Talk:Triple Crown of Motorsport

Villeneuve
Juan pablo isnt the only active driver to win 2 legs as Villneuve is competing in the 24 hours of le mans.
 * Villeneuve has not won two of the three. If he does, he will be a second active one. --Chr.K. 00:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Villeneuve only won the Indy 500 of these three. However, I heard the term Triple Crown used to describe the Indy 500, F1 World Championship and 24 of Le Mans (which Villeneuve would have completed had he won at Le Mans) --Kelsomallette 03:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * http://sport.guardian.co.uk/motorsport/story/0,,2104097,00.html also says the Triple Crown is Indy 500, F1 World Championship & 24 Hour Le Mans. If that is the case, Hill is still the only Triple Crown winner, but Montoya isn't even close... Can someone come up with a source verifying that the Monaco F1 GP is a part of the Triple Crown? Otherwise I'd suggest we change the page. --Fred Bradstadt 12:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

TRIPLE CROWN
What an bizarre notion that anyone would think that the definition of Motor Racing's Triple crown is the Indianapolis 500 (yes) Le Mans (yes) and..... the Monaco Grand Prix!!

The Monaco Grand Prix is only PART of the Formula 1 World championship, and ANY authoritative reference you care to look up (even the one on the French version of Wikipedia, which at some point this article makes reference to) will confirm that the Triple Crown of Motor Racing is regarded as :

FIA F1 World championship

Le Mans 24 Hours

Indianapolis 500

The only driver that has so far captured all three is Graham Hill, (Jacques Villeneuve has 2/3, namely the Indy 500 and the F1 championship) and so long as the present entry for both "Graham Hill" and the "Triple Crown" remain defined as they are at present in Wikipedia, they will define precicely the weakness of Wikipedia, namely they are the work of someone more interested in his/her (misguided) conviction in their own infallability, rather than providing true facts.Peterkirchem 20:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * It isn't a "bizarre notion", and there are NO "true facts". There is no such thing as the Triple Crown of Motor Racing, in so far as no such trophy has ever been awarded. It's a recurrent notion, mostly of journalists, but the contents vary. I have seen each of the suggestions here called the Triple Crown, and I have seen the Daytona 500 included as well. If the accolade is to be included, it seems to me that the only solution - apart from name-calling and an edit war - would be to document and SOURCE the various suggestions. -- Ian Dalziel 16:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The first time I ever heard of the Triple Crown was back in the late 1960's / early 1970's - and almost certainly again around the time that Hill won Le Mans in 1972. There should be mention in the (UK) motoring press from around that time.   Online the only non wikipedia article that mentions the "F1 championship" being part of the triple crown is the one in the Grauniad Guardian, and we all know how accurate that rag is :)  The article [] is by 'Oliver Irish', someone I've never heard of, who doesn't even feature on their 'sporting writers' page and someone who's father was probably still in short pants in 1972.  I'd place absolutely no reliance on a source such as this and more on those who were there at the time - I was, but some would prefer to believe the words of a trainee reporter/wet behind the ears 'expert' than an old fart like me.  Be buggered if I'm having an edit war over this, I'd prefer to keep my blood pressure where it should be! M100 18:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth, what the French Wikipedia version of this page actually says is "In motorsports, the most prevalent definition of the Triple Crown is for a driver to achieve win during his career the world championship in Formula 1, the 500 miles from Indianapolis and the 24 hours of Le Mans" (translation courtesy of Google Translate, my italics). It then goes on to say "This definition of the triple crown had no official sanction, it may be subject to minor variations. Thus, it may also consist of the completion of three Indianapolis 500-24 hours of Le Mans and the Monaco GP, the three most prestigious events in the international calendar.". I agree with Ian Dalziel that this page should be updated to describe both possible definitions of the term. DH85868993 (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. DH85868993 (talk) 01:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The second reference quoted in the article is on a page first cached  by google on 29 Nov 2007 @ 04:10:02 GMT has no sources quoted and incidentally has no copy existing at www.archive.org - the cynical might say it was created in the past week or so purely to support the premise that the F1 championship is part of the triple crown and to support the changes to this page.  The first reference also doesn't quote its source either, and neither does the French wikipedia article.  Sadly history and other 'reference' works will probably now cite this wikipedia article as 'fact' when others including myself know it isn't.  M100 (talk) 12:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * A lot of younger Wikipedia editors probably don't realize that, until the F1 world championship was a couple of decades old, it didn't have the kind of preeminence among fans that it has today, and individual F1 races had a special mystique that they no longer have. To win an F1 race at Monaco (or the 'Ring) put one in a special class among F1 drivers, just as a win at Le Mans put one in a special class among endurance drivers, and a win at Indy put one in a special class among champ car drivers.  So, in those days (and that is the era we're talking about, realistically), a "triple crown" of individual races in different series made perfect sense to fans, whereas a "triple crown" consisting of a mix of individual races and entire championships would have seemed odd.  Having said that, though, I agree that the entire notion of a "triple crown" as a valid Wikipedia article is a bit suspect.--Tedd (talk) 17:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speaking as one of the older Wikipedia editors, I can assert that when I first heard the term it referred to the World Championship. Now, do you have any basis for that assertion other than it making "perfect sense"? My OR is just as good as your OR. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 01:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't want you to think that I'm arguing for "Monaco, Le Mans, and Indy" as the official definition of the "triple crown of motorsport." As I said, I think the concept is questionable as a Wikipedia article to begin with.  The article itself points out that there are several alternate definitions, and none of the references pre-dates Hill's win a Le Mans.  Also, I can find no references to the term that pre-date Hill's win at Le Mans in any of the books in my own library, which runs back to 1958.  So it seems questionable to me that there was a triple crown of motorsport consisting of Monaco, Le Mans, and Indy sitting around waiting for someone to win it.  It seems more likely that this particular definition was created after the fact, and doesn't deserve any special status in the article.


 * Having said that, though, I maintain that a "triple crown" that included the World Driver's Championship would have been unlikely until relatively recently (by which I mean since around the time Hill won Le Mans). The World Championship did not exist before 1950, and it would not have made a lot of sense to make a claim for driving greatness for which many of the drivers still considered to be "the greats" could not possibly have qualified.  Whatever the genesis of the term "triple crown," it's clear that it could have been defined as some combination of three races at almost any time in history, but it could not have included the World Championship until some time after 1950, and it would not have made sense to include the World Championship until such time as the pre-1950 drivers were no longer considered particularly relevant, which would have been much later (if ever).--Tedd (talk) 21:46, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I think the idea originated with Hill's Le Mans win - never heard of it before that. The first references I encountered were to the WDC, though - including Monaco seemed to come later. That usage certainly exists now - don't really see why Monaco would have been considered pre-eminent, though. Monza, or the French GP, or even the British GP, were always as important. --Ian Dalziel (talk) 23:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

(outdent) I've added two more refs for the "World Championship" definition - the Guardian reference mentioned above, plus one from Bette Hill's book. DH85868993 (talk) 13:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * and one more for the "Monaco GP" definition. It really appears (to me) as though both definitions are used. DH85868993 (talk) 13:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

So we are back on with the Triple Crown thing !! As someone has quite correctly pointed out, there is in fact no such thing as the Triple Crown of Motorsport. It is a concept invented by someone for the sake of it, and as there is certainy no formal recognition of it in any form whatsoever, such as a trophy, a prize, a website dedicated to it, I am surprised it is included in Wikipedia which purports to deal in facts only. Anyway, I have dropped Mad Max Moseley a tongue in cheek email asking him to rule on the whole matter. Crikey.. maybe we get a fine of 50 million quid... and..... hold the presses.... !! Havent we forgotten someone who came close to winning the triple crown, and, if you include the Daytona 500 instead of Le Mans (as someone has) DID win the Triple Crown.... namely Mario Andretti !! And he came pretty darned close to winning Le Mans too, coming 2nd in 1995 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkirchem (talk • contribs) 12:44, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, Indianapolis is PART of IndyCar and Le Mans has the Le Mans Series, so what's your point, Peterkirchem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.32.251.16 (talk) 22:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Once upon a time USAC had a formal "triple crown" with prize money for Indy, Michigan, and Pocono. NASCAR had a three of four events triple crown. Does any sanctioning body recognize this romantic triple crown? This looks suspiciously like some over-the-top Graham Hill fan put this nonsense (Monaco) together to further the legend. Indy, LeMans, Monza would be more appropriate; answer is still Graham Hill. How about Indy, Monza, Daytona? Mario Andretti. Truth is the only one I've ever heard of as some sort of international "triple crown" is Indy, LeMans, Daytona, in which case AJ Foyt stands alone. Then again, Indy doesn't mean nearly as much as it used to so I guess if you went with Monza, Le Mans and Sebring you'd have to talk about Phil Hill. Further begs the question, if Monaco is so significant, and this has supposedly been widely accepted since the 1960s, how come Jim Clark skipped that event in the 1960s to race Indy? It's an undeniable fact this is a subjective definition of triple crown and inappropriate content for Wikipedia.Rickbolger (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

I was trying to resolve the question on which definition of the Triple Crown of motor racing is the "correct" one:
 * Le Mans 24 hours, Indy 500 and Monaco F1 GP
 * Le Mans 24 hours, Indy 500 and F1 Drivers' Championship

Two things came to light:
 * A sentence often used to describe the Triple Crown is that it consists of winning the 3 most prestigious races of motor racing.
 * A quick Google search for "Triple Crown of motor racing" and opening only search results that didn't link back to Wikipedia or wiki-type sites that often draw from Wikipedia revealed that, out of 5 sites, all 5 listed the Monaco F1 GP as part of the Triple Crown, and only 1 mentioned that "some people" consider the F1 Drivers' Championship as being part of the Triple Crown. There's always going to be "some people", isn't there. Real tlhingan (talk) 23:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Did your Google search turn up the previous discussion on this page? There is quite clearly no "correct" definition. You might be surprised to learn that F1 considerably pre-dates the internet... I don't think you will be able to show that Bette Hill's book links back to Wikipedia, either. Both definitions have been, and are, used. Ian Dalziel (talk) 15:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * There's been a lot more talk of the Triple Crown now that Alonso seems to be attempting it, and not once have I heard a definition that includes the world championship. This is dangerously close to original research. Wicka wicka (talk) 19:32, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Erm... "not once have I heard" and YOU'RE accusing people of original research? There are references in the article and in this very discussion to the world championship being considered part of the "triple crown". Ian Dalziel (talk) 14:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

definition...
The interesting part of this is, that Hill is the last le mans winner on this list. This is even more interesting, as Jim Clark (the only driver without a le mans win being added to this list before Hill) had a second place there - but out of the other four (and adding to this Nigel Mansell, who won both titles, but not their major events) only two even ever started in le mans - Andretti several times with one second place, Villeneuve with one start and only a 30th place). --TheK (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Le Mans is an endurance race, so it demands different skills compared to speed racing. Many people who has made good results in F1 or CART has failed in Le Mans and many who were good in Le Mans never had any luck in F1 or CART. John Anderson   (talk) 09:40, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=https://co.marca.com/claro/motor/2021/08/25/6125566e22601da6118b460f.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)

Triple Crown for Constructors
I thought it'd be interesting to add a constructors' section of the Triple Crown of Motorsport. When the crown is considered to consist of Indy, Le Mans and Monaco, both McLaren and Mercedes are the only constructors to have won all three. Only McLaren succeeded to take the other definition of the crown, with the F1 Constructors' championship instead of the Monaco Grand Prix. (Should one opt to look at the Drivers' title in this matter, which appears to be illogical, it's also McLaren and Mercedes, by the way). Lustigson (talk) 08:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've taken the liberty of adding the section myself. Hope you like it. Lustigson (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It is interesting but I think "Triple Crown" is usually used only for the drivers...--Morio (talk) 15:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I can't find any reference anywhere to a constructors triple crown. I'm concerned that us at Wikipedia have effectively invented it. If we can't find any reference to such a thing anywhere (I note this morning that Williams (!) was being used to justify a Triple Crown for Ford) then I am going to strongly suggested deleting the Constructors section as a violation of WP:OR. --Falcadore (talk) 00:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've only ever heard of the Triple Crown in reference to drivers. Per Falcadore's comment, if we can't find a reliable source for a constructors Triple Crown, the section should be deleted. DH85868993 (talk) 00:33, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Lustigson (talk) 14:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The section has been removed (in November 2010). DH85868993 (talk) 01:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Is this really a formal, accepted term?
I see a few webpages here and there, a couple recent press articles which make a passing mention of it (some possibly influenced by this wiki), often in a short and informal manner. But I do not see consistent and widespread recognition of this achievement by officials and observers of the race driving world, like the grand slam in tennis. It seems to me that the term's occurrence is limited to a few articles about Graham Hill, and this wikipage has been taylor-made as a tribute to his achievement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.233.107.169 (talk) 05:51, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Does it have to be a formal title? It is not a formal title but it is nevertheless widely accepted and discussed over many decades, since the 1960s at least. That ongoing discussion over such a long period of time certainly meets notability standards. --Falcadore (talk) 11:55, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

NOPE! the title is unofficial and honorary

source:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=https://co.marca.com/claro/motor/2021/08/25/6125566e22601da6118b460f.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)

Missing drivers on table
What happened to Alain Prost and Ayrton Senna, since both of them won in Monaco and became F1 Champions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.160.232.101 (talk) 00:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The two alternative definitions of the Triple Crown are:
 * Indy+Le Mans+Monaco GP
 * Indy+Le Mans+F1 World Championship
 * So the Monaco GP and the F1 World Championship are alternatives for one "leg" of the Triple Crown. Although I agree that's not especially clear from the table (although it is explained in the text). DH85868993 (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Triple Crown of Motorsport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080118101235/http://www.lastingtribute.co.uk:80/famousperson/hill/2601501 to http://www.lastingtribute.co.uk/famousperson/hill/2601501

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Fernando Alonso
Where is Alonso? I am quite sure he is actively trying to get the prize... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.82.195.27 (talk) 18:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have renamed the "Active competitors" section to reflect that it only discusses active competitors who have completed two legs of the Triple Crown. In theory any active competitor could claim to be "pursuing the Triple Crown". DH85868993 (talk) 09:46, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sheesh. Alonso has entered one non-F1 triple crown event once (and failed to finish) and he must already be included because he's "pursuing the triple crown"? At least Nico Hülkenberg won when he ventured into a non-F1 triple crown event. If he wins in Monaco one of the upcoming seasons, he'll have completed two legs of the Triple Crown.Tvx1 19:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Mark Webber/Others
Mark Webber has a Monaco Win (2010) and Le Mans (2015), and im sure theres a few others. Id edit the table myself but im unfamiliar with the syntax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.143.32 (talk) 22:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Webber has not won the 24 Hours of Le Mans. He finished second in 2015. He won the 2015 FIA World Endurance Championship, but that's not the same thing. DH85868993 (talk) 01:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
 * If you are sure there are others, find them! --Falcadore (talk) 09:53, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Triple Crown of Motorsport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071106023236/http://www.usgpindy.com/news/story.php?story_id=1417 to http://www.usgpindy.com/news/story.php?story_id=1417
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071211040252/http://intakeinfo.com/automotive/monaco-grand-prix-glitz-draws-rising-stars.html to http://intakeinfo.com/automotive/monaco-grand-prix-glitz-draws-rising-stars.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Montoya
Juan Pablo Montoya, Henrik Hedman, and Ben Hanley won the 24 hours on 2021. They won the race on their category lmp2 pro am, there was a podium and a trophy for got sakes... then all the winners in history of LMP2 (Le Mans Prototype 2) ...LMGTE PRO. LMGTE PRO. ...LMGTE AM. LMGTE AM didn't won the race?. Montoya won, and after Graham Hill he won the 3 races without alternative realities or definitions, one of them twice. The original definition specified winning the 3 races, well he won the 3 of them.... 181.55.155.218 (talk) 08:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * In line with the commonly accepted definition, you have to be the overall winner, class winner does not count. SSSB (talk) 11:01, 24 August 2021 (UTC) LEGAL PROOF OF THAT????  fia rules or accus rules to that??
 * This is the same reason Mario Andretti, who won the WSC class while finishing 2nd overall at the 1995 24 Hours of Le Mans, is not listed. That's the precedent, and until we have reliable sources other than JPM's own assertion there's no reason to change it.

Bakkster Man (talk) 15:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Not to belabor the point, but the same for Stirling Moss who was one of 5 class winners in the 1956 24 Hours of Le Mans. Also not listed on the page for good reason. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * He didn't even finish first in LMP2. So claims that he has now won the triple crown have even less basis than I thought. SSSB (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * They won the race on their category lmp2 pro am, there was a podium and a trophy for got sakes... then all the winners in history of LMP2 (Le Mans Prototype 2) ...LMGTE PRO. LMGTE PRO. ...LMGTE AM. LMGTE AM didn't won the race? Correct, they won their class, not the race itself. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)


 * let's see.. So lets take for example Alessandro Pier Guidi, he runs on
 * GTE pro, and he won. So, if somebody asks him if he won the the 24h.. he has to answer... ummm.. NO I finished 20th. but I won the GTE pro.. really? then you will have to correct all the articles in Wikipedia, because no one goes to le mans.. wins the race, and will say... no I finished 20th overall.
 * starting because there are only 5 LMH, and there is no way in the world that a GTE pro can win over a LMH... then the 5 LMH have the first 5 places of the race secured..
 * No one would run to say Im not the winner I finished 20th because it is fisically impossible to win... thats absurd..
 * and to me honestly Montoya is closer to the objective than Alonso for example.. is not the same to retire in one of the objectives, than to win a 'Sub Category' as you say (like he didnt win anything, he, his team mates, and team, were just running for fun)... he (Montoya) finished the race and won it. Each sub category has its own requirements, and if you win, you win the 24 hours of lemans. Otherwise it would not make sense even to run that race. Now, perhaps you have to clarify that only the top category counts to achive the triple crown,and be very clear, and to be honest with you, is that clear since the beginning, that would be my question. 181.55.155.218 (talk) 02:48, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * So, if somebody asks him if he won the the 24h.. he has to answer... ummm.. NO I finished 20th. but I won the GTE pro.. really? - yes, because he hasn't won the race, only the GTE Pro category of the race. No one would run to say Im not the winner I finished 20th because it is fisically impossible to win... thats absurd.. - irrelevant. I would say Guidi and Montoya haven't won their class. Guidi won his class, and Montoya one his sub-class but neither has won the race. to me honestly Montoya is closer to the objective than Alonso for example - irrelevant. Each sub category has its own requirements, and if you win, you win the 24 hours of lemans. - you win your sub-category, not the overall race. Otherwise it would not make sense even to run that race. - they race because they enjoy it, because winning in your category is still an impressive achievement, even if you don't win the overall race, because it is still profitable to not win. Need I go on? Now, perhaps you have to clarify that only the top category counts to achive the triple crown,and be very clear, and to be honest with you, is that clear since the beginning, that would be my question. - that's not true. If all the cars in the top class retire, or suffer major difficulties... It says you have to win the race, if people don't understand that winning a race means beating everyone else in that race, that can't be helped. SSSB (talk) 07:55, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, many professional drivers specifically avoid saying they won the race unless they distinguish that it was a class victory. But there's two simple reasons why we're not listing Montoya:
 * We don't have an independent, reliable source that we can cite listing him as a triple crown winner. This is required for an encyclopedia, we can't independently determine him the winner.
 * We have no reason to believe any reliable source will list him as a triple crown winner, because nobody has bestowed that title to past class winners like Andretti.


 * Hope that explains it. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)


 * MARIO ANDRETTI NEVER WON MONACO GRAND PRIX AND SURELY NOT THE OVERALL RACE AT DAYTONA 24
 * Source:


 * https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=https://co.marca.com/claro/motor/2021/08/25/6125566e22601da6118b460f.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs) 18:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Daytona is irrelevant. It is not a part of the triple crown of motorsport. And no, Andretti did not win the Monaco GP (no-one has claimed he did). But the point is that Andretti's triple crown wins are listed in the article, and his 24 Hours of Le Mans class win isn't listed. That is the precedent that Bakkster Man talks about. As for your source, it says that most people don't consider Montoya to have Le Mans - Wikipedia follows what most people say. So your source actually goes against your position.SSSB (talk) 18:38, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

ESPN Proclaimed Montoya as owner of the triple crown:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=https://www.espn.com.co/video/clip/_/id/9100076?fbclid%3DIwAR2Y1QU_OqACW2xBKg96XOUMbNtfJ8IjGD6WYbhNMPlyf4Dcwpt8-6I5EIg

and this media granted him a "mini-triple"

"In the new LMP2 Pro-Am category, an illustrious Formula 1 player could triumph. Juan Pablo Montoya prevailed alongside Ben Hanley and Henrik Hedman, and it is not just any victory, because the Colombian is chasing the 'Triple Crown', like Fernando Alonso. That is, winning in Monaco, Indianapolis and Le Mans.

He has already achieved the first two things, and although this category triumph does not count towards winning the 24 Hours of Le Mans, it is a victory that gives him a kind of mini 'Triple Crown', waiting to see if any brand bets on him in the future, when hypercars multiply."

Source:

https://www-motorpasion-com.translate.goog/otras-competiciones/drama-robert-kubica-mini-triple-corona-juan-pablo-montoya-otras-historias-24-horas-le-mans?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=es-419&_x_tr_pto=nui,elem

P.S.  he earned the very same 50 points like the overall winners.... Andretti class victory was in 1995 when FIA was not endorsing le mans 24 ... FIA nor IMSA did not endorse le mans 24 from 1994 to 1996 ... Because there was no world endurance championship

In my opinion: I would grant the triple crown, if JPM earns the championship trophy for drivers within his class in 2021 ... Hill never won WEC's drivers' class or overall championship NOR ROC

plus: HILL won le mans 24 with 344 laps only

montoya won his class with 356 laps — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * please don't add the same comment/try to have the same discussion in multiple places. Doing so may be considered WP:FORUMSHOPPING and will result in you getting yourself in hot water. Thank you. SSSB (talk) 10:42, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Unsigned comments from Rvanegap
> This is message is in regarding this article: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_of_Motorsport > https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_couronne_en_sport_automobile > https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_(automobilismo) >https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E4%B8%89%E5%A4%A7%E3%83%AC%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B9 >https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tr%C3%ADplice_Coroa_do_Automobilismo >https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trippelkronan_av_Motorsport >https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%89%E5%86%A0%E7%8E%8B_(%E8%B5%9B%E8%BD%A6) > > The point is, an authority ruled in Favor of jp montoya long before the start of > the race.... There is this youtube video by FIA the judge for LE MANS 24 and the > FIA WEC : >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ojKjsPuYXM >ACCORDING TO THIS PIECE OF EVIDENCE, jp montoya pocketed the honorific and > unofficial triple crown of motorsports.... > the info must be updated .... Otherwise it is misleading and merely a personal > opinion with no legal value....Or am i wrong?

There is this youtube video by FIA the judge for LE MANS 24 and the > FIA WEC : > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ojKjsPuYXM > ACCORDING TO THIS PIECE OF EVIDENCE, jp montoya pocketed the honorific and > unofficial triple crown of motorsports....I think it should be added

This is message is in regarding this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_of_Motorsport https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_couronne_en_sport_automobile https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_(automobilismo) https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C%E4%B8%89%E5%A4%A7%E3%83%AC%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B9 https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tr%C3%ADplice_Coroa_do_Automobilismo https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trippelkronan_av_Motorsport https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%89%E5%86%A0%E7%8E%8B_(%E8%B5%9B%E8%BD%A6) > The point is, an authority ruled in Favor of jp montoya long before the start of > the race.... There is this youtube video by FIA the judge for LE MANS 24 and the > FIA WEC : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ojKjsPuYXM > ACCORDING TO THIS PIECE OF EVIDENCE, jp montoya pocketed the honorific and > unofficial triple crown of motorsports.... >the info must be updated .... Otherwise it is misleading and merely a personal > opinion with no legal value....

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)
 * It's unclear what the YouTube link you posted to an interview before the race is meant to indicate. Please provide a timestamp if you want someone else to verify.
 * That said, we're going to want a secondary source that directly calls him a Triple Crown winner, which this isn't. And for that to happen, we'd have had people applying the title to Mario Andretti already, as he is a class-winner at Le Mans as well. This is unlikely to happen. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * For others, the timestamp is 24:20, where JPM explicitly replies to the question of the Triple Crown with referring to overall victory and needing to be in a Toyota for that, until the Hypercar class increases car counts. Per this source (and JPM's own words) he doesn't have the Triple Crown. Bakkster Man (talk) 16:03, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The English language Wikipedia requires you to win the overall classification to be listed as a triple crown winner. This is by de facto consensus, based on the definition of winning (beating everyone else, EVERYONE, not just those in your class.) I don't mind adding a sentence saying that some sources consider Montoya as having won the Triple Crown, but am strongly opposed to listing win as having completed the crown. SSSB (talk) 16:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * } What sources actually consider Montoya a Triple Crown winner, though? We have, to my knowledge, one interview in another language where Montoya makes the claim himself, and then a bunch of WP:OR. I haven't yet seen a WP:SECONDARY source claiming he has the Triple Crown, let alone a reliable one which also considers Mario Andretti's 2nd place overall WSC class victory to also place him in the category. Unless and until there's a source, no reason to change anything. Bakkster Man (talk) 16:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, IF some sources consider Montoya to have won, I don't mind having a note, even though we won't consider Montoya a winner. SSSB (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

new proof:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=https://co.marca.com/claro/motor/2021/08/25/6125566e22601da6118b460f.html

source of confusion:

https://www.porscheroadandrace.com/porsche-and-the-triple-crown-of-endurance-racing/

i am not stating montoya won the triple crown, HILL and the journalists back in the day, they made up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)
 * That's not proof, it's an opinion article saying it's "up to interpretation". No source is listing him as achieving the triple crown, not yet. Again, there's a reason why we don't list Mario Andretti's class win, there's even less reason to list Montoya's sub-class win. Bakkster Man (talk) 17:38, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

SHOW ME the fia or accus rules for the triple crown??? there are not any.... Because such a crown is honorary and unofficial ... No constructor, no manufacturer, no sponsor has rules about it and it is not endorsed by them....

unlike this one:

https://www.porscheroadandrace.com/porsche-and-the-triple-crown-of-endurance-racing/

or that of NASCAR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)
 * Of course it's an honorary, unofficial title. But that just means we need to base it around whether people refer to him as having achieved this honorary, unofficial accomplishment. And the motorsports world isn't referring to him as such, so there's nothing for us to add to the article.
 * Not sure why you mention the endurance triple crown as if it's somehow more official. It's not. Original research (WP:OR) doesn't make it into the article, you need a direct source for the thing. Bakkster Man (talk) 17:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Mario andretti and graham hill never won the overall race at daytona 24.... Montoya did it.... Mario andretti never won MOnaco grand prix


 * porsche asserts overall victory is needed to become a triple crown winner of FIA WEC ... Manufacturer and sponsor of such a triple crown... Respectable authority... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs) 18:23, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Daytona is irrelevant. It is not a part of the triple crown of motorsport (only triple crown of endurance). And no, Andretti did not win the Monaco GP (no-one has claimed he did). But the point is that Andretti's triple crown wins are listed in the article, and his 24 Hours of Le Mans class win isn't listed. That is the precedent that Bakkster Man talks about. SSSB (talk) 18:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * porsche asserts overall victory is needed to become a triple crown winner of FIA WEC ... Manufacturer and sponsor of such a triple crown... Respectable authority... Of the three races in the Endurance triple crown, only one of them is part of the FIA WEC. The endurance triple crown is just as unofficial as the overall one we've been discussing, Porsche does not 'sponsor' it. Please read your sources more carefully, your contributions are unproductive. Bakkster Man (talk) 19:17, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

official tombstone of some racers you are granting a triple crown:

https://halloffame.fia.com/driver-profile/626

https://halloffame.fia.com/driver-profile/616

https://www.motorsportshalloffame.com/inductees/graham-hill/

https://www.motorsportshalloffame.com/inductees/mario-andretti/

https://halloffame.fia.com/driver-profile/995

the races are listed as highlights of their careers or the only one so far .... BUT NO TRIPLE CROWN IS AWARDED....

none of this racers won ROC, Baldi and Andretti won daytona but Hill did not ... Montoya did! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs) 18:52, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Daytona isn't part of the triple crown. Le Mans is - but Montoya hasn't won it. SSSB (talk) 18:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

ESPN Proclaimed Montoya as owner of the triple crown:

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=es&tl=en&u=https://www.espn.com.co/video/clip/_/id/9100076?fbclid%3DIwAR2Y1QU_OqACW2xBKg96XOUMbNtfJ8IjGD6WYbhNMPlyf4Dcwpt8-6I5EIg

and this media granted him a "mini-triple"

"In the new LMP2 Pro-Am category, an illustrious Formula 1 player could triumph. Juan Pablo Montoya prevailed alongside Ben Hanley and Henrik Hedman, and it is not just any victory, because the Colombian is chasing the 'Triple Crown', like Fernando Alonso. That is, winning in Monaco, Indianapolis and Le Mans.

He has already achieved the first two things, and although this category triumph does not count towards winning the 24 Hours of Le Mans, it is a victory that gives him a kind of mini 'Triple Crown', waiting to see if any brand bets on him in the future, when hypercars multiply."

Source:

https://www-motorpasion-com.translate.goog/otras-competiciones/drama-robert-kubica-mini-triple-corona-juan-pablo-montoya-otras-historias-24-horas-le-mans?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=es-419&_x_tr_pto=nui,elem

P.S.  he earned the very same 50 points like the overall winners.... Andretti class victory was in 1995 when FIA was not endorsing le mans 24 ... FIA nor IMSA did not endorse le mans 24 from 1994 to 1996 ... Because there was no world endurance championship

In my opinion: I would grant the triple crown, if JPM earns the championship trophy for drivers within his class in 2021 ... Hill never won WEC's drivers' class or overall championship NOR ROC

plus: HILL won le mans 24 with 344 laps only

montoya won his class with 356 laps

BANANAS!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)
 * That's nice, but out opinions don't matter, and your source specifically says this category triumph does not count towards winning the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Here's another source saying it's "crazy" to suggest he has the Triple Crown. This isn't a Juan Montoya fan page, it's an encyclopedia. Bakkster Man (talk) 19:24, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Bakkster Man: and you are not a racing authority for a never sanctioned triple crown... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvanegap (talk • contribs)
 * Neither are you, which is why we need a citation. Which there are aren't, because nobody considers class wins (let alone sub-class wins) to count. Until that changes, we're done. Bakkster Man (talk) 00:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)


 * If the media assign him a "mini-triple crown" (we will need more than one source) becuase he won his class, I have objection including that. As for your andretti comments - so? With regards to your Hill comments - the fact he never won WEC (it didn't even exist) is irrelevant. I am not sure what ROC stands for...? As for the number of laps - given how much faster cars are these days - Hill's lap count is more impressive, but this is also irrelevant. SSSB (talk) 10:47, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ROC refers to Race of Champions, an event which was founded in 1988 (explaining why Graham Hill never won it). I agree it's irrelevant (Montoya's ROC win is listed on the ROC article, no need to reference it here), but figured I might as well at least satisfy your curiosity so this thread wasn't entirely useless. Bakkster Man (talk) 12:43, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Motorsport
Is racing really the only kind of motorsport? Grassynoel (talk) 05:39, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * No: Motorsport lists several non-racing forms of motorsport. DH85868993 (talk) 05:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

List of Triple Crown competitors
I recently added a table listing the 63 drivers (as of 2022) who have competed in all three legs, but it was quickly removed with the reason that it was "(unsourced) and not really relevant". I'd have appreciated the chance to defend this contribution before its deletion, and I'd like to argue those two points below:
 * 1) Unsourced: I'm not sure exactly what needs to be sourced here. A reference for every driver's participation in each of the three legs is overkill, and besides, one can simply click on the driver's article or the race's article, all of which I linked, if verification is needed. Further, a driver's result in a given race might count as "common knowledge" and not require referencing. For "fringe cases" such as David Hobbs' non-participation in the 1968 Monaco Grand Prix, I did indeed give references, so a sweeping generalisation that the list is "unsourced" is slightly unfair and belies the rigour with which it was compiled. If "unsourced" refers to my claim that the list is complete, it's difficult to give concrete references because I compiled the list with data from a range of sources. I could remedy this by giving general references to the databases: https://www.racing-reference.info (Indy), https://www.racingsportscars.com/ (Le Mans) and https://www.statsf1.com/en/grand-prix-monaco.aspx (Monaco GP). Would that be preferable?
 * 2) Not really relevant: A list of drivers to attempt the Triple Crown is surely relevant to an article on the Triple Crown. It gives context to the prestige of such an achievement, given the standard of drivers who have failed to do so, and its relative shortness shows how difficult it is even to compete in the three races across a single career. It provides a good resource for those seeking to find who (consciously or not) attempted it through history, in the same way as the table above it provides a good resource of those drivers who have won two legs. The table of drivers who have won two legs doesn't account for the fact that many of them never competed in all three, and it doesn't account for the fact that many others have ran very strongly in all three but not won more than one. Hence, there is a gap in the information provided by the article, which my table aims to fill. From a personal standpoint, I've been fascinated for years with the idea of drivers competing in multiple disciplines and I've been waiting for a resource such as this. I claim that, if I have sought this resource, many other people will too, which gives it some use. All this aside, "not really relevant" is not well-defined. What is the reason why it isn't relevant, and what could be changed to make it relevant?

If the list is not relevant to this article but useful in its own right, should I publish it as a standalone article?

I'm willing to work with you all on this, as I feel that the list is a useful and needed contribution to the motorsport section of Wikipedia.

Link to the table: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Triple_Crown_of_Motorsport&oldid=1092124454

Best wishes, DanTickner (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree with the removal, and retaining only the list of drivers who have won two of the three legs. My rationale is more on the topic of notability, which relates to the sourcing. Pulling individual racing histories from multiple sources to determine which drivers are "triple crown competitors" is what I would consider textbook WP:OR.
 * By way of example, is there a secondary source which refers to Chuck Daigh (with two DNQs and a DNF as his best results) as competing for the triple crown? That's what determines notability; not whether we think it's notable, but whether reliable sources consider it notable enough to cover. Is Daigh considered by others (or even himself) as a driver who attempt[ed] the Triple Crown? Is he actually contextualizing the standard of drivers who have failed in a way that listing McLaren, Clark, Rindt, Andretti, and Fittipaldi hasn't already?
 * You've compiles an interesting list, and I think it's worth publishing on a blog, but it's WP:NOT suited to Wikipedia. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * As additional context, Triple Crown of Thoroughbred Racing (United States) lists winners of these races, but not the individual horses which entered all three races in a single year. The article doesn't even describe every single horse which won 2 of 3, as only the horses who won the first two (failing on the last race) were considered notable enough (due to the extra media coverage). A list of drivers with every entry (even if their best result was a DNQ) is way outside existing precedent. Bakkster Man (talk) 15:07, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective. I was confused by the initial deletion, but your points on original research, notability and lack of a precedent hit the nail on the head. Happy to consider this matter closed. Cheers, DanTickner (talk) 18:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll add that there might be potential for a category to tag most of these drivers with, if we can demonstrate the general notability of 'drivers who competed at Monaco, Indy, and Le Mans' more broadly. Though my impression is that nearly all the attention is on the winners of at least one of those events attempting the others, not just the participants. Bakkster Man (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Triple Crown
Can anyone show a serious motor sport source that shows the Triple Crown to include Monaco rather than the WDC? Literally every single source from before at least 1995 has it as WDC and not Monaco. In Vitrio (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * This article from Reuters does a pretty good job of covering the disagreement. And as an unofficial title, that kind of disagreement is somewhat expected. Bakkster Man (talk) 19:05, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Misses out a lot though. Like NOBODY thought it was Monaco until a mistake by David Tremayne in the Independent.  Graham Hill even had a trophy with it inscribed after he won Le Mans from the BRCDC. In Vitrio (talk) 20:02, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * What's important is what people think now. That being, if you can find sources which confirm that F1 Championship came before Monaco GP, we could include that in a history section. SSSB (talk) 06:19, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Same with David Tremayne. We reflect what secondary sources say, and if there's a reliable source indicating that's where the change came from we can include it. Bakkster Man (talk) 12:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * The idea of ​​the Triple Crown is about the three greatest achievements that a driver can have in their career: the World Drivers' Championship (Formula 1) and the two races so big that they do not fit within its scope: Indianapolis 500 and 24 Hours of Le Mans.
 * It is not an official label, but a historical record that comes from the times of Graham Hill himself (Monaco's biggest winner until his death) and endorsed by people like Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve. The version of Triple Crown with the Monaco GP has no origin or relevance - Monaco is not even the oldest race in Formula 1, nor the one with the biggest audience, biggest prize and much less the most contested with today's cars. In addition to not being an open race, where you can sign up to specifically win it. A typical case of the idea that a lie repeated many times becomes the truth. Gefersonkern89 (talk) 21:39, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, the truth. The Monaco definition is explained in the sources included in the article, which you are free to consult. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 01:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah I saw. Four articles from journalists written in 2000s. How can it be more trustable than Graham Hills words? 191.19.109.211 (talk) 01:56, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Because Graham Hill is not the sole authority on the Triple Crown, nor does he decide when it is achieved. As everyone seems to agree, it is not an official award or prize bestowed by anyone on drivers, it's an unofficial achievement. If dozens of journalists over the last decade or two all take a different definition, why is that any less correct or arbitrary than Hill's original definition? 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 02:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * We can talk for the rest of our lives about this without reaching a conclusion, but it is difficult to understand how a decades-old definition endorsed by world champions (Graham and Damon Hill, Jacques Villeneuve) who have followed history over time can have no validity. Gefersonkern89 (talk) 02:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Nobody is saying it isn't valid – both definitions, as well as several other variants, are covered in the article. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 02:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding. Don't you think it might be appropriate to leave this duality of definitions in the first sentences of the article, instead of one being primary and the other secondary? It seems to me that it could be a fair way out for divergent views and with their reasonable arguments Gefersonkern89 (talk) 02:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure, the lead should summarise the entire article, not just one part. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 02:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thats my first time debating and trying to aggregate something in Wikipedia. How can I help or contribute here specially on this way? Gefersonkern89 (talk) 02:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * In this case you should feel free to make changes directly to the article to improve the lead section. This is the change that I have just made. If other editors disagree with changes, or want to make improvements of their own, they can either edit the article directly with remarks in the page history, or they might bring the changes back to the talk page for further discussion. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 02:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I submitted an edit trying to be the more impartial I can and justify my diploma in journalism. Thank you for your attention and I hope to be able to contribute to this and any motorsports subject that is my great passion. Gefersonkern89 (talk) 03:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Shell Motorsport
This year 2024 Shell Motorsport ran teams winning a triple crown, do they count as a team or not since they’re technically a sponsor 162.120.125.53 (talk) 05:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * They aren't "technically a sponsor", they are a sponsor, and nothing more. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 06:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)