2011 nurburgring results

Formula 1 2011 German Grand Prix results

• German Grand Prix

The race in Germany was round 10 of 19 of the 2011 season.

weather conditions

Weather conditions at 24 July 2011 12:00 GMT (raceday) .

2011 German Grand Prix

The 2011 German Grand Prix, formally the Formula 1 Grosser Preis Santander von Deutschland 2011, was a Formula One motor race that was held on 24 July 2011 at the Nürburgring in Nürburg, Germany. It was the tenth round of the 2011 Formula One season. The 60-lap race was won by McLaren's Lewis Hamilton , who had started from second position on the grid. Ferrari's Fernando Alonso finished in second place, and Mark Webber , who had started the race from pole position, completed the podium in third position for Red Bull Racing. Webber's teammate and championship leader Sebastian Vettel finished fourth, ending an eleven-race streak of finishing in the podium placings.

As a consequence of the race, Vettel's lead in the World Drivers' Championship was cut by Webber to 77 points. Hamilton's victory allowed him to move into third place in the championship, five points behind Webber in second, and four ahead of Alonso. In the World Constructors' Championship, Red Bull extended their championship lead to 112 points over McLaren, with Ferrari a further 51 points behind in third position.

source: Wikipedia

Although we strive to keep all data on this website correct and up to date, we do not state that it always is. The use of these data is at your own risk. By using this website you acknowledge that you are aware of this. A special thanks to Ergast for providing a comprehensive database of current and historical Formula 1 data! Formula 1 Statistics claims no rights to these data. All names, brands and otherwise copyrighted material are and remain property of their respective owners.

This website is unofficial and is not associated in any way with the Formula 1 companies. F1, FORMULA ONE, FORMULA 1, FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP, GRAND PRIX and related marks are trade marks of Formula One Licensing B.V.

• Formula 1 circuits
• Formula 1 constructors
• Formula 1 F1 drivers
• Formula 1 seasons
• Formula 1 rankings

share or save

Social media.

• share on Facebook
• share on Twitter

just click on the link and then copy it so you can use it on another website.

24 Jul 2011 German Grand Prix

The 2011 German Grand Prix was Round 10 of the 2011 FIA Formula 1 World Championship . The event was held at Nürburgring in Germany on Sunday, 24 July 2011. Mark Webber started on pole position in the Red Bull Renault and Lewis Hamilton was the race winner in the McLaren Mercedes.

This website uses cookies

We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to analyse our traffic. Advertising and analytics partners may combine it with other information that you’ve provided to them or that they’ve collected from your use of their services

Accept Decline

2011 Nurburgring Formula 1 Grand Prix

24 July 2011

Nurburgring Grand Prix

Fastest lap Lewis Hamilton : 1:34.302

Formula1 2011 Nurburgring Grand Prix results

©2013-2024 All Rights Reserved. This is a unofficial Formula1 page

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content

GP Racing Stats

2011 German Grand Prix

Race result, starting grid.

• Vitantonio Liuzzi received a five-place grid penalty for a gearbox change.

Qualifying result

• Sebastien Buemi was disqualified from qualifying due to a fuel irregularity.

Free practice appearances

Championship standings.

How the championship standings stood post-race .

Constructor

Stats & milestones.

Racing Series

• Super Formula
• Ital. Formula 4
• Ger. Formula 4
• GT W.C. Europe
• GT End. Cup
• Jap. Super GT
• Aus. Supercars

• Racing Calendar of Season 2024
• Racing Calendar of Season 2023
• Racing Calendar of Season 2022

• Australia/Ozeania
• North America
• South America

24h Nürburgring Nordschleife - 2011: Entrylist

• Speedsport Magazine
• Series & Results
• Sportscars GT
• 24h Nürburgring
• Saison 2011

24h Nürburgring Nordschleife - 2011

• Circuit info
• Photos and Videos

AvD Oldtimer Grand Prix 2011 – Report and Photos

Report and photos by Marcel Hundscheid

During the weekend of 12-14 August 2011, the Nürburgring hosted the 39th edition of the Oldtimer Grand Prix, organised by the Automobilclub von Deutschland (AvD). Despite heavy rain on both Friday and Saturday afternoon, and almost the entire Sunday, 61,500 enthusiasts found their way to the famous track, seeing drivers from twenty different countries.

Spectators were treated with a great variety in historic race cars, dating back from the roaring twenties and thirties to the eighties. Besides thirty-two hours of spectacular racing historic car fans were also treated to a large amount of privately owned race cars, displayed on the several parking grounds.

Grand Prix Masters – Fans of historic Formula 1 cars could eat their hearts out seeing a grid of no less than twenty one cars. True legends from the glory days of Formula One, produced between 1966 and 1985 battled it out during two races.

A dry track on Saturday invited the drivers for fifteen laps around a shortened Nürburgring. Spectators were treated with an exciting battle between the Arrows A4 of Rowland Kinch and the Brabham BT49C of Joaquin Folch. During the first part of the race it was Joaquin Folch dictating the race pace, but during the second part Rowland Kinch decided to really put the pressure and finished first, just 0.331 seconds in front of Folch. Briton Steve Hartley finished third. The second race on Sunday started on a wet track. Once again it was an Arrows A4 on top of the scoreboard. This time, Steve Hartley was the man to beat and proved to be the quickest. Rowland Kinch had to settle for a second place, 0.8 seconds behind his fellow country man. Richard Barber drove his Fittipaldi F5a to the final spot on the winner’s podium.

Revival Deutsche Rennsport Meisterschaft 1972-1981 – Deutsche Rennsport Meisterschaft, abbreviated as DRM and translated as German Racing Championship was a touring cars and sports car racing series, starting in 1972, regarded as a predecessor of the current DTM championship. 1985 was the final year of the immense popular championship, followed by the birth of the DTM. During the yearly Oldtimer Grand Prix, the AvD organizes a revival of this great series.

The first race saw a true battle of the beasts like in the old days. The Porsche 935 K3s of Wolfgang Kaufmann and Daniel Schrey thrilled spectators with a nail-biting fight. Kaufmann managed the cross the finish line just 0.192 second in front of Daniel Schrey. The dominance of the two 935s resulted in a gap of no less than 1 minute and 20 seconds before Ralf Heisig finished the race on a third place in his Porsche 930 Turbo.

Porsches also proved to be the brand to beat on Sunday. No one had an answer on the great performance of Daniel Schrey in his bright yellow Porsche 935 K3 finishing first with a gap of thirty two seconds in front of the Porsche 935 of Jerome Miloe. Ralf Heisig scored a second consecutive podium finishing the second race third.

World Sportscar Masters – Le Mans Type Group 4 Prototypes, built between the mid-1960’s up to 1974 were a common sight for this race as well as some GT’s built during the same period. One of the true eye catchers was an immaculate sounding 1969 Ferrari 312P of David Franklin. This car was a Group 6 prototype-sports car, powered by a 3.0 litre V12 engine meant as an opponent for the Porsche 908 and Matra V12.

Manfredo Rossi di Montelera dominated the first race on Saturday with his Abarth Osella PA1. Sandy Watson couldn’t do anything with his Chevron B8 finishing forty-two seconds behind the Italian. David Franklin scored a third place in his gorgeous looking Ferrari 312P. The second race saw a very close battle between a pair of classic Ford GT40’s. Spaniard Joaquin Folch battled it out with Briton David Forsbrey, crossing the finish line just 0.1 of a second earlier. Italian Manfredo Rossi scored a second consecutive podium that weekend finishing third.

Two-seat race cars & GTs until 1960-1961 – Thirty-three beauties filled the grid for this interesting single race, such as several Maserati Tipo 61’s, Maserati 300’s and Mercedes-Benz 300 SL’s. The car that dominated the first race was the nr. 33 Maserati Tipo 61 Birdcage of Alan and Jason Minshaw. A gap of no less than 1 minute and 7 seconds lasted until the Lister Jaguar of Simon Ham crossed the finish line. Irvini Laidlaw scored a third spot in another Maserati Tipo 61 Birdcage. On Sunday another Maserati Tipo 61 Birdcage dominated the race driven by Max Werner. Josef Otto Rettenmaier couldn’t do anything than follow and finished second in his Tipo 61. Christian von Wedel and Franz zu Ortenburg drove their Austin-Healey 3000 Mk.I to the final spot on the podium.

Historic Grand Prix Cars until 1961 – Great cars, great sounds, just two ingredients for the Historic Grand Prix Cars race, bringing back memories from the early years of Grand Prix car racing. The Ferrari 246 Dino of Tony Smith scored a victory on Saturday, in front of the Aston Martin DBR4 of Hubert Fabri. Allan Miles and Gerry Hann finished third in their Maserati 250F CM7. The second race became a prey for Paul Grant in his Cooper Bristol. Willy Balz (Maserati 250F 2533) and Allan Miles and Gerry Hann (Maserati 250F CM7) finished second and third.

Masters GT until 1965 – No less than thirty-five lovely GT’s from the early sixties filled the grid for the single Masters GT race. Different Jaguars, Lotus, Ford Shelby Mustang, TVR’s as well as a gorgeous looking Cobra Daytona Coupe could be seen and relived the early years of GT racing. Count Marcus von Oeynhausen claimed victory in a Jaguar E Type. UK driver Rob Hall finished second in a AC Cobra, thirty seconds behind the E-Type of von Oeynhausen. Sandy Watson and Martin O’Connell celebrated a third place in their Jaguar E-Type.

AvD-Youngtimer Sprint for Touring Cars and GTs 1972-1990 – Only ten GTs including six Porsches, three BMW’s and a single De Tomaso Pantera were entered for this single race. After thirteen laps around the shortened Grand Prix track it was Daniel Schrey in a Porsche 964 who crossed the finish line first. Hans Wagner in his 800 bhp BMW M1 Turbo scored a second place. Edgar Salewsky had to settle for a third place in a Porsche 911 Carrera RSR.

Jaguar E-Type Challenge – The AvD organized two races along the Nürburgring especially for Jaguar E-Types. The first race would become a fight between different drivers from the United Kingdom, giving Gary Pearson the honour of finishing first. Martin Melling scored a second place in front of Stephen Skipworth and Graeme Dodd. Gary Pearson had a perfect weekend at the Nürburgring scoring a second victory on Sunday. Count Marcus von Oeynhausen finished this race in second place, Jon Minshaw scored a third place.

Mini Challenge – Perhaps a little out of order but the modern Mini Challenge is almost a tradition during the yearly Oldtimer Grand Prix. Hendrik Vieth scored victory in race one, 3.5 seconds ahead of Nico Bastian and Jürgen Schmarl. The second race on Sunday was a copy of the first race on Saturday giving another victory to Hendrik Vieth. Nico Bastian and Jürgen Schmarl scored a consecutive second and third place.

Roaring Twenties and Golden Thirties – Truly oldies but goldies were presented in two regularity races featuring 22 classics such as the Alfa Romeo 8C Monza, Lagonda LG45, BMW 328 etc. Michael Straus in his Talbot AV105 scored the best total time, followed by Hans-Werner Wirth in an Opel 10/35 PS. Peter Forster scored a third total time in an classic MG. The second regularity race became a prey for the Alvis 12/70 of Berthold Urrich. Ulrich Sauer managed a second total time in his BMW 328, as Michael Strauß finished third in a Talbot AV 105.

Avd Historic Marathon/Nürburgring Trophy – No less than 57 cars participated in the Avd Historic Marathon held on the classic Nordschleife featuring touring cars and GTs from the sixties. The four hour marathon became a victory for the Jaguar E-Type of Count Marcus von Oeynhausen and Frank Stippler. “Fred & Barney” drove their Ford Fairline to a second place, third place went to the Jaguar E-Type of Alexander Berstein and Wolfgang Weber.

Besides an action packed programme featuring races in single seaters, sports cars, touring cars and GTs the AvD organized two classic revivals including a part of the racing history of Opel as well as an very welcome DTM-STW revival. Presented were former touring cars from the legendary DTM championship (Deutsche Tourenwagen Masters) as well as the STW championship (Spezial Tourenwagen).

AvD Oldtimer Grand Prix 2011 – Photo Gallery (click image for larger picture)

[envira-gallery id=”136205″]

[Source: Marcel Hundscheid]

Bugatti Chiron Super Sport 300+ To Be Auctioned By Bonhams

RM Sotheby’s To Auction A McLaren P1 And Porsche 918 Spyder Both Finished In Blue

A Pair Of Mercedes-Benz CLK GTRs Is Heading To RM Sotheby’s Las Vegas Auction

FOR SALE: 1995 Ferrari F50

FOR SALE: 2006 Ford GT

FOR SALE: 1965 Shelby GT350 R

Very neat and thorough coverage. Was wondering if anyone knew when the Old Timers racing ceremonies began/started in the US? Any info or pics would greatly be appreciated for some Historical work we are currently engaged in. All the best today,

Pictures of the Old Timer GP are great; thanks to Marcel for some great work!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• Free Newsletter

Get Our Free Weekly Newsletter

GP3 Series 2011 Nurburgring Information

• Reviews Home
• Motorcycle Reviews
• Product Reviews
• Racing News Home
• Road Racing
• Features Home
• Advanced Riding
• Motorcycle Track Guides
• Buying Advice
• Sell Your Bike

WSB 2011: Nurburgring Race Results

Race One Results

Not Classified RET J. SMRZ CZE Team Effenbert-Liberty Racing RET M. BERGER FRA Supersonic Racing Team NS M. BIAGGI ITA Aprilia Alitalia Racing Team

Race Two Results

1. T. SYKES GBR Kawasaki Racing Team Superbike 2. S. GUINTOLI FRA Team Effenbert-Liberty Racing 4.063 3. J. SMRZ CZE Team Effenbert-Liberty Racing 22.759 4. J. REA GBR Castrol Honda 28.497 5. E. LAVERTY IRL Yamaha World Superbike Team 38.374 6. M. MELANDRI ITA Yamaha World Superbike Team 45.326 7. A. BADOVINI ITA BMW Motorrad Italia SBK Team 47.030 8. C. CHECA ESP Althea Racing 50.032 9. L. HASLAM GBR BMW Motorrad Motorsport 53.586 10. M. BERGER FRA Supersonic Racing Team 55.261 11. J. LASCORZ ESP Kawasaki Racing Team 1'12.805 12. T. CORSER AUS BMW Motorrad Motorsport 1'15.468 13. R. ROLFO ITA Team Pedercini 1'40.323

• Privacy Policy

Candidate of Biological Sciences and Candidate of Legal Sciences, [email protected]

Analyzing the Results of the 2019 Moscow City Duma Election: A Preface to the Discussion

Lyubarev A.E.

The paper points out special features of the 2019 Moscow City Duma election campaign. As a lead-up to the discussion of how "Smart Voting" has influenced the results of the election, the author makes a series of remarks on its potentially different influence on vote returns and election results as well as on different understanding of the "Smart Voting" phenomenon. The paper also gives an overview of the main data on vote returns and election results.

There are several remarkable things about the 2019 Moscow City Duma election. First, a relatively recent trend of rejecting popular candidates for running in the election by refusing to register them after checking signature sheet was most evident this time. This gave rise to unprecedented protest activity among Moscow citizens: it was the first time when protest rallies against mobilizing administrative resource in the election took place during the campaign and not after it [ 4 ].

Second, it was the first election to have utilized a so-called "Smart Voting" technology. "Smart Voting" aims to concentrate opposition votes in every constituency around the candidate with the best chance of winning [ 6 ]. The technology was spearheaded by Alexey Navalny – a politician who lost his right of passive suffrage due to the sentence in Kirovles case and who does not have an official party, as any attempt to establish one was cut short at various stages by the Ministry of Justice. Nevertheless, Navalny wields significant authority among the opposition, as evidenced by the 2013 Moscow mayoral election results in particular, where he became the runner-up, receiving 27.2% of votes – the highest number ever for an oppositional candidate in Moscow mayoral election.

Third, the election results themselves are quite curious. Contrary to all the previous Moscow City Duma campaigns [ 5 ], the "party of power" won nearly "on the verge" by getting 25 seats while the notional opposition got 20 seats (the overall number of seats is 45). That said, all 20 opposition winners were endorsed by "Smart Voting" campaign.

This result sparked a discussion among experts. On the one hand, it is obvious that the result of the "party of power" dropped largely because of it generally starting to lose popularity following the 2018 pension reform [ 3 ], which went further downhill during the Moscow protests. On the other hand, the role of "Smart Voting" in the opposition's relative success became the most debated issue. Opinions varied greatly in this case, from "Smart Voting" being called a decisive contribution to denying its significance.

This is an interesting discussion for reasons other than assessing the last Moscow election. It is important from a methodological standpoint as an attempt to devise models that would allow to assess the contribution of various factors and technologies to the success of any specific political power. I hope this discussion will facilitate the development of electoral studies in political science.

The papers published in this issue continue the discussion that began in 2019 mostly in blogosphere, but has already moved on to the pages of political science journals [ 1 ]. It is unlikely this discussion will stay within the confines of our journal only.

Before we begin, I would like to draw a methodological line between two aspects. It is important to see the difference between vote returns and election results. Vote returns are the number of votes gained by candidates. Election results imply the decision of who is elected deputy. "Smart Voting" campaign sought to influence the election results in particular. That said, it could not but influence vote returns as well; still, its influence extended over vote returns of the opposition candidates, but not the "party of power" vote returns.

However, influencing vote returns in a plurality voting system does not always end favorably. The main line of the discussion concerns this aspect in particular. Did "Smart Voting" actually help certain opposition candidates win, or would they have won without this campaign anyway? In an attempt to answer this question, researchers use different models, which we can make sure of by looking through their papers.

Another issue stems from different understanding of "Smart Voting" as a political phenomenon. It can be viewed through three different aspects. The first aspect is the well-known "tactical" (or "strategic", as other researchers put it) voting [ 7 ; 2 ], which voters in Russia intuitively used before, as evidenced by liberal voters supporting CPRF candidates in particular (A.Ye. Klychkov in the 2014 Moscow City Duma election, D.A. Parfyonov in Medvedkovo constituency in the 2016 legislative election, S.G. Levchenko in the 2015 Irkutsk Oblast gubernatorial election, A.S. Ishchenko and V.O. Konovalov in the 2018 gubernatorial election). The second aspect is the idea of "Smart Voting" proposed by Navalny back in 2018, which developed a life of its own, largely detached from Navalny himself (for example, certain candidates being endorsed by opinion leaders, including unregistered candidates, discussing candidates' chances on social media). The third aspect is Navalny's project as such and his specific recommendations for all single-member constituencies.

Readers with only superficial understanding of the Moscow campaign might find it useful to take a look at the general information on election results. This information can be found in Tables 1 and 2. That said, my classification offers the following grouping of candidates. Candidates nominated by the four parties that covered most of the constituencies are grouped separately: CPRF, LDPR, A Just Russia (JR) and the Communist Party of Communists of Russia (CPCR). Three Yabloko party candidates in Table 2 are grouped with three independent candidates from the liberal pool (Daria Besedina, Dmitry Klochkov, Roman Yuneman). They are defined as "Opposition independents" in Table 1. Candidates from other parties (Rodina, Party of Growth, the Greens, Civilian Power) are grouped together in Table 1 ("Other parties"). The group called "Administration candidates" includes independent candidates endorsed by the mayor's office as well as two independents endorsed by United Russia, but having had a purely technical purpose. The remaining independent candidates are grouped under "Technical independents" in Table 1, while in Table 2 they are grouped together with candidates from "Other parties" under "Other". A separate row in Table 1 includes candidates endorsed by "Smart Voting"; in Table 2, these candidates are marked by an asterisk.

Table 1. Average results of different candidate groups

Table 2. vote returns by constituency.

The table is not fully displayed Show table

* Candidate endorsed by "Smart Voting" project. ** Candidates nominated by Russian United Democratic Party (RUDP) Yabloko or those we refer to as opposition independents.

Received 25.05.2020, revision received 01.06.2020.

• Bolshakov I.V., Perevalov V.V. Konsolidatsiya ili protest? "Umnoye golosovaniye" na moskovskikh vyborakh [Consolidation or protest? "Smart Voting" at Moscow election]. – Politeia. 2020. No. 1 (96). P. 50–73. (In Russ.) DOI:10.30570/2078-5089-2020-96-1-50-73.
• Kim H.M., Kostadinova T. Does tactical voting matter? The political impact of tactical voting in Canadian elections. – International Area Studies Review. 2011. V. 14. No. 1. P. 49–72.
• Kynev A., Lyubarev A., Maksimov A. Regionalnyye i mestnyye vybory v Rossii oseni 2018 goda: elektoralnyye peremeny na fone sotsialnykh reform. Moscow: Fond “Liberalnaya missiya”. 2019. 554 p. (In Russ.)
• Lyubarev A.E. Kynev A.V., Maksimov A.N. Itogi vydvizheniya i registratsii na vyborakh deputatov Moskovskoi gorodskoi Dumy 8 sentyabrya 2019 goda. Analiticheskiy doklad No. 2 po Monitoringu vyborov 08.09.2019 [Nomination and registration results for Moscow City Duma election of September 8, 2019. Analytical report No. 2 on monitoring activity of the September 8, 2019 election]. – "Liberalnaya missiya" [Liberal Mission] foundation website, 26 July 2019. URL: http://liberal.ru/files/articles/7394/Vibory_08092019_Doklad2.pdf (accessed 06 May 2020). (In Russ.) - http://liberal.ru/files/articles/7394/Vibory_08092019_Doklad2.pdf
• Lyubarev A.E. Vybory v Moskovskuyu gorodskuyu Dumu shestogo sozyva: administrativny resurs menyayet napravleniye [Moscow City Duma election of the sixth convocation: administrative resource changes direction]. – Vybory stolichnyye (2014). Vzglyad ekspertov. Moscow: Tsentr "Panorama", 2015. P. 22–70. (In Russ.)
• Navalny A. Kak my budem pobezhdat "Yedinuyu Rossiyu" na vyborakh. Umnoye golosovaniye [How we are going to defeat United Russia in the election. Smart Voting]. – Alexey Navalny's website, 28 November 2018. URL: https://navalny.com/p/6017/ (accessed 6 May 2020). (In Russ.) - https://navalny.com/p/6017/
• Taagepera R., Shugart M.S. Opisaniye izbiratelnykh sistem [Electoral systems: a description]. – POLIS. 1997. No. 3. P. 114–136.

Advertisement

Supported by

Voters Watch Polls in Russia, and Fraud Is What They See

• Share full article

By Michael Schwirtz and David M. Herszenhorn

• Dec. 5, 2011

MOSCOW — The shot opens at the top of a flight of stairs and zooms in shakily on a gray-haired man, who sits at a desk furtively checking off what appear to be ballots — a stack of them.

The video is shot with the grain and chop of an amateur. But it is apparently sharp enough.

“A big hello to you,” says the cameraman, Yegor Duda, a 33-year-old volunteer election observer. “This is a violation of the criminal code. The chairman of the electoral commission is filling out ballots. Everything has been captured on the video camera,” he said.

Mr. Duda raced home and uploaded the clip to YouTube. Though just three minutes long, it quickly became an election-day sensation, helping fuel a major demonstration of as many as 5,000 people on Monday evening in central Moscow. They chanted “Russia without Putin!” and “Putin is a thief.”   Several hundred were arrested, including t wo major opposition leaders . 

Valentin Gorbunov, the head of the Moscow City Elections Commission, confirmed the substance of the video and announced that Russian investigators had opened a case into ballot tampering by the head at Polling Place No. 2501, where the episode occurred, Russian news agencies reported Monday.

Election monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe said that they, too, had observed blatant fraud, including the brazen stuffing of ballot boxes. While the monitors declined to draw firm conclusions, it was clear from their report that vote stealing and other alleged malfeasance might have spared the presumed beneficiary, Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin’s United Russia, an even worse blow than it officially received .

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton sharply criticized what she called “troubling practices” before and during the vote in Russia. “The Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve the right to have their voices heard and their votes counted,” she said in Bonn, Germany.

With 99.9 percent of ballots processed, election officials said that United Russia had won 238 seats in Parliament, or about 53 percent, from 315 seats or 70 percent now. The Communist Party won 92 seats; Just Russia, a social democratic party, won 64 seats and the national Liberal Democratic Party won 56 seats.

The scathing report by international observers, combined with the amateur video of alleged election malfeasance posted on the Web, made clear that the authorities would face continuing questions about the fairness of the vote despite the main party’s steep losses.

Indeed, on Monday evening, thousands of demonstrators gathered on a promenade by the Chistye Prudy metro station in central Moscow, and denounced the government at an event organized by the opposition group Solidarity. It was one of the largest such rallies in recent memory.

Throngs chanted “Russia without Putin!” and “Putin is a Thief.” Police officials estimated the crowd at about 2,000 though some participants said it was larger. There was a presence of police officers in riot gear and some protesters were detained.

Mr. Duda’s video was just one of several clips putatively documenting violations to go racing through the Internet during parliamentary elections on Sunday , a relatively new weapon in the fight against vote rigging that has begun to expose Russians to the realities of their electoral system like never before.

“To be honest, I didn’t expect there to be any violations. I hoped there wouldn’t be,” Mr. Duda, who had never been an election observer before, said in a brief telephone interview. “I now understand better what goes on there. And as long as I think it will be useful, I will continue to tell people about what is happening.”

Mr. Duda is one of a number of freelance election observers in Russia, who, with the help of hand-held cameras and smartphones, have grown increasingly successful at frustrating voter fraud here.

It is not clear whether this tactic will ever succeed in changing the conduct of elections in Russia. With many of the videos apparently showing violations by United Russia, officials on Monday moved quickly to discount them.

“I’ve seen these clips people are uploading to the Internet,” Russia’s president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, said. “Nothing can be seen in them.”

But many of the millions of Russians who have watched the videos seem convinced that they are witnessing fraud.

In another video from Moscow , observers from the opposition Yabloko party demonstrated that the ink in pens supplied in voting booths at one polling place on Sunday was easily erasable.

Another showed packets of ballots apparently just removed from the ballot box, stacked neatly, one on top of the other, an indication that they were inserted together, not individually. All were marked for United Russia.

Among the most widely circulated videos was one shot by amateur cameramen accompanying journalists and other election observers who had reportedly infiltrated a group hired to stuff ballot boxes in Moscow. Caught with multiple ballots marked for United Russia in bags they wore under their clothes, some involved in the plot tried to flee. The video showed the police stopping them at the doors.

Andrei Kursov, a 24-year-old employee of a tobacco company, helped record the episode. Speaking by telephone, he said the police at the polling place were initially aggressive to the observers and unwilling to take action against the violators. One threatened to beat him over the head if he refused to stop recording, he said.

“The law enforcement agencies typically try not to pay attention to violations,” Mr. Kursov said. “But with the camera there, they were probably afraid this time that if they let these guys go they would get in trouble.”

Such videos have appeared in the past, but this seems to be the first election in which the tactic was put to such widespread and effective use. Even the international observers from the O.S.C.E. praised the work of amateur election monitors.

“We saw in the campaign before the elections all sorts of possible tricks being shown and displayed on the Internet,” said Ambassador Heidi Tagliavini, the head of the election observation mission of the group’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. “This was, I would say, a new feature.”

Glenn Kates contributed reporting from Moscow, and Steven Lee Myers from Bonn, Germany.