Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Three Car Teams - implications for new/young drivers.


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 10:54

At the risk of being accused of starting yet another thread on the subject of 3 car teams I think it useful to start this thread to consider how such a system might affect new/young drivers getting/staying in F1 as I have not read any comments in other topics regarding this subject.

My first though would be that it opens up opportunities for young drivers to get into a front running car earlier in their career, rather than running round at the back in less competitive cars. However on reflection I am not sure that will necessarily be the case.

I guess it depends on how FIA/FOM decide to regulate the third cars.
If it is a free-for-all on third drivers for the top teams then I assume most will opt for the 'best' they can afford, especially if all 3 cars are eligible for WCC points. If so, then it probably does not help improve the situation for young drivers.
Alternately, the rules could mandate a 'young driver' in the third car, though it then depends on how that term is quantified as to just how helpful it will be.

At present the only option for young drivers, unless you are on a 'young driver' program, is to do a deal with the lower grid teams to run on Friday morning.
With the loss of 2 (or possibly more) such teams, those opportunities will become much scarcer, unless the top teams decide to do take up the slack - something I somehow doubt will happen.
Only a handful of drivers who have tried the FP1 route actually get to progress to a race seat, and then normally only by bringing an even bigger bag of cash.

Even if the 3 car teams have to take a young driver, I wonder just how helpful it will be to that driver, as they will be compared (very unfavourably on forums such as this if history is anything to go by) with the teams top drivers, rather than the present situation of getting experience out of the limelight, could kill a career before it has really begun.

The other concern I have is the Red Bull junior team situation. Where does this put the case for having a young driver in the Red Bull and 2 (possibly 3) young drivers in the Toro Rosso team. Would Mataschitze continue to fund a second team?

To me it looks like it could be a negative move - what do others think?

Advertisement

#2 SpeedRacer`

SpeedRacer`
  • Member

  • 1,423 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 27 October 2014 - 11:12

I want to see completely unrestricted line ups if we have 3 car teams, not sham third seats forced to be younger drivers. At least then we could have a genuine 3 way battle for the lead if there is a dominant team again.



#3 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 27 October 2014 - 12:10

I don't see forcing teams to accept inexperienced junior drivers as any better a scenario than teams being forced, through finances, to run pay drivers. If a team can afford, or attract, top order drivers that's their business. F1 is contrived enough as it is.

Part of the role of lower order teams was/is/should be to showcase new talent. Sadly, the fact that this is even being debated just highlights the p*ss poor state the sport is in.

#4 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 27 October 2014 - 13:13

I can't see them having 3rd cars that can't score championship points (well maybe I can see them doing something that dumb, but it wouldn't be welcomed by anyone).

 

Imagine the fan outrage we'd have if someone new came into the sport and won the most races but his team can't win the championship because he's stuck in a super contrived "pointless" rookie seat.


Edited by johnmhinds, 27 October 2014 - 13:19.


#5 SirT

SirT
  • Member

  • 722 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 27 October 2014 - 13:20

I can't see them having 3rd cars that can't score championship points (well maybe I can see them doing something that dumb, but it wouldn't be welcomed by anyone).

 

Imagine the fan outrage we'd have if someone new came into the sport and won the most races but can't win the championship because he's stuck in a super contrived "pointless" rookie seat.

 

Could there be a rookie/3rd car WDC?



#6 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 27 October 2014 - 13:32

Could there be a rookie/3rd car WDC?

 

I edited my post to make it clearer i was talking about WCC points not WDC.

 

I think the assumption is that the 3rd car won't get constructor points so it evens things out with the two car teams.

But that may just end up being whichever car in the team finishes lowest in each race and not an allocated non WCC scoring car anyway......

 

It's really absurd that none of the rules for the 3rd car are out in the open for fans to know.



#7 purplehaireddolphin

purplehaireddolphin
  • Member

  • 312 posts
  • Joined: June 13

Posted 27 October 2014 - 13:45

At the risk of being accused of starting yet another thread on the subject of 3 car teams I think it useful to start this thread to consider how such a system might affect new/young drivers getting/staying in F1 as I have not read any comments in other topics regarding this subject.

My first though would be that it opens up opportunities for young drivers to get into a front running car earlier in their career, rather than running round at the back in less competitive cars. However on reflection I am not sure that will necessarily be the case.

I guess it depends on how FIA/FOM decide to regulate the third cars.
If it is a free-for-all on third drivers for the top teams then I assume most will opt for the 'best' they can afford, especially if all 3 cars are eligible for WCC points. If so, then it probably does not help improve the situation for young drivers.
Alternately, the rules could mandate a 'young driver' in the third car, though it then depends on how that term is quantified as to just how helpful it will be.

At present the only option for young drivers, unless you are on a 'young driver' program, is to do a deal with the lower grid teams to run on Friday morning.
With the loss of 2 (or possibly more) such teams, those opportunities will become much scarcer, unless the top teams decide to do take up the slack - something I somehow doubt will happen.
Only a handful of drivers who have tried the FP1 route actually get to progress to a race seat, and then normally only by bringing an even bigger bag of cash.

Even if the 3 car teams have to take a young driver, I wonder just how helpful it will be to that driver, as they will be compared (very unfavourably on forums such as this if history is anything to go by) with the teams top drivers, rather than the present situation of getting experience out of the limelight, could kill a career before it has really begun.

The other concern I have is the Red Bull junior team situation. Where does this put the case for having a young driver in the Red Bull and 2 (possibly 3) young drivers in the Toro Rosso team. Would Mataschitze continue to fund a second team?

To me it looks like it could be a negative move - what do others think?

ahem.....

 

http://forums.autosp...-young-drivers/

 

 

and at the risk of repeating myself, the 3rd car should be for the winner and runner up of GP2, WSR etc



#8 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 27 October 2014 - 13:49

ahem.....

 

http://forums.autosp...-young-drivers/

 

 

and at the risk of repeating myself, the 3rd car should be for the winner and runner up of GP2, WSR etc

 

What happens to those drivers at the end of the year though when they get replaced by the next years winners?



#9 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 14:11

ahem.....
 
http://forums.autosp...-young-drivers/
 
 
and at the risk of repeating myself, the 3rd car should be for the winner and runner up of GP2, WSR etc

Sorry - I must have missed it - but there again the fact that replies to it only seemed to last for a couple of days, shows just how little interest most posters on here have in the drivers of the future.
Your topic however only proposed an idea for one possible solution rather than looking at the implications 3 car teams might have.

Edited by ExFlagMan, 27 October 2014 - 14:20.


#10 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 27 October 2014 - 14:24

Sorry - I must have missed it - but there again the fact that replies to it only seemed to last for a couple of days, shows just how little interest most posters on here have in the drivers of the future.

 

I wouldn't say it shows that people aren't interested in future talent, it's just hard to talk about where any of that future talent is going when everything for next season is so up in the air.

 

We don't know where half a dozen of the current drivers are going to be driving yet so it's hard to see where any new drivers could slot in.



#11 Sash1

Sash1
  • Member

  • 1,291 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 27 October 2014 - 15:16

The third car has to be given to a troubled team. So Sauber could get the third Ferrari (that's how it works) if they fail to put their own cars on the grid. They can put their sponsor on it but also have to run Ferrari sponsors. But Ferrari decides who drives it. But what happens then with the contracts of the team's own drivers? If they have Alonso- or Kimmi-style contracts the team would have to buy them out of their contracts. Just as other staff who they do not need to run 1 Ferrari. They could fire all factory people etc. But all of that costs money.

So Ferrari decides they want some cash return on their third car investment and sell the drive to Max Chilton.... That's great news for the Ocon's and Sainz's of this world. Let alone the two drivers who got fired.

I just don't see how this systems is going to work. A team who gets the third car still has its old debts, has to make more to get rid of all personell they don't need and can just generate enough sponsor money to run the third car personell. It is not in any way going to stop them from going bankrupt. This third car idea and the contractual obligations of the system is already to late for failed teams like Caterham and Marussia. Even for a team like Sauber that situation would only push them faster into administration. IMHO the teams and Bernie have completely lost the grip on the situation.



#12 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 15:28

I am not sure where that idea came from - I cannot recall seeing anything suggesting that was the process - do you have a link?

#13 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 27 October 2014 - 15:44

It was what was suggested in a Daily Mail article I believe, but they probably got the wrong end of the stick.

Making teams like Sauber mothball their car production and buy customer cars from Ferrari doesn't solve anything, it just gives more money to an already rich team while cutting all of the technical side from the lower teams.

#14 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 27 October 2014 - 16:12

If three car teams come, I think the WCC points will be something like in WRC. A team/manufacturer has to nominate two drivers, who score team points. And the third driver is just for the drivers points. However he doesn't deduct constructors points for other teams, i.e if Mercedes gets a 1-2-3 finish, the 4th place (i.e Red Bull) still gets 15 points for WCC, though 12 for himself in WDC.

 

This alone will probably motivate teams not to hire three high quality drivers, as two is enough and the third driver can be more like experimental, i.e a rookie. You don't need to pay super-salaries to all of Hamilton, Rosberg and Alonso for one of them not to play a role in constructors' championship at all. Though I wonder if for example some rookie is super-successful, could you switch the "WCC nominated driver" around, because in WRC you can nominate the second driver before each round separately. While the #1 driver has to score points for WCC during the whole season.



#15 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 16:25

It was what was suggested in a Daily Mail article I believe, but they probably got the wrong end of the stick.

Making teams like Sauber mothball their car production and buy customer cars from Ferrari doesn't solve anything, it just gives more money to an already rich team while cutting all of the technical side from the lower teams.

It does nothing to help bring the no of entries back up to the required minimum if Sauber runs single Ferrari instead of 2 Saubers. Does nothing to help bring on young drivers either.
Looks like Bernie will have to think of another plan.

If a team can afford to run 3 top line drivers then it would make sense as it reduces the potential competitiveness of a rival team. Not sure if they could manage the internal team rivalry though with the potential for 3 times the no of Spa like collisions, compared to running just two drivers.

#16 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 23,183 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 27 October 2014 - 16:31

There's many reasons why 3rd cars are a bad idea, but the careers of young drivers isn't one of them. Typically top teams hire on merit, lower teams hire on wallets size. Yes it's hardly ideal for the likes of Wehrlein or Ocon to get their first taste on F1 with a top car on the limelight, but Mercedes are more likely to give them a go than backmarkers who'd rather hire someone like Max Chilton or Giedo van der Garde.

 

Mercedes is just a random example, I've just argued in another thread I really do think they'd give a go to Alonso in this case, but in 1 year time that seat might be open, or by hiring the best possible driver it might create an opening in some other team where they need a lead driver on talent. Ultimately over time it might all even itself out as the likes of Force India Lotus and Sauber all become backmarkers and forced to hire purely on wallet size, but it's not really worse for junior drivers than it is right now (might be worse for the stability of the sport though).



#17 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 27 October 2014 - 17:00

When did any of the top teams give a young driver a run in FP1?
The situation is already worse for new drivers just by having 4 cars missing from the grid.

#18 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 23,183 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 27 October 2014 - 17:13

When did any of the top teams give a young driver a run in FP1?

 

Why on earth would a well funded team hinder their own race drivers by doing something like that? When they want to prepare a junior driver they give him a race seat not half arsed solutions like this.

 

Besides I'm pretty sure a few years ago they were able to run 3rd cars in FP1 only, and we had the likes of BMW giving miles to a teenager Vettel and other situations like that.

The situation is already worse for new drivers just by having 4 cars missing from the grid.

 

Thanks, captain obvious. Of course it is and the more seats the better, I don't see what 3rd cars have anything to do with this?

 



#19 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 27 October 2014 - 21:33

If the criteria for "young drivers" is the same as for the "young driver tests", expect to see the likes of Pedro De La Rosa and Gary Paffett in the cars!

 

In all seriousness, I don't see why it would need to be restricted. If you carefully craft the rules so that it's not worth putting the best possible driver in the third cars, then even teams that don't have financial problems might be tempted to sell the seats or put in drivers that will help to attract a particular sponsor, just on the basis that they might as well. That wouldn't be an improvement on what we have now.

 

If you make it unrestricted, it would be interesting to see how the top teams approached it. Three top drivers and no team orders would make it hard to win the WDC against a team that had a clear number one and two fast, young drivers working for him. Would they go for a young charger on a contractual "number three" contract? Or would they just sign the three best drivers they could and let them have at it? It could take a few seasons before the teams worked out how best to go about it.

 

I actually think the situation as regards driver development in single seaters is so appalling at the moment that it's hard to see how third cars could fail to make it better. Other than the Red Bull programme which is the one bright spot, it's just a rich kids' game where the higher you go up the single seater ladder, the weaker the competition, because rather than filtering on ability, the system amounts to a financial filter and, because the filter removes the vast majority of the drivers from the pool of talent each time you go up a rung on the ladder, the group that is filtered out invariably includes the most talented people.

 

If the teams do opt to use the third car for a young driver who they want to develop, possibly on a contract that makes sure he won't take points off the team's title contender, that's clearly better than what happens now, and would provide a big incentive for teams other than Red Bull to identify talented kids and back them and bring them through the ranks, rather than letting the financial filter weed them out.



Advertisement

#20 Sash1

Sash1
  • Member

  • 1,291 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:28

I am not sure where that idea came from - I cannot recall seeing anything suggesting that was the process - do you have a link?

 

Pitpass article "Ecclestone: Teams will supply third cars to rivals NEWS STORY 26/10/2014"

 

Bernie Ecclestone has revealed that Formula One's teams have signed contracts agreeing to help competitors which get into financial trouble by supplying a third car to them according to an article in the Mail on Sunday by Christian Sylt.

 

I do not know if the quotes are genuine. And I do not know the credibility of Christian Sylt. 



#21 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 28 October 2014 - 09:28

Sounds like one of Bernie's off-the-cuff remarks that someone has reported without thinking it through.

If 3rd cars are needed to keep the no's up then say Ferrari giving a car to a failing Sauber team does not increase the no of cars on the grid if Sauber just run a single car instead of their normal 2 cars.
OK it limits the drop to one car rather than 2 but it does not seem like a sustainable solution.

If the team is in deep enough trouble that they file for administration, then how do they run the car anyway, as the administrators will have control of the teams assets such as pit gear etc. Not sure if the administrators might not even try and take the 'loaned' car as being a team asset.