I came across this article recently stating that F1's young driver schemes are winning out over what was perceived as the rise of the pay driver.
http://sportontap.com/2014/02/07/young-driver-schemes-talent/
I was interested to get everyones views on this point as whilst I think, in principle, the article is correct I think it misses some of the double edged swords of the schemes that actually benefit the 'pay driver'.
Whilst it is great that the F1 teams are running these schemes I think they also see them as a way of gaining extra cash and satisfying sponsors. For instance Mercedes only currently visible youth driver this season is Malaysian driver Jafaar who races in the 3.5 Series. Whilst he's not terrible he is considerably behind others which leads you to conclude he is getting the backing due to being Malaysian and Mercs Petronas connection.
Williams have a similar thing going on with Flippe Nasr. They sign him to their team and suddenly the name of Banco De Brazil, who have always funded Nasr's career, appears on the car. Did Williams want Nasr or did Nasr come as part of the package for the funding?
Marussia and Caterham are both F1 teams that run teams in GP2 and GP3. You only have to look at the selection history of those teams to see its basically being used as an extra cash income. Caterham started GP2 last year with a line up of Ma and Cannamas and neither had any sort of race record at all. Marussia have Dino Zamperelli who is backed by a very rich Bristolian and lets not forget Max Chilton is a Marussia academy driver.
Is this extra way of the teams getting funding actually smoothing the passage to F1 for drivers who can only get there on funds? The more they get to run in GP2 and the like the more likely they are to get more funding and secure that F1 seat.
The other side is are these young driver schemes pushing drivers into F1 too early? Red Bull have a very visible programme and there young drivers are in and out very quickly. Drivers like Alguersauri and Felix Da Costa, who were both set to be the next big thing at one point, have already been chewed up and spat out and there barely in their 20's. Would they have done better with more time to develop?
Another example of this is poor old Esteban Guttierrez who was part of the Sauber driving acadamy and was promoted to the race seat prematurely as Sergio Perez left the team and Sauber had a deal in place with there sponsor that they must run a Mexican driver. Even Guttierrez stated he was not ready for F1 and promptly proved it. He has now ruined his rep in F1 forever when given a couple more years development he might have proven to be a competitive driver.
Rather than Young Driver programmes should we instead be looking to the FIA to make it much harder to get a super-licence? If the licence was only granted to drivers who had placed within the top 3 in the championship in a designated feeder series (or indy cars, le mans etc) wouldn't that be a much better way insure it was only the real talent that got into F1? It might also stop F1 missing out on some of the talent its missed.
http://sportontap.com/2014/02/07/young-driver-schemes-talent/
I was interested to get everyones views on this point as whilst I think, in principle, the article is correct I think it misses some of the double edged swords of the schemes that actually benefit the 'pay driver'.
Whilst it is great that the F1 teams are running these schemes I think they also see them as a way of gaining extra cash and satisfying sponsors. For instance Mercedes only currently visible youth driver this season is Malaysian driver Jafaar who races in the 3.5 Series. Whilst he's not terrible he is considerably behind others which leads you to conclude he is getting the backing due to being Malaysian and Mercs Petronas connection.
Williams have a similar thing going on with Flippe Nasr. They sign him to their team and suddenly the name of Banco De Brazil, who have always funded Nasr's career, appears on the car. Did Williams want Nasr or did Nasr come as part of the package for the funding?
Marussia and Caterham are both F1 teams that run teams in GP2 and GP3. You only have to look at the selection history of those teams to see its basically being used as an extra cash income. Caterham started GP2 last year with a line up of Ma and Cannamas and neither had any sort of race record at all. Marussia have Dino Zamperelli who is backed by a very rich Bristolian and lets not forget Max Chilton is a Marussia academy driver.
Is this extra way of the teams getting funding actually smoothing the passage to F1 for drivers who can only get there on funds? The more they get to run in GP2 and the like the more likely they are to get more funding and secure that F1 seat.
The other side is are these young driver schemes pushing drivers into F1 too early? Red Bull have a very visible programme and there young drivers are in and out very quickly. Drivers like Alguersauri and Felix Da Costa, who were both set to be the next big thing at one point, have already been chewed up and spat out and there barely in their 20's. Would they have done better with more time to develop?
Another example of this is poor old Esteban Guttierrez who was part of the Sauber driving acadamy and was promoted to the race seat prematurely as Sergio Perez left the team and Sauber had a deal in place with there sponsor that they must run a Mexican driver. Even Guttierrez stated he was not ready for F1 and promptly proved it. He has now ruined his rep in F1 forever when given a couple more years development he might have proven to be a competitive driver.
Rather than Young Driver programmes should we instead be looking to the FIA to make it much harder to get a super-licence? If the licence was only granted to drivers who had placed within the top 3 in the championship in a designated feeder series (or indy cars, le mans etc) wouldn't that be a much better way insure it was only the real talent that got into F1? It might also stop F1 missing out on some of the talent its missed.
Last edited: