Review of Maurice Hamilton's new book 'Formula One: The Champions'

Formula 1 world champions are indeed an exclusive bunch. Only 33 have reached the status from over 600 to compete in F1 across 70 years, not to mention the innumerable additional group who have not even made it that far. Few therefore would dispute long-serving F1 correspondent Maurice Hamilton describing F1's title as "the ultimate accolade in motorsport".

And Hamilton's latest book, Formula One: The Champions, is a fitting tribute to them. Released tomorrow on March 3 and published by White Lion, it is a stylishly-presented and sizeable 240-page hardback made up of written and photographic portrayals of every one of those 33, from Giuseppe Farina through to Nico Rosberg, stopping off at legends such as Juan Manuel Fangio and Michael Schumacher, among several others, along the way.

Hamilton for this has allied his words with the photography of Bernard Cahier and his son Paul-Henri of The Cahier Archive photographic collection, reuniting the same trio that brought us 2016's The Pursuit of Speed title.

The task of portraying all the title winners going back to 1950, who as Hamilton notes at the outset are a diverse band in an ever-changing category, is a sizeable one. Yet these authors are well-placed to take it on, with Hamilton offering 40 years on the F1 front line as well as a keen eye for its history, and The Cahier Archive stretching back to the F1's beginnings and, uniquely, remaining throughout that time in its original hands.

F1 retro grand prix articles for Motor Sport Magazine's website

I'm very pleased to have provided for Motor Sport Magazine this year retro grand prix reviews for forthcoming F1 grands prix. For these I've picked a noteworthy grand prix of the past in the week before each F1 race.

By Janice Waltzer from Owasso, USA - Monte Carlo
harbor, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.
org/w/index.php?curid=4127081

And the latest of these has just landed, where I selected from the treasure trove of the Monaco Grand Prix, the first of which was a mere 90 years ago...

I've picked the one that provided likely its most thrilling finish of all, in 1970. It was a battle of the old hand Jack Brabham vs young gun Jochen Rindt. The old hand led for much of the way, but in the final minutes the young gun chased him down at a scarcely plausible rate. And at the final turn, the old hand, highly atypically, cracked...

You can have a read of the tale in full here: https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/history/f1/monaco-90-its-most-thrilling-finish

And, in case you fancy flicking back through my previous grand prix retro reviews from this season so far, here are the links:

Australian Grand Prix - 1997; The Australian Grand Prix that didn't go to form
Bahrain Grand Prix - 2014; The race that saved F1 as we know it
Chinese Grand Prix - 2006; Michael Schumacher's final Formula 1 win
Azerbaijan Grand Prix - 2017; Hamilton and Vettel clash; Ricciardo conquers

Sadly I didn't do the Spanish Grand Prix article!

Why the mystery of F1's greatest ever hasn't been answered - not even by science

So, that's that settled then. The sport's biggest and most ubiquitous bone of contention. Done. That one of who is the best driver ever, over and above the equipment they had access to. That one we thought near unsolvable given everything. All by a team of academics from the Universities of Sheffield and Bristol, and using statistical analysis.

According to the statistical study,
Juan Manuel Fangio's 
F1's best of all time
By Unknown - Museo Juan Manuel
 Fangio, reimpreso en "La fotografía
en la historia argentina", Tomo I,
Clarín, ISBN 950-782-643-2,
Public Domain, https://commons.
wikimedia.org/w/index.php?
curid=3934090

And when its news release announcing this was published just over a week ago it caused quite the stir. All seemed rather monumental indeed. Underlining the view even the (not necessarily always science-loving) Daily Mail proclaimed in its headline that what we had revealed before us was "the best Formula One driver of all time according to SCIENCE". Yes it actually capitalised the word. It was as if we were getting something irrefutable.

The first few on the study's all-time driver ranking - Juan Manuel Fangio top, followed by Alain Prost, Fernando Alonso, Jim Clark and Jackie Stewart - are hardly hideous. Michael Schumacher appeared low in ninth but when he was considered from before his first retirement in 2006 only he shot up to third, which again looked fair enough (as an aside, a curiosity about the reporting of this study is that there is more than one list floating about, in addition to the pre/post Schumi lists the one presented in the academic paper has Alonso sixth rather than his widely-reported placing of third, and it's not explained by the Schumi shift apparently as the Daily Mail article at least shows Alonso fourth when Schumi from 2006 and before only is considered).

But then it gets patchy. Stirling Moss is but 35th in the ranking (some 12 places behind Marc Surer) while the likes of Niki Lauda, Nigel Mansell, Alberto Ascari, Jochen Rindt and Gilles Villeneuve are simply nowhere to be seen in the top 50. It all gets, um, a little more interesting too as Christian Fittipaldi is in the elevated position of 12th best driver ever while the luminary that is Louis Rosier is placed 19th. And unless this pair were against just about all assessments in fact secret F1 geniuses never given their break in a good car - in addition to the drivers listed above being actually vastly over-rated, again contrary most assessments - it would seem the study has some shortcomings.

Non-championship F1 races - time to bring them back?

Recently for Grand Prix Times I wrote an article looking at the 1965 year of the late and very great Jim Clark (you can have a read of it here). Why that year in particular? Well, partly it was because we're now exactly 50 years on from it, but especially because without hyperbole it was likely the most astonishing calendar year of motorsport success undertaken by anyone ever.

To the modern eye his achievements read like something from fantasy - in addition to winning the F1 title in record time he also within those 12 months bagged the Indianapolis 500, two F2 championships as well as took a couple of race victories each in sports cars and in saloons.

Jim Clark's 1965 included as many as
12 non-championship F1 races.
"ClarkJim1965mitMechaniker".
Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0 de via
Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.
wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ClarkJim1965mit
Mechaniker.jpg#mediaviewer/
File:ClarkJim1965mitMechaniker.jpg

Of course your initial response to hearing this might be to point out that back then the F1 championship calendar was much more sparse, which left far greater time for other things, and that is true. In 1965 the offical itinerary consisted of ten races, around half of what we have in the modern era. But factor in that on the other hand travel and logistics is much easier now than it was then. More pointedly factor in too that in addition to his championship schedule Clark - as many of his contemporaries did and in every year - took part in a number of non-championship F1 races.

You may be wondering at this point what the heck I'm on about - but time was that the F1 annual schedule on top of the points-paying stuff had a handful, and sometimes a big handful, of Grands Prix that didn't count towards the title scoring. The non-championship races that I mentioned.

Britain was especially well-served by them, with the International Trophy at Silverstone taking place as an F1 event almost every year between 1949 and 1978, the Race of Champions (not to be confused with its current namesake) at Brands Hatch which was first held in 1965 and last happened in 1983, and the Oulton Park Gold Cup which existed as an F1 race on and off from 1954 to 1972. Therefore British fans of a certain vintage could have seen F1 cars racing on three separate occasions - and not one of them the British Grand Prix - before even the spring was out.

1 - Film Review: Not just another F1 film

Yet another F1 film release? Right in the wheel tracks of the blockbuster successes of Senna and Rush, a documentary and a theatrical film respectively? Just like them based on the sport's past? What on earth can it offer over and above these? Well, in the case of 1, rather a lot as it turns out.

Even above and beyond the challenges outlined in the opening paragraph, the film-makers of 1 - a new film about the history of F1 - hardly could have asked for a more daunting set of objectives. Max Mosley told the film's director Paul Crowder at the project's outset that if he could 'capture why he's devoted 40 years of his life to F1 then he'll have succeeded'. In essence, the makers felt that their mission was to capture the essence of this the pinnacle of motor sport. Its glamour, its pace, its danger, and everything else besides. No mean feat.

Despite what it says on the tin though 1 isn't really a history of F1. Not exactly anyway. But nevertheless it can be said to have gone a long way to meeting its haughty mission statement.

Martin Brundle starts
 and ends the story
Credit: greenmashup / CC

The film starts not in the beginning, but on the starting grid of the 1996 Australian Grand Prix. Perhaps not the most obvious choice, but its reasoning soon becomes clear. The animated buzz of the assembled crowd, the rich colours resultant of the full-beam Melbourne sunshine, as well as the mass of team members and assorted hangers on crawling over the assembled cars - all in eager anticipation of the race, and season, start - are familiar. As is the gradual, aching build up of tension, eventually to be released as the cars are unleashed like feral beasts when the red light goes out.

But then...not long after we had a spectacular accident: Martin Brundle got his braking wrong and cartwheeled over several cars, his machine disintegrating as it did so. The car, by now a heap of wreckage, came to rest upside down in a gravel bed, and the seconds of time wherein there is no movement from the cockpit seem to stretch on like hours. All of the harrowing accidents, some fatal, that took place within the previous 24 months suddenly seem scarily redolent. Yet, before you know it Brundle emerges, in his own words 'without a bruise on his body' and then can be seen - accompanied by the roar of the crowd - hot-footing it down the pit lane to find Sid Watkins in order to get the OK to take the restart.

Österreichring - a matter of perspective

There is a joke that psychologists like to tell. Two psychologists, who are old friends, happen upon each other in the street. Psychologist one asks psychologist two: 'How's your wife?' Psychologist two replies: 'Compared to what?'

I won't give up the day job.

But there is a reason that psychologists like to tell this joke. In psychology, as in everything, all is a matter of perspective, a matter of relativity. Nothing can be judged in a vacuum; everything must be judged in comparison with what is around it.

And so it is with the A1-Ring (or the Red Bull Ring to give its latest moniker), which the Red Bull company announced recently is to return to the F1 calendar next year. In itself, the A1/Red Bull Ring is a perfectly acceptable motor racing venue of the modern sort. It's set in fine, scenic surroundings; there is plenty of welcome (and perhaps increasingly rare) use of gradient. The Austrian Grands Prix it hosted between 1997 and 2003 tended to give us diverting races, with rather a lot of overtaking, in an age which usually didn't give us much of either. And set as it is in central Europe it is within relatively easy reach of large numbers of much of the sport's latent following - a following that's had the sport turn its back on it to a rather absurd extent in recent times, in preference for venues wherein local interest can be meagre. To be a little more brutal however, while the A1-Ring wasn't a grand feast of a track perhaps if you're used to a diet of workhouse gruel something a bit more appetising than that will always be welcome.

The A1/Red Bull Ring is back by the looks of things,
but I'm not too excited

And judging by the views of F1 fans that I've spoken to as well as those discerned from reading internet comments the track's return is a welcome one, I'd imagine for the reasons outlined above. But I've never been at ease with the A1-Ring entirely. I'd much rather, if it had to exist, that they'd built it somewhere else. Because when it was created it trampled on something really rather wonderful, about as grand a feast as the sport has offered in its long history. This was a track known as the Österreichring, which itself had been an F1 stop-off between 1970 and 1987.

Sadly, the creation of the new-fangled Austrian circuit meant the magnificent Österreichring was consigned to the history books and film reels forever. And, rather like the new Nurburgring and very much unlike the new Spa, the new layout - mainly straights separated by second and third gear corners - didn't begin to capture the spirit of the old (though at least they didn't commit the same act of heresy as the Nurburgring and give the Ersatz version the same blimming name).

Monaco Preview: Spin of the roulette wheel

What is it with Monaco? Really, there are so many reasons to dislike Grands Prix there. It is an anachronism: the modern F1 car outgrew the torturous course not so much years but decades ago (Nelson Piquet once likened driving there to riding a motor cycle in your front room) while overtaking is a near impossibility. It would for various reasons all be laughed out of town if proposed from scratch today. Clive James once noted dryly that 'it is said these days with increasing frequency that Monaco makes a nice change from Grand Prix racing'.

Furthermore, the wealth on show is ostentatious, and the poseur occupants of the yachts in the harbour in all probability have little interest in the sport in the rest of the year. On the face of it, there seems very little to look forward to about F1's annual visit to the principality.

There's nothing quite like Monaco
Credit: Niels Mickers / CC

But we do look forward to it. And to the point that it is (genuinely) hard to imagine F1 without it. Monaco has an intangible quality that ensures it is this sport's Blue Riband event, the sort that just about every sport, and not just motor sport, has. Just as tennis has Wimbledon, golf has the Masters, and Indycars has the Indianapolis 500 (and I could go on), F1 has Monaco, the event most commonly associated with the activity. And American racing did its best to demonstrate the importance of this sort of thing after Champ Cars split from the Indianapolis 500 in 1996 and took most of the teams and drivers with it; for all the virtues of the championship it never managed to overcome it not having the big draw and had eventually to return somewhat with its tail between its legs.

Looking back: Jochen Rindt's greatest day

There are lots of reasons to dislike the Monaco Grand Prix. The wealth on show is ostentatious. The poseur occupants of the yachts in the harbour in all probability have little interest in the sport in the rest of the year. And for large part of the race's history the contemporary F1 car had long since outgrown the circuit. Nelson Piquet once likened driving there to trying to ride a motor cycle in your front room.

But even with all this, for many F1 fans there's nothing quite like the Monaco Grand Prix. Monaco has an intangible quality, what you would call 'magic'. Just watching racing cars around Monaco is an enchanting experience. The backdrop is one of the very most iconic of any sporting event, let alone in motorsport. Wherever you turn in Monaco when the racing is on you invariably see something eye-catching. And when you've got Monaco you've got F1.

The Monaco Grand Prix has a long history.
This is Station Hairpin in 1932.

Its magic is also no doubt related to its heritage. The first Grand Prix around the principality was held in 1929, and the layout of streets that cars race around today isn't much different. All of the sport's greats have graced the place.

But in my view one of the most endearing aspects of the Monaco Grand Prix is that in terms of driving challenge and the ability of an individual driver to make a difference over and above their car, Monaco is probably unparallelled among F1 races, and has been that way for many a year. Almost all of F1's greatest drivers can point to an occasion around the principality streets in which they transcended their machinery, in which all watching on could hardly comprehend what they had witnessed.

Additionally, while we may instinctively associate races here with a scarcity of overtaking, things happen at Monaco, the Grand Prix there somehow attracts drama and incident. Throughout history many such examples can be cited, such as Stirling Moss in the outdated Lotus 18 holding off the more powerful Ferraris for the entire distance in 1961, the extraordinary late laps in 1982 where a succession of leading cars faltered and the likely winner changed continuously like the display of a fruit machine, Ayrton Senna's celebrated 'star is born' drive in the rains in the Toleman in 1984 (cut short by a red flag, just as he was posed to take the lead), and Nigel Mansell's desperate but ultimately futile attempts to usurp Senna in 1992. And there are a multitude more that could be mentioned.

My personal favourite Monaco Grand Prix was that in 1970, however. This is for a number of reasons, all of which are linked to the things that I believe lend the magic to a Monaco Grand Prix. Partly it is because much of Monaco's heritage was on show: it was on a Monaco layout still in its original configuration, virtually identical to that used all the way back in 1929 (the 1973 race witnessed the first significant divergence from it with the introduction of the 'swimming pool section', fatuously to allow more grandstands but ensuring Monaco races from then on were usually a case of follow-my-leader). Also the architectural backdrop was still classic and elegant, Monaco not quite yet all the way to becoming the tightly packed cluster of high rises that it was to become.

Looking back: Montjuïc - a street track like out of your dreams

Reality bites in F1. Organisers of both of F1's Spanish races, the Spanish Grand Prix in Montmelo near Barcelona and the European Grand Prix on the Valencia street circuit, have made it known in recent weeks that they'll need less costly deals if the events are to continue. This is not surprising given the state of the world economy, which has hit Spain harder than many. A deal will be done presumably to ensure Spain continues on the F1 calendar - you'd think it would have to given Alonso-mania - though it's hard to see how two Spanish events can prevail, especially in an age where Bernie's keen to reduce the European presence on the calendar and with many countries queuing to get on it.

Spain's history of hosting F1 races is a long one, the first ever Spanish Grand Prix in the formula was in 1951. But the latest threats to the Spanish races continues the rather hit-and-miss and nomadic existence of Spanish F1 venues over the decades.

Six different circuits in Spain have hosted F1 Grands Prix (including Valencia, which has always had the 'European GP' moniker). The first venue used was the attractive Pedralbes track, run through wide open avenues in Barcelona's suburbs. It was used twice in total (the other race there was in 1954), before the Le Mans disaster the next year, and its fallout vis-a-vis circuit safety, did for it. The Spanish Grand Prix then disappeared from the calendar all the way through to 1968, when it resurfaced at the rather torturous, twisty and unpopular Jarama track near Madrid. That venue held the race on and off until 1981, with its final appearance that year giving witness to the classic and lauded win under pressure by Gilles Villeneuve.

The Spanish race then disappeared again for a while, until 1986 when the Jerez circuit in the south of the country became its host. It was an impressive facility, arguably the first of the 'modern' F1 venues that populate the calendar so heavily these days. Similar to Jarama it was known for being tight and twisty, but its main problem was that it never began to pull in a crowd, due in large part to being situated rather remotely, far away from Spain's major population centres. It lost the race eventually in 1991, though made a couple of further appearances in the 1990s as a last minute replacement for drop-outs elsewhere, and it continues to be used as an F1 test venue. Jerez was replaced by the Montmelo track near Barcelona, and it seemed that finally the Spanish round had found a permanent home. This was further cemented later by Spain finally uneartheding a top-level driver of their own in Fernando Alonso. And this was a lot of the reason why Barcelona was joined on the calendar by the Valencia street circuit in 2008. The Valencia track hasn't won any popularity contests though, not helped by the fact that it has been dogged by undiverting races in its short existence.

But there was one Spanish Grand Prix venue in history that was a real hit. It was a street track like out of your dreams. Faster, more varied and more challenging than Monaco, more picturesque as well. That track was Montjuïc.

Looking back: 1968 - Chris Amon's unluckiest year

Chris Amon. Mention of his name to a historically-minded F1 fan invariably brings up the association of 'the best F1 driver never to win a Grand Prix'. His ill-luck was legendary, and was only equalled by his astonishing natural talent and artistry behind the wheel.

Chris Amon in 1973
Credit: Lothar Spurzem / CC

Many argue that Amon didn't help himself in many ways: he was guilty of a number of bad career moves, had a far from disciplined life off the track and his relative lack of selfishness didn't serve him well in the warped world of F1. But it was also the case that time and again Amon would dominate F1 races with considerable elan and flair (summed up by one of the most iconic photographs in the history of the sport, of Amon attacking Oulton Park in his Ferrari 312 in 1968), only to crawl to a halt through no fault of his own. 183 laps, and 851 km, led in 95 F1 starts didn't add up to a single victory. Mario Andretti once commented that had Amon become an undertaker people would have stopped dying!

The tag of 'best F1 driver never to win a Grand Prix' sells Amon short however. This is partly because his talent is such that he should be remembered as being among the best of all time, regardless of the lack of wins. Ferrari designer Mauro Forghieri rated Amon as highly as they come: 'it's a fact that we never gave him a car worthy of him. As far as I'm concerned he was as good as Clark', while Jochen Rindt considered Jackie Stewart and Amon as his only true rivals. But the tag also sells him short because there was one season that the drivers' world championship should have been his. This year was 1968.