What If?

[Phoenix]

The legend that is Taki Inoue almost drove for Minardi at the beginning of 1996 but his sponsors pulled out. Therefore what if they hadn't? What sort of 'antics' would Taki have got up to that year in the Minardi? Also would that have deprived a certain Johnny Carwash of a seat later in the year?

I believe Lavaggi would have still driven for Minardi, just in place of Pedro Lamy.

[Bleu]

What if Christian Fittipaldi stayed in F-1 instead of going to Cart?

I think he may have stayed within the midfield of F1 with Arrows (or teams simliar to them) for the majority of his career before moving to Cart racing by 2000?

Perhaps he might have got his 'big break' with someone like Jordan in 1997 (replacing Rubens) where perhaps he would have been capable of a few podium finishes. However I'm not sure he ultimately had the talent to set F1 alight with glory. Good but not brilliant is how I tend to think of Christian Fittipaldi's time in F1.

I can recall that Fittipaldi was one of the option McLaren considered for 1995. In the end they chose Mansell with a little bit of pressure from sponsors.

[UgncreativeUsergname]

What if Tom Jones was allowed to race at the 1967 Canadian GP?

[tommykl]

What if Tom Jones was allowed to race at the 1967 Canadian GP?

I'd say he'd run decently for a rookie in an old car, if he finished the race, I can see him ahead of Mike Fisher but behind Attwood. If he got prize money, maybe he would have attempted the United States Grand Prix and even Mexico, with decent results but no points. Maybe he'd do the same in 1968 and maybe he could get lucky with attrition, but I can't see him getting picked up by a top team.

[eurobrun]

What if Super Aguri had of been brought by a group of investors before the 2008 season.

[Wizzie]

What if Super Aguri had of been brought by a group of investors before the 2008 season.

Do you mean the Magnum Group? From memory, I'm not quite sure if the deal fell through at the last minute before the 08 season begane or collapsed right after the purchase but, if it did work out, they may have survived till the end of the year but they'd have been left on the lurch without an engine supplier once Honda pulled out. From there, it's anyone's guess.

[pasta_maldonado]

What if Super Aguri had of been brought by a group of investors before the 2008 season.

Do you mean the Magnum Group? From memory, I'm not quite sure if the deal fell through at the last minute before the 08 season begane or collapsed right after the purchase but, if it did work out, they may have survived till the end of the year but they'd have been left on the lurch without an engine supplier once Honda pulled out. From there, it's anyone's guess.

Probably Super Aguri's assets would be merged with Honda's to form Brawn GP, reverting the timeline back to normal

[eurobrun]

What if Super Aguri had of been brought by a group of investors before the 2008 season.

Do you mean the Magnum Group? From memory, I'm not quite sure if the deal fell through at the last minute before the 08 season begane or collapsed right after the purchase but, if it did work out, they may have survived till the end of the year but they'd have been left on the lurch without an engine supplier once Honda pulled out. From there, it's anyone's guess.

Probably Super Aguri's assets would be merged with Honda's to form Brawn GP, reverting the timeline back to normal

I would have wanted them to last all of 2008, partly because I would rather a 22 car grid to a 20 car grid.

[pasta_maldonado]

What if Hamilton stopped whigning like a stupid baby and actually focused on his driving?

[eurobrun]

What if Hamilton stopped whigning like a stupid baby and actually focused on his driving?

He would probably be slightly faster.

[mario]

What if Super Aguri had of been brought by a group of investors before the 2008 season.

Do you mean the Magnum Group? From memory, I'm not quite sure if the deal fell through at the last minute before the 08 season begane or collapsed right after the purchase but, if it did work out, they may have survived till the end of the year but they'd have been left on the lurch without an engine supplier once Honda pulled out. From there, it's anyone's guess.

Probably Super Aguri's assets would be merged with Honda's to form Brawn GP, reverting the timeline back to normal

Some of their staff were absorbed into the Honda team after their collapse (which reportedly included the design team behind the double deck diffusers, save for one or two lone engineers who went to Toyota instead), whilst the remainder of their assets were sold off to other teams or otherwise put up for sale. I guess that, had they survived until the end of the year, the withdrawal of Honda probably would have killed them off anyway, so the merging of their most valuable assets and designers into what became Brawn with the dispersal of their other assets and personnel to other teams is the most plausible outcome.
In that scenario, what might have happened is that the double deck diffuser that Brawn had might have been less refined to begin with due to those key personnel joining the team at a much later date. On the other hand, it might have also meant that only Brawn would have had the double deck diffuser in the early part of the season, so it might have taken a little longer for the other teams to have uncovered the design of Brawn's diffuser and caught up with them.

Thinking about things, another large "What if" moment has struck me - what if Colin Chapman had been charged and put on trial for manslaughter in 1971 after Rindt's fatal accident the previous year? Nina Rindt reported that Chapman was still formally under investigation by the Italian authorities in 1971 - the threat of being arrested and having his cars impounded was why Team Lotus didn't officially take part in the 1971 Italian GP and Chapman himself stayed in the UK - and John Miles's account, whilst not intentionally seeking to criticise Chapman, could be used to criticise Champan and potentially accuse him of negligence (Miles mentions that the pit crews were undersized and overworked - especially since Chapman had entered three works cars for the Italian GP - and were badly fatigued, whilst Chapman repeatedly ignored his warnings that the car - which had never been subject to testing without wings before - was dangerously unstable at high speed).

[James1978]

What if Hamilton stopped whigning like a stupid baby and actually focused on his driving?

Races like Hungary.

[David AGS]

The legend that is Taki Inoue almost drove for Minardi at the beginning of 1996 but his sponsors pulled out. Therefore what if they hadn't? What sort of 'antics' would Taki have got up to that year in the Minardi? Also would that have deprived a certain Johnny Carwash of a seat later in the year?

I believe Lavaggi would have still driven for Minardi, just in place of Pedro Lamy.

First of all I think he would have struggled to make the grid on a few occasions. The Minardi was the 1995 car, slightly developed with the new regulations and a few other mods, first year with 107% qualifying.

IMO, Lamy would have stayed the whole season, he did bring a bit of cash from Portugal too. Inoue would have drove until his money ran out and either Fisichella or Lavaggi would have come in. Fisi had money too (not as much as the others) and was quick. I think not much would have changed.

[ibsey]

Thinking about things, another large "What if" moment has struck me - what if Colin Chapman had been charged and put on trial for manslaughter in 1971 after Rindt's fatal accident the previous year? Nina Rindt reported that Chapman was still formally under investigation by the Italian authorities in 1971 - the threat of being arrested and having his cars impounded was why Team Lotus didn't officially take part in the 1971 Italian GP and Chapman himself stayed in the UK - and John Miles's account, whilst not intentionally seeking to criticise Chapman, could be used to criticise Champan and potentially accuse him of negligence (Miles mentions that the pit crews were undersized and overworked - especially since Chapman had entered three works cars for the Italian GP - and were badly fatigued, whilst Chapman repeatedly ignored his warnings that the car - which had never been subject to testing without wings before - was dangerously unstable at high speed).

Assuming the Italian authorities held Chapman directly responsible for Rindt's death & therefore jailed him. As appose to the verdict stated on Wikipedia where "The accident was initiated by a failure of the car's right front brakeshaft, but that Rindt's death was caused by poorly installed crash barriers".

It would be pretty difficult to imagine how Lotus would have continued to obtain success after the Lotus 72 car without the pioneering influence of Chapman. Especially considering Chapman's knowledge in aerodynamics & ground effects, from his aviation background, which helped the team to success in the late 70's.

IMO after the Lotus 72 car was finished, in 1976, the team (now headed by someone like Peter Warr, or Tony Rudd) would have the only produced substandard cars thereafter. Therefore, largely occupying the midfield of the F1 grid, perhaps occassionaly fluking into a win or a good result. In short they would have been like the Lotus team were in 1983, but from 1976 onwards, if that makes sense.

So although I think ground effects would have eventually been developed in F1, Lotus without Chapman, perhaps wouldn't have pioneered it.

Therefore I believe it would have been unlikely that Mario Andretti would have re-joined the team in 1976 without Chapman & the possibility of developing ground effect cars. Even if Mario did join the team without Chapman (who was a major part of Mario's decision to join Lotus IIRC). I believe Mario would have probably joined Ferrari in 1978, after he was offered a seat by the 'Old Man'. IIRC, In reality Mario turned down the Ferrari offer, since he got Chapman to match Ferrari's salary offer & he knew just how good the Lotus 79 was going to be.

In any case, Andretti's technical development ability would have been massive loss to Lotus. Maybe Peterson would have been left to spearhead Lotus thereafter. Although I believe he would have been capable of getting Lotus back to the front of the grid. Without Andretti's development ability, this process may have taken longer. It is also questionable whether Peterson would have survived Monza 1978?

After reading Autosport brilliant 1982 retro edition, this week, I've been wondering What if Chapman had survived beyond 1982. Would he have stayed & developed the active suspension system & possibly have lead Lotus back to the front?

Or would he have been disillusioned with F1's increasingly restrictive attitudes towards new / innovative ideas, particularly after the Lotus 88 was banned & simply walked away from F1 (as I believe the article suggests).

Also what if Peter Warr hadn't stopped development of the active suspension system after Chapman's death?

Sorry to keep firing out questions here, but would really love to know people's opinion's on what if Jackie Stewart joined Ferrari whenever he was offered a seat from them around 1968 IIRC?

[ibsey]

IMO, Lamy would have stayed the whole season, he did bring a bit of cash from Portugal too. Inoue would have drove until his money ran out and either Fisichella or Lavaggi would have come in. Fisi had money too (not as much as the others) and was quick. I think not much would have changed.

Agree. Although I do wonder what sort of funny reaction we would have seen from Taki when his 1996 Minardi car caught fire during Hockenhiem free practice?

Also the same could be asked when M Schumi & Villeneueve came to lap Lavaggi at Portugal 1996. Might Taki have made things slighty more 'interesting'?

Considering his 'accident prone' reputation, those possible incidents would have certainly be worth watching.

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

The legend that is Taki Inoue almost drove for Minardi at the beginning of 1996 but his sponsors pulled out. Therefore what if they hadn't? What sort of 'antics' would Taki have got up to that year in the Minardi? Also would that have deprived a certain Johnny Carwash of a seat later in the year?

A little bit off topic, but a couple of months ago Inoue wrote on his twitter that he thinks he could have been on the podium at Montecarlo if he had raced for Minardi in 1996.

[Phoenix]

The legend that is Taki Inoue almost drove for Minardi at the beginning of 1996 but his sponsors pulled out. Therefore what if they hadn't? What sort of 'antics' would Taki have got up to that year in the Minardi? Also would that have deprived a certain Johnny Carwash of a seat later in the year?

A little bit off topic, but a couple of months ago Inoue wrote on his twitter that he thinks he could have been on the podium at Montecarlo if he had raced for Minardi in 1996.

Too much wasabi up his nose, perhaps?

[Ferrim]

After reading Autosport brilliant 1982 retro edition, this week, I've been wondering What if Chapman had survived beyond 1982. Would he have stayed & developed the active suspension system & possibly have lead Lotus back to the front?

There you have the DeLorean scandal. He was in risk of going to jail, IIRC.

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

The legend that is Taki Inoue almost drove for Minardi at the beginning of 1996 but his sponsors pulled out. Therefore what if they hadn't? What sort of 'antics' would Taki have got up to that year in the Minardi? Also would that have deprived a certain Johnny Carwash of a seat later in the year?

A little bit off topic, but a couple of months ago Inoue wrote on his twitter that he thinks he could have been on the podium at Montecarlo if he had raced for Minardi in 1996.

Too much wasabi up his nose, perhaps?

I suppose you're right.

[ibsey]

After reading Autosport brilliant 1982 retro edition, this week, I've been wondering What if Chapman had survived beyond 1982. Would he have stayed & developed the active suspension system & possibly have lead Lotus back to the front?

There you have the DeLorean scandal. He was in risk of going to jail, IIRC.

Ahh yes, forgot about that.

Colin Chapman could be considered somewhat of a 'bad boy' since he was at risk from being jailed on two seperate occassions (1971 & 1982). Never knew that beforehand. IIRC the Autosport article even suggested that at the time, some people within the F1 press thought that Chapman 'faked' his own death & fled to live in a jungle. In order to avoid facing any charges regarding the DeLorean scandal.

Also having re-read that Autosport article since my last post here, I had forgotten that in it Peter Wright answers the question as to....

What if Chapman had survived beyond 1982.

IIRC (as I don't have the article to hand when writing this post), Peter Wight thinks Chapman, despite becoming increasing disillusioned with F1, would have stayed & developed the active suspension system which would have lead Lotus back to the front of the F1 grid post 1982.

[mario]

ibsey, I was a little careful with that question about Chapman because I mentioned being put on trial - it is possible he could have been deemed guilty, though equally I was open to the option that he might have been put on trial and then acquitted.

The other reason why I mentioned Miles's account is that some of the things that he mentions in his memories of the Lotus 72 might have exposed Chapman to some awkward questions - after all, Miles had retired from the Austrian GP, just one race earlier, with a similar brake shaft failure that had sent his car out of control and into the barriers (he was still recovering from that accident when he turned up at Monza, whilst Lotus had recently introduced a thicker brake shaft to try to prevent the same sort of failure happening again).

What is interesting is that Miles also pointed out how rashly Rindt and Chapman were acting during the practise sessions - it was Rindt who suggested that they should strip the wings off the car, even though they had never tested how the car would behave without wings before, with Miles complaining that the rear of the car was extremely unstable (he refers to having to fight the rear of the car throughout the Curva Grande and Lesmos, whilst Rindt was almost out of control when he went through the Ascari corner).
Chapman refused to countenance Miles's advice that they were trying to make too many changes to the car too quickly (they were trying to adapt the balance of the car in a single practise session) - added to that, at the time that Rindt had his fatal accident, he had been sent out in a car with unscrubbed tyres and brake pads that had not yet been bedded in properly, and Miles suggests that the set up data indicated that the team hadn't changed the brake balance to account for the reduction in rear grip.

Ultimately, that is not to refute the finding of the inquest - had that barrier been properly installed, and had Rindt, arguably, worn a proper safety harness (he only wore a belt around his waist), then it is possible that Rindt may have had a chance of surviving that accident. However, it has to be said that the actions of the team did increase the chances of such an accident happening sharply, such that I feel that the chances that somebody would have been killed whilst driving the 72 was more a question of when rather than if.
After all, Rindt had complained to Chapman quite strongly after a heavy accident in the 1969 Spanish GP, caused by the suspension mounted rear wing collapsing, that he felt he wasn't paying enough care and attention to how the cars were being put together and the poor build quality of the Lotus 49 was eroding his confidence in the car:

All in all, I think that Chapman might have been acquitted by the jury on the ground that the crash barrier was the cause of death for Rindt, but I strongly suspect that, had some of those details come out in court, it would have hurt the reputation of Chapman and Team Lotus quite badly.

[ibsey]

All in all, I think that Chapman might have been acquitted by the jury on the ground that the crash barrier was the cause of death for Rindt, but I strongly suspect that, had some of those details come out in court, it would have hurt the reputation of Chapman and Team Lotus quite badly.

I agree with you Mario (as is usually the case) that Chapman might have been acquitted. Personally I think he should have been. As I don't believe team principles / members should be held to account when one of their racing drivers are killed in their car. Unless, of course, a clear intention to murder can be proved against them.

The thing that does make me question this, however, is other incidents where the Italian authorities have accused either a driver or team responsible for a death in an F1 event.

For instance, I believe, the Italian authorities where trying (abeit unsuccessfully) to blame Jim Clark for the tragic death of Wolfgang von Trips & the fifteen spectators at the 1961 Italian Grand Prix. Although I can't quite remember the details of that particular case. Also there was the time where the Italian authorities tried to hold members of the Williams team responsible for the death of Senna in 1994. In fact I think there is something in Italian law, which states that someone must be held responsible for a death in a sport activity or something like that. However since I am not an expert in this field I can't be sure.

So had Chapman been charged, one cannot be 100% sure how the Italian authorities might have re-acted if faced with all these details in court.

In any case, I agree with you that had those details come out in court it would have hurt the reputation of Chapman and Team Lotus quite badly. To the extend that even if Chapman was acquitted, then he probably would have had to resign from Lotus afterwards anyway. Furthermore I feel it is likely Lotus probably would have to restructure the team, simliar to how Renualt had to restructure after 'Crashgate'.

Otherwise F1 drivers might have had second thoughts on driving for them, over fears on their cars safety. In fact in this month's Motorsport Magazine, either in the Emmerson Fittipaldi interview or the memories of the top F1 men of the 1960's article, someone said something along the lines of 'the perception at the time was although Lotus cars were fast, they were fragile & that might have put some drivers off ever driving for them'.

What is interesting is that Miles also pointed out how rashly Rindt and Chapman were acting during the practise sessions

IIRC in a BBC4 documentary shown last year, about the safety of F1 during the 1970's. It was stated that there was a bit of tension between Rindt & Chapman during the weekend of Monza 1970. Bascially Rindt had previously asked Chapman to bring the Lotus 49 car to Monza. As he felt the Lotus 72 car was too new & therefore unsafe. Particularly considering the high speeds reached at Monza. Appartently Chapman ignored this request & only brought the 72 car that fateful weekend.

Ultimately, that is not to refute the finding of the inquest - had that barrier been properly installed, and had Rindt, arguably, worn a proper safety harness (he only wore a belt around his waist), then it is possible that Rindt may have had a chance of surviving that accident.

For the benefit of those who might not be aware, apparently the reason why Rindt had only worn a belt around his waist, & not a proper safety harness, was because he felt this would be quicker in case of a fire.

However, it has to be said that the actions of the team did increase the chances of such an accident happening sharply, such that I feel that the chances that somebody would have been killed whilst driving the 72 was more a question of when rather than if.

Interesting thought indeed. I wonder to what extent (if any) did Rindt's accident help reign in Chapman approach to risk taking, when designing future F1 cars?

[mario]

All in all, I think that Chapman might have been acquitted by the jury on the ground that the crash barrier was the cause of death for Rindt, but I strongly suspect that, had some of those details come out in court, it would have hurt the reputation of Chapman and Team Lotus quite badly.

I agree with you Mario (as is usually the case) that Chapman might have been acquitted. Personally I think he should have been. As I don't believe team principles / members should be held to account when one of their racing drivers are killed in their car. Unless, of course, a clear intention to murder can be proved against them.

The thing that does make me question this, however, is other incidents where the Italian authorities have accused either a driver or team responsible for a death in an F1 event.

For instance, I believe, the Italian authorities where trying (abeit unsuccessfully) to blame Jim Clark for the tragic death of Wolfgang von Trips & the fifteen spectators at the 1961 Italian Grand Prix. Although I can't quite remember the details of that particular case. Also there was the time where the Italian authorities tried to hold members of the Williams team responsible for the death of Senna in 1994. In fact I think there is something in Italian law, which states that someone must be held responsible for a death in a sport activity or something like that. However since I am not an expert in this field I can't be sure.

So had Chapman been charged, one cannot be 100% sure how the Italian authorities might have re-acted if faced with all these details in court.

In any case, I agree with you that had those details come out in court it would have hurt the reputation of Chapman and Team Lotus quite badly. To the extend that even if Chapman was acquitted, then he probably would have had to resign from Lotus afterwards anyway. Furthermore I feel it is likely Lotus probably would have to restructure the team, simliar to how Renualt had to restructure after 'Crashgate'.

Otherwise F1 drivers might have had second thoughts on driving for them, over fears on their cars safety. In fact in this month's Motorsport Magazine, either in the Emmerson Fittipaldi interview or the memories of the top F1 men of the 1960's article, someone said something along the lines of 'the perception at the time was although Lotus cars were fast, they were fragile & that might have put some drivers off ever driving for them'.

In the case of von Trips, I would presume that the reason Clark was being investigated was down to the fact that not only was von Trips killed after he lost control when he and Clark collided, 15 spectators were also killed by the wreckage of von Trips's car. The fact that so many bystanders had been killed in that accident - only a few years after the horrendous accident at the 1955 24 Hours of Le Mans - might have meant that the authorities were more zealous than normal with their investigations.
In the case of Ayrton Senna, that is a little different - it is true that the case went through the Italian legal system for many years (the final proceedings were eventually wrapped up in 2007), although in that instance the Italian authorities held Patrick Head responsible for design changes that directly lead to Senna's fatal accident (on the basis that Ayrton's accident was caused by failure of the steering column, with Patrick Head held responsible for the modifications to the steering column that were judged to have failed).

[ibsey]

In the case of Ayrton Senna, that is a little different - it is true that the case went through the Italian legal system for many years (the final proceedings were eventually wrapped up in 2007), although in that instance the Italian authorities held Patrick Head responsible for design changes that directly lead to Senna's fatal accident (on the basis that Ayrton's accident was caused by failure of the steering column, with Patrick Head held responsible for the modifications to the steering column that were judged to have failed).

Thanks for that piece of info Mario, I didn't know what the conclusion of the Senna was. You learn something new every day. Hope you have a great bank holiday weekend .

[Ferrarist]

What if Heinz-Harald Frentzen stayed with Mercedes after 1990, thus not doing his move to the Formula 3000 championship?

[Wizzie]

What if Heinz-Harald Frentzen stayed with Mercedes after 1990, thus not doing his move to the Formula 3000 championship?

Then chances are it would have been him, not Schumacher, that would have driven for Jordan in 1991 because, from memory, Mercedes rated him and Wendlinger slightly higher than Schumacher.

[David AGS]

IIRC Frentzen and Wendliger was arguably more talented than M$.

1990-91 was terrible for Frenzten. Not only did he see his arch rival M$ in F1, that same man took his mrs from him too. (Corrina Schu)

[eurobrun]

IIRC Frentzen and Wendliger was arguably more talented than M$.

1990-91 was terrible for Frenzten. Not only did he see his arch rival M$ in F1, that same man took his mrs from him too. (Corrina Schu)

I always thought that Frentzen had Fisichellitis, preventing him from ever getting in Schumacher's career.

[Wizzie]

IIRC Frentzen and Wendliger was arguably more talented than M$.

1990-91 was terrible for Frenzten. Not only did he see his arch rival M$ in F1, that same man took his mrs from him too. (Corrina Schu)

I always thought that Frentzen had Fisichellitis, preventing him from ever getting in Schumacher's career.

That was something we found out in hindsight but still, it'd be interesting to see what Frentzen would have achieved given the same opportunity at Jordan as Schumacher

[JeremyMcClean]

Given Frentzen's luck, I imagine he would do well at Jordan and follow Schumacher's career, go to Benetton, only in 1994, ends up sodding off. It is only then that the 1994 Drivers' Champion is none other than Jos the Boss. (Hill loses by 3 points.)

[pasta_maldonado]

Given Frentzen's luck, I imagine he would do well at Jordan and follow Schumacher's career, go to Benetton, only in 1994, ends up sodding off. It is only then that the 1994 Drivers' Champion is none other than Jos the Boss. (Hill loses by 3 points.)

Who then gets too drunk in the afterparty and beats his wife, and goes to prison.

[takagi_for_the_win]

What if Alboreto won the 1985 drivers championship?

[mario]

What if Alboreto won the 1985 drivers championship?

For the purpose of that assessment, I would assume that Ferrari had not broken its relationship with KKK for its turbochargers (given that it was their decision to suddenly switch to Garrett turbochargers that caused their late season unreliability). In that scenario, with a reliable enough car Alboreto might have had a slim chance of beating Prost, although it has to be said that there are question over whether Ferrari could have matched McLaren's development rate at the time even if the car had been reliable.

Overall, though, I don't think that it would have had much of an impact - Alboreto might have gained additional confidence and been more competitive in subsequent years as a result, although he wasn't considered to be an outstanding driver and didn't have other teams clamouring for him. Even with the drivers title under his belt, I don't think that the other teams would have rushed to sign him up and he probably would have remained at Ferrari, so the driver line ups would probably have been fairly similar in 1986.
Similarly, I don't think that there would have been many changes behind the scenes either - it is possible that Ferrari might have been a bit more complacent in early 1986 on the back of success in 1985, but I still think that they would have poached Barnard when they realised the F1/86 was a step in the wrong direction. All in all, I don't think that it would have lead to any significant changes elsewhere on the grid or in the paddock.

[Phoenix]

What if Alboreto won the 1985 drivers championship?

For the purpose of that assessment, I would assume that Ferrari had not broken its relationship with KKK for its turbochargers (given that it was their decision to suddenly switch to Garrett turbochargers that caused their late season unreliability). In that scenario, with a reliable enough car Alboreto might have had a slim chance of beating Prost, although it has to be said that there are question over whether Ferrari could have matched McLaren's development rate at the time even if the car had been reliable.

Overall, though, I don't think that it would have had much of an impact - Alboreto might have gained additional confidence and been more competitive in subsequent years as a result, although he wasn't considered to be an outstanding driver and didn't have other teams clamouring for him. Even with the drivers title under his belt, I don't think that the other teams would have rushed to sign him up and he probably would have remained at Ferrari, so the driver line ups would probably have been fairly similar in 1986.
Similarly, I don't think that there would have been many changes behind the scenes either - it is possible that Ferrari might have been a bit more complacent in early 1986 on the back of success in 1985, but I still think that they would have poached Barnard when they realised the F1/86 was a step in the wrong direction. All in all, I don't think that it would have lead to any significant changes elsewhere on the grid or in the paddock.

I am going to say that Alboreto would have beaten Johansson and Berger in subsequent years. Not that it would have meant much considering Ferrari was a second rate team between 1986 and 1988. I'm going to take a little leeway and say he's signed by Williams after 1988, remaining in the team until 1992. He fails to beat Mansell when he arrives to the team, but still he does better than Patrese. Moves to Benetton for 1993 and 1994, but fails to beat Schumacher. Still, decent performances.

[Aerond]

The legend that is Taki Inoue almost drove for Minardi at the beginning of 1996 but his sponsors pulled out. Therefore what if they hadn't? What sort of 'antics' would Taki have got up to that year in the Minardi? Also would that have deprived a certain Johnny Carwash of a seat later in the year?

A little bit off topic, but a couple of months ago Inoue wrote on his twitter that he thinks he could have been on the podium at Montecarlo if he had raced for Minardi in 1996.

Too much wasabi up his nose, perhaps?

Inoue would have been overtaken by Badoer in the Forti. When Villeneuve came to lap Inoue, he would have tangled with Inoue instead of Badoer. Badoer goes on and scores a 5th place for Forti!

[darkapprentice77]

What if Scuderia Italia didn't leave Dallara?

[nome66]

What if Scuderia Italia didn't leave Dallara?

maybe they would have remembered to get better at designing F1 cars

[giraurd]

What if Alboreto won the 1985 drivers championship?

Agree to mario's post on the department that Alboreto himself wouldn't have ended up having too much more gorgeous career (maybe retired earlier) but how would another loss have affected Prost, mentally? Would have he still won the '86 title against Piquet and Mansell having been close to title in 4 successive seasons yet failing to take it? How about Prost-Senna wars if Prost didn't have the titles; would have he won any at all during his career?

---

Another which probably has been asked, but how would F1 world have looked like if MSC didn't exist at all? Who would have taken his Benetton seats, how about Ferrari - would have they opted for a new 'leading star driver' in late 90's anyway..?

[giraurd]

What if Alboreto won the 1985 drivers championship?

Agree to mario's post on the department that Alboreto himself wouldn't have ended up having too much more gorgeous career (maybe retired earlier) but how would another loss have affected Prost, mentally? Would have he still won the '86 title against Piquet and Mansell having been close to title in 4 successive seasons yet failing to take it? How about Prost-Senna wars if Prost didn't have the titles; would have Alain won any at all during his career?

---

Another which probably has been asked, but how would F1 world have looked like if MSC didn't exist at all? Who would have taken his Benetton seats, how about Ferrari - would have they opted for a new 'leading star driver' in late 90's anyway..?

[Phoenix]

What if Alboreto won the 1985 drivers championship?

Agree to mario's post on the department that Alboreto himself wouldn't have ended up having too much more gorgeous career (maybe retired earlier) but how would another loss have affected Prost, mentally? Would have he still won the '86 title against Piquet and Mansell having been close to title in 4 successive seasons yet failing to take it? How about Prost-Senna wars if Prost didn't have the titles; would have he won any at all during his career?

---

Another which probably has been asked, but how would F1 world have looked like if MSC didn't exist at all? Who would have taken his Benetton seats, how about Ferrari - would have they opted for a new 'leading star driver' in late 90's anyway..?

I still think Prost wouldn't have allowed himself to be let down by so many disappointments, but apart from that, I can't predict much. I still think the Senna-Prost war would have been every bit as fierce. After all, Senna didn't allow Warwick to move into Lotus in 1986 and Warwick was not a World Champion.

Without MSC, Damon Hill would have been THE driver in the mid-90s, but mainly because he was driving for Williams. Villeneuve would have won 1997 though. Then, Mikka Häkkinen becomes the top driver in the sport and perhaps decides to elongate his career until 2003-2004.

So, who would have driven for Ferrari then in 1996 and beyond? Perhaps Frentzen, since he was after all quite well regarded in the mid-90s, but I don't know if Ferrari would have eventually come over the top of their technical shortcomings, not until the 2000s at least.