The first race on the 2024 F1 calendar was in Bahrain

All cars finish two consecutive F1 races for first time ever

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

The first race of the 2024 Formula 1 season was also the 17th time every car which took the start saw the finish.

However, in a first, the same thing also happened in the previous race.

As cars have become more reliable, F1 is seeing more races where all cars finish. There were three such races in 2021, one when new technical regulations were introduced in 2022, and three again last year.

Had Lance Stroll not parked his damaged Aston Martin in Monaco last year, that would have been the second of three consecutive races where every driver was classified.

Michael Schumacher, Ferrari, Albert Park, Melbourne, 2004
Schumacher started the 2004 season with a ‘grand slam’
Max Verstappen made a perfect start to his season by leading every lap from pole position and setting fastest lap on the way to victory. This was his fifth ‘grand slam’, leaving only Jim Clark (eight) and Lewis Hamilton (six) with more. He is level with Alberto Ascari and Michael Schumacher on five.

Schumacher was also the last driver to score a grand slam in a season opener, at Melbourne 20 years ago. Valtteri Bottas came close to doing this four years ago in the Austrian Grand Prix, but lost the fastest lap to Lando Norris by a tenth of a second on the final tour.

This was Verstappen’s eighth consecutive grand prix win, which is the fourth-longest streak in F1 history. He took that record last year when he reached 10. Sebastian Vettel and Ascari made it to nine, but Verstappen could break it again at the Japanese Grand Prix next month.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

He scored the 114th win for Red Bull, which means they have now taken as many grand prix victories as Williams, a much older team which has started more than twice as many rounds. Williams is F1’s third longest-running team, having arrived in 1975 and started 816 races since. This is Red Bull’s 20th season and last weekend’s round was the 370th they’ve started.

Lewis Hamilton, Jarno Trulli, Albert Park, Melbourne, 2009
Hamilton had his lowest round one grid position for 15 years
Verstappen’s pole position was his 33rd, meaning he is tied for fifth place on the all-time list with Clark and Alain Prost. He scored his 31st fastest lap by a whopping margin of 1.482 seconds from Charles Leclerc. The last driver to achieve a larger margin was Lewis Hamilton at the Belgian Grand Prix last year, beating the next-best time by 1.617s, though unlike Verstappen he needed a late pit stop for a fresh set of tyres to do it.

However Charles Leclerc kept his run of front row starts going. This was his sixth in a row compared to Verstappen’s four (which would be two had it not been for Carlos Sainz Jnr’s contentious Las Vegas Grand Prix penalty).

Lewis Hamilton had little to smile about after qualifying. Ninth on the grid was his second-lowest starting position for a season-opener. His worst came in 2009, when he qualified 15th in Australia and lined up 18th after taking a grid penalty for a gearbox change.

The 10 points-scoring places were filled by the smallest possible number of teams, five. This last happened at the Hungarian Grand Prix last year with the same five teams: Red Bull, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren and Aston Martin.

The Bahrain Grand Prix marked both its 20th anniversary and its 20th running: The 2011 edition was cancelled when the government declared a state of emergency after suppressing pre-democracy protests, leading to violent clashes, deaths and arrests. However this was the 21st grand prix held on the Bahrain International Circuit, as it held a second round during the pandemic-struck 2020 season, named the Sakhir Grand Prix.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Have you spotted any other interesting stats and facts from the Bahrain Grand Prix? Share them in the comments.

Become a RaceFans Supporter

RaceFans is run thanks in part to the generous support of its readers. By contributing £1 per month or £12 per year (or the same in whichever currency you use) you can help cover the costs of creating, hosting and developing RaceFans today and in the future.

Become a RaceFans Supporter today and browse the site ad-free. Sign up or find out more via the links below:

2024 Bahrain Grand Prix

Browse all 2024 Bahrain Grand Prix articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

37 comments on “All cars finish two consecutive F1 races for first time ever”

  1. How reliable the cars are is an incredible feat of engineering that should be celebrated, especially given how little testing there is. Sure they can virtually test every component, but nothing will prepare them for the conditions – G-force, temperature, vibration on the track itself. The teams ability to overcome the challenge presented (bar obtuse oversights from the organisers) is a testament to their engineers and manufacturing processes.

    That being said, I wonder if from a competitive perspective there isn’t perhaps too much punishment for a failure that is preventing teams from being willing to push the mechanical limit of the cars. Maybe if there were less points overall per race such that having a single failure isn’t so expensive, in terms of the championship, that could promote further willingness to risk a failure.

    I’m not sure that’s even desirable. But given the derision of the last races predictability, maybe it couldn’t hurt?

    1. “Maybe if there were less points overall per race such that having a single failure isn’t so expensive,”

      Haha :) You didn’t think it through, Tristan :) The value of points you score is relative, there’s no absolute value in them, it doesn’t matter how big the numbers are as such.
      You could change the points system from 25-18-12… into 25000-18000-12000… and it wouldn’t make the “punishment for a failure” any greater.

      1. Yeah you’re right… Not thought through at all.

      2. Not sure you got the point, he might also suggest a 10-9-8-7 etc. points system, that would change the relative values between first and second place, now this in particular would be more punishing, but can also be done the other way around.

        1. A way to measutre the impact of a single DNF under a given points system could be to calculate the number of race wins you’d need in order to offset that non-scoring round.

          Currently, the difference between first (+FL) and second is 8 points. So, you would need 3.25 races to recover from a DNF.
          The 9-6-4 system requires 3 races per DNF.
          The 10-6-4 system requires 2.5
          The 10-8-6 system (which, as the story goes, was introduced to stop the dominance of the bullet-proof Ferrari) requires a whopping 5 races and is the most DNF-punishing system that we have seen until now.

          In theory, you would indeed expect more DNFs (and cars closer to the edge),, when the punishment for a DNF is smaller.
          However, this is not in line with what we have seen througout the seasons.
          Exhibit A. The points system has been changed in the past as a response to more bullet-proof cars, not the other way around.
          Exhibit B. Even though the current points system is more tolerant to DNF (3.25 races) than its predecessor (5 races). the DNF rate has decreased nevertheless.

          Based on this, you would be inclined to believe that tinkering with the points system will have no meaningful impact on the DNF rate.

          1. Frank, you try to analyze an irrelevant part of this whole thing. 1st vs 2nd place is not the issue!
            There are 20 cars in each GP, and only 2-3 max cars even consider possibly winning.
            You won’t push Williams to try more experimental things by changing the scoring margin for a win, sorry mate ;)

            The assumption Tristan’s question was made on, is that teams don’t have technical failures because they don’t try hard enough to improve by risking with experimental solutions that as a drawback would have a higher failure rate.

            I would argue this assumption is wrong. The most failure prone part of the car has always been the engine, and engines are not being developed any more. With everything else simulated on a computer, things are just super well developed.
            The technical development race these days concerns almost solely aerodynamics – and those do not cause capital car failures. Simple as that.

          2. You won’t push Williams to try more experimental things by changing the scoring margin for a win, sorry mate ;)

            Well, the Williams example actually enforces the point that I was making.
            For Williams, points scoring is very rare. Currently, in any given grand prix, they would expect to score 0 points anyway – as much points as you receive from a DNF. So – in the stated theory – they should push their car development to a point where they are fastter yet less reliable.

            And yet – as was my point – they do not create that faster, but less reliable car. This supports the claim that the points system does not trigger a team to change the focus of development.

          3. The thing is of course that punishment for unreliability isn’t confined to just a points loss. The regulations themselves have reliability baked in (as in, the maximum number of power units within a season being defined) as well as punishment for transgressing these regulations.

            That is one factor that will skew heavily towards building reliable cars and running them in a way so they will hold up for a series of racing weekends.

            Then there are technical limitations that further help this. There’s a limit RPM for the ICE, meaning naturally they will be less stressed.
            Then there’s a limited amount of fuel available and the fuel flow rate is limited as well. This encourages teams to create efficient engines, which again focuses on balance instead of pushing the engines to the limit.

            All of these things will push teams towards reliable engines, directly or indirectly, and will have more impact than the points system itself.

    2. You could in theory score drivers on their best 20 races, meaning you get 4 freebies. Similar point systems have been used in the past. It doesn’t feel as satisfying for viewers, though.

      An alternative would be to make the points dropoff steeper, eg 1 3 7 15 31 63 127 255 for the top eight positions. That way, you’d rather be third once than fourth twice.

      None of that changes that tech is fundamentally more solid, though.

    3. More and more advanced computer simulations have taken F1 a long long way. I wish they had more engines allocated, and possibly some more flexibility in how they were allowed to push the engines temporarily for more power when they need it, to create some more dynamic and strategy variability, and less DRS snoozefest.

      1. Exactly – if each car were allowed 24 engines per season within the rules, you can guarantee they’d be less reliable and more dynamic.
        F1’s engine reliability has been mandated – it isn’t optional.

        And also agree – Push to Pass is preferable over DRS, provided it can be used defensively as well as offensively.

    4. Coventry Climax
      5th March 2024, 9:25

      If I read you correctly, that’s a very polite way of expressing my first thought about it all:
      How is this even positive, in a competitive sports?
      I want to see cars break down, in their attempts to achieve the absolute maximum, and I want to see driver’s crash for exactly that same reason. I want to see cars utterly destroyed from running just one race, instead of only requiring a wash and be ready for the next 10 races.
      So now we’re happy that for a number of reasons, all cars and drivers repeatedly make it to the finish? And we still call that F1? Pathetic.

      1. I absolutely agree with this.

        I know that this can seem harsh, as a driver could be delivering a perfect performance only to be let down by the machinery. But the frailty of a car at it’s technological limit has always added to the thrill for me (even if – as a Nigel Mansell fan – it may have been more beneficial for cars and tyres to hold together better back then [I haven’t actually confirmed this as obviously breakdowns effected his competitors at the time as well]).

        I truly find it amazing that the teams are seemingly able to calculate within such fine tolerances, the point at which the risk of any notable gains by pushing the PU are outweighed by the probability of failure.

        I note the discussion above with regard to penalties, but Frank makes the point that has often intrigued me. If a back marker team pushed their power unit to the point that it would break down say half the time. Yes, they would essentially be starting from the back every time (as they would basically be doing anyway) but surely there would be enough performance gain to get into the points more regularly than they otherwise would. The fact that they do not do this re-enforces (for me) my previous point that they must genuinely believe they are both ‘marginally’, but at the same time ‘assuredly’ with the PU limits.

        1. As you are no doubt aware – engine manufacturers determine the conditions the engines operate within, and even embed staff in each customer team to manage this.
          Even if a Haas or Williams wanted to ‘turn it up’ for gains in every second or third race – they would be forbidden from doing so, even if their version of the ECU software allowed it. Which it wouldn’t, of course.

          Gains made in increasing performance in other ways (ie, reduced cooling for better aero efficiency, or even tighter packaging) wouldn’t boost performance enough to make up for the retirements that would almost inevitably ensue.
          These engines are reliable because the rules say they have to be, and there’s no getting around that.

  2. Tell me what else is boring about F1, huh?

    No spins, no collisions, no crashes, no racing, no nothing… F1 has become so blend it almost feels like it doesn’t exist.
    Oh, but we can always hope for a new investigation of the week.

  3. Max Verstappen has won 17 consecutive pole positions, a new record.

    The second consecutive season-opening Bahrain GP Pierre Gasly qualified & started dead last.
    On a related note, Team Enstone propped up the field for the first time in a while.

    The first Bahrain race with all drivers reaching the chequered flag & the first-ever such season-opener.
    Additionally, the race also became the fifth-shortest race for BIC with a winner’s overall time of 1:31.44.742 bettered only by the first four Bahrain GPs:
    2004: 1:28:34.875
    2005: 1:29:18.531
    2006: 1:29:46.205
    2008: 1:31:06.970

    The second consecutive season-opener with a Red Bull Racing one-two & Checo’s first second-place finish since the last Italian GP six months ago.

    The first race without anyone using the middle compound since three compounds per event became a thing back in 2016 or at least I don’t recall such an occurrence in any other race within this period.

    Lastly, on a more trivial note, the first GP for Williams with a built-in steering wheel display since the 2007 Brazilian GP & the first such LCD one.

    1. notagrumpyfan
      5th March 2024, 8:27

      Max Verstappen has won 17 consecutive pole positions, a new record.

      You confused me, but I guess (I haven’t checked) that this refers to having won his last 17 races where he started from pole position.

      1. Yes. I guess I should’ve worded that differently to be a little more clear with what I meant.

    2. Not a great performance by the steering wheel.

    3. Not only was my Caption Competition entry referencing a mobile phone holder as a Williams cockpit display poorly received at the time, this change now makes it look positively confusing should anyone read it going forward :-( .

  4. Approval for team Lada’s admission to F1 confirmed!

    1. Mandatory Lucas Electric devices for all cars.

  5. * Max has now won 20 races within a rolling 1 year period extending his record.
    * Max has won 50 of the last 100 races tying for 2nd place with Schumacher, still 5 race wins in 100 races behind Lewis.

    * Red Bull has now won 22 races within a rolling 1 year period extending its record.
    * Red Bull won 55 of the last 100 races tying for 3rd place with Williams, Ferrari is 2nd with 63 and Mercedes is still far ahead with 75 wins in 100 races.

    * Max has scored 22 podiums within a rolling 1 year period extending his record.
    * Max has been on the podium 75 times in last 100 races – ranked 2nd behind Lewis with 82 podiums in 100 races.

    * Max has broken the record of most consecutive points scored scoring 1,030 points in 42 consecutive raceweekends breaking Lewis record of 1,008 points in 48 consecutive raceweekends (2018 British – 2020 Bahrain).
    If counting only race days (so excluding sprint races) Max is at 964 points while Lewis stays at 1,008 points as sprint races only started in 2021.

    1. Max has now won 20 races within a rolling 1 year period extending his record.

      Even with the extended calendars, that is a shocking statistic.

      Max has won 50 of the last 100 races tying for 2nd place with Schumacher, still 5 race wins in 100 races behind Lewis.

      Which means he only has to score 5 more wins in 2024-2025 than he managed in 2019-2020 abd that record is his.

      1. Correct Max won 3 races in 2019 and 2 races in 2020.

        The current 100 races run from Monaco 2019 to Bahrain 2024, so with 16 races in 2019 and Max having won 3, Max need to win 8 of the next 16 races to tie with Lewis.
        Earliest possible moment is Monaco if Max wins next 7 races.

  6. There should always be accidents at each GP. Always. It should be a consequence of pushing cars to the limits of human ability and concentration for almost 2 hours.

    Cars are too easy to drive, and they are not being pushed, due to the tyres. This is the issue. And it makes for full racing. Instead of fixing aero (also needed doing) they should have fixed the tyres.

    1. Andy (@andyfromsandy)
      5th March 2024, 12:49

      I forget the race now but last year one GP mandated a maximum number of laps on the tyres and the drivers were pushing more than they have in a GP.

      Makes sense maybe the same should be done on a regular basis.

    2. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
      5th March 2024, 14:30

      I don’t agree that there should accidents at every GP but they should be fighting for position with more passion. I feel the entire paddock is sort of comatose at this point and has been since 2021. I think that season tainted the sport in a way that is almost unrecoverable and it was followed by the farcical overspend, in hindsight, which they should not have revealed. If you’re not going to hold them accountable or give them any meaningful penalty, just sweep it under the rug and pretend it didn’t happen. It’s worse ethically but at least we’d all marvel at Red Bull’s supremacy irrespective of the legality of how it was gained.

      Last year every driver was saying “what’s the point of this? it will last until 2525”. This Saturday, it was confirmed that they were right.

      It’s hard to motivate yourself when there’s a race but really no race past a 500 meter dash. Okay Charles, make those 500 meters count and then give up the position!!!

      1. notagrumpyfan
        5th March 2024, 15:40

        every GP but they should be fighting for position with more passion

        Don’t get too vocal or FOM/FIA will start awarding points for each on-track overtake (excluding teammates).

  7. Get rid of the minimum weight limit and then the engineers will actually be rewarded for taking risks. Currently to get the the weight limit is not that hard and maintain safe margins of error for component failure. If you free up the weight limit then teams will be rewarded for lowering the safety of margin and you will naturally get more unreliability. The weight limit is too high. Maybe if you remove the weight limit you will see smaller cars too.

  8. Did we or just me miss Jim Clarks birthday yesterday/today wherever people are?
    Know you can’t read or hear this but thanks for the memories.

    1. Sorry Keith.
      Found it.

  9. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
    5th March 2024, 14:16

    This raises an interesting point. Let’s take Mercedes, they had an overheating issue and managed it but did that management come at the expense of potentially more points and more racing? I guess with all the sensors and data they collect now, they can make better decisions to proactively manage a car’s likelihood to fail.

    Usually one would expect more retirements during the inaugural race of the season especially with limited testing as teams would try to eke out as much performance as possible. Perhaps the penalties for engines and other parts have made teams more risk averse and the potential payoff of performing well in a single race may not outweigh the potential penalties they may face later on during the season.

  10. Always enjoy the Stats and Facts but almost missed this one because the label is Formula 1 instead of 2024 Bahrain GP stats and facts like last year.

    1. @x1znet Thanks for that feedback – I’ll keep that in mind for upcoming races.

      1. Likewise, I only stumbled across this by accident, as it’s linked in the Saudi preview article.

  11. First season since 1977 in which the first race of the season has not seen any driver make their debut start.

    First time since Europe 2016 that the Enstone-based team have been the two slowest cars in qualifying.

    2nd consecutive year in which Mercedes have finished 5th and 7th in Bahrain.

    18th consecutive season in which Hamilton has scored at least 1 point – a new record.

    Thanks to statsf1 and the official F1 site for some of these.

Comments are closed.