planetf1.com

Completely agree, especially with the bit in bold. Both the points and the age limit are for me indicators that someone in the FIA has too much time on their hands and appear to be tasked with dreaming up legislation for the sake of it.

But, sadly, it also reinforces the point made earlier that Todt's FIA presidency has been a disaster for F1.

The superlicence points table has been revised: http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/09/21/f ... -for-2018/

Notable changes:
- F2 has been added as a new category, scoring a bit higher from P3 onwards. This means Luca Ghiotto will now also be eligible, given he keeps fourth place. Same for Markelov, if he keeps third. Especially Markelov's case shows that the series is getting even more attractive to spend a few years in it and end up P3-P4 on experience.
- Some series have been downrated. Probably justified in case of F-E and Euro F3, maybe WEC. Highly questionable for Super Formula.
- Meanwhile, FIA continues its crusade against FR3.5/FV8 3.5. Not that it matters much anymore, but still. 20 points to gain for winning it basically will see to it that the talents will not flow from F3 to FV8 3.5. One year and it'll be dead?
- A good number of series will only count points obtained on FIA-homologated tracks. This has big consequences for drivers in e.g. IndyCar and Super Formula.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

Are there any comprehensive lists of FIA homologated tracks floating about?

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}

Read somewhere that of the entire IndyCar season up until now, only two tracks qualify

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

So, not even one year. FV8 3.5, formerly FR3.5, is officially calling it quits after the end of the season.
https://www.autosport.com/fv8+3.5/news/ ... 017-season

Congratulations FIA, mission accomplished.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

There was too many junior classes anyway, I thought it was also rumored that GP3 will merge into F3?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

There were not. FR3.5 and GP2 coexisted for a long time without problems and with healthy driver count before the FIA decided to push its own agenda.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

F2, FR3.5, GP3, F3, FR2.0, F4, there was too many.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

You can't hold entry level national championships against F2 and compare them directly. They serve different [complementary] purposes.

_________________
Organiser of the single most low-tech Robot Wars tournament in history, PM for details!

Only two at the second tier which were GP2 and FR3.5. Even if you were correct it's pretty unethical for the FIA to kill off a thriving championship for political reasons.

Why do you need two second tier Championships?

MotoGP has a defined structure with Moto2 and Moto3, It's not fragmented, a structure of F1, F2, F3, FR2.0 and F4 is enough.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Why not have two second tier championships?

Surely there needs to be a funnel or in the end everyone who competes in F3 will have to compete in F2 in the end just to make the numbers up.

It works differently in the case of Moto 2 and Moto 3 because some riders make a career at that level.

With F2 being very expensive it made sense for less backed drivers to have a cheaper option. There have been stand out junior talents in the last decade who simply couldn't afford GP2.

Because there aren't always enough seats for everyone if you only have one? Because some teams don't have sponsorship routes through the main series, and would prefer to put drivers through the other series instead?

Really, as long as both are healthy, why not have two?

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

Which drivers have actually gone from FR3.5 to F1?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Ross Brawn wants a structured ladder were F2 is the last step before F1 and the best will be given seats in F1, he wants drivers to go up the ladder based on talent alone and I believe in that respect that drivers will be helped, a future Frijns doesn't win 3 titles on the bounce and then basically his career stalls.

I don't understand how in fragmented series were drivers basically avoid one another how you determine who are the best drivers, the only FR3.5 drivers that went to F1 were already backed by F1 teams in the first place, the ones that weren't like your Wickens and Frijns they found out that winning the title meant very little to F1 teams and their future single seater career.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

It's a pipe dream, and it will never happen. How is he going to make the teams take the best drivers? Just because the best maybe end up in F2 (and I'm not sure that will happen), nothing is making teams take them.

If anything, I think having this single path to F1 will make F2 seats more expensive and harder to come by for good drivers on a low budget.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

BIB, how can that happen with only one championship at each tier? Surely nearly every driver who competes in F3 will have to compete in F2 just to make up the grid.

Really it should be more like a pyramid with F1 at the top. What would happen to the likes of Frijns and Wickens now? There career just stalls a level earlier. They won't be able to get out of F3 now. At least with competing cheaper series they have chance to put themselves on show and try and get some sponsors.

They are going to have more teams in F1, the new teams will have some drivers sponsored by Liberty Media or the F1 pot perhaps to be more exact, these being the cream of the F2 field.

Brawn has stated the desire for drivers getting into F1 needs to be based on talent rather than money.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

I believe the model would see future driver like Wickens and Frijns being promoted as the prize for being the Champion.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Why? Who pays? Surely it it's just one series per tier then everyone will make it to F2 if they can afford it? Otherwise where will the drivers in F2 come from.

I think there's a big gulf between what Brawn wants and what will actually happen. Maybe I'm just cynical.

If FOM is actually willing to fully pay for the ride of all lower-tier champions into the next tier, that's one thing (and it would help). But how much would they be paying? There's no such thing as the 'cost to run' in F1; if the F2 champion - with FOM sponsorship - is going up against Lance Stroll, is his sponsorship going to balance against Stroll's? No, of course it won't. And if the F2 champion is viewed as mediocre, like some in the past have been, nobody's going to take them anyway.

I personally agree that the system should work more like a funnel, getting narrower at the top. More seats for drivers to prove themselves and be noticed is always a good thing as far as I can see.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

All the F2 drivers do not simple just disappear that are already competing, Brawn wants a proper structure in place, how exactly that would operate I can only guess but he is keen for the very best drivers to progress through the tiers.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Like I said they are looking to add more teams into F1, these new teams will accommodate the FOM backed drivers.

I'm not sure what you mean by more seats to get noticed in, which FR3.5 drivers got picked up by F1 teams?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

I don't have a comprehensive list, but Sainz and Magnussen at least went straight from FR3.5 champion to F1 driver. FR3.5 was also the highest level Ricciardo competed at, I believe.

I just don't really see the point of having a single path to F1. Why do we need that? I know the FIA wants it so they can control the path better and promote their own series, but I don't see how it's objectively a good thing. FOM can sponsor talented drivers whether or not we have only one tier two series.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (3 wins, 12 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

Kubica, Di Resta, Vettel, Vergne, Alguersuari etc.

These drivers were backed by F1 teams, some didn't even have to win the FR3.5 title before being promoted to F1 whereas Champions like Aleshin who beat Ricciardo (Red Bull), Frijns who beat Bianchi (Ferrari), and Wickens who beat Vergne (Red Bull), never got a chance at F1 and we see them now racing in Indycars, FE and DTM.

Splintered series mean the best drivers being able to avoid one another so who do the FOM define as the drivers that should be helped, I would guess there would be some kind of limit to the amount of drivers they would be looking to help which would be not helped by having too many series?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

di Resta didn't race in FR3.5, Kubica I would say is the only one without the backing of a F1 team. Vettel, Vergne and Algueruari were backed by Red Bull and perhaps tellingly not one of them won the FR3.5 title but still got promoted to F1, whilst the actual champions were left on the wayside.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

Pokerman, I don't understand the point. How is trying to argue that most drivers who promoted were backed by F1 teams, going to prove that there were too many?

Drivers "could" avoid each other. Sure. But at least drivers had a far cheaper option to run top level series and try to get noticed. The point has been given before, take away FR3.5 and you just keep a terribly expensive F2 series. How is that supposed to help the likes of Frijns? It won't. All it means is that there now will be even less good seats at top level, and the drivers without huge budgets stand even less of a chance of landing a good one.

But in the end, refute this: we had two series, both were healthy, so both could exist just fine. Economically that is the entire proof there weren't too many series.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!

My point being that it wasn't a route into F1 so was more of an accessory, also all this talk of drivers needing to be millionaires, Ocon didn't come from money but was able to compete in F3.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

After it merges with GP3 drivers like him won't. If you're not picked up in F4 you'll need to be backed by multi millionaires to move on.

I thought F3 was the expensive category?

The only category that's folded is FR3.5 and not one driver in recent years has made the jump from there to F1 based purely on talent so I don't understand all the grief?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

F3 is OK now. When it merges with GP3 the costs will go up massively. The likes of Ocon's single seater career would have been over before it began.

We are talking about F3 were Stroll basically bought the title, I heard that drivers left F3 to go to GP3 because they couldn't compete with that level of spending.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

As I'm sure you're aware Stroll is not the norm. So what's good about less funded drivers now having less opportunity to obtain funding?

I find it sad to see diversity gone and series like FR 3.5 and Euro F3 effectively destroyed. They provided excellent motor racing. And, to add to your reasoning that I wholehertedly support, they provided accessibly monoposto racing for the fans - outside expensive F1 weekends and on accessible circuits at accessible times.

A really sad development.

Also, I hate this reversed grid nonsense in F2 and GP3. It just makes some lucky average drivers look better. Have as much proper qualifying sessions as you have races!

I did some quick research, FR3.5, F3 and GP3 cost virtually the same to compete in so why all the angst?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

I would second that, it gives a chance to blow up the results of average drivers giving them false wins and podiums.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015

The cost of FR3.5 was a lot less than GP2 and the cost of F3 are currently quite a bit less than GP3. Enough to make a difference anyway.