Are junior formulae fair? Could they be better?
#51
Posted 08 May 2019 - 07:08
Frijns came into Motorsports when he won a scholarship for BMW and drove in the formula BMW. That became the formula Renault but he still retained his seat. After winning the F2.0 he landed in the World Series by Renault. That class was a better spring board into F1 at the time compared to GP2 because talented drivers did not need as much money to compete in that. And Frijns proved that for winning a title you did not need a big team. Arden tried to launch Red Bull talents, but they sacrificed Lewis Williamson even though the car was bad at the time. Could have been Frijns if he had agreed to an offer from Christian Horner.
After that came the unfair part. In GP2 he was approached by Russian Time and Trident but he had to find extra sponsor money. Which he did not have, so apart from a few races at Hilmer, he was passed over for richer "talent". At Sauber and caterham he was a test and reserve driver but again the richer colleagues got all available tracktime.
That Frijns is still racing is mostly thanks to WRT, an Audi customer team that approached him for the GT3 races in the Blancpain cups. He won the GT cup and the sprint cup and that got both attention from Audi itself (who gave him work in long distance races and DTM) as well as Andretti for the FE, although he had to leave when BMW took over.
Advertisement
#52
Posted 08 May 2019 - 07:21
I'm not going to touch intergenerational genitalia-measuring over who is more entitled with a 10-foot pole.
But as far as helping junior formulae, I'd just go back to harping on my point of too many different series under different rules hurts everyone.
It happens all the time in sports cars and touring cars as well. Before TCR, the global touring car scene was in a tail spin after costs in Super 2000 had spiralled out of control with the TC1 follow-up for the WTCC failing spectacularly. Then, with TCR you could suddenly run the same car in about 3-4 different series, depending on driver funding. That meant each series could get more diverse grids, and teams could find more places to run the same cars, lowering costs and making it easier to keep the lights on. It's not as spectacular as if everyone got to live their dreams and run whatever pseudo-DTM or V8 Supercars derivative their heart desired, but it is economically sustainable, and offers healthy racing. GT3 and GT4 did that in sports cars. It's not as spectacular as the old GT1 stuff, but it's grids of more than 6 cars and teams aren't going bust constantly trying to run over-priced garage queens.
Open-wheel junior formulae should be the same. I don't think there should be more than 4 tiers between karts and "F1".
Start with Formula Ford or FF1600 (since in the US at least, Honda supply crate motors for the same cars). Then F4, with very strict cost limits. Then F3, with basically the same ethos, but about 400hp. Then for the final tier, GP2/F2/Super-duper Formula. 650+hp, big wings (or tunnels if they're smarter), big slicks. Plenty of fear-inducing speed, but on a formula that can run in multiple places so that teams don't need to buy different cars. Hell, for a real act of genius, steal Lola's idea from their failed 2011 IndyCar proposal. Make the F3 tub and the F2 tub the same, with only the stuff bolted on different. That would mean that teams could move between series as funding allowed, making it even easier to fill grids. These kinds of things would lower costs by allowing the same teams to use the same cars, lowering the required budgets. And also creating larger markets for parts, which would also help the manufacturers/suppliers.
Or, you know, don't do that kind of stuff, and just keep arguing about perceived fairness and how it all comes down to money, but never thinking about what's being paid for and why.
I don't think this is the problem tbh.
Even if cars are similar and teams can hop around series, you will still have the situation where some drivers have talent and no money and others have less talent but more money.
And teams will usually opt for the latter because it will allow them to develop their cars which equals speed.
You would have to create an environment in which teams don't need driver funding to survive and/or be competitive, much like F1 is trying to do for 2021 I suppose.
#53
Posted 08 May 2019 - 07:56
I stopped reading right about there. No need to spark up the old generational warfare.
It's funny how the same posters who think motorsport is 'fair' when it's more about money than talent also dismiss the W Series, think younger generations are entitled and think Max was fine to shove Ocon. If I squint a bit I can see a trend here...
It depends very much on the end goal. I think that for the very junior series it should definitely be spec and be limited. I hadn't heard before about the rule that allows you to buy a competitors car at a fixed price but I think that helps but doesn't fix everything. Richer drivers can still pay for more testing or the very best mechanics to help setup the car exactly to suit them, but then you could argue that being a good driver is about being able to setup the car right! There is nothing stopping drivers having to pay to enter the series to cover the costs, but as others have posted, those costs need to be sensible and affordable for anyone who has collected a small(ish) amount of support and sponsorship so cost cutting is a must. Someone said that £600k is a rough price-tag of taking part in an F3 series? F3 can't be that attractive to sponsors as it's not mainstream viewing, so that figure sounds astronomical to me!
However, the line needs to be drawn somewhere. I don't think F2 should change really. I'd love to stop rich kids getting a massive leg up, but being a outstanding driver includes being able to work with your mechanics and our team and to get the best out of them as well as yourself. This pretty much means that you need your OWN team once you get to F2 or equivalent level to allow those skills to develop. If you've made it to F2 so far on equal terms then you are there on merit and not money so at that point it makes sense to relax the rules to create a more similar environment to F1, FE, Indycar or top GT series.
#54
Posted 08 May 2019 - 08:22
There is nothing stopping drivers having to pay to enter the series to cover the costs, but as others have posted, those costs need to be sensible and affordable for anyone who has collected a small(ish) amount of support and sponsorship so cost cutting is a must. Someone said that £600k is a rough price-tag of taking part in an F3 series? F3 can't be that attractive to sponsors as it's not mainstream viewing, so that figure sounds astronomical to me
That's mostly because F3 as from this weekend is not F3 anymore, it's GP3 with an F3 badge tacked on it. Bruno Michel made it happen in the end. Instead of being ousted with GP3 and GP2, as FIA tried to do a few years ago, he managed to integrate both the championships he runs as official FIA championships. I wonder what would have happened if FIA had not ruined the SL points system by nerfing World Series by Renault so much that Renault pulled the plug on it.
As for the W series, most people hate because it was Carmen Jorda who actually came up with the idea, but she was absent from the selection process, so that's a moot point now. Fact is there is female talent in motorsport (Chadwick, Visser, Wohlwend to name but a few), but still no one is breaking into Formula seaters. The debate still rages on whether it is a physical problem, a money problem or a thinking problem that makes this happen. The W Series could serve as a way to solve this strange puzzle.
#55
Posted 08 May 2019 - 10:21
of course it's not fair, half of the grid of Formula 2 and Formula 3 classes are terrible drivers and shouldn't be there. And teams become too dependent on their daddies who finance the lot and thereby keeping seats that should go to talent. I wrote in another topic something similar:
it's funny how the argument is used that if Chadwick doesn't impress in a new series higher up, it would reflect badly on the w series. That argument is never used when a guy moves up and doesn't impress, and we've seen many many instances of that episode.
And F3 classes and even F2 are filled with guys who shouldn't be there and keep hanging around without notable results, thereby keeping seats that should've gone or should go to talent. But because rich daddy is willing to fund an expensive hobby, we keep seeing these useless drivers over and over again.
And then there's perception. A certain son of a 7-time F1 champion is hailed by some here on this forum as the next big thing despite having a very mediocre racing career so far. In fact, a certain L. Stroll has a much more impressive racing CV and yet he was dismissed as a rich kid who shouldn't be in F1. Biased much regarding name recognition?
What the W series does is shining a spotlight on these girls and give them a platform to race, get experience and prove themselves. And if for example a team in F2 is taking them onboard, the objective of this new series is already succeeding. And more racing around the world is always a positive, not a negative, since we're on a autosport forum. Plus, young girls watching this series might actually get interested.
#56
Posted 08 May 2019 - 14:32
I don't think this is the problem tbh.
Even if cars are similar and teams can hop around series, you will still have the situation where some drivers have talent and no money and others have less talent but more money.
And teams will usually opt for the latter because it will allow them to develop their cars which equals speed.
You would have to create an environment in which teams don't need driver funding to survive and/or be competitive, much like F1 is trying to do for 2021 I suppose.
I don't think we can ever get the money issue out of the sport. My goal was, as you describe, creating an environment were teams were less reliant on driver funding for survival, which would lower the cost to participate, making the money less of an issue.
I don't really see many other solutions, as a dying sport (which motorsports is) isn't going to get widespread financial backing as easily going forward, so sustainability needs to be thought of much more.
#57
Posted 08 May 2019 - 15:45
I'm not going to touch intergenerational genitalia-measuring over who is more entitled with a 10-foot pole.
But as far as helping junior formulae, I'd just go back to harping on my point of too many different series under different rules hurts everyone.
It happens all the time in sports cars and touring cars as well. Before TCR, the global touring car scene was in a tail spin after costs in Super 2000 had spiralled out of control with the TC1 follow-up for the WTCC failing spectacularly. Then, with TCR you could suddenly run the same car in about 3-4 different series, depending on driver funding. That meant each series could get more diverse grids, and teams could find more places to run the same cars, lowering costs and making it easier to keep the lights on. It's not as spectacular as if everyone got to live their dreams and run whatever pseudo-DTM or V8 Supercars derivative their heart desired, but it is economically sustainable, and offers healthy racing. GT3 and GT4 did that in sports cars. It's not as spectacular as the old GT1 stuff, but it's grids of more than 6 cars and teams aren't going bust constantly trying to run over-priced garage queens.
Open-wheel junior formulae should be the same. I don't think there should be more than 4 tiers between karts and "F1".
Start with Formula Ford or FF1600 (since in the US at least, Honda supply crate motors for the same cars). Then F4, with very strict cost limits. Then F3, with basically the same ethos, but about 400hp. Then for the final tier, GP2/F2/Super-duper Formula. 650+hp, big wings (or tunnels if they're smarter), big slicks. Plenty of fear-inducing speed, but on a formula that can run in multiple places so that teams don't need to buy different cars. Hell, for a real act of genius, steal Lola's idea from their failed 2011 IndyCar proposal. Make the F3 tub and the F2 tub the same, with only the stuff bolted on different. That would mean that teams could move between series as funding allowed, making it even easier to fill grids. These kinds of things would lower costs by allowing the same teams to use the same cars, lowering the required budgets. And also creating larger markets for parts, which would also help the manufacturers/suppliers.
Or, you know, don't do that kind of stuff, and just keep arguing about perceived fairness and how it all comes down to money, but never thinking about what's being paid for and why.
Agree with this, actually F3 was pretty much as you describe...until this year. Even if different series had different control tyre suppliers, and some had control engines, your F3 tub would be pretty much eligible to run in most F3 series around the globe.
Whereas now your GP3FIA F3 car is eligible for precisely nothing else, Asian F3 and whatever that Regional European F3 series founded is called, you can run your car between those two series, but only because they happened to both chose the same approved spec car (the same W-Series uses coincidentally), but it wouldn't be eligible for American F3, all the while Japan is still running to the open rules (and I guess Macau too?), while British F3 is as far as I remember using a souped-up F4 car.