Max Verstappen
c/o James Moy Photography
The FIA today announced new regulations relating to the issuing of a Formula 1 Super License. Our sport’s governing body has got itself into something of a flap over the fact that, in Max Verstappen, F1 will have its youngest ever driver in 2015 at the age of 17. While it can do nothing to stop the prodigious and, I must say from my own personal perspective, tremendously exciting Dutchman from being granted his license for competition next season, it has taken its time and thought long and hard about how best to deal with the situation.
And in typical FIA style, it has managed to contrive a system which would have excluded three of the world champions who will line up on this year’s F1 grid, half of the 2015 Red Bull Racing line-up, and both Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna from making their F1 debuts.
The system works on the basis of a points allocation per finishing position in sub-F1 categories. In order to qualify for a Super License, a driver must have amassed 40 points over his or her past three years of competition and must have spent at least two seasons racing single-seaters. I say “her” lightly, however, as there is not a single female racing driver to my knowledge who would, at present, qualify for a Super License.
The structure of the championships top to bottom weighs heavily in favour of its own categories, placing the FIA F3 European Championship on the same footing as FIA WEC and Indycar. It serves Formula Renault 3.5 a tremendous disservice by placing it both below Euro F3 and on the same level as GP3. But the actual cherry on top of this cake is that the championship which merits the most points (more than GP2, Indycar or WEC) is a “Future FIA F2 Championship.” So an event that doesn’t even exist, then. And one which, until today, nobody outside 8 Place de la Concorde, Paris, and I’d wager a fair few inside, even knew was going to exist.
There is no mention of Formula E, the FIA’s own flagship green “future” of racing. There is no mention of NASCAR. And only LMP1 drivers in WEC qualify for points.
The system’s intentions are good. It has clearly been brought in to try and stop drivers from either being rushed into F1 or from simply buying their way in. To that end it’s worth noting that Max Verstappen would have amassed just half the points required in his first and thus far sole season of single-seater racing and Marcus Ericsson would have fallen 26 points under the total required from his three years of GP2 results and would thus not have qualified to make his debut last season.
But, as is the increasing norm for a body which seemingly struggles to write its own name without getting one of the letters wrong or simply missing one out entirely, it is in the execution that the FIA hasn’t really thought it through.
Not one of them would have made their debuts under the new regulations.
c/o James Moy Photography
Kimi Raikkonen and Jenson Button would both have fallen 35 points short of the 40 point requirement. Sebastien Vettel would have been just two points shy of the tally at the time of his USGP debut in 2007 if we use just his 04-06 results. On the basis of his 2007 WSR results, however, he’d have qualified for his Toro Rosso drive in 2008. Just the six world championships between them.
Daniel Ricciardo, voted by many as the F1 driver of 2014 would not have qualified for his debut either so that’s Red Bull Racing’s lead man out of luck.
Ayrton Senna and Michael Schumacher, two of the finest drivers to ever grace the planet, would not have been granted a Super License under this system. Neither would Mika Hakkinen. Neither Gilles Villeneuve. Jim Clark’s tractor definitely wouldn’t have given him the points. Not entirely sure racing a Model A Ford taxi would have done Fangio much good either.
Drivers are rarely rushed into the sport if they’re not good enough. Those that are, tend to be the exceptions. And exceptional. The new regulations, as such, are an overblown and ineffectual reaction to a rarity.
Almost every driver that is currently maligned in Formula 1 would have qualified under this system had it been in place at the time of their debuts while, ironically, the majority of those that wouldn’t have been granted their licenses are either now Formula 1 World Champions, or driving for the team that has won the most world championships this decade.
Not to worry. On traditional form I’m sure there’s a loophole in there somewhere.
Jean Todt
c/o James Moy Photography
Well, this probably kills the idea of having a single test driver for most F1 teams, with the exception of those who don’t already have their super license. Seeing that most of them will have to keep racing to keep up that points average.
Also, what happens if a driver qualifies for his superlicence, doesn’t make it into F1, and races somewhere else and has poor seasons afterwards? Does the license get taken away?
Brilliant kicker and almost certainly true….
Worth noting that Michael Schumacher would have failed to gain his superlicense at both times of asking, since he had been away from the sport for more than 3 years prior to his Mercedes comeback. The system would even fail to allow the most prolific champion return…
While I agree with your overall premise, I cannot agree when you include historical names (up to and including Schumacher). In the “past” there was testing, where drivers could amass quite a bit of experience before entering a race. Today no such option exists, so as you say, the FIA has again taken good intentions and mucked it up with their own brand of dis-functionality.
Good point… f1 of the past gave more opportunities for a driver to accumulate experience.
In case of Max Verstappen,
He did already 3 Free Practise Sessions,
Tested two whole days at Dubai,
At Red Bull Ring he drove the distance needed to gain a superlicense,
And there are more test sessions coming in February.
I not even mention the massive amount of sessions in the simulator.
And not forget “the boy” was already ‘competitive’ since the first day he entered a F1 car.
Verstappen is an extreme talent,
and Red Bull is preparing him extremely well.
There is totally no need to change the superlicense requirements because this “kid” gets his chance at such a young age.
It is good that the requirements are higher now,
mainly to avoid all those useless pay-drivers coming into the F!,
but if that helps teams to survive financially will become the big question.
Further, the whole requirements implemented are just terrible.
it will help drivers who are with the top teams in the lower competitions,
but what about the talents who drive for the weaker teams?
PS.
The funniest thing is the requirement of having a valid driver license.
In Thailand this costs you a half day and 55 Baht (=15 Euro), without even stepping into a car.
In The Netherlands it costs you at least a few months and a few thousands of Euros.
This requirement is totally ridiculous.
Good read. Especially the last sentence, kind of sums up the FIA.
I think this will just put people off trying to get to F1 and maybe lead to more people going to the WEC, Formula E, or Stateside for TUSCC and IndyCar. And is there even any mention of the TUSCC in the requirements? Maybe I’m slightly biased, but IndyCar should be higher up on the list, at the minimum on par with GP2.
You’ve set the bar way too high for the rest of 2015 I’m afraid Will. Spot on.
The way the WEC fits into this equation just feels odd. First there is the fact that it’s behind GP2 and on-par with GP3. Between the night racing, class racing, amount of time in the car between testing and racing, and speed in comparison, it feels wrong to have it weighted at or below the other series. Then there is the fact it’s a full-time series, so drivers can’t race in other series to get points through those championships. Then there is the fact it is a multi-driver series, so if seat changes occur it can hurt other drivers championship wise by no fault of their own. Lastly, there is the fact that LMP2 is not included at all when it is still a very serious class.
You’ve nailed it. The FIA should be REQUIRED to answer your questions in a public forum.
I figure they will quickly change it, just like they did when they went to the current points system. The FIA intended to make first worth more points, but in that case, it had to be pointed out to them that despite them increasing the number of points from 10 to 25, having 2nd worth 20 kept it at the same percentage, and thus made absolutely no change to the standings. They quickly changed it to 18.
True… But at the same time I’m a really big fan of the smaller categories. The thing about Max is that I would have loved to see him take it up with Ocon in GP2 or WSR. Having him shoved into F1 as a ‘too big too fail’ RB driver kind of spoils the fun. (A bit similar to RB not letting Vettel drive a full season in any series after he came 2nd in F3, too big too fail…)
Incidentally, is Carlos one of the few RB drivers to have won a serious championship before F1? (Luizzi Antonio comes to mind in F3000)
Bourdias was a 4x consecutive champ car title winner.
Sorry? He won a serious championship. It was the most pore championship of the last decade.
As a casual F1 fan over the years, I find the more I now pay attention to what the F1 authorities do, the less professional the whole thing seems. Was it good fortune and luck that it happened to become the premier motorsports spectacle? Or at least the most expensive?
Part of it is that Bernie was actually pretty handy at promoting the sport up to the 1990s or 2000s. Part of it is that legally you can’t just organise a major, independent motorsport series without at least getting the FIA’s blessing, so it’s hard for a rival series to emerge. Part of it is that if and when a rival series emerges, it usually tend to self-destruct at some point, either due to costs getting out of control or diverging interests(Can-Am in the early 1970s, world endurance and IndyCars in the early 1990s).
F1 is still too big to fall right now, its name appeal is still big enough to withstand absurdly high costs, nonsensical decision making from the FIA, and the CVC leeching the life out of it. How long will this last, here’s the question.
I agree with your premise that determining a driver’s qualification for a Superlicense by a points system alone seems totally rigid and arbitrary. However, physical, mental and emotional maturity must be considered. There are numerous medical studies regarding teenage brain development that show that teens are prone to risky behavior and immature decision making. Teens excell at extreme sports because peak motor skills are coupled with high risk tolerance. In order to compete at any level of professional racing competetion a young driver must exhibit all aspects of adult maturity in addition to driving skills.
However, Since Jean Todt and the FIA have basically sold out to F1 (and their credibility to oversee the sport, make regulations, et. al. when Todt made a deal with Bernie that will give the FIA $40 million per year to give up its rule-making power to the Strategy Group…), aren’t they free to do whatever they damn well please without regard to what is best for the sport?
Great post and a fantastic job on the research.
I agree with you 100%
Yet again, the FIA takes a simple problem and turns it into an utter debacle. There’s a simple solution to keeping drivers that are too young or too inexperienced out of an F1 cockpit. It’s called an age limit. Every other professional series has one; usually it’s at least 18 years of age. It’s dead simple, and everyone seems to recognize that it works.
Except the FIA. Who look at this as an opportunity to push drivers into their feeder series, making money for their cronies. Discounting Formula Renault, creating a new F2 series for yet another step in the ladder-typical short-sightedness on their part. No credit for drivers who do testing-which would give them the right kind of experience to move into F1.
And here’s where everything will get tossed in the trash: either Ferrari will want a driver with too few points to move up to the Scuderia, or one of Todt’s son’s prodigies will need some “unofficial” help to get a superlicence. Because that’s how F1 rolls-make Ferrari happy or let Todt get his way.
No wonder I’ve pretty much given up on the sport.
I would make the age limit 21 years. If you’re good enough at 17, you’ll still be good enough at 21. Actually finishing school is a good idea too. And a few more years’ experience in lower formulae would be good. And more media experience. Frankly, I really see no logical argument against a much higher age limit. Is the world a better place because some random schoolkid can race at 17 instead of having to wait until he’s 21?
I don’t care if they are fast enough and safe enough – that’s not the point.
Of course, it would take a few years for us to get used to the new rules, and I guess we’d have to make exceptions to allow existing drivers to continue. But when we get used to it, it will seem pretty sensible. I’d like to be able to tell pushy parents of 10-year-old karting kids that the kids will be kept out of F1 until they are at least 21 years old.
It is a known fact that the FIA is upgrading their junior categories. Gerhard Berger did this to Formula 3 and 4 and stopped short of Formula 2, because he didn’t want to oppose Ecclestone. So the new president of the FIA Single Seater Commission is now Stefano Domenicali and it is assumed he will re-install the new Formula 2 Championship as a cheaper alternative than the GP2.
Brilliant post, Will. I’ve read up the other F1/Motorsport blogs/magazines on this subject and I think you’ve hit it better than anyone else I’ve seen.
This is just plain stupid. Not all drivers can make it to these top level junior championships at the age of 16. So the older drivers are essentially being forced to race in these categories for a longer period with far less possibility of making it to F1 one day.
Everyone’s going to rush to GP2/F2 now and everything will become even more expensive and full of rich powerful kids. The independent drivers have no chance.
Also why in the world is WSR/Superformula on par with GP3? It should be next to GP2 if not better. Same for Indycar and WEC. This points system should be based on the performance levels of the cars being driven. Not on what FIA want to promote for their own benefit. The WSR and Superformula cars are very potent machines and you can clearly see they are trying to put them down to promote their own championships.
I understand the 18 age limit and two seasons of junior categories. But the points system will only lead to heavily funded/backed drivers reaching F1 as you’ll need to be in a top team with a sh*t load of testing to win a junior championship.
I hope enough teams/drivers protest against this so FIA are made to tweak the points system and include more championships in it.
You and Arthur make a very good point, and its something I was reflecting upon this morning: namely, the FIA’s push to market its own championships via the allocation of points in the licensing system.
By putting WSR on a level with GP3 it undermines WSR to the point of irrelevance. But by placing F3 above GP3 it also serves to make GP3 irrelevant, thus leaving F3 as a best option. Why, after all, would a driver wish to graduate from F3 to either GP3 or WSR if they’re worth less points for a Super License? Indeed, so important have the FIA made Euro F3 that it is on the same footing as WEC and Indycar.
GP2 might be the next logical step given the points available, but why bother with GP2 when Future F2 is on the way?
It seems to me this new system is quite simply the only way the FIA could manoeuvre its own ladder system and oust all competitors, leaving just F4, F3, F2 and F1.
Thanks. The more I look into it the more flaws I see in it.
As a racing driver myself planning to enter F3 this year (now confused). What if I finish outside the top 10 this year and next year miss the championship title by 1 point? (lets say I’m winning and last lap my engine blows up).
That would only get me 30 points in total. And miss me an F1 seat. Even though I fulfill all other requirements from the new rules. And lets say considered a talent.
As an independent driver with no F1 team/family backing it has become 10 times more tough to get into F1 now.
I’ve worked 6 months on a path to get ready for F1 by 2017. It would have included a whole season of F3 and a few guest drives in WSR and GP2 towards the end of the season. Then if I’m good enough I would have been logically ready for an F1 seat (provided I get the required sponsorship needed).
And everyone should realize racing in the junior categories is as tough if not tougher than F1. Everyone drives like Maldonado with the whole field much tighter than the F1 filed. So I feel if you’re good enough to be in lets say top 10 of GP2, GP3, F3, WSR, Indycar, Superformula etc. then you are physically and mentally eligible for F1. That’s how it should be and would still prevent the really crappy rich drivers from rushing to F1.
Fair argument, but, not being eligible to have made their debut when they did doesn’t necessarily mean their careers would have been lost. Surely, they wouldn’t have panned out the same way, I agree.
However, considering the spike in the F1 pay drivers in the last decade – FIA will have to start somewhere. I don’t think, FIA got it all right, but, it won’t be fair to write this off before we see the results.
I see that many F1 journalists writing which top F1 drivers would have been denied their debut with this new rule. Why not analyze how many good drivers would have got their chances or how many young F1 talents who were ousted too soon from F1 might have had a better racing career?
Also, what’s this is going to do is make junior series seats even more expensive, because teams that can give more points if you do well can charge more money for that seat.
Just making the single seater ladder even more about the 1%.
For what it’s worth – if it leads to a strengthening of GP2, if it leads to more drivers getting serious F1 chances out of WEC, IndyCar, and/or Super Formula, and with the proposed FIA F2 category perhaps foreshadowing the first time Formula 1 has had a proper feeder series ladder the way IndyCar, MotoGP, and the WRC have – then I’m on board for this in the future with some tweaking.
Still can’t get over how Juan Pablo Montoya is as qualified over the last three years as Martin Cao, who beat exactly three other full-time drivers to become the last British F3 champion.
You were kind enough to say ‘his or her’ acknowledging that there are many female racing drivers. The FIA did not extend his courtesy and all the drafting of the regulation is ‘he, his’ etc.
Not good for a supposedly IOC affiliated governing body.
Yes. The FIA clearly isn’t expecting to see any female F1 drivers in the near future.
To be fair, using ‘he’ is quite common in legal drafts/contracts etc. Considering what a huge publicity machine it is, though, it wouldn’t have hurt for someone to pick up on that…
Reblogged this on Chiacchiere da Paddock and commented:
Interessante riflessione di Will Buxton sugli effetti perversi delle nuove regole FIA per il conseguimento della superlicenza che consente di correre in Formula1 [E no, non ci sarà più pericolo di ritrovarsi con un dodicenne in pista]
The system is not bad, from now on neither mere pay-drivers can enter F1 (theoretically), nor fresh-from-elementary youngsters. There are two funny points though: isn’t there a mileage criterium? Some x hundred kms of F1 testing would do no harm 🙂 The 60 points given to F2 is a bit bizarre as well, considering that we know absolutely nothing about this series; it can easily happen that D-class drivers will be competing there, and thus their champion (in terms of skills) won’t be worth the 60 points.
Politics aside, it will really hit the fan if he has a big accident – and even more so if he causes one for someone else. I think the press will have a field day crucifying him and the FIA for letting such an immature driver into the top series (note: I’m not saying he is an immature driver).
That points system is just crazy, and as a few have mentioend, clearly designed to promote their own agendas. That can’t be good for the sport as a whole?!
In my eyes such rules should be made to stop drivers from entering F1 who have paid their way into F1 and to prevent young drivers doing dangerous things. And initially I thought the rule changes would go a long way in achieving that, especially in preventing pay drivers from entering, but thinking about it I came to the same conclusion as Will and that is that the effect of these rules miss the intended outcome by a few miles. When you look at the most ‘dangerous’ drivers from recent years, Maldonado and Grosjean, than these rules would have done nothing to stop them from entering F1. Sure Maldonado and Grosjean have grown up and aren’t nearly as dangerous as they used to be but to say they were ready to race in F1 when they entered is going too far. Grosjean was even kicked out of F1 and when he came back he was still not ready, why else would you get a race ban? To make matters worse Vettel, Alonso and Raikkonen have as far as I know never done anything as dangerous as Grosjean or Maldonado. To me this proves being ready to race in F1 has more to do with talent and a drivers psychological state of mind than the amount of miles driven in the car.
Another less than desirable effect would be the demotion of series that many believe should be rated much higher. Not only does this list devalue a series like WEC, Formula Nippon or WSR but it also makes it impossible for the series to become more important since the point allocations are locked for at least a whole season. It makes it almost impossible for a feeder series to grow. And for the series that are not even on the list it means that they will die because no one wants to drive or sponsor them. So goodbye AutoGP, goodbye Formula Acceleration and goodbye European F3 Open (or will they be classified as a national F3 series?). Is this even legal from an anti competition point of view? Especially considering that the FIA owned championships get prefered to non FIA championships.
Fangio raced Chevrolets btw 😛 He debuted with a Ford but was champion twice with Chevrolet
Hi Will, I know Stephano Domenicalli is now commissioner in charge of Single Seaters for the FIA, do you the he may be behind this licensing sceme?
[…] Not to mention that, per NBC commentator Will Buxton’s personal blog: […]
[…] Not to discuss that, per NBC commentator Will Buxton's personal blog: […]