| Jim Clark | Peter Gethin | |
|---|---|---|
| Career | ||
| Championships | 2 | — |
| Career span | 1960–1968 | 1970–1974 |
| Seasons | 9 | 5 |
| Race starts | 72 | 30 |
| Teams | Lotus | McLaren, BRM, Lola |
| Wins & podiums era-dependent · not directly comparable across eras | ||
| Wins | 25 | 1 |
| Podiums | 32 | 1 |
| Poles | 33 | 0 |
| Fastest laps | 28 | 0 |
| Era-fair rates career rate · across all seasons | ||
| Win % | 34.7% | 3.3% |
| Podium % | 44.4% | 3.3% |
| Pole % | 45.8% | 0.0% |
| Reliability & consistency era-dependent · see explanation | ||
| DNF rate | 33.3% | 63.3% |
| Points-finish rate | 55.6% | 10.0% |
| Points scoring-era variable · not directly comparable | ||
| Career total | 274 | 11 |
The share of race starts that ended without a classified finish. Formula: races not finished ÷ race starts × 100. Races the driver did not start are excluded from both sides. A disqualification counts as a finish that scored nothing, not a DNF. Why it sits apart from the era-fair rates: unlike a win or a podium, finishing meant something very different in different eras. Cars in the 1950s–70s broke constantly; modern cars almost always reach the flag. A high DNF rate in 1955 says far more about the machinery than the driver. Comparing two drivers within the same season is meaningful — they faced the same conditions. Across eras it's context, not a verdict.
The share of race starts that ended in a points-paying position. Formula: races finished in a scoring position ÷ race starts × 100, using that season's real points system. Why it's era-dependent: the number of positions that pay points has changed repeatedly — the top five scored in 1950, the top ten score today. A modern driver has roughly twice as many scoring positions available for the same relative performance, so a higher percentage doesn't necessarily mean a better driver. Like DNF rate, it's shown as context.