Objectively the Best F1 Race Ever

  • Thread starter Dotini
  • 23 comments
  • 1,764 views

Dotini

(Banned)
15,742
United States
Seattle
CR80_Shifty
Racing is, or should be, about drama, tension, excitement and emotion. But is there a place for objectivity and statistics to tell us something about the felt quality of racing?

If so, consider a real F1 race in which actually occurred:

- 25 changes of the lead
- 8 different drivers led the race
- 6 different constructors led the race
- 4 different engines led the race
- Margin of victory 0.01 second
- Top 5 finishers with 0.61 seconds
- Winner qualified 11th
- 24 cars qualified
- no one injured
- first 8 finishers from 7 different teams
- Dry, hot weather

Does this sound boring or outrageous? Or does it seem like something you might like to experience? Let me tell you this is currently impossible in the world we have come to accept. It happened in a Golden Age that cannot come again. Or can it?
 
Last edited:
You're talking about the 1971 Italian Grand Prix. The first 8 finishers were all from different teams too.

You cannot have objectively the best race ever because there is no universally accepted metric for what would qualify a race as being "the best". For example, I will openly acknowledge my bias to when an underdog or midfield team wins:

1998 Belgian Grand Prix (Hill & Jordan)
1999 French Grand Prix (Frentzen & Jordan)
1999 European Grand Prix (Herbert & Stewart)
2003 Brazilian Grand Prix (Fisichella & Jordan)

Four races I love and by sheer coincidence three of them are for Jordan. Each of those has drama, intrigue, surprise, action and retirements. They're not static objects with no retirements, they're not processions with no overtaking; they are an animated, collective event that lives, breathes and moves.

But they're by no means the only type of race I enjoy watching and nor do I like every race where an underdog wins. I hugely enjoyed the 2000 German Grand Prix not only because my favourite driver Barrichello finally won a race but also because the intrigue between Barrichello on dry tyres and Häkkinen on wet tyres made for great strategic viewing; the stadium section was wet but the forest section was dry and the two drivers were better at different parts of the circuit. One driver might have made an error in the imperfect, not optimal conditions; was Barrichello going to aquaplane in the stadium section? Was Häkkinen going to burn his tyres in the forest?

That's five races where weather played a huge part though so I guess weather is a great equaliser to make for a good race. Most people love the 2011 Canadian Grand Prix for similar reasons and the lead driver did make a mistake at the worst possible time.

How many times these days are we praying for rain to spice up the action? I'll have a think about my most enjoyable dry races to watch.
 
2011 Canadian GP cones close
Canada, 2011:
- 3 changes of lead
- 3 driver led
- 3 constructors led
- 3 engines led
- MoV 2.709
- Top 5 covered by 20.295
- 24 qualified
- Race red flagged for 124 minutes (rain), many spectators left
 
Last edited:
Canada, 2011:
- 3 changes of lead
- 3 driver led
- 3 constructors led
- 3 engines led
- MoV 2.709
- Top 5 covered by 20.295
- 24 qualified
- Race red flagged for 124 minutes, many spectators left

And the record for the most pitstops by a winning driver - 6 (5 actual pitstops and 1 penalty).
 
You cannot have objectively the best race ever because there is no universally accepted metric for what would qualify a race as being "the best". For example, I will openly acknowledge my bias to when an underdog or midfield team wins:
Agreed. The must be subjective qualities taken into considerations as well as the objective facts. However, my purpose here is to stimulate conversation about what constitutes good, better and best F1 racing, and to collect and organize ideas about how best to make F1 racing better.

Thank you for your contributions, and please keep them coming.
 
2012 European Grand Prix is one of the most amazing dry races I've ever watched.
Seriously, the last 10 laps are even more incredible when you know the result.
2012 European GP, Valencia street circuit:
- 1 lead change
- 2 drivers led
- 2 constructors led
- 2 engines led
- MoV 6.421sec
- Top 5 19.993 sec
- 25 qualified
- 6 teams in top 8 finishers
- Dry, sunny weather
- Amazing drive up the field to 3rd by Schumacher
- 3 accidents
 
Apart from the ones mentioned above, what about Monaco '82 that no one wanted to win, or Monaco '96 with Panis going from 14th to 1st for his only win?
 
Rainy Monaco's have produced some good ones from a stats point of view, in 1996 only 3 cars finished!

And there was that one in 2008 where Force India after many retirements were on track to score their first WC points in 4th when Raikkonen rear ended Sutil at the restart.
 
Last edited:
There begins to be the glimmerings of a pattern here of what makes for great racing: Rain. Street circuits. Lack of chicanes.
 
2008 Brazilian GP for me, though I have a bad memory... or what about the 2007 Belgium GP (if we ignore the FIA post race decision! :P)... Japan 2014 was also a pretty great race, overshadowed of course by the horrible and fatal accident with Jules
 
What about the 2005 Japanese GP when Kimi and Alonso came through the field. Or Long Beach in 1983 where Watson and Lauda came from 22nd and 23rd to finish 1-2?

1981 Spanish GP at Jarama when Gilles Villneuve in his powerful, but with track-like handling, Ferrari held off 5 faster cars for the whole race?

Dijon '79 for the last ~3 laps of Epicness?
 
Last edited:
Or Long Beach in 1983 where Watson and Lauda came from 22nd and 23rd to finish 1-2?
I was there and saw this race first hand. A very good candidate for a very great race indeed. @baldgye @daan As time permits, I will do the objective analysis for some or all of them.
 
2007 European GP up untill the Redflag was probably the most WTF I have ever seen, had there not be a Redflag it was possible that the slowest car on the grid wins the race.
 
2007 European GP up untill the Redflag was probably the most WTF I have ever seen, had there not be a Redflag it was possible that the slowest car on the grid wins the race.

Your nomination has both an impressive objective and subjective score:

2007 European GP, Nurburgring:
- 6 lead changes
- 6 drivers led
- 4 constructors led
- 3 engines led
- MoV 8.155 sec
- Top 8 within 1m 34.603s
- 22 qualified
- 6 teams in top 6 finishers
- Rain event, several drivers impressed, signs of rivalry between drivers
- Considered to be the race of the year by Autocourse
 
Some races go down in history for being great because of one particular event or one, maybe two specific drivers out of the entire grid of twenty plus.

The 1967 Italian Grand Prix was almost as good as the later 1971 race and is famous for arguably being Jim Clark's best performance in a Grand Prix careven though he didn't win; Clark led the race until lap 12 where he had to pit to replace a puncture. The pitstop took so long that Clark rejoined last and a lap down. Over the remaining 46 laps he continuously broke the lap record to not only unlap himself but end up leading the race on lap 60 with 8 laps left. Essentially, from being dead last, Clark put two laps on the entire grid.

As it was, a fuel pump failure on the penultimate lap saw him lose time and Jack Brabham and John Surtees overtook him partway round the final lap. Brabham and Surtees themselves had had a great race at the front, trading places multiple times and in the end Surtees pipped Brabham by 0.2 seconds, the two cars being side by side coming out of the Parabolica.

The same principle applies to the 1957 German Grand Prix; Fangio was three-quarters of a minute behind the two Ferraris after a botched pitstop. Over the remaining 10 laps he broke the lap record 9 times, 7 of which were consecutive, to be within sight of the leading Ferraris and passing them on the last lap. Notwithstanding that this took place on the Nürburgring, it's an incredible achievement that makes a great race.

As it is, @Dotini, seeing as you submitted the 1971 Italian Grand Prix to start this thread, the entire race is up on YouTube with French commentary:

Race starts at 6:15. It is really great but the amazing thing is that there are just four cameras; one on the start/finish line, two at the Lesmos and one at the Parabolica.

 
I think something people forget is that more overtaking doesn't mean better racing.

Yes, overtaking generally has to be possible for racing to be good (although the Villeneuve at Jarama example perhaps contradicts that notion), but often if a race has too many overtakes it can just become hard to follow and lack a coherent narrative or a sense of tension.

A lot of the best races don't necessarily come at tracks where overtaking is easy, often the difficulty of getting those overtakes to stick is what makes them so enthralling.

In that regard Japan 2005 stands out, all of the overtakes in that race are properly exciting on a track which doesn't lend itself to overtaking in high downforce single seaters.
 
I've only really been paying attention to F1 for the last 12 years so my judgement won't be that good. I'd say that Azerbaijan 2017 was the best F1 race ever, as it's the only one that instantly springs to mind. Bottas was LAST and a lap down but managed to finish second, Stroll came third, Vettel got penalised after hitting Hamilton behind the safety car and Ricciardo won the race. They were 3 safety cars, one red flag, a crash between the two Force Indias, 7 retirements, 3 constructors in the top 3 and 2 engine manufacturers. Oh, did I mention that Hamilton's headrest came loose, forcing him to pit? The race definitely qualifies.
 
If you want to have a look at some older races Dotini, I present to you the legendary 1933 Grand Prix de Monaco.

In this race the lead changed a shocking 21 times! It was a close duel between Nuvolari in an Alfa 8C Monza and Varzi in a Type 51 Bugatti. Both cars were of similar performance but achieved their lap times in different ways, the Alfa being faster on the straight bits and the Bugatti making up for it in handling. Both drivers were of similar skill and determination. Nuvolari lead for 56 laps out of 100 and Varzi lead for 44. To add to the drama Nuvolari's Alfa failed in a spectacular way on the 99th lap, still close to Varzi. :lol: As an interesting sidenote, this was the first Grand Prix where the starting grid was ordered by the drivers' practice times.
 
There begins to be the glimmerings of a pattern here of what makes for great racing: Rain. Street circuits. Lack of chicanes.

I think, unfortunately, the only pattern I've seen from races I genuinely find fantastic tend to be: the worse the car, the better the racing. This is probably why F1 is leaving me "meh" a lot the past 10 years, and why I've taken to endurance racing - where even stupidly reliable modern racecars can encounter issues and debris, etc.
 
I found another one for your consideration, the 1953 French Grand Prix at Reims.

Circuit-Reims-1953-%28openstreetmap%29.png


A long, hard fought battle between Hawthorn, Fangio, and friends. Slipstreaming battles were plentiful on the fastest road course in Europe. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find the exact number of overtakes that happened in this race. Perhaps there were too many for them to count at the time? This Grand Prix made such an impact in its era that it was called "The Race of the Century."

Some footage:
 
Back