F1 Records Unlikely To Be Broken

[D28]

Lewis Hamilton's win yesterday in China, brought him even with Jim Clark and Niki Lauda in wins, just another indication how the record book is tilting toward current and much younger drivers. I mentioned in the Senna post above how Sebastian Vettel's youngest point scoring record has already fallen to Daniil Kvyat.

I thought it might be interesting to list records extremely unlikely to be broken:

Oldest win Luigi Fagioli 53 (French GP 1951 sh w Fangio)
Oldest point scorer Philippe Etancelin 56 ( 5th Italian GP 1950)
Oldest starter Louis Chiron 56 (Monaco 1955 finished 6th just out of points)

Driver/Constructor All Jack Brabham's records, wins, poles, fl, championships

John Surtees Titles and records on 2 and 4 wheels

Graham Hill's triple including Drivers Championship, Le Mans win, Indy 500 win.(only Jacques Villeneuve is still racing but lost his chance with Peugeot at Le Mans)

Anyone have further suggestions?

[steveaki13]

I agree with those. None are likely to be broken.

Apart from maybe the Indy/F1/LeMan I suppose. That could still happen.

[D28]

I agree with those. None are likely to be broken.

Apart from maybe the Indy/F1/LeMan I suppose. That could still happen.

Indy racing is no longer a feeder series for F1 or unlikely to be so again. So the driver would have to do the F1 part first, then do Le Mans and Indy. That is a very tall order . In Hill's day it was possible to combine Indy with a F1 season as he, Clark, Brabham and several others did, now with specialization that is out. Mario Andretti also had a good shot but the Le Mans win eluded him. Its a good bet to remain an unique feat.

[pcal226]

I agree most of those won't be broken. I think the Indy/F1/Le Mans one is still pretty doable though. Juan Pablo Montoya won the 500 and finished 3rd in the F1 Championship twice in a row (he did however win at Monaco and Monaco, Indy and Le Mans are often considered to be the true definition of the "Triple Crown"). He never raced at Le Mans but he has won the very prestigious 24 Hours of Daytona. So basically, he hasn't done it and probably won't, but I think he's shown that it is at least doable in the modern era. A whole bunch of former F1 guys race at Le Mans every year and every once in a while you get an IndyCar guy like JPM or Sebastien Bourdais moving over to F1. All it takes is one.

As for the Jack Brabham one, I find it EXTREMELY unlikely, but I don't think its completely out of the realm of possibility. I was thinking that maybe a driver, later in his career, could buy the team (or at least a controlling stake in the team) he was driving for, and then win. Brawn bought Honda and won, so what would stop a driver from doing the same?

[inimitablestoo]

The Indy/F1/Le Mans triple could definitely be done in that order, if a driver shows well in IndyCar before moving to F1 (Le Mans is almost certainly going to be the last one to be completed). There haven't been many drivers coming from Indy to F1 lately (struggling to think of the last; probably Bourdais, taking the wider world of Champ Car into account) but with Haas' team due soon that could easily change.

If anything, the major barrier to the triple at the moment is the fact that a number of veteran drivers have won Indy in the last few years, who are long past their F1 prime.

As for the oldest driver records, it's no surprise they were all set in the 1950s, as an entire generation was effectively lost, or at least severely disrupted, by World War II - hence many of the drivers in the early World Championship Grands Prix were the now ageing pre-war stars. Not sure we'd want to see those records broken if it requires similar circumstances...

[journeyman racer]

Keke Rosberg and Mike Hawthorn's least amount of race wins to win a title.

[D28]

I agree most of those won't be broken. I think the Indy/F1/Le Mans one is still pretty doable though. Juan Pablo Montoya won the 500 and finished 3rd in the F1 Championship twice in a row (he did however win at Monaco and Monaco, Indy and Le Mans are often considered to be the true definition of the "Triple Crown"). He never raced at Le Mans but he has won the very prestigious 24 Hours of Daytona. So basically, he hasn't done it and probably won't, but I think he's shown that it is at least doable in the modern era. A whole bunch of former F1 guys race at Le Mans every year and every once in a while you get an IndyCar guy like JPM or Sebastien Bourdais moving over to F1. All it takes is one.


As for the Jack Brabham one, I find it EXTREMELY unlikely, but I don't think its completely out of the realm of possibility. I was thinking that maybe a driver, later in his career, could buy the team (or at least a controlling stake in the team) he was driving for, and then win. Brawn bought Honda and won, so what would stop a driver from doing the same?

Sorry I should have said Driver/Constructor which I have now changed. I mean in the spirit of McLaren (when Bruce was alive) Gurney, Surtees and Graham Hill. Driving a car you had built from a team you assembled.

As for the GH triple, 7 guys have managed 2 of the 3, but it has been 42 years since Hill completed it at Le Mans. As for Monaco/Le Mans/Indy triple, that again would be Graham Hill quite the versatile driver.

[steveaki13]

Keke Rosberg and Mike Hawthorn's least amount of race wins to win a title.

Good one.

I cant see anyone only winning 1 race in a championship winning season.

[anfield5]

Good one.

I cant see anyone only winning 1 race in a championship winning season.

Even if they do they will only equal the record, it is extremely unlikely to break it by winning the championship without winning a single race

[anfield5]

Serenessima's record of scoring points in every gp a car powered by one of their engines started. These engines were used briefly by McLaren at the very start of McLaren's journey into F1. They entered in 3 races as McLaren/Serenssima, qualified for 1 and Bruce McLaren finished 6th in the race (GB 1966).

[journeyman racer]

If the time comes where someone wins a championship with one or zero wins, I wonder how it'll be received? I suppose it may depend on what car/team he drives for. If Rosberg won it this year for instance, I don't think he'd get as much applause/credibility for it, as a champ would in most cases. But when we look at Raikkonnen at Lotus the last couple of years, I think he would've got tremendous praise.

Even Kubica too in 08. I don't think he would've been diminished had he won.


Good one.

I cant see anyone only winning 1 race in a championship winning season.Thanks

[D28]

Good one.

I cant see anyone only winning 1 race in a championship winning season.

The current point system rewards 2nd proportionally similarly to 1958 and 82, but 58 had points for FL.
Conceivably it could happen again, with a year similar to 1982. However the real kicker is the double points on tap for the last race. Someone could keep in play with a run of podiums and win the title on the last race. Wonder how that would go down.

[inimitablestoo]

That's another one that looked difficult to beat - 1982's 11 winners. Then we had eight winners at the start of 2012 and maybe that looked entirely beatable... :D Especially with so many races now.

[journeyman racer]

What about John Watson's deepest starting spot to win a race? 22nd if you didn't know.

[pcal226]

What about John Watson's deepest starting spot to win a race? 22nd if you didn't know.

I think that will be done. Vettel came from 23rd to 3rd at Abu Dhabi in 2012. Imagine if one of the Mercs got a grid penalty or something and had to start at the back this year. The way they've been dominating one of them could do it. I think what makes Watson's extra difficult is that he did it on a street circuit at Long Beach. That can't be easy.

[inimitablestoo]

Well it can only be equalled this year! Unless they start adding more cars for some reason. But yes, it could be done - see Raikkonen's last-to-first drive at Suzuka in 2005 (he started somewhere near the back but, since there were only 20 cars that season, the record wasn't under any threat).

[jens]

In 2003 Räikkönen was only 2 points shy of a WDC with a single win. I do think a championship in such circumstances is a possibility though the likeliness is pretty small.

In Hawthorn's case there were much fewer races in a season, so to put it into perspective with current almost 20 races, his wins have to be multiplied by 2 or 2.5.

Rosberg is a good case though and as mentioned, 1982 has another record - 11 winners. It was a very unique and messy season and to be honest, unlikely to be repeated. In some seasons we have got close to it (like 2008 or 2012), but I don't think current level and structure of competition enables us to see 5-7 almost evenly matched teams, who keep taking wins and points off each other all season. But that would be the only possibility, how we could possibly see a new record for the closeness of a season.

[journeyman racer]

I think that will be done. The more I think about it, with safety car situations and variable conditions, it could be knocked off.


I think what makes Watson's extra difficult is that he did it on a street circuit at Long Beach. That can't be easy.There's a wider, variable gap in performance between qualifying and racing, in those days. I've watched the 83 USGP on YT. It seemed quite processional. Watson was up the front by 1/3 distance. Had the lead by 2/3, and just cruised to an easy win. As if he started on the front row.


Well it can only be equalled this year! Maybe. But I think, regardless of the size of the field, starting from pit lane would top it?.


In 2003 Räikkönen was only 2 points shy of a WDC with a single win. Raikkonnen would've had to have won the last race to make it 2 wins?

[journeyman racer]

Alright, I'll take this low amount of winning even further. Phil Hill has the record for the least amount of wins in a career for a champion, with 3. Is anyone going to "beat" that? Nicky Hayden has, embarrassingly imo, equalled that in motogp.




In Hawthorn's case there were much fewer races in a season, so to put it into perspective with current almost 20 races, his wins have to be multiplied by 2 or 2.5.Yep, that's a good point.

How about Stirling Moss's record for most wins without a title? It'd be pretty hard, even with the increasing amount of races. Coulthard couldn't break it, and he was in a prime position to do it. Going by jens's logic, Moss's record would be the equivalent of 40+ wins without knocking off a title!

edit: Come to think of it. I can now recall many races (at Williams and early McLaren years) was denied by mechanical, circumstantial, or other non-driving errors. If you gave him every race where he was in a strong, leading position, he'd easily have had 20+ wins!

[Alfa Fan]

Any of the "proper" lap records by the looks of it.

[D28]

journeyman racer:

"Alright, I'll take this low amount of winning even further. Phil Hill has the record for the least amount of wins in a career for a champion, with 3. Is anyone going to "beat" that? Nicky Hayden has, embarrassingly imo, equalled that in motogp".

Mlke Hawthorn also has 3 career wins total. In fairness to both there were far fewer races then; both are Le Mans winners Hill 3 times, along many other sports car classics.

How about Hill's record of Le Mans Sebring wins plus Belgian and Italian GPs all in one year (1961)

[D-Type]

In today's era of specialisation, we simply won't see [top] drivers racing in multiple categories such as F1, sports cars and touring cars.

Other notable 'hat tricks' are AJ Foyt's Indianapolis, Le Mans and Daytona 500, Mario Andretti's Indianapolis, Daytona 500 and F1 Championship, or Jacky Ickx's Le Mans, Bathurst, Paris-Dakar and German (Nurburgring) GP foursome.

[journeyman racer]

I forgot about Hawthorn's 3 wins. I think it must've slipped my mind because his were spread out. Whereas PHill had 1 win in 60, then 2 in 61. His record on 61 you've nominated is unlikely to be repeated, because the motorsport "world" doesn't lend itself to even attempt it. I'm not knocking those drivers. But I'm saying it'd be hard to "better" it. A title without a win? (I could see it happening in WRC though). A career with a title, but only 2 wins? I reckon it'd be easier to get the most wins in a season.

I've thought of another one, particularly in the context of the increased amount of races, the last 5+ years. Prost and Raikkonnen's record of most wins and not winning the title? (7 in 84 and 88 for Prost. Raikkonnen in 05).

[Rollo]

In the 1961 Belgian Grand Prix, the Ferraris finished 1-2-3-4. I don't suppose that that's likely again in a hurry.

[D-Type]

For some reason, nobody comes close to Fangio's wins to starts ratio. The only reason I can think of is that Fangio was an experienced driver when he started in F1 with a top team.

[D28]

For some reason, nobody comes close to Fangio's wins to starts ratio. The only reason I can think of is that Fangio was an experienced driver when he started in F1 with a top team.

That is a likely explanation; Ascari is 2nd and for the same reasons. Interestingly Michael Schumacher was very close to Ascari when he retired first time 36.5% compared to 39.4; but this of course decreased with his 58 extra races. I doubt if Schumacher cared too much this stat, he just enjoyed racing.

[D28]

A dubious achievement perhaps, Arrows F1 team raced for 24 years, 368 races without a win. Sometimes competitive, they scored 5 seconds and led some races, but victory always eluded them. I can't see anyone lasting that long again, given the financial considerations.

[journeyman racer]

Kubica's win counts for Sauber, does it?

[D28]

Kubica's win counts for Sauber, does it?

It's a bit complicated; the team went from Sauber to BMW Sauber and back to Sauber in 2010.
Officially Robert Kubica won the 2008 Canadian GP for BMW Sauber.
The team in both guises has been around since 1993, still a bit less than Arrows.

[rjbetty]

I don´t know if this has been mentioned,

But seeing as this is an issue this week:

Hopefully we should never see the record for most driver fatalities in a season broken. I wonder what is the highest; I remember reading the statistic that first motivated Jackie Stewart to begin his campaign for safety; when he sat down and counted how many drivers had lost their lives. I think it was 32 in something like less than 4 years.

[inimitablestoo]

Amen to that; conversely, the 20 years since Senna died is the longest spell without a fatality (in the cockpit at least; sadly we have lost three trackside workers in that period). That in itself seemed to contribute to yesterday being very much a celebration rather than just a memorial.

[D-Type]

Without a fatality in Formula 1 certainly. But, sadly this does not apply to other forms of racing, testing or, as you say, to trackside workers.

[journeyman racer]

I think that one is pretty safe.

[anfield5]

Amen to that; conversely, the 20 years since Senna died is the longest spell without a fatality (in the cockpit at least; sadly we have lost three trackside workers in that period). That in itself seemed to contribute to yesterday being very much a celebration rather than just a memorial.


What about Maria deVillota. Her accident was in a F1 car, albeit at a private test. Her subsequent death from a cardiac arrest, was caused by the accident

[D28]

What about Maria deVillota. Her accident was in a F1 car, albeit at a private test. Her subsequent death from a cardiac arrest, was caused by the accident

Yes sadly it was, This was covered in the 20 years since Senna thread below

[inimitablestoo]

It's a tricky one, because I don't believe it's been formally established* that her death was caused by the accident - although it seems very likely, and it is her family's belief. While not wishing to overlook Maria, it has nevertheless been 20 years since a death of an F1 driver at a Grand Prix itself. (As such, Ratzenberger's death was the first at a GP meeting in 12 years, disregarding de Angelis' at the Paul Ricard in 1986)

*If anyone can correct me on this, please feel free

[D-Type]

Folks,
Please remember this is about people's lives not simply a mere statistic.

[inimitablestoo]

Indeed; I was hoping to keep it on the respectful side of such matters. Let's just say the safety levels are considerably better today than at any previous time and leave it there.

[anfield5]

Indeed; I was hoping to keep it on the respectful side of such matters. Let's just say the safety levels are considerably better today than at any previous time and leave it there.

Absolutely. As far as motorsports and other dangerous sports go F1 has an incredible record for safety and long may this continue

[inimitablestoo]

There is one stat that won't be broken, pending another change in the rules - smallest or largest numbers to have won a Grand Prix. Since 0 isn't one of the numbers the drivers can choose from, that can't even be equalled, while for reasons known only to them the German Grand Prix organisers insisted that entries for the 1952 race were given three-figure numbers. Thus Alberto Ascari's 101 - despite being the smallest number in the field - will remain the largest ever to have won a race.

But not the largest to have been fielded, of course, since that remains Lella Lombardi's #208 Brabham (a tie-up with Radio Luxembourg and its 208 MW frequency, terms which may have to be explained to younger readers :D )

[D28]

There is one stat that won't be broken, pending another change in the rules - smallest or largest numbers to have won a Grand Prix. Since 0 isn't one of the numbers the drivers can choose from, that can't even be equalled, while for reasons known only to them the German Grand Prix organisers insisted that entries for the 1952 race were given three-figure numbers. Thus Alberto Ascari's 101 - despite being the smallest number in the field - will remain the largest ever to have won a race.

But not the largest to have been fielded, of course, since that remains Lella Lombardi's #208 Brabham (a tie-up with Radio Luxembourg and its 208 MW frequency, terms which may have to be explained to younger readers :D )

Damon Hill used the 0 number in 1993-94 as neither Prost nor Senna wanted it. Williams team were the reigning WC but the driver had retired. Did F1 make a ruling that 0 would never be used again? If so what is their solution?

[D-Type]

Being pedantic, the 1952 German GP was not a F1 race as the Championship GPs that year were run for F2 cars.

[inimitablestoo]

Did F1 make a ruling that 0 would never be used again? If so what is their solution?

When the system changed this year to "think of a number" the range given was 1 to 99. Until then, had the World Champion not taken part, presumably the number 0 would have been used again - although this was a Max-era rule and it may have had something to do with a spat with Williams, so maybe not ;)

[D28]

When the system changed this year to "think of a number" the range given was 1 to 99. Until then, had the World Champion not taken part, presumably the number 0 would have been used again - although this was a Max-era rule and it may have had something to do with a spat with Williams, so maybe not ;)

It wasn't just a spat, the number 1 is a symbolic nod to the current World Champion; if he retires after winning, it is inappropriate to assign another to use it. Customarily the WC drivers team received numbers 1 and 2 next season, hence the rule to use 0 and 2. With Williams it happened 2 years in a row with Mansell and Prost retiring (temporarily for Mansell) It is quite likely to come up again, numbers 2 and 3 could be used, but I'm wondering does F1 have a solid plan.

[inimitablestoo]

I would point out that the 1974 F1 season did see the number 1 awarded to the reigning constructors' champion (Lotus) rather than driver (Jackie Stewart having retired). So there was a precedent there which Max decided not to follow...

[D28]

I would point out that the 1974 F1 season did see the number 1 awarded to the reigning constructors' champion (Lotus) rather than driver (Jackie Stewart having retired). So there was a precedent there which Max decided not to follow...
I see what you mean, Ronnie Peterson actually wearing number 1 in 1974. However, 1973 was one of the odd seasons where the driver and constructors titles were split to different teams. Williams won both titles in 92 and 93, so it would have been hard to award number 1 to another team. Again the symbolic importance of number 1 comes up.
I guess giving Williams numbers 2 and 3 would have been a solution.

[Ex-Jagboy]

There was a tragic coincidence at Silverstone in 1958, concerning the number 1, when at the Daily Express meeting in May, Archie Scott Brown drove his Lister Jag car No 1 into second place in the unlimited sports car race, only to lose his life in the very next race at Spa the following weekend, and later in July, Peter Collins won the British GP in his Ferrari ,car No 1, only to lose his life in his next race at Nurburgring a fortnight later,

[zako85]

Most Monaco GP wins: Senna (six).

Sadly, this is Senna's only record of significance that still stands. Schumacher came close to tying, but couldn't get the sixth win.

[D28]

Most Monaco GP wins: Senna (six).

Sadly, this is Senna's only record of significance that still stands. Schumacher came close to tying, but couldn't get the sixth win.

A fair assessment. Senna'a impressive record of poles was finally surpassed by Schumacher 68 to 65; he does retain some records for consecutive poles.
The 6 Monaco wins include 5 in a row, a record for consecutive wins. Virtually all F1 records favour the current or recent field of drivers, Schumacher had 90% more races than Senna for example, at 308 he is second only to Barricello.

[BDunnell]

Alright, I'll take this low amount of winning even further. Phil Hill has the record for the least amount of wins in a career for a champion, with 3. Is anyone going to "beat" that?

When viewed against the much smaller number of championship GPs held when Hill won the title, the statistic looks much less unimpressive.

Mention of Hill reminds me of another fact (if not a 'record' in any sense) that one hopes will never be repeated: that whenever a driver from the US has won the title, their team-mate has died in, or as a result of, an accident in the race in which the title was achieved.

[inimitablestoo]

Both times at Monza too, by even eerier coincidence.

It's possible somebody could match the 3 career wins at least - if they only had one good season but it just happened to be the one where they made the most of it and won the title, but I reckon you'd need at least three in that one season to do it. Short of another 1982, of course, when a variety of unlikely circumstances occurred in the same season.

[BDunnell]

Well, talking of Monza (and straying even further from the subject of 'records', but never mind), another interesting feat concerns the 1967 Italian GP and its winning car. The Honda RA300 was in its first race; it won it, and only at the end of the very last lap did it lead across the line. It was never victorious again.

[D-Type]

The Honda RA300 was built by Lola so it holds another record as the first win for a car built in one country for a company in another. In saying this I am taking Brabham and AAR Eagle as British as that's where the teams were based.

[marathonboats]

I like this quote "These engines were used briefly by McLaren at the very start of McLaren's journey into F1."