Grand Prix Rejects 2015-16 Off-season Rolling Trivia Quiz!

Post by **tommykl** » 25 Feb 2016, 12:18

Here's my question:

What unusual catch was there to qualifying in Monaco in the 1960s, which was extended to most race in 1970? As an aside, what even more unusual decision did the organisers make in Monaco 1970 when practice was rained out?

AxelP800 · Post by **AxelP800** » 25 Feb 2016, 12:36

tommykl wrote:Here's my question:

What unusual catch was there to qualifying in Monaco in the 1960s, which was extended to most race in 1970? As an aside, what even more unusual decision did the organisers make in Monaco 1970 when practice was rained out?

That's funny, I don't know what the organizers do!

But I'll try:
Adding a pre-pre-qualifying and brooming the entire circuit to dry it

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 25 Feb 2016, 13:22

Was this the seeding thing where x number of drivers, based on past performance, works status and general reputation were guaranteed a starting spot regardless of qualifying time?

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 25 Feb 2016, 13:44

Works drivers and previous winners were quarenteed a place on the grid regardless of the qualifying time? In monaco 1970 it changed and the top 10 in fastest practice laps went to the race while the rest of the grid their own session to set a laptime but couldnt start ahead of the 10 cars that had made the grid even if they set a faster time

Post by **tommykl** » 25 Feb 2016, 13:50

MorbidelliObese wrote:Was this the seeding thing where x number of drivers, based on past performance, works status and general reputation were guaranteed a starting spot regardless of qualifying time?

You got the main thing first, which is that a number of drivers, usually simply works drivers and 10 in the case of Monaco in 1970, were guaranteed starting spots on the grid. The grid was still set by increasing qualifying times, but drivers would often fail to qualify when they'd set quicker times than the man in last place on the grid.

However, you still haven't found the answer to how practice played out in Monaco 1970. MorbidelliObese gets the point, but I'd still like to see someone get it!

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 25 Feb 2016, 14:13

F1 Has seperate sessions for it and its support races, did they combine all of them into one session. So you had F1 cars practicing at the same time as whatever was supporting them

Post by **tommykl** » 25 Feb 2016, 16:03

peteroli34 wrote:F1 Has seperate sessions for it and its support races, did they combine all of them into one session. So you had F1 cars practicing at the same time as whatever was supporting them

While that would have been an awesome sight, that didn't happen. I'll give a slight clarification: what I'm looking for is the idea that the organisers came up with. This idea didn't actually get used, and a more conventional arrangement used.

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 25 Feb 2016, 20:19

Complete guess but did they propose to run on Friday to make up for lost time?

Post by **tommykl** » 25 Feb 2016, 22:18

MorbidelliObese wrote:Complete guess but did they propose to run on Friday to make up for lost time?

Adding extra practice was indeed the eventual solution, in the form of an extra 30-minute session on Saturday evening, as it was most of Saturday that had been rained out. On Thursday, only four drivers had set times in the already rainy weather.

But what was the organisers' original proposition?

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 25 Feb 2016, 23:22

To set the grid by numerical or alphabetical order?

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 26 Feb 2016, 01:22

At the time there was no seperate qualifying session like there is today. A drivers qualiication time would be their fastest lap time regardless of what practice session it was set in. Did they propose a qualifying session like we have know where only the times from that session would count for the grid.

Post by **tommykl** » 26 Feb 2016, 10:45

peteroli34 wrote:At the time there was no seperate qualifying session like there is today. A drivers qualiication time would be their fastest lap time regardless of what practice session it was set in. Did they propose a qualifying session like we have know where only the times from that session would count for the grid.

Given that all they eventually had was 30 minutes and most drivers hadn't yet set a time, that's essentially what ended up happening, but that's not what I'm looking for...

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 26 Feb 2016, 13:23

Grid to be set by random drawing of names?

yannicksamlad · Post by **yannicksamlad** » 26 Feb 2016, 14:00

....mmm....maybe an early revelation of a concept that came to the fore much , much later;
they proposed a reversed grid (Championship order....possibly length of hair?), recognising that this was needed to 'spice up' ( "epicier" in the franglais used in the draft press release) the 'show'..

I've ( clearly) no idea

AxelP800 · Post by **AxelP800** » 26 Feb 2016, 14:35

They decided the grid by playing BlackJack with the 16 drivers

EDIT: They want to held a qualifying race for 23 laps for not locked-in drivers

yannicksamlad · Post by **yannicksamlad** » 26 Feb 2016, 14:52

..or to be based on finishing order of previous race....

Post by **tommykl** » 26 Feb 2016, 21:01

AxelP800 wrote:EDIT: They want to held a qualifying race for 23 laps for not locked-in drivers

...you Googled it, didn't you?

AxelP800 · Post by **AxelP800** » 27 Feb 2016, 07:52

tommykl wrote:
AxelP800 wrote:EDIT: They want to held a qualifying race for 23 laps for not locked-in drivers

...you Googled it, didn't you?

I can't deny it

I don't realise statsf1 actually have the explanation. It's up to Simtek to DSQ me. But anyway I'm reluctant to give the next question to other eligible, I'm busy now

Post by **tommykl** » 27 Feb 2016, 08:53

AxelP800 wrote:
tommykl wrote:
AxelP800 wrote:EDIT: They want to held a qualifying race for 23 laps for not locked-in drivers

...you Googled it, didn't you?

I can't deny it I don't realise statsf1 actually have the explanation. It's up to Simtek to DSQ me. But anyway I'm reluctant to give the next question to other eligible, I'm busy now

Well, either way, I said that the main thing I was looking for was the system of the works drivers being automatically guaranteed a spot, so MorbidelliObese gets the point and the question

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 27 Feb 2016, 13:00

In the first ever race held at Silverstone, who lost their life as a result of an accident during the race?

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 27 Feb 2016, 13:35

Its a trick question noone was killed

During Silverstone's operational history as an RAF airfield some bored personnel decided to run a race using the vehicles on the airfield during this race one of them hit and killed an animal that had wondered onto the runway. When the actual track opened these people claimed that they were the first to race on what was now a proper race track.

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 27 Feb 2016, 20:18

Correct, I was playing a bit fast and loose with the "who" pronoun there, but the key point was that a living breathing organism, albeit a non-human, ceased to be as a result of an accident during that unofficial race. Over to you!

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 28 Feb 2016, 00:32

MorbidelliObese wrote:Correct, I was playing a bit fast and loose with the "who" pronoun there, but the key point was that a living breathing organism, albeit a non-human, ceased to be as a result of an accident during that unofficial race. Over to you!

Dont tell me that my entire awnser is correct? i thought it might have been a animal of some kind just wasnt sure of the race circumstances. But ill take it.

Was what significant about Tony Brooks win at the 1955 Syracuse GP?

Post by **Miguel98** » 28 Feb 2016, 09:39

peteroli34 wrote:
MorbidelliObese wrote:Correct, I was playing a bit fast and loose with the "who" pronoun there, but the key point was that a living breathing organism, albeit a non-human, ceased to be as a result of an accident during that unofficial race. Over to you!

Dont tell me that my entire awnser is correct? i thought it might have been a animal of some kind just wasnt sure of the race circumstances. But ill take it.

Was what significant about Tony Brooks win at the 1955 Syracuse GP?

It was his first grand prix victory?

Post by **tommykl** » 28 Feb 2016, 10:02

peteroli34 wrote:
MorbidelliObese wrote:Correct, I was playing a bit fast and loose with the "who" pronoun there, but the key point was that a living breathing organism, albeit a non-human, ceased to be as a result of an accident during that unofficial race. Over to you!

Dont tell me that my entire awnser is correct? i thought it might have been a animal of some kind just wasnt sure of the race circumstances. But ill take it.

Was what significant about Tony Brooks win at the 1955 Syracuse GP?

Multiple things, really.

First win by a British driver in a British car in a major European Grand Prix after WW2. Afterwards, he returned to the UK to take his final exams to qualify as a dentist.

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 28 Feb 2016, 22:07

While indeed both the above awnsers an correct its not the awnser i was looking for. The awnser is something to do with the car rather then the person behind the wheel

Post by **tommykl** » 28 Feb 2016, 22:13

peteroli34 wrote:While indeed both the above awnsers an correct its not the awnser i was looking for. The awnser is something to do with the car rather then the person behind the wheel

Well, it was a Connaught-Alta, so it might have been the only win for either of them?

Izzyeviel · Post by **Izzyeviel** » 28 Feb 2016, 22:14

peteroli34 wrote:While indeed both the above awnsers an correct its not the awnser i was looking for. The awnser is something to do with the car rather then the person behind the wheel

First GP win for a British constructor for 31 years?

MorbidelliObese · Post by **MorbidelliObese** » 28 Feb 2016, 22:43

peteroli34 wrote:
MorbidelliObese wrote:Correct, I was playing a bit fast and loose with the "who" pronoun there, but the key point was that a living breathing organism, albeit a non-human, ceased to be as a result of an accident during that unofficial race. Over to you!

Dont tell me that my entire awnser is correct? i thought it might have been a animal of some kind just wasnt sure of the race circumstances. But ill take it.

Was what significant about Tony Brooks win at the 1955 Syracuse GP?

I don't believe the race was run during wartime by servicemen based there, but the key point was that a member of of the local wildlife was involved in an unfortunate accident during that first informal race around the airfield, so yeah you get the point

My first guess on your question was that it was the first post war win by a British car in a major European race, but since it's not that, I'll take a wild guess and say the first win for a car running on Avon tyres?

Post by **Miguel98** » 28 Feb 2016, 22:50

First british driver to win driving a car built and designed in his country?

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 29 Feb 2016, 00:05

No one has the awnser im looking for yet

Normal32 · Post by **Normal32** » 29 Feb 2016, 01:43

First english driver of a british car to win a "continental" Grand Prix since 1924?

Post by **mario** » 29 Feb 2016, 07:47

peteroli34 wrote:
MorbidelliObese wrote:Correct, I was playing a bit fast and loose with the "who" pronoun there, but the key point was that a living breathing organism, albeit a non-human, ceased to be as a result of an accident during that unofficial race. Over to you!

Dont tell me that my entire awnser is correct? i thought it might have been a animal of some kind just wasnt sure of the race circumstances. But ill take it.

Was what significant about Tony Brooks win at the 1955 Syracuse GP?

First victory to be taken by a car equipped with disk brakes?

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 29 Feb 2016, 07:55

A few different souces say it was the first victory by an car with disc brakes so over to you

Post by **mario** » 29 Feb 2016, 21:08

peteroli34 wrote:A few different souces say it was the first victory by an car with disc brakes so over to you

I'll admit that my answer was a little speculative, but I'm glad to see it paid off - anyway, onto a new question.

Officially, during the 1974 Argentinian GP, Fittipaldi had to pull into the pits to have a loose spark plug lead reattached in the opening laps of the race, causing him to loose time.

However, according to Fittipaldi, there was a different reason for him pulling into the pits - what was his explanation for what happened?

yannicksamlad · Post by **yannicksamlad** » 29 Feb 2016, 21:31

Can't wait to find out..but in meantime I will guess ; were his seatbelts loose?

novitopoli · Post by **novitopoli** » 29 Feb 2016, 21:44

A wild guess: he accidentally soiled/wet himself.

yannicksamlad · Post by **yannicksamlad** » 29 Feb 2016, 21:55

Or...steering wheel and/ or gear lever was loose?

Peteroli34 · Post by **Peteroli34** » 29 Feb 2016, 22:08

He didnt have a reason to pit it was a misunderstanding

AxelP800 · Post by **AxelP800** » 01 Mar 2016, 09:13

He thought the engine was not set on full power yet