Deadliest F1 track - pub quiz question

[BelperJim]

Which is the Deadliest F1 track?

Choices given in quiz were: A) Indianapolis B) Brands Hatch C) Nurburgring D) Silverstone

I answered Nurburgring as I'm sure lots of people would do. But the answer given was Indianapolis. I am not so sure, but I am hardly a buff on F1 statistics. I did clarify at the time that the question asked was just regarding how many F1 drivers had died at the circuit not spectators marshalls etc.

I know it's a fairly grim question sorry!

[Eric Mc]

The Indianapolis 500 was, from 1950 to 1960, a round of the World Drivers Championship, even though none of the cars running during that period ran in accordance with the technical formulae used for the World Drivers Championship. So, it never was a Formula 1 track (or Formula 2 in 1952/53). Therefore any fatalities incurred in that decade should not count as "Formula 1 fatalities" - although they would count as World Driver Championship fatalities.

Of course, in more recent times, Indianapaolis has been a round of modern Formula 1 but no drivers suffered any fatal accidents in the modern era during F1 races, testing or qualifying there.

So, in essence, the answer is not Indianapolis. I would suggest Monza, Spa or the Nurburgring as being the circuits where the most fatalities have occured in Formula 1 (ignoring the two years - 1952/53 - when the World Drivers Championship was a Formula 2 event).

Edited by Eric Mc on Monday 1st November 10:12

[plg]

Hmm, tricky one.

It's a badly phrased question as it's ambiguous.

"What's the deadliest race track that's use has included F1 races" might be closer.
Or did they mean "the track that has had the highest number of F1 fatalities" or "all fatalities at a track"

Tricky as Nurburgring has had it's toll of deaths, as has Indy. But neither are current F1 tracks and Indy didn't host F1 that regularly - deaths have occurred their as a consequence of racing - not as a consequence of F1.

[plg]

Hmm..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_f...
(then sort by circuit)

Indy 6
Nürburgring 5
Silverstone 3
Monza 3

So they were right I guess - I would never have thought it - all the Indy ones were 53-59 and it was when the race was part of the FIA World Drivers' Championship?

[jonnylayze]

plg said:

Hmm..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Formula_One_f...
(then sort by circuit)

Indy 6
Nürburgring 5
Silverstone 3
Monza 3

So they were right I guess - I would never have thought it - all the Indy ones were 53-59 and it was when the race was part of the FIA World Drivers' Championship?

but these were not Grand Prix races and were not run to F1 regulations.

[plg]

jonnylayze said:

but these were not Grand Prix races and were not run to F1 regulations.

But then you get into a very pedantic debate about what the question should read. As the constructors championship didn't start until 58 we'll discount that.

Points for the FIA Formula One world championship were awarded for competing at Indy - so they were Championship races - contributing to the Drivers title. Could you clarify your point?

Whereas all the other races ran under F2 regs, Indy didn't. But they were F1 races, with F1 points awarded and recognised by the FIA...?

Edited by plg on Monday 1st November 10:46

[BelperJim]

I thought it was ambiguous at the time so clarified and the question should read 'Which track have most F1 drivers died at'.

So based on the facts provided above Nurburgring is correct. As any deaths at Indy were Grand Prix not Formula 1.

[Eric Mc]

plg said:

jonnylayze said:

but these were not Grand Prix races and were not run to F1 regulations.

But then you get into a very pedantic debate about what the question should read. As the constructors championship didn't start until 58 we'll discount that.

Points for the FIA Formula One world championship were awarded for competing at Indy - so they were Championship races - contributing to the Drivers title. Could you clarify your point?

Whereas all the other races ran under F2 regs, Indy didn't. But they were F1 races, with F1 points awarded and recognised by the FIA...?

Edited by plg on Monday 1st November 10:46

Not one race at Indy between 1950 and 1960 were run to F1 regs - so no deaths in that period can be classified as F1 deaths.

The World Driver's Championship has not been exclusively run to F1 regulations anyway - including those two years in the 1950s when the Chmpionship was based on F2 regs.

The4 problem is that many sources of "stats" equate "F1" with "World Drivers Championship". The two are terms are not the same.

Edited by Eric Mc on Monday 1st November 11:09

[plg]

Eric Mc said:

Not one race at Indy between 1950 and 1960 were run to F1 regs - so no deaths in that period can be classified as F1 deaths.

The World Driver's Championship has not been exclusively run to F1 regulations anyway - including those two years in the 1950s when the Championship was based on F2 regs.

The4 problem is that many sources of "stats" equate "F1" with "World Drivers Championship". The two are terms are not the same.

I take your points, but as you say - most will not interpret that way.

Would a better statement be, "The Indy 500 contributed to the World Drivers Championship, conducted under Indy regulations and points were awarded to all drivers in line with those regs"?

However, even the F1 official site doesn't make that caveat or distinction as a reference. eg,
http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1952/
http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1952/609/

[Eric Mc]

The FIA are trying to portray F1 as always being the basis of the World Championship because that is part of the modern marketing mythology of the sport.

It is, of course, incorrect, but why sully marketing spin with the truth - especially when it's messy.

They also tend to omit the 44 years of Grand Prix racing that existed before the World Driver's Championship and they also tend to ignore the scores of non-championship F1 races that were held between 1946 and the early 1980s.
Any statistic of F1 deaths should have included those non-Championship races too.

Edited by Eric Mc on Monday 1st November 11:37

[Derek Smith]

Eric Mc said:

The Indianapolis 500 was, from 1950 to 1960, a round of the World Drivers Championship, even though none of the cars running during that period ran in accordance with the technical formulae used for the World Drivers Championship. So, it never was a Formula 1 track (or Formula 2 in 1952/53). Therefore any fatalities incurred in that decade should not count as "Formula 1 fatalities" - although they would count as World Driver Championship fatalities.

Of course, in more recent times, Indianapaolis has been a round of modern Formula 1 but no drivers suffered any fatal accidents in the modern era during F1 races, testing or qualifying there.

So, in essence, the answer is not Indianapolis. I would suggest Monza, Spa or the Nurburgring as being the circuits where the most fatalities have occured in Formula 1 (ignoring the two years - 1952/53 - when the World Drivers Championship was a Formula 2 event).

A very nice summery of the Indy 500 anomoly.

However, with regard to 1952/53: I had a bit of a criticism of a magazine Christmas quiz (no prizes but two mates drew with me - much more important) where the question as to how my F1 GP wins Ferrari had totalled. The mag suggested an answer that was substantially larger than the correct one as it included the 52/53 years so it was a case of going into battle.

But I lost. It would appear that the 'official' point of view of the FIA (what do they know?) was that it was still F1 between 1952-53. The fact that the regs were the same as F2 is of no consequence.

So just to make it clear: I'm with you but we're both wrong.

Edited by Derek Smith on Monday 1st November 11:39

[Jungles]

I would have thought Nurburgring Nordschleife.

Indy wasn't a championship round in F1 until 2000.

[Eric Mc]

How do they take into account the genuine F1 races that were held in 1952/53 - there were some - although none counted for the World Championship.

They have massaged the facts to fit an "Official History" that is not really true. It has overtones of a Stalinist Regime "memory hole".

[Eric Mc]

Jungles said:

I would have thought Nurburgring Nordschleife.

Indy wasn't a championship round in F1 until 2000.

Agreed - but it was a Championship Round between 1950 and 1960 - although not to F1 regs. That's why the original question was awkwardly put.

[Rude-boy]

BelperJim said:

I thought it was ambiguous at the time so clarified and the question should read 'Which track have most F1 drivers died at'.

So based on the facts provided above Nurburgring is correct. As any deaths at Indy were Grand Prix not Formula 1.

Or if you want to be a real geek then we would have to look at the non F1 races as a number of drivers who started F1 races where also killed at both in other races, such as sports cars...

Typical Pub Quiz question type question though. Experience has taught me that you can argue all you like about a badly worded question or even a flat out wrong answer, but ultimately, other than when asked on here as the OP has, it will only mark you down as a bit of a Billy if you try top correct the error of the quiz master's ways

[Mazda Baiter]

Eric Mc said:

How do they take into account the genuine F1 races that were held in 1952/53 - there were some - although none counted for the World Championship.

They have massaged the facts to fit an "Official History" that is not really true. It has overtones of a Stalinist Regime "memory hole".

[1984] "The next F1 statistics book to come out has 200 less pages than the last one. Double plus good." [/1984]

[BelperJim]

Yeah I didn't fancy standing there in front of a pub full of people trying to argue a point. Just got on with it. Especially when I wasn't entirely clued up on the facts I just new that it wasn't right.

[Eric Mc]

BelperJim said:

Yeah I didn't fancy standing there in front of a pub full of people trying to argue a point. Just got on with it. Especially when I wasn't entirely clued up on the facts I just new that it wasn't right.

Been there myself. No point in making a fool of oneself in these circumstances - but on PH nerdism rules OK

[Northern Munkee]

Shirley if it's a question of F1's most deadly track, and keep the pedantry going, would it not have to include spectator fatalities caused by crashes as well? At f1 events?

Thinking caps on.

[Eric Mc]

Northern Munkee said:

Shirley if it's a question of F1's most deadly track, and keep the pedantry going, would it not have to include spectator fatalities caused by crashes as well? At f1 events?

Thinking caps on.

Monza would win that one I think - Von Trips killed 14 spectators in his crash there in 1961.