Discussion:
No classified drivers lapped
(too old to reply)
Geoff May
2020-09-06 18:07:49 UTC
Permalink
I cannot recall the last time no classified drivers had been lapped.

Cheers

Geoff
Brian Lawrence
2020-09-06 21:00:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff May
I cannot recall the last time no classified drivers had been lapped.
Cheers
Geoff
Sorry. Try last week :-)
Alan Baker
2020-09-06 21:22:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Geoff May
I cannot recall the last time no classified drivers had been lapped.
Cheers
Geoff
Sorry. Try last week :-)
And some people here wonder why I might not hold them in high regard for
their understanding of the sport...

:-)
texas gate
2020-09-06 21:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
And some people here wonder why I might not hold them in high regard for
their understanding of the sport...
:-)
Get over your yourself.
Fucking idiot.
Oh that smiley is so fucking cool.
Alan Baker
2020-09-06 21:49:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by texas gate
Post by Alan Baker
And some people here wonder why I might not hold them in high regard for
their understanding of the sport...
:-)
Get over your yourself.
Fucking idiot.
Oh that smiley is so fucking cool.
Hey.. ...do you know why I never bother replying to you...

...why essentially NOBODY replies to you:

You're too fucking dull.
geoff
2020-09-07 03:19:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by texas gate
Post by Alan Baker
And some people here wonder why I might not hold them in high regard for
their understanding of the sport...
:-)
Get over your yourself.
Fucking idiot.
Oh that smiley is so fucking cool.
Hey.. ...do you know why I never bother replying to you...
Never ?


geoff
Alan Baker
2020-09-07 03:47:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by geoff
Post by Alan Baker
Post by texas gate
Post by Alan Baker
And some people here wonder why I might not hold them in high regard for
their understanding of the sport...
:-)
Get over your yourself.
Fucking idiot.
Oh that smiley is so fucking cool.
Hey.. ...do you know why I never bother replying to you...
Never ?
geoff
Next to never.

First reply in... ...6 months... ...a year?
Bigbird
2020-09-07 12:52:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Hey.. ...do you know why I never bother replying to you...
"never"
...er...because most of us have him killfiled and it is only when
someone is dumb enough to quote him we are even aware of his existence.
Post by Alan Baker
You're too fucking dull.
:)
--
Bozo bin
Texasgate
Heron
Enjoy!
Geoff May
2020-09-07 15:59:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Geoff May
I cannot recall the last time no classified drivers had been lapped.
Cheers
Geoff
Sorry. Try last week :-)
I really must pay attention ... ;-)

Cheers

Geoff
Brian Lawrence
2020-09-07 16:39:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff May
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Geoff May
I cannot recall the last time no classified drivers had been lapped.
Cheers
Geoff
Sorry. Try last week :-)
I really must pay attention ... ;-)
Short-term memory is usually the first to go.

There were two instances last year, also in consec. events - Singapore &
Russia. Also one in 2018, 2016 & 2015.

I haven't checked every season but I couldn't find any before 1980.
Geoff May
2020-09-07 17:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Geoff May
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Geoff May
I cannot recall the last time no classified drivers had been lapped.
Sorry. Try last week :-)
I really must pay attention ... ;-)
Short-term memory is usually the first to go.
There were two instances last year, also in consec. events - Singapore &
Russia. Also one in 2018, 2016 & 2015.
I haven't checked every season but I couldn't find any before 1980.
Thanks Brian, much appreciated.

Cheers

Geoff
Brian Lawrence
2020-09-08 08:04:04 UTC
Permalink
I think that this first happened in 1999, at the Italian GP.

<https://www.statsf1.com/en/1999/italie/classement.aspx>

First 10 finished on the same lap (53).

However, Panis WAS classified 11th although he DNFd on lap 52. It is
normal for drivers who DNF having completed 75% of the race distance
to be classified. Historically that wasn't always the case, certainly
in the 1950s drivers who didn't take the flag at the finish line were
'not classified' as finishers and failed to score points they would
have received in later years.

I found a total of 18 GPs where all 'classified' drivers were unlapped,
but in 8 of them there were one or more drivers who had DNFd were also
counted. Technically if you are in the pits or parked somewhere out on
the circuit you can't be lapped, but it is possible some were lapped
as they slowly returned to the pits or were finding a safe place to park.

Without going into the full details these were the 18 events:

ITA 1999 11 Panis (-1)

GER 2000 12 Heidfeld (-5)
CDN 2007 12
SIN 2008 15 Raikkonen (-4)
BEL 2009 14
SIN 2009 14

MON 2010 15 Petrov (-5), Chandhok & Trulli (-8)
ABD 2012 17
MON 2013 16 Perez (-6)
GBR 2013 20 Grosjean (-1) & Perez (-6)
KOR 2013 20 Vergne (-2), Ricciardo (-3) & Sutil (-5)
USA 2015 12
BRA 2016 16
CHN 2018 19 Hartley (-5)
RUS 2019 15
SIN 2019 17

BEL 2020 17
ITA 2020 16

Numbers (16 last Sunday) is the number of classified finishers.
Numbers after drivers names are number of laps short of full race
distance.
Mark Jackson
2020-09-08 12:41:57 UTC
Permalink
It is normal for drivers who DNF having completed 75% of the race
distance to be classified.
It's 90%:

"45.2 Cars having covered less than 90% of the number of laps covered by
the winner (rounded down to the nearest whole number of laps), will not
be classified."

That's from the current Sporting Regulations, and IIRC that's what is
has been since taking the flag at the finish line was replaced as the
criterion.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
When all you have is a hammer every problem becomes a nail.
When all you have is the police every problem becomes a crime.
- Danielle Ponder
Brian Lawrence
2020-09-08 14:09:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Jackson
It is normal for drivers who DNF having completed 75% of the race
distance to be classified.
"45.2 Cars having covered less than 90% of the number of laps covered by
the winner (rounded down to the nearest whole number of laps), will not
be classified."
That's from the current Sporting Regulations, and IIRC that's what is
has been since taking the flag at the finish line was replaced as the
criterion.
Thanks Mark. 75% is the minimum for full points of course.

I think the change was in 1959 or thereabouts.
Mark Jackson
2020-09-08 17:19:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Mark Jackson
"45.2 Cars having covered less than 90% of the number of laps covered
by the winner (rounded down to the nearest whole number of laps), will
not be classified."
That's from the current Sporting Regulations, and IIRC that's what is
has been since taking the flag at the finish line was replaced as the
criterion.
I think the change was in 1959 or thereabouts.
Trawling through Forix, the first "not classified" I see is Bernard
Collomb in the 1961 German GP at 11 of 15 laps. That's consistent with
a 90% rule but there are many examples of classified retirees who would
have been excluded by that threshold. Tony Brooks, for example, was
classified 13th in the 1961 Monaco GP despite retiring after 54 of 100
laps.

AFAICT the first season in which the 90% rule was consistently applied
was 1966. It's possible that a consistent 70% rule applied for some
time before that. The oldest regulations I have available to consult
are for 1970; in the FIA's /Year Book of Automobile Sport/ for that year
(pocket-sized, yellow vinyl cover) the "General Prescriptions" set 90%
as the threshold for circuit races lasting less than 4 hours but 70% for
those longer than 4 hours.
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
When all you have is a hammer every problem becomes a nail.
When all you have is the police every problem becomes a crime.
- Danielle Ponder
Geoff May
2020-09-08 18:53:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Jackson
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Mark Jackson
"45.2 Cars having covered less than 90% of the number of laps covered
by the winner (rounded down to the nearest whole number of laps),
will not be classified."
That's from the current Sporting Regulations, and IIRC that's what is
has been since taking the flag at the finish line was replaced as the
criterion.
I think the change was in 1959 or thereabouts.
Trawling through Forix, the first "not classified" I see is Bernard
Collomb in the 1961 German GP at 11 of 15 laps.  That's consistent with
a 90% rule but there are many examples of classified retirees who would
have been excluded by that threshold.  Tony Brooks, for example, was
classified 13th in the 1961 Monaco GP despite retiring after 54 of 100
laps.
AFAICT the first season in which the 90% rule was consistently applied
was 1966.  It's possible that a consistent 70% rule applied for some
time before that.  The oldest regulations I have available to consult
are for 1970; in the FIA's /Year Book of Automobile Sport/ for that year
(pocket-sized, yellow vinyl cover) the "General Prescriptions" set 90%
as the threshold for circuit races lasting less than 4 hours but 70% for
those longer than 4 hours.
I have the /Grand Prix Data Book/ (4th edition) by David Hayhoe and
David Holland. In this, there is a very brief description of the season
and rules at the beginning of each season.

They say that the 300km or 2 hour limit was introduced in 1958. This
coincided with the WCC and no points for shared drives.

The entry for 1963 says "Drivers now had to cover two thirds distance to
be classified".

The entry for 1966 says that the drivers had to cover 90% race distance
(rounded down) to be classified.

Cheers

Geoff.
Mark Jackson
2020-09-08 19:05:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Geoff May
The entry for 1963 says "Drivers now had to cover two thirds distance to
be classified".
The entry for 1966 says that the drivers had to cover 90% race distance
(rounded down) to be classified.
Thanks!
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
When all you have is a hammer every problem becomes a nail.
When all you have is the police every problem becomes a crime.
- Danielle Ponder
Loading...