed starting numbers.

Originally posted by uechtel
between 1981 and 1987:
Ban on customer cars: Teams are allowed in only if they bring cars of their "own" design along. First victims: Colin Bennett 1981, Middlebridge 1987. Contradiction: Onyx 1982

This is the "privateer" can of worms... The ban was in the Concorde Agreement, so there must have been an "elegant" solution to the No.19 March in 1982. A single entrant perhaps? With only the de facto situation being that the "third car" was run by mechanics from another company? The starting numbers - 17, 18, 19 - would suggest this.

The Middlebridge car would have been a separate entity, where Middlebridge would also be the entrant. That wasn't allowed, it being an obvious privateer/customer effort, hence its ineligibility.

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Racer.Demon


Would that be after Spain '73? The next race is the first one with fixed starting numbers.



This is the "privateer" can of worms... The ban was in the Concorde Agreement, so there must have been an "elegant" solution to the No.19 March in 1982. A single entrant perhaps? With only the de facto situation being that the "third car" was run by mechanics from another company? The starting numbers - 17, 18, 19 - would suggest this.

The Middlebridge car would have been a separate entity, where Middlebridge would also be the entrant. That wasn't allowed, it being an obvious privateer/customer effort, hence its ineligibility.

The de Villota/Onyx deal came about only after Guy Edwards landed March the big Rothmans sponsorship for '82.

Mike Earle of Onyx, quoted in Mike Lawrence's March book: "By 1982 John Mac[donald] was basically separate from March Engineering but he had decided to continue and had signed de Villota. Then Guy Edwards came up with the Rothmans deal - Rothmans wanted total corporate identity on the cards but John didn't want to kick de Villota into touch. I don't think it was a matter of money, he'd given his word, and he approached us to see if we would run Emilio. At the time we weren't doing much so we were happy to do it...... It was quite interesting working alongside the works programme, being part of it yet separate, seeing it not from the outside but from just inside the door."

Onyx had quite an association with March over the years - so that entry was probably very much seen as at least semi-works (and certainly as works-sanctioned). (Well, for values of 'works' that take into account the fact that March Grand Prix had nowt much to do with March Engineering in 82...)

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by Racer.Demon


Would that be after Spain '73? The next race is the first one with fixed starting numbers.

grin... I dug up the details on "fixed starting numbers" a while back, and they didn't really come into effect totally until 1982 IIRC

Discussion here: http://www.atlasf1.c...&threadid=56835

pete

[fines]

Originally posted by uechtel
1967:
graded driver (Formula 2) : Drivers having been "successful" in Formula 1 being not allowed to score points in the Formula 2 championship

The "grading" of drivers started much earlier, in the late fifties iirc!

Originally posted by uechtel
between 1960 and 1976?:
Practise partcipation required: A driver is allowd into the race only if he has taken part in practise on a car of the same "make" (consisting of chassis/engine combination turning "Lotus-Climax" into a different "make" than "Lotus-BRM"!). Late victim: De Angelis 1983 (practised a Lotus-Renault while driving a Lotus-Ford in the Brasilian GP) BUT "a Brabham is always a Brabham" said Bernie Ecclestone and Stommelen is into the German GP in the works Brabham-Alfa Romeo after having practised the RAM-Brabham-Ford

That was 1974: Before, every driver had to qualify the same chassis he wanted to race, afterwards only one of the same make. This rule was always interpreted liberally...;)

Originally posted by uechtel
around 1974:
Homogenization of entry rules: The acceptance of entries is no longer down to the organizers of the individual races and also the qualifying rules are centrally fixed.

The standardization of practice and qualifying started much later, in 1979 iirc.

[Vitesse2]

Originally posted by uechtel
1967:
graded driver (Formula 2) : Drivers having been "successful" in Formula 1 being not allowed to score points in the Formula 2 championship

Originally posted by fines
The "grading" of drivers started much earlier, in the late fifties iirc!

Michael: I think the point being made here is that this was the first time the gradings had been put to any practical purpose.

[Ray Bell]

As mentioned earlier, FJunior was out of bounds for graded drivers...

[Vitesse2]

Okay then: .... any practical purpose other than to restrict in which classes graded drivers could compete.

Better?

[Rob29]

I think 'graded drivers' were introduced c.1956. At the same time 'National Open' meetings were created.A graded driver was not allowed to take part in a national open outside his(or her) own country. Some years later these were renaimed 'International' and the full Internationals became 'International Open'
Fixed numbers for F1 started mid 1973 but a fixed entry list was much later,with the Concorde agreement of 1982,which accounts for most of the stupid rules we have today.

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by petefenelon


The de Villota/Onyx deal came about only after Guy Edwards landed March the big Rothmans sponsorship for '82.

Mike Earle of Onyx, quoted in Mike Lawrence's March book: "By 1982 John Mac[donald] was basically separate from March Engineering but he had decided to continue and had signed de Villota. Then Guy Edwards came up with the Rothmans deal - Rothmans wanted total corporate identity on the cards but John didn't want to kick de Villota into touch. I don't think it was a matter of money, he'd given his word, and he approached us to see if we would run Emilio. At the time we weren't doing much so we were happy to do it...... It was quite interesting working alongside the works programme, being part of it yet separate, seeing it not from the outside but from just inside the door."

Onyx had quite an association with March over the years - so that entry was probably very much seen as at least semi-works (and certainly as works-sanctioned). (Well, for values of 'works' that take into account the fact that March Grand Prix had nowt much to do with March Engineering in 82...)

Thanks, Pete. I knew that would be your game...

So indeed no Concorde infringement - only a bit of stretching applied to the meaning of 'works' (another can of worms) while the Concorde ink is still drying up - whereas Middlebridge would have been a clear infringement.

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by petefenelon


grin... I dug up the details on "fixed starting numbers" a while back, and they didn't really come into effect totally until 1982 IIRC

Discussion here: http://www.atlasf1.c...&threadid=56835

Interesting analysis there, Pete. But you will agree that the numbers were slightly more fixed from the 1973 Belgian GP on than they were before!;) From then on only the smaller teams and third-car entries fell out of line, really.

Was there some central ruling responsible for this, similar to the deformable-structure rule that came into effect the race before? Poor me, I can't find anything in my severely limited library...

[Leo]

I've another rule to ad to uechtel's list:

A constructor entering a team in F1 may not enter a works team in any other category.
When did that happen?

And a remark: nowadays the constructor of a car is defined as the owner of the intellectual property of the car. This is why the Nickerson/Walkinshaw Phoenix entry was denied last year: they had the cars, but didn't own the intellectual property, so they were not seen as a proper constructor by the FIA.

[uechtel]

Originally posted by Vitesse2
Okay then: .... any practical purpose other than to restrict in which classes graded drivers could compete.

Better?

As this thread IS all about restrictions I think fines is quite right with his remark. Certainly they would not have introduced the term "graded driver" if this had not had any actual consequences.

Originally posted by racer.demon
So indeed no Concorde infringement - only a bit of stretching applied to the meaning of 'works' (another can of worms) while the Concorde ink is still drying up - whereas Middlebridge would have been a clear infringement.

But then it´s automatically turning into an infringement of the two-car-per-team rule...

Originally posted by petefenelon
grin... I dug up the details on "fixed starting numbers" a while back, and they didn't really come into effect totally until 1982 IIRC

So is it possible that fixed numbers were rewarded to FOCA (FISA) members only? In combination with Rob29´s remark about the Concorde Agreement bringing fixed entry lists this would also explain why swapping of numbers would not happen again after 1982!

[Racer.Demon]

Originally posted by uechtel
But then it´s automatically turning into an infringement of the two-car-per-team rule...

Above you quoted 1979 as the starting year for the two-car maximum, but was this really carved into stone somewhere? I know it is now...

Was Villota eligible for points? He was only entered for a handful of races anyway, so it could still be similar deal to the third Renault cars of Hesnault and Streiff. (And Streiff's wasn't a camera car, but a genuine contender for places!)

[uechtel]

Originally posted by Leo
I've another rule to ad to uechtel's list:

A constructor entering a team in F1 may not enter a works team in any other category.
When did that happen?

And a remark: nowadays the constructor of a car is defined as the owner of the intellectual property of the car. This is why the Nickerson/Walkinshaw Phoenix entry was denied last year: they had the cars, but didn't own the intellectual property, so they were not seen as a proper constructor by the FIA.

Thank you Leo, for those, two. Actually I have never heard of any of them so far. And that despite normally I try to be quite aware about such things (as you see)!

The first one seems more strange to me regarding the fact, that at least a couple of years ago most Formula 1 teams were had junior teams in Formula 3000.

And regarding the "intellectual property": It´s really amazing to see into what numerous, complicated and far-fetched interpretations the officials ar forced with every new rule they introduce, instead of getting things clearer (which is the purpose of rules after all!). But that is the danger of ruling things where there is no need to do such. Not that I am anti rules at all, for example it is obvious, that engine capacity etc. has to be limited and also the safety rules are simply necessary. But if some rules lead to such aberrations this is a clear proof to me of their "artifical" or "unnatural" character (as I would call that).

[Racer.Demon]

So are you by chance preparing a story, uechtel?;)

[uechtel]

Originally posted by Racer.Demon


Above you quoted 1979 as the starting year for the two-car maximum, but was this really carved into stone somewhere? I know it is now...

Was Villota eligible for points? He was only entered for a handful of races anyway, so it could still be similar deal to the third Renault cars of Hesnault and Streiff. (And Streiff's wasn't a camera car, but a genuine contender for places!)

You are probably right.

But that also shows that there is still much uncertain to us. Interesting! As Don stated, every barn-built special of what exotic origin ever (thinking about the Kohout for example) is identified within a couple of minutes or so in this forum, but nobody here is able to tell the exact date from when on teams were restricted to two cars in the world championship after more than two whole days!

[petefenelon]

Originally posted by uechtel

The first one seems more strange to me regarding the fact, that at least a couple of years ago most Formula 1 teams were had junior teams in Formula 3000.

There was very little actual connection between most of the F1 teams and their 'junior' squads - usually just lent their name and one of their sponsors to an existing 3000 team for one of their favoured test drivers. The only one I think had much in the way of a link to its parent team was McLaren Junior, which seemed to exist only to keep Heidfeld going. It became MySAP, but they were 'in the family', and I'm not sure what happened then -- did it become something else, or did it fold completely?

[Racer.Demon]

I think it was run by David Brown, and he went on to do something else. Isn't he in IRL at the moment?

[uechtel]

Originally posted by Racer.Demon
So are you by chance preparing a story, uechtel?;)

Perhaps I will think about that some day, but I brought up the issue on mere interest only. And I have to admit, that at the moment I have already problems getting into the updates of my texts on German postwar racing, which I are more than overdue with regarding the heap of information that I have received from members of this forum and other people virtually from all around the world since. So let me take the occasion to send a big THANK YOU to all, who have shared your knowledge so freely with me!

And perhaps we have still a chance to find somebody who is really "fit" in the issues of this thread to sum up what we hopefully will still find out on the subject...

[BRG]

Originally posted by uechtel
between 1952 (1959?) and 1968:
24 h rule: Drivers not allowed to take part in a Grand Prix when having raced elsewhere within the last 24 hours

Great work, uechtel!

Was the 24 hour rule waived to allow for the Procar race series in 1980 or so? IIRC they raced on Saturday - or maybe that was Saturday morning, so more than 24 hours before the race. Or was it waived because it suited Bernie who promoted that series?

[uechtel]

Originally posted by BRG
Great work, uechtel!

Was the 24 hour rule waived to allow for the Procar race series in 1980 or so? IIRC they raced on Saturday - or maybe that was Saturday morning, so more than 24 hours before the race. Or was it waived because it suited Bernie who promoted that series?

perhaps the key lies in the word "elsewhere"?

I have to admit, that I gave the Procar series too much attention then, so I am not able to say at what timeof the day they usually started.

[conjohn]

Originally posted by uechtel
Funny was also when certain drivers were guaranteed a position on the grid when others, who had qualified faster, had to watch from the outside. Usually that was the case for the leading drivers of the works team and former champions of Grand Prix winners in the early seventies. To me the climax of that was at the Swedish GP in 1974 where AFAIK Scandinavian drivers were automatically qualified.

This I cannot let stand unopposed.

Yes, it is true that all Scandinavians started the race, but they had not all qualified originally. Kinnunen started as first reserve, having been let in by Belsö crashing his Iso-Marlboro in the morning warmup. Belsö took over Richard Robards car (incidentally using the new for 1974 similar-but-not-identical rule discussed earlier in this thread), leaving Robards without a ride (but then he had only gotten the ride in the first place because Arturo Merzario found that he could not drive with a broken finger, and Frank Williams had brought Robards along for just that eventuality).

So the grid was formed taking account of all drivers qualifying times, regardless of nationality. There was no automatic qualifying for the Scandinavians. Even the Antipodian Vern Schuppan was allowed to start, even though he hadn't qualified, falling into the category of 'Unofficial Participation' in my records...

Other than that, hats of for uechtel for bringing up these interesting matters.

[uechtel]

Hm, I´m not completely convinced yet. I have my information from Ulrich Schwab´s German yearbook "Grand Prix 1974". Here is what he writes:

"Even more grotesque was an additional rule in the invitation. It allowed the race organizers to admit Scandinavian drivers to take the start even if they had not qualified for one of the 25 places. So theoretically there could have been 27 starters, as this was the number of entries that had been accepted"

and then Schwab continues:

"The organizers did not have to make use of the exceptional rule. Belso had an accident in the untimed practise session and the car was a wreckage, that could not be repaired even by the quick Williams mechanics. Belso took over the Iso from Robarts, Kinnunen automatically moved up the place and Schuppan became reserve driver. Nobody flagged him off despite everybody had survived the pace lap and got off well."

So how comes Schwab to this information? I hardly believe that Schwab completely invented this passage, so I think there must have been at least SOME evidence for that. Maybe some misunderstanding?

[Don Capps]

As I have been a tad busy lately practicing the art of Beltway Banditry I have not been able to give this intriguing thread the attention I have been meaning to direct its way. There is a real need for some with better research materials than currently at my disposal to start rooting around for the (F1) history that uechtel has pointed out that is missing and rarely discussed.

The various ins-and-outs of the starting money deals are perhaps lost to the ages for the most part, but those of the 1960's -- the Geneva and various other agreements -- should be somewhat available.

Keep in mind that much of what uechtel is asking questions about are elements that sprang from the fertile imagination of B.C. Ecclestone and a few others as the accent shifted from Inclusive to Exclusive on the F1 scene. This is the point that should anchor this inquiry.

conjohn, you can take exception all you want but such deals were scarcely limited to the Scandinavians -- and apparently may have included the Scandinavian drivers in question. After all, the promoter had to pay the bills and in that far distant time "local" drivers were a real draw. Smart for business regardless of how it seems today.

I have found this whole line of thought very interesting and one that I have often wished I had done more about. All the focus goes to the car and its mechanicals -- regardless that to the vast majority is simply gobblegook and folks nod sagely since they don't wish to be embarassed by the fact that they haven't the slightest idea of what it really means or does (something which hasn't changed a lick over the decades), the drivers, and the circuits -- but scarcely a peep about the underbelly of the sport: how the races were promoted, the supplementary regualtions that races added on to give each event something of a home field advantage or slant. It is really something we might want to put some effort into. After all, not many some to give a flying, wet fudgesicle about what there was before BCE and JMB to change. Seems to be more a case of our lack of knowlegde only being exceeded by our ignorance.

[conjohn]

Maybe I got a little too hot under the collar about this, but as I recall nothing was ever mentioned about this at the track, at that time, and I was there all years between 1973 - 1978. And I still maintain that the grid was formed strictly by the qualifying times, so that nobody who should have started would have been excluded to make way for any of the locals.
The acceptance of entries is another matter. Why Kinnunen was deemed 'better' than Schenken (Trojan), Pryce/Purley (Token) or Nicholson (Lyncar) probably had to do with that he was a Finn. That the Maki entry was turned down is more understandable.

OT: Don, maybe we saw each other on the streets of DC last week, as I was there for a conference.

[uechtel]

I don´t understand that the rule (if it had been that) said, that the other drivers were meant to make way for the locals. Schwab says, that any local missing the cut would have been allowed in ADDITIONALLY (that is of course from the very back of the grid, so everything still strictly in order ofthe qualifying times). So maybe allowing Schuppan to have a go was the best solution to settle the issue to everybody´s satisfaction.

But anyway, I did not want to chase Scandinavians, it was only my best example for one of the "individual" qualifying modes set up by the organizers until the seventies. So perhaps I can calm you down again a little bit by also bringing the example of my "home" GP at Hockenheim 1977, when nobody hindered Heyer from taking part in spite of not even being the first of the non-qualificants!

And Don, yes I completely agree with you (at least as far as the words I understand... ).

[Racer.Demon]

Mind you, this practice of turning a blind eye to the rules for the local hero's sake happened well into the 80s - so even in Concorde days.

Anyone remember Huub Rothengatter's orange Spirit allowed to start from 27th at the 1984 Dutch GP?

[Racer.Demon]

BTW, in some way it reminds me of the "force majeure" practice used in the 107% days of allowing people to start without having set a time below 107%. That thing of "Well, we've proved in other sessions that we were able to" was always a bit of, well, old school!

These days, of course, with the small entry number and one-shot qualifying, you can make the grid with "no time"... If you look at it from a different angle, F1 has become "inclusive" again! DNQs are simply impossible now.