You Lucky Bastard for teams?

FMecha · Post by **FMecha** » 29 Jan 2011, 12:45

As we know, there's a You Lucky Bastard award in the hall of shame in the main site. However, it is for drivers. What teams you consider should be given the You Lucky Bastard - Teams award? Discuss.

Mods/eytl: Move if this is in wrong place.

watka · Post by **watka** » 29 Jan 2011, 13:58

Considering that the teams require 6 points to be unrejectified (i.e. 2nd place under most points systems), it's unlikely that a team could truly fluke their way to unrejectification. Only Leyton House would really fall into this group with Capelli's 2nd place at Paul Ricard (which was a race akin to Force India at Spa 2009, or Toro Rosso at Monza 2008). There are a few though that just about got enough points. For example, Ensign were lucky to get Clay Regazzoni in 1977 (he was way above them, he moved from Ferrari and had an offer from Brabham!).

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 29 Jan 2011, 16:37

Yes, really, the only team i have found during my quick research who would come close (aside from Leyton House, as mentioned by Watka) would be British Racing Partnership, who scored 11 points, but always in races with high attrition (exception would be the '63 Dutch GP) but that doesn't really count. Attrition was a standard part of F1 back then.

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 29 Jan 2011, 16:55

watka wrote:Considering that the teams require 6 points to be unrejectified (i.e. 2nd place under most points systems), it's unlikely that a team could truly fluke their way to unrejectification. Only Leyton House would really fall into this group with Capelli's 2nd place at Paul Ricard (which was a race akin to Force India at Spa 2009, or Toro Rosso at Monza 2008). There are a few though that just about got enough points. For example, Ensign were lucky to get Clay Regazzoni in 1977 (he was way above them, he moved from Ferrari and had an offer from Brabham!).

I thought it was 7, because Rial and Onyx both scored 6 points.

Ed24 · Post by **Ed24** » 29 Jan 2011, 16:57

I think ATS could qualify for this.

They got their 6th and 7th points in the 1982 San Marino GP, with Salazar finishing 5th - last, 3 laps down. He had also qualified last, 6.7 seconds off Arnoux.

It's lucky because this was the race when many top teams boycotted the race as part of the FISA-FOCA dispute, which meant there were only 14 starters. Without that, they probably wouldn't have made it into the points and escaped rejectdom.

watka · Post by **watka** » 29 Jan 2011, 18:48

redbulljack14 wrote:
watka wrote:Considering that the teams require 6 points to be unrejectified (i.e. 2nd place under most points systems), it's unlikely that a team could truly fluke their way to unrejectification. Only Leyton House would really fall into this group with Capelli's 2nd place at Paul Ricard (which was a race akin to Force India at Spa 2009, or Toro Rosso at Monza 2008). There are a few though that just about got enough points. For example, Ensign were lucky to get Clay Regazzoni in 1977 (he was way above them, he moved from Ferrari and had an offer from Brabham!).

I thought it was 7, because Rial and Onyx both scored 6 points.

Sorry, you're right.

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 29 Jan 2011, 19:23

redbulljack14 wrote:
watka wrote:Considering that the teams require 6 points to be unrejectified (i.e. 2nd place under most points systems), it's unlikely that a team could truly fluke their way to unrejectification. Only Leyton House would really fall into this group with Capelli's 2nd place at Paul Ricard (which was a race akin to Force India at Spa 2009, or Toro Rosso at Monza 2008). There are a few though that just about got enough points. For example, Ensign were lucky to get Clay Regazzoni in 1977 (he was way above them, he moved from Ferrari and had an offer from Brabham!).

I thought it was 7, because Rial and Onyx both scored 6 points.

I still think both of those teams being rejects is hogwash. They were clearly better than every other reject team profiled on the site.

eagleash · Post by **eagleash** » 29 Jan 2011, 22:15

Somebody has to be the best of the Rejects.....

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 30 Jan 2011, 02:37

eagleash wrote:Somebody has to be the best of the Rejects.....

There is a huge difference between those organizations and the next best ones though.

DOSBoot · Post by **DOSBoot** » 30 Jan 2011, 03:56

Haas Lola is worth mentioning. Having a bad first half, they did manage to score a few points near the end of the 1986 season. A 4th and 5th in Austria, and a 6th in Italy. Just enough not to get them a full profile on this site.

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 30 Jan 2011, 11:34

thehemogoblin wrote:
eagleash wrote:Somebody has to be the best of the Rejects.....

There is a huge difference between those organizations and the next best ones though.

AGS weren't that pathetic to be honest.

Post by **tommykl** » 30 Jan 2011, 11:40

I don't know whether Osella is considered a reject team or not.
Jean-Pierre Jarier took 4th in the boycotted 1982 San Marino GP and Piercarlo Ghinzani took 5th in the high-attrition 1984 Dallas GP. That makes 5 points. However, the grey area lies in the 1984 Italian GP. Jo Gartner had been entered as a 2nd driver for a one-car team, and was therefore uneligible for points. At the Italian GP, Gartner took a 5th place, which therefore didn't count for points. Should the additional 2 points be counted towards Osella's reject or non-reject status?

watka · Post by **watka** » 30 Jan 2011, 14:05

tommykl wrote:I don't know whether Osella is considered a reject team or not.
Jean-Pierre Jarier took 4th in the boycotted 1982 San Marino GP and Piercarlo Ghinzani took 5th in the high-attrition 1984 Dallas GP. That makes 5 points. However, the grey area lies in the 1984 Italian GP. Jo Gartner had been entered as a 2nd driver for a one-car team, and was therefore uneligible for points. At the Italian GP, Gartner took a 5th place, which therefore didn't count for points. Should the additional 2 points be counted towards Osella's reject or non-reject status?

Considering they lasted 11 seasons in F1, I'd think that on a non-numerical basis, most people would call them rejects.

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » 30 Jan 2011, 17:06

Surely Leyton House and March (1987 - 1992) were the same team so they'd easily get out of it based on their 1988 season before you even count anything else!

eagleash · Post by **eagleash** » 30 Jan 2011, 17:31

thehemogoblin wrote:
eagleash wrote:Somebody has to be the best of the Rejects.....

There is a huge difference between those organizations and the next best ones though.

Still rejects though, unless the criteria should be altered....

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 30 Jan 2011, 17:56

James1978 wrote:Surely Leyton House and March (1987 - 1992) were the same team so they'd easily get out of it based on their 1988 season before you even count anything else!

Leyton House got about 8 points I think and March got easily enough points in 1988 as well as a few in 1989 and 1992, not sure about 1987 though.

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 30 Jan 2011, 18:32

tommykl wrote:I don't know whether Osella is considered a reject team or not.
Jean-Pierre Jarier took 4th in the boycotted 1982 San Marino GP and Piercarlo Ghinzani took 5th in the high-attrition 1984 Dallas GP. That makes 5 points. However, the grey area lies in the 1984 Italian GP. Jo Gartner had been entered as a 2nd driver for a one-car team, and was therefore uneligible for points. At the Italian GP, Gartner took a 5th place, which therefore didn't count for points. Should the additional 2 points be counted towards Osella's reject or non-reject status?

The criteria say positions, not points. (As far as I recall.)

Post by **mario** » 30 Jan 2011, 22:50

thehemogoblin wrote:
tommykl wrote:I don't know whether Osella is considered a reject team or not.
Jean-Pierre Jarier took 4th in the boycotted 1982 San Marino GP and Piercarlo Ghinzani took 5th in the high-attrition 1984 Dallas GP. That makes 5 points. However, the grey area lies in the 1984 Italian GP. Jo Gartner had been entered as a 2nd driver for a one-car team, and was therefore uneligible for points. At the Italian GP, Gartner took a 5th place, which therefore didn't count for points. Should the additional 2 points be counted towards Osella's reject or non-reject status?

The criteria say positions, not points. (As far as I recall.)

Are you sure that you are not thinking about the criteria for the drivers? The rules appear to be as follows:

All a former Formula One team needs to have done to get a page on this site is ...

• to have attempted to qualify at at least 2 Grands Prix and
• to have scored 6 points or fewer

How hard can that be? Very!

http://www.f1rejects.com/teams/index.html

And Gartner wasn't the only driver who finished in the top six but was not awarded any points in the 1984 Italian GP - ATS entered a second car for Gerhard Berger at the Italian GP, and he finished in 6th place. Ironically, those two ineligible drivers happened to push Ghinzani's Osella, which could have otherwise scored two points, out of the top six - he was classified in 7th place (he'd run out of fuel three laps from the end, but had completed enough laps to be classified as a finisher).

I suppose, though, that it turns on how you define scoring. I would guess that because the FIA deemed the car ineligible for points, then despite finishing in the top six those points cannot be added to the total that Osella scored.

Pieman · Post by **Pieman** » 01 Feb 2011, 02:05

I think Rial and Onyx should be classified as rejects due to the nutcases that owned and ran them - Gunter Schmid always seemed more than a little odd, while Jean-Pierre van Rossem sought power and publicity and really didn't have a clue what he was doing. Same with Peter Monteverdi.

Aerospeed · Post by **Aerospeed** » 02 Feb 2011, 03:56

How about the "Worst Run F1 team award" for the self-titled award?

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 03 Feb 2011, 19:11

Pieman wrote:I think Rial and Onyx should be classified as rejects due to the nutcases that owned and ran them - Gunter Schmid always seemed more than a little odd, while Jean-Pierre van Rossem sought power and publicity and really didn't have a clue what he was doing. Same with Peter Monteverdi.

They are already classified as rejects :mrgreen:

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 03 Feb 2011, 21:22

Phoenix wrote:
Pieman wrote:I think Rial and Onyx should be classified as rejects due to the nutcases that owned and ran them - Gunter Schmid always seemed more than a little odd, while Jean-Pierre van Rossem sought power and publicity and really didn't have a clue what he was doing. Same with Peter Monteverdi.

They are already classified as rejects

Hey, smartass, look up at my comment where I said they shouldn't be reject teams. Now does his reply make sense?

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 04 Feb 2011, 16:39

thehemogoblin wrote:
Phoenix wrote:
Pieman wrote:I think Rial and Onyx should be classified as rejects due to the nutcases that owned and ran them - Gunter Schmid always seemed more than a little odd, while Jean-Pierre van Rossem sought power and publicity and really didn't have a clue what he was doing. Same with Peter Monteverdi.

They are already classified as rejects

Hey, smartass, look up at my comment where I said they shouldn't be reject teams. Now does his reply make sense?

In all fairness, Mike Earle who originally ran Onyx knew what he was doing, Monteverdi ruined the team.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 04 Feb 2011, 23:30

thehemogoblin wrote:
Phoenix wrote:
Pieman wrote:I think Rial and Onyx should be classified as rejects due to the nutcases that owned and ran them - Gunter Schmid always seemed more than a little odd, while Jean-Pierre van Rossem sought power and publicity and really didn't have a clue what he was doing. Same with Peter Monteverdi.

They are already classified as rejects

Hey, smartass, look up at my comment where I said they shouldn't be reject teams. Now does his reply make sense?

Chill out, tough guy, I just forgot to check the previous comments, that's all, no need to fret. Remember, I know where you live (approximately, at least :lol:

)

golic_2004 · Post by **golic_2004** » 05 Feb 2011, 01:12

Toleman WOULD be a reject team had it not been for one certain late Brazilian being on the team in 1984. That Brazilian makes Toleman included on this forum.

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 05 Feb 2011, 04:55

Phoenix wrote:
thehemogoblin wrote:
Phoenix wrote:They are already classified as rejects

Hey, smartass, look up at my comment where I said they shouldn't be reject teams. Now does his reply make sense?

Chill out, tough guy, I just forgot to check the previous comments, that's all, no need to fret. Remember, I know where you live (approximately, at least )

Don't worry. I'll draw you a map of where I live. I'll be waiting for the guy with the funny English...

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 05 Feb 2011, 05:19

thehemogoblin wrote:
Phoenix wrote:
thehemogoblin wrote:
Hey, smartass, look up at my comment where I said they shouldn't be reject teams. Now does his reply make sense?

Chill out, tough guy, I just forgot to check the previous comments, that's all, no need to fret. Remember, I know where you live (approximately, at least )

Don't worry. I'll draw you a map of where I live. I'll be waiting for the guy with the funny English...

He can't speak English. He can only write it. :lol:

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 05 Feb 2011, 10:44

Wizzie wrote:
thehemogoblin wrote:
Phoenix wrote:Chill out, tough guy, I just forgot to check the previous comments, that's all, no need to fret. Remember, I know where you live (approximately, at least )

Don't worry. I'll draw you a map of where I live. I'll be waiting for the guy with the funny English...

He can't speak English. He can only write it.

If you look closely, you'll notice I never said that he spoke it. I just said that he had it and it's funny.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 05 Feb 2011, 21:06

Wizzie wrote:
He can't speak English. He can only write it.

Hey! I'm taking offense at this point

I can definately speak English (not Engrish) properly. And here's a prime example of funny English, by the way http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqQhQSbe6fw.

James1978 · Post by **James1978** » 06 Feb 2011, 11:45

Didn't Derek Warwick get enough points in 1983 to make Toleman escape rejectdom? Off the top of my head I think he got 9 with 2 4ths, a 5th and 6th?

Pommy Barsteward · Post by **Pommy Barsteward** » 07 Feb 2011, 23:57

I was going to say Larousse, but having looked them up I am shocked to see they actually scored about 20 points. I could only recall Aguri San's efforts in Japan back in 1990.

As for Toleman, Warwick scored 9 points for them in that old dog double wing thing in 1983.

My favourite Montiverdi story is when they fitted the diff the wrong way round on JJ Lehto's car. Truly priceless incompetence. It was like Colin Kolles deciding the technical direction of Midland F1.

(Did you know Kolles real name is C?lin Colesnic and his dad was allegedly Nicolae Ceau?escu's dentist?)

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 08 Feb 2011, 00:29

Go home, Colin Colesnic, and go home, Nicolaie Ceaucescu.

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 08 Feb 2011, 18:42

Pommy Barsteward wrote:(Did you know Kolles real name is Colin Colesnic and his dad was allegedly Nicolae Ceausescu's dentist?)

With the latter being a rumour without any factual basis, this reminded me that Kolles is in fact a dentist. So that's why we don't like him ... he's just getting on our nerves

Dohohohoho!

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 09 Feb 2011, 19:05

I think this explains why the HRT had teething troubles at Bahrain...

watka · Post by **watka** » 09 Feb 2011, 22:34

Phoenix wrote:I think this explains why the HRT had teething troubles at Bahrain...

Oh dear.

FMecha · Post by **FMecha** » 10 Feb 2011, 04:16

golic_2004 wrote:Toleman WOULD be a reject team had it not been for one certain late Brazilian being on the team in 1984. That Brazilian makes Toleman included on this forum.

Ayrton Senna?

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 10 Feb 2011, 22:55

Phoenix wrote:I think this explains why the HRT had teething troubles at Bahrain...

*facepalm*

Yannick · Post by **Yannick** » 15 Feb 2011, 23:03

DOSBoot wrote:Haas Lola is worth mentioning. Having a bad first half, they did manage to score a few points near the end of the 1986 season. A 4th and 5th in Austria, and a 6th in Italy. Just enough not to get them a full profile on this site.

Yes, the Beatrice Haas Force probably is the prime example for being lucky to escape a profile on this site.

What about BMS Scuderia Italia? How many points have they scored over the years?

baddriving50 · Post by **baddriving50** » 16 Feb 2011, 00:31

Yannick wrote:What about BMS Scuderia Italia? How many points have they scored over the years?

Since you asked, they scored 15 over 5 seasons.

1988 - 0 points. Best finish: Caffi 7th at Estoril
1989 - 8 points. Caffi 4th at Monaco, 6th at Canada; de Cesaris 3rd at Canada.
1990 - 0 points. Best finishes: Pirro 10th at Hungary; de Cesaris 10th at Monza
1991 - 5 points. Lehto 3rd at San Marino; Pirro 6th at Monaco
1992 - 2 points. Martini 6th at Spain and San Marino; Lehto 7th at Spa
1993 - 0 points. Best finishes: Badoer 7th at Imola; Alboreto 11th at Interlagos and Donington

watka · Post by **watka** » 16 Feb 2011, 22:22

They most certainly did not score any points with the Lola chassis, that's for sure.