Why the F1 super licence system is STUPID
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 09. 2022
- The FIA superlicence system needs changing to allow for perfectly capable drivers to race in F1...
SUBSCRIBE to WTF1 bit.ly/WTF1Subscribe
JOIN Team WTF1 www.wtf1.com/teamwtf1
---- Follow WTF1 ----
On Twitter: / wtf1official
On TikTok: / wtf1official
On Instagram: / wtf1official
On Facebook: / wtf1official
On our website: www.wtf1.com
---- Music provided by ----
Epidemic Sound
www.epidemicsound.com - Sport
I don’t think the license itself is dumb. They just need to rethink how many points each category can receive
Exactly like it’s simple
But the FIA doesn’t run IndyCar. They want up and coming stars racing in THEIR series, not in America. That’s why they punish IndyCar drivers. It’s stupid.
@@arwyss its not just stupid it's saving themselves a ton of money. Indy is well established like F1, F2 is a feeder series. That's alot of money in F2 sinking, for teams and driver academies
yep .. ending 5th in Indycar gives you 8 pts .. 3th in W-series gives 10 pts .. imagine that
@@mohammadnashitsiddiqui2168 people seem to underestimate how difficult and expensive it is to get to indycar as well. you can't just hop into an indycar and make it to the front of the grid. it's not any easier or cheaper to make it to F1 through indycar. especially since the level of competition is so high since a lot of the drivers have a lot of experience and drive at a high level. F2 is basically full of junior drivers while indycar is full of top tier drivers. i may be simplifying it a bit but i hope you see my point. i can see why F1 wants to protect their ladder but to award so little points to indycar is a disservice to the quality of drivers in indycar
edit: accidentally put different instead of difficult
The system should definitely exist but if a racer wins indycar races 7 times but can't even compete in F1, then the system is clearly not working
Indycar isn't comparebale to F1 in terms of difficulty
@@metro3313 Good thing you don't race in F1 to get points to compete in F1.
@@metro3313 you clearly haven’t watched Indycar judging by your comments and therefore can’t talk. Both are actually very similar in terms of difficulty.
@@metro3313 I heavily disagree since with Indycar being a spec series now, it is an equalizer on the field means more competitive racing plus the field is stacked with talent from veterans of the sport to drivers from other racing disciplines, plus there are more races on the schedule.
@@metro3313 IndyCar is weighted far less than F2 which is bullshit go look and see how quickly IndyCars points fall down from F2
This has a super simple solution: Recognize Indy as "equal" to F2 and retroactively fix the allotted points. The system itself works, it just wasn't recognizing Indy properly.
If you do that the Heurta has 68 points and all problems are solved.
This. (Herta BTW) Also Indy=The 500, IndyCar=the series.
Hey you also have to do the same with super formula racing in Japan
The system works as designed: to favor European feeder series at the expense of the rest of the world.
@@gwcrispi if you're going to play semantics..... Indy = Town of Indianapolis shortened to Indy. Indy 500 = 500 mile race ran in May with indycars.
Indy doesn't receive as many points just because it's non-FIA sanctioned. But the racing level is very good indeed. I think there are better drivers in Indy than Herta, but this will give a chance to other Indy drivers to get the points.
Can we talk about the Finnish driver who was given a temporary 4 race super license after having only competed in 23 races in his entire career before 2001. And that driver became the last driver for Ferrari to win the WDC... Kimi Raikkonen
But that's only because he knows what he is doing
As long as he has his drincc
They also couldn’t get the drink system to work so.
@@12thninja Well that was the case with Herta. He knows what his doing, yet fell short because of his super license points.
@@homeperson11244 It's from a meme.
Mazepin and Latifi were allowed to race so clearly the standards on the grid are not that high
your point would be valid if they didnt finish top 3 or top 5 consistently on F2
@@kimura2176 their point is that having enough super license points doesn't automatically make you capable of actually competing in F1, and you can be more than capable of competing in F1 without meeting the super license requirements, which is evidence that the criteria for points is not sufficient for filtering talent
Latifi is a perfectly good driver… won a race in every f2 season he competed bar 2018 and finished runner up in 2019.
@@kimura2176 that is the point. Indycar is twice as professional and competitive as F2.
@@lexistential it does tho...it means they were good enough in f2 consistently to warrant a f1 seat. That's how it works right now and it should remain that way.
Yeah, don't think we should scrap the system, or set a precedent by granting exemptions, but Indycar should be equal to F2 for points, and so they should retroactively apply them, so Herta would have the required points.
Equal if not reward more points because the opinion among drivers is indy car is a harder more comptetaive series
Why should Indycar be on the same level, i can 100% guarantee you that driving in F2 is much harder than just driving around a giant circle
@@Dragracingduleist Yes because driving in a circle is so difficult
@@metro3313 so you know more than callum illot... whos done both?
@@metro3313 Yeah can tell you don't watch indy car (hint ovals make up a small number of tracks, the rest are street and race tracks like f1)
Everyone brings up how Indycar gets less points than F2, but no one hardly mention how they also get less points than F3. You get the same amount of points for finishing 3rd in F3 as Indycar. And from there, 4th to 10th F3 gets more points. F3!!!! So what happens is, the "solution" for Herta would be to go race at a less competitive series with a top team just to garner some points. Which is silly.
Also, there are all kinds of little things that make no sense once you dive down the rabbit whole of the SL points. Like, you can win back to back Super GT series (which a driver did) and have enough points to jump into an F1 car without ever stepping foot in a single seater. Or how you can make your rounds in the F4 series and get enough points in 3 years (which a driver also did) to jump straight to F1.
You mean Naoki Yamamoto?
Yamamoto is also a driver in Super Formula series so calling him not having driven a formula car isn't fair.
Most Super GT drivers also drives in Super Formula as well since the calendar isn't that many (compared to other series).
@@AbrahamArthemius But that's besides the point. What @KENNETH was saying , is that he didn't have to race a one-seater in order to actually get enough points to move into F1. Hence why, the rule is stupid
@@AbrahamArthemius yes, Yamamoto is amazing! What I'm saying is, is that's what someone could do to get enough SL points for F1.
I think the system makes sense for young drivers working their way up and getting to grips with increasingly powerful/complicated cars. But, established racers in a top-level series who have proven that they can handle the car, race well, and be consistently competitive shouldn't have to jump through such hoops if an F1 team decides to hire them.
this also happened to Robert Kubica in 2019, he didnt have a super license back then, but because of an exception granted by the FIA he was able to race, I'd imagine them doing the same with Herta
@@toonengelen2278 One would hope. But, when does the FIA ever do the sensible thing?
@@toonengelen2278 Kubica was F1 driver before, thats why he got the exception. Race winner for flub sakes.
@@whythefuckineedhandle i know thats why i bring it up
@@toonengelen2278 it was not an exception. There are separate rules for drivers who held previously a SL.
The problem with vassuer argument is its idealistic. Nick de Vries and Oscar Piastri won more F2 races than Nikita Mazipan, yet he got a drive without proving he was ready. The superlicense system should definitely stay but indycar (and superformula) should not be getting less points than F2.
Like what? Mazepin got legit superlicense. He got decent results in junior series, he drove fucktons of laps in Mercedes and Force India cars. He proved he was ready, its very handy to forget that his teammate, who was F2 champion, led 21' destruction championship. Probly wasn't worthy also?
@@whythefuckineedhandle He did get a superlicense but was he any good though? The point of superlicense was to prevent drivers with no experience getting on an f1 grid and potentially causing problems and danger for others and for themselves, and yet mazepin who got a license the right way was hated by every driver on the grid for either driving dangerously in practice and qualifying or spinning out and causing red flags
Just another Max rule. He really left a mark on motorsport.
💯💯💯
And lance too
The super license, and it's silly points scheme have been around for decades... they only added an age restirction to it because Max came in as a kid, and made all the grown men look bad...
Lol you're not aware with Kimi
Hey, don't forget about Kimi.
Before he started in F1 he only competed for just 5 races before in junior class. It was quite a controversial stuff back then but it all turned out great, huh..
Latifi is in and Colton Herta is out, something needs to change. I believe just giving Indy the same point as F2 retroactively would be a good start
Well certainly not retroactively. And like it or not but Indycar is an entirely different thing from F1. AND Indycar is US-only. The world is so much bigger than the US.
@@Arsenic71 what's the issue about being US only? They race in some of the finest race tracks in the world like Indianapolis, COTA, Laguna Seca, etc. The point is it's a senior category, not a junior meant to develop drivers like F3 and F2. They can't be viewed as less of a series.
they shouldn't have the same point value, f2 should be higher as it goes beyond the "ability" of the drivers. it's away to regulate a pathway to create safe racing. yes the points can increase but should not be equal.
@@whitt5676 the super licence wasn't created to regulate pathways into f1
@@Arsenic71 That's why there just as many countries represented in INDY as F1. Who care if it's only in the US because the drivers aren't.
Technically he does have enough points, there is a clause that allows the FIA to accept people with lower points as long as it's over 30 or so. Or something along those lines, The Race did a video on it in much further detail go watch that for more info on it.
They talked about this during FP1 today, said the FIA is not budging
@@ealeitz99 They're not budging because he's American. If this system was in place 15 years ago and a young Lewis Hamilton from Great Britian didnt have enough SL points to enter F1 with McLaren, you can bet your a$$ he'd get his exemption no question. F1 is elitist and doesn't like Americans, just wants their viewership to boost their profits. Otherwise, even our own "American" team isnt even really american. No american drivers and very little is done at their "headquarters" most is done in the UK and Italy.
@@MattGoelz "F1 is elitist and doesn't like Americans" 3 races, "even our own "American" team isnt even really american" take that up with Gene not the FIA.
@@MattGoelz never before has one country gotten 3 races in one season, guess what the US has next season... "ooohh they hate Americans"
@@mavadelo what part of they want our viewership but not our drivers/workers do you not understand? Of course they'll put 3 races on some of the lamest tracks (barring COTA) we have to offer in our biggest tourism cities and then charge us $1200 for a GA ticket. Because they're trying to milk the American viewer. They care about our $$$$$. That's it. Nothing else
I know only of 2 times where a team wanted to sign a guy without the necessary experience and everybody made a fuss about how they are damaging the sport.
Kimi Räikkönen and Max Verstappen.
Let's just say, when a team is so convinced, it's gonna working.
I don't think its stupid because you are performing at the highest level of motorsport but maybe they should include more categories than others or maybe should make it equal. Its a very competitive sport.
Aggreed, it works as a filter.
It is stupid, Mazepin got one. 😆
It is not well implemented
It’s very stupid. Indycar is closer to F1 than F2. Not in car performance but in driver quality and experience as well as race length and track diversity.
@@mikko3 and if they crash too much they will sit on the sidelines the way Mick did in Australia. The teams will regulate themselves on this.
This coin have two sides, one the one hand we don’t want the grid full of Latifis, Mazepins or worse.
But on the other hand we would like to have the possibility for new Max or Kimi to enter F1.
Kimi didn’t even have a super license when he entered and had 5 races to prove him self.
The current system allowed Latifi and Mazepin in but would have kept Verstappen and Raikkonen out. That's all that really needs to be said about the system.
Allowing more competition coming in would get rid of the need for pay drivers.
The more market, the more options, more chances of better drivers for cheaper.
@@Viking_Raven pay drivers will always be a part of f1
Herta: Gets 7 Indy wins
Fred: “We need to avoid drivers with big budgets and no results in the past”
Ikr 😂 Not only does Herta have results, but his budget (minus PR from nationality) is likely considerably smaller than that of many other drivers
Guess he doesn't mean people like Mazepin or Latifi. Because you must be pretty bad to be 21st in a 20 car championship.
Hey! Don't treat Mr. Super License like that. He's not stupid....kinda, he's just a little misguided >:(
I think the idea behind super licenses is solid, it just needs tweaking a bit. I also think it should be expanded to the lower categories so that no talent pay drivers can’t just advance up the ladder.
F2 definitely needs it. I’ve had enough of seeing people like Roy Nissany and Ralph Boschung warming seats for years and years when they obviously don’t have the talent to go any further.
The issue the system has now is that it was clearly and blatantly designed to heavily favor, and more importantly, protect, direct F1 feeder series. Anyone that even attempts to state that F2 is remotely as challenging as Indycar is comically kidding themselves. But by making sure the points system favors F2 they ensure that series gets a prestige bump the cars, competition and races it has, absolutely does not deserve. It was done for a reason, which was to keep Indycar in its place. F1 well remembers the 90s when Indycars worldwide expansion, technology and competition levels was starting to give F1 a run for its money; before self-destructive egos within their own series set them back 30 years.
The system was a kneejerk reaction to having a young, eager driver come into a sport full of adults. Yet within years proved himself worthy of the seat. What's the system protecting against? Teams will only want the best drivers for them and their team. And with several drivers currently nearing retirement age, this system might cause a shortage of drivers in the future, especially if more teams join the grid.
Sorry, but what shortage of drivers are you talking about? This year there was no spot for Piastri. Every year we have drivers from f2; drivers, who was in f2 but didn't make it to f1 and are in other series now; ones who lost their spot in f1 in prev years (or who decided come back). And now we also may have some IndyCar drivers.
There was some special cases (like Redbull struggled to find second driver) but main problem current f1 -- find spot for young driver after f2.
iiii dont think verstappen is the norm :P they just saw it as a stepping plan for the mazepins being bought into the sport at 16 years old if they let this happen. max came in early and it worked..... the chances of another 17 year old being on that level is....... yeah...
The Super License was NOT introduced because of Verstappen. It has been part of the sport for longer and was implemented to keep unskilled rich people from getting into the sport. The additional requirement added because of Max/RB was just the minimum age requirement of 18+
@@user-zo5sv5nc9y Sorry if English isn't your first language, but "might cause a" and "is a" are totally different ideas, because he never said there was a shortage, he said there might be a shortage in the future. You didn't understand the comment at all.
Verstappen triggered the system, but it seems very obvious to me that it also aims to exclude the pure pay drivers, very common in the the 90s. These were nothing like the Latifis & Stroll: they had wealth but no experience, little to no upbringing as race drivers, or in very different categories.
It was typical for a team like Minardi, Larousse, Prost GP, etc...To have 1 stable driver, then a driver pushed in by a sponsor (the engine manufacturer for instance), and swap that 2nd seat all year long between 3 or 4 in total. A plethora of bad drivers ended up in F1 that way, often 2 or 3 seconds off the #1. Some gentlemen drivers (J-D Delétraz comes to mind, Carrera cup racer I believe), quite a few terrible Japanese drivers who managed a little in Japanese F3000 championship but couldn't drive an F1 properly (T.Takagi or Inoue came to mind) and other wealthy tourists. When they finished a race (terrible reliability at the tail end), that was 5 to 7 laps behind the winner.
I feel like this should be obvious, Indycar is a direct competitor to F1's expansion in the US.
Which is why F1 should stay an European sport
@@metro3313 Except most of the races are outside of Europe, F1 is owned by an American company, and traditional European circuits are beingdropped to make room for circuits elsewhere (see the US having 3 races next year and 5 total in North America).
So explain to me how F1 is a European sport again.
@@metro3313 I realize opinions are just that, but Christ that's a mind-numbingly daft take.
F1 hasn't _been_ a purely European sport for a while now, and it's definitely better for it. Some of the best tracks (and drivers) in the world are in Europe, but there are plenty of them that also _aren't_ .
You want F1 to be (stay) the clear pinnacle of motorsport, then it damn well better be built to farm efficiently from all the best other categories, whether or not they also represent some level of competition for viewership (referencing Indycar, for example).
@@RobMakowski It started that way, it should be that way
Indycar should award same points as F2. It's insulting Indycar drivers otherwise
I thought I was only the stupid one lol
Only the top few F2 drivers could compete in the top 10-15 in Indycar. Even counting indycar the same as F2 would be a disgrace. If you are a multiple indy race winner or finished in top 10 points you are better than Mazepin or Latifi.
Considering the system was implemented because of Verstappen, and with it we see drivers like Mazepin, one could argue it's due for an overhaul.
Evidently Mazepin had the required number of points, but look how he did when racing on the circuits. The system needs to be fine-tuned to recognize driver skill.
Indeed. The defenders of the current system must logically think that Mazepin was more deserving of an F1 seat than Verstappen or Raikkonen.
@@4Leka they’re the exceptions to the rule though. The system doesn’t exist to vet talent, it’s to vet safety. It’s to ensure drivers can progress to f1 without being a risk to the entire grid, like pay drivers of old, your jarier’s, Yuji Ides, taki inoues and the like.
When considering the system through that lens it makes sense that f2, which is a closer aligned to f1 and is better for preparing drivers for it gets more superlicense points than Indy, even if the Indy field is more talented, and the cars are faster.
We don’t complain about endurance racers not getting the same number of points as f2 for this exact reason
Indycar is considered the top open wheel sport in the US. The fact that they're not even getting the same number points as F2, which would be Indy Lites, for comparison, is wild to me. At least give him a race or two as a fair shake. Allow teams to put up a third entry for development drivers that don't earn points toward a constructor's or driver's championship, but are at least F1 teams. Points are awarded to teams and drivers without the development drivers counting.
The FIA should change the rules, but they should not make any exemptions. We have all seen what happens when there are rules but they are not followed consequently (2021 season finale)
The super lisence system is working as intended
It continues the tradation of the FIA trying to monopolize the best young driver talent into their perfered feeder series
Even If it tells the world and drivers that indy car and or other more competive series are LESSER then F2/F3 with how absurd the points drop off is
They had an option where you had to drive an F1 car for a certain amount of laps at full speed or something like that... Well bring that back. Even if someone has too much money or not, if he can prove that is as good as or better driver than someone else in the F1 grid then he should have the chance of competing.
The only reason I find why F2 give more points than indy is the fact that most of the teams have junior drivers in F2 and wants make them easier get the super licence.
The simplest reason why there must be changes: We all want to see Lord Mahaveer in a F1 car. The legendary driver who achieved the unplanned scenario of getting 12 penalty points twice in a season
I dont think we should be using the "Super License" points system to compare two racing series, but more like an objective way to compare a certain level of "readiness" to race in F1. When it comes to road courses, F1 cars are quite a bit of a jump compared to even F2 or Indycars. A video by driver61 showed an estimate that Indycar would be about 13secs slower than F1 around Spa and only about 3secs faster than F2. And I would think in circuits where there are fewer long straights than Spa, F2 may be faster.
But F2 has an advantage in preparing you for F1, because it only races road/street courses and does so at the same tracks as F1. So in that sense I think F2 should be given somewhat higher points than Indycar. Though Indycar performance should be graded higher than F3, because of the significantly higher speeds of Indy.
And yes, I am completely discounting the ovals of Indycar. Those are a completely different beast all together, and you cannot compare F1/F2 etc to Indycar on Ovals. If Indy had a "Super License" system for readiness on Ovals, I would put F1 lower than NASCAR. Also, I am not getting into comparing which series has better "talent" of drivers. That is very very difficult to compare.
The only thing where I will have an issue with the Super License system is why at higher positions, Indycar is equivalent to F2, but it isnt at lower positions.
Again, just to clarify, this is about an objective system of trying to judge readiness. This is not to say whether in "subjective" terms Colton Herta is ready or not for F1. But like Guenther Steiner said, if we have a set of rules we should follow them. And if there is cause for it modify the system as required, but not because of any one person or the other. In that sense I dont think there is any reason to change the system, unless we have more evidence that the system doesnt work outside of Colton Herta.
Lmao IndyCar does have a restriction for 1st time drivers/attempt when it comes indy500 because you have take the indycar rookie orientation for indy 500 which is completely different than road courses and they test you through 3 different speed tests
It’s just a method that proves the FIA are elitists.
They want you to go the route they want you to. The current system makes you go up the most expensive (and most profitable for the FIA) route to F1 you can.
If you come up from another racing background they want you to fail even if you’re talented enough.
I have yet to hear anyone talk about the affects on the formula feeder series (F2/F3) if you up the super license points for Indycar.
Think about it, salaries for and F2 driver are far below their Indycar competitors, if the FIA offers the same points system why would kids go into the F-Feeders series when they can make more else-where with the same result.
The bigger question to me is whether AT wants to replace Pierre with another Yuki rather than someone consistent like Felipe Drugovich.
Tbh I think Fred’s comments reflect more on the teams. They can choose who drives for them. If Nikita could still get in then the system doesn’t work well at stopping pay drivers.
There are only 20 seats in F1 and if you manage to convince one of the 10 teams to hire you, you clearly deserve the drive there.
Just look at the driver who caused the SL system to be reformed: Max Verstappen.
Back then, he was too young, wouldn't have enough points and I think didn't have his national driver license but he instantly exceeded all expectations and soon will be a two-times Champion.
Don't forget Max was dubbed as a dangerous driver by almost all drivers in his first season for causing some serious crashes. Thus opened up the question about necessary experience.
@@Xiphros I don't remember him to be particularily crashy that year. Especially not compared to older rookies or even experienced drivers.
The only thing that comes to my mind are the moving-under-braking maneuvers of him, that angered especially Raikkonen.
I just think because he was so young and under scrutiny that there was some bias against him.
I wonder if Josef Newgarden has ever been approached to go to F1. The guy's been a BEAST. 22 wins in 6 years with championship finishes of 1-5-1-2-2-2(current). He's one of the few people EVER to have triple-digit Super License points (2019 and 2021), and is still sitting on 90 right now. But with how well he's been doing, he's probably quite happy staying in his home country and racing.
He's too old at this point
The reason Herta doesn't have a superlicense is because his championship results aren't good enough for it. He's own a few Indycar races but hes' never won any important championships and his overall results aren't consistent imo. He never won Indy Lights championship, or Indycar championship, or any of the F3 championships he competed in, he's never competed in F3 or F2.
Meanwhile there's Alex Palou who won Indycar championship in 2021 and has superlicense, Nick de Vries won the 2019 F2 championship, Felipe Drugovich is about to win the F2 championship this year. All 3 of them would be more logical choices for a F1 team imo.
Fun fact: Colton Herta has raced in more Indy races than Max Verstappen competed in any single seater races before getting to F1
I feel they should do a test secession where he has to display that he can consistently be under the old 107% rule. If he can that shows he has the experience and skill to be a legitimate F1 driver
It's not an old rule, it still exists, it's just that the cars are much closer now
I've always thought the Super License was deliberately obtuse.
Super Formula and Indy Car should get the same point or more than Formula 2. Nice video. Keep up the good work.
It's incredibly simple to understand why the points are set out as they are, and it's as simple as *drum roll* The FIA wants F1 drivers coming through the F1 feeder series, and Indycar going through their own US based feeder series. Sure it's unbalanced for Indycar to get less points than F2, but that's what help keep F1 a special category of racing, and doesn't get blown out to be like NASCAR, with 38 drivers. Really not that hard, and completely fair imo.
If Mazepin and Latifi got into F1 than Colton Herta should be able to
Mazepin and Latifi have money, what does Herta have?
@@metro3313 more talent
The super licence system does need to change, but also it would be great if they could entice more teams onto the grid. With the pool of talent at the moment could do with at least a couple more seats to accommodate everyone. There are teams that have driver contracts signed for years to come, and only a few mainly midfield teams with any movement going on (even that's mostly due to retirement/movement among older drivers)
this is one proof that live-streaming and discussing this is actually slightly better than an edited video.. takes less time to produce, put together and put out. You can do it almost ad-hoc with little actual prep and just need talking points... Tommo did it a few days ago.
I'm gonna say it. Indy car gets way less points because it's easier to keep F1 in the European family that way and keep the Americans out. Look at Andretti situation. Wants to pay all the fees like F1 all agreed too, form a team and drivers all American..and suddenly all the Euro F1 teams are like nahh..we changed our minds.
100% this.
This is why I honestly hate F1 and started to watch more indycar over the past 3 years. Indycar is far less restrictive and way more competitive, unlike F1 that tries to restrict people with it being heavily elitist. Theres a reason why only certain sports are popular in america, we wanna see the underdog win, we want sports to be competitive (salary cap, etc). I feel like european people shit on us so much because we don’t accept elitism as much as they do
Black flags matter made a good video about f1 elitism
czcams.com/video/QnT1OAp-oX4/video.html
Absolutely disagree. If it changes it will be a detriment to young drivers.
Fun fact: Kimi got his super license after only having completed 23 races
One of the biggest reasons the points system exists is also to dissuade pay drivers by making it impossible for people with no racing experience to just buy a seat on the grid. However, this should be less of a concern now that we're in a new financial era of F1. With a budget cap in place plus more equitable sharing of FOM payouts, there's far less incentive for backmarker teams to accept pay driver money. That's why Haas aren't interested in finding a new one after Mazepin's departure and why Williams aren't looking for one to replace Latifi.
That just makes the Super License point system even more untenable. Now that we know teams aren't in a position where they must accept a billionaire's talentless son for a driver or else they go bankrupt, I think the FIA and Formula One can trust teams to sign drivers that they think will give them the best odds of success.
Super Formula is also deserved more points. It's so under rated series
One problem. Not many races. There’s like 8 in a season.
@Houki Chan much better. I do love the series but it’s just too short. Maybe mix super formula license points with super gt (I know a lot compete in both) and you have a deal.
@Houki Chan because of the lack of races is why they compete in both.
Herta has made way too many mistakes only this year, costing him race victories, he doesn't have the level of f1 just yet, I do agree that maybe indy car should have the same or similar points for f1 but that still shouldn't make more sense, the whole point of the feeder series is to give a path to f1, indycar has its own jr series to get there, Herta shouldn't be above the rules, red bull has a ton of jr talents waiting for the opportunity to get there, in indy there are also others way more valid like Pato or Palou that earned the enough points for that opportunity, if he gets it, it would be so so unfair for many other drivers out there
I think Herta is way more deserving of a seat in F1 than Stroll or Latifi, two drivers who have made critical and race altering mistakes time and again, yet they qualify for a super licence due to the backwards system of points allocation
@@mattbriggs6404 stroll is perfectly deserving of a seat in f1 imo. 2016 European f3 champion. That said, I’m surprised he’s stayed for as long as he has.
@@mattbriggs6404 Stroll would utterly obliterate Herta in the same car
Totally agree. Neither Colton nor Red Bull are above the rules. I'd much rather see them change the points you're getting for IndyCar now, and have Colton join F1 in two years when he has enough points.
Can you explain the grid order for Monza race after penalties? What system do they apply?
I think the exception should be consistency. Maybe they do not have the race wins, but have they landed on the top 10 consistently? If so then maybe that is a way in. Earn extra points for consistently landing in the top 10 or top 8. Maybe 3 or 4 consecutive top 10 would earn them an extra 6 to 8 points helping their cause.
A lot of it is based on the tracks they race at. F2, F3 etc... race at many of the same tracks that F1 does, thus it is easier for the top drivers in those series to accumulate the need SL points.
In IndyCar there are only a few tracks they race at which are FIA certified Grade One, Indianapolis (which F1 hasn't raced on in 15 years) and CoTA (which isn't on the IndyCar schedule this season). They do currently race on a lot of former F1 tracks which do not give them SL points.
Outside of adjusting the SL points awarded in IndyCar, their solution might be to include more tracks that F1 currently uses; they hold a race in Canada Toronto, maybe they can add or switch to Montreal/Circuit Gilles Villenueve, and/or and the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez ie the Mexican GP.
Maybe even consider one off races each season at F1 tracks in other countries; Honda is an IndyCar engine supplier so maybe consider Suzuka and/or Fuji which are both Grade One tracks.
It wouldn't help Colton Herta this season, but going forward might balance things.
Such an easy thing to fix, award the same points for F2 to Indycar finishers. That way drivers have an easier time getting in and F1 can still be super derogatory to IndyCar as a lesser series. Everybody wins!
If they want to give American drivers more of a chance to compete in F1, they need to change the rule to give IndyCar more points. Even some of the guys coming over from F1 to IndyCar aren't winning or dominating a "less competitive" racing series
True. Aren't all indy cars all basically the same unlike F1. So technically the much better driver should win most of the time. But that's not the case. Either the talent is in F1 and indy or something else. Otherwise former F1 drivers would dominate. But they dont
@@OveranalyzingEverything marcus Ericsson is in the championship fight….
@@lucas_dr3 and rightfully so. He's fast and he put on the off season the work (Mentally and physically) do being do great now. He worked for it,
@@VITORB82 yeah of course. But he was extremely mid in F1. And Herta can’t even beat him
@@lucas_dr3 sure. But apples and bananas. Not everyone is destined to be a great. I follow IndyCar very closely and Marcus put on off season the work to overcome some of the "deficit" he may have. He worked for what he had achieved this season.
I’ll be at the final Indy car race this weekend at Laguna Seca. I’m going to try to get Colton to sign a can of Red Bull lol
The problem with changing the system retrospectively is that drivers have taken decisions about their careers based on the current system, so I am not sure it should change retrospectively. It should change from this season on though.
really wouldn't change much either way. most american drivers aren't willing to move to europe for a chance to race vs staying home and having a seat.
Reminds me of the whole "I had to pay my student loans so why should others have theirs written off?" debate going on in the US right now
@@hallamhal apples and oranges. this would be like telling a engineer that he's no better than a construction laborer.
There's more to being a top racecar driver than performance on the track. F1 and IndyCar put entirely different off-track pressures on the drivers, so ir makes sense to rate them differently on the Super Car license.
F2 runs on the same tracks in the same countries as F1.
Indycar runs on different tracks (except for 1⭐️ Texas) in only the US and Canada.
@Queen Elizabeth 🅥 ... The Queen is dead... Probably shouldn't have tased her.
Well the thing is, it's 40 points no questions asked, or 30 points with a special exemption. Colton missed out on half a season because of Covid, so I think it's reasonable.
Worst comes to worst, he does a season of F2 in 2023. Chances are he'd win it by a fair margin.
"keep up standarts on the F1 grid"?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! So Nikita Mazapin, Lance Stroll, Yuki Tsunoda and many more are fine right?
First things first, Juan Pablo Montoya and Jaqques Villeneue already set precedent that indycar drivers can actually do well in F1, with Max Chilton being the more recent example.
We also had Emerson and Christian Fittipaldi going the other way around to victories, and Grosjean recently.
So there seems to be two issues here:
1) indycar is not a feeder series and should score higher than those for super licence
2) indycar is not FIA sanctioned, which is a unique characteristic for such a high level series, but also means other standards apply for safety and sporting rules
So maybe a portability test for understading what rules change when you move between them?
I remember Lando causing an incident in a virtual race in 2020 because he didn't know oval rules for three wide into a corner.
Sure there has to be something to learn the other way around as well.
And definitely review super licence points attribution for indycar results.
The indycar does not follow F1 standard as in rules and regulations (idk if they are better or worse) so they should not be given the same points. Also by giving the same points it would mean that the FiA would be making way for other drivers. The move seems more commercial than rather for raw talent. If he's so good he should have no problem in breezing pass F2 in a season. Other drivers have payed the price and entered, he should too.
Does the F1 points system need an updated? Yes. Should they make an exception? No.
I’ve watched herta race in real life, multiple times. and I’ve even met him. I can say that he could possibly be on the same level as russel, Norris, and on a good day could even challenge verstappen and leclerc, he deserves a seat. This is supposed to be the pinnacle of Motorsport, right?
@@Chris-bm5qd and i am Gandalf and i approved Colton in F1. You shall pass!
So the dude that's currently 8th in Indycar deserves an F1 seat but the guy leading the F2 championship is not even in contention for a seat next year? doesn't seem fair to me.
@@JuanCarvajal2000 8th out of 33 drivers? I'll take that.
@@JuanCarvajal2000 F1 is and wasn't and will never be about fairness.
Tf? The guy isnt on that level,think your bias for him is showing ,withour racing in F1 the guy is around 5-8 th place level? Theres better ex F2 drivers that can be around those places,this is a $$$ move to have yanks happy,same as with scot speed who was trash and most likely will be the same with herta,and for example look at how good seb bourdais was in indy and look at him in f1.
There are some comments arguing that Herta should either be passed over and Alpha Tauri should select a different Indy car driver, or Herta should take a year in F2 and then move to F1.
I kind of leave it to to AT when it comes to these issues. They have juniors they could pick and there are likely dozens of drives who have the points and would love the AT seat. Red Bull thinks they're all boring. They've watched Herta race, put him in a sim and evaluated him to the best of their abilities and something in all that made them want him more than this crop of F2 drivers or anyone else in Indy car who wants to move to F1. That isn't to say that RB is correct. Lots of drivers have come in to the RB junior team and been horrible disappointments, but it's not as though RB want him in the AT seat for nefarious reasons he's not an oligarch's son paying his was in. RB wants him because they think he'll be more fast and marketable than anyone else they've looked at.
I also am a little bothered by the outsized weight of F2 because it's a very expensive series. No one can buy an F2 championship, but a sizable fortune will give you a greater advantage there than it can in Indy car. Herta isn't exactly working class, but he also doesn't have the mountains of familial wealth that someone like Logan Sargent does. If part of the goal of the super license system is to avoid allowing lower quality divers with lots of financial backing taking places that ought to be held by more skilled drivers shouldn't there be space for teams to choose drivers who have done well in relatively high skill low cost series?
Thanks Tommo for sorting this out for WTF1 😉
I agree with the FIA. Indycar is different from F1 in comparison to f2. F2 is very similar to F1 like rules, cars, tracks so the know f1 better. And also because f2 in in house, like if you are a CEO of a multi billion dollar company and you have to choose you heir, your son or a person more deserving who would you choose, most people would choose their son
Indycar is far superior to F2, and only very so slightly behind F1. Indycar needs almost equal recognition to F1.
At minimum Indycar drivers should be allowed to test F1, if they prove they can drive an F1 car with successful test, then licence should be issued.
Even if they have an unsuccessful test, they should be awarded double points of F2.
Having Indy be the same points as F2 is key here. It needs to happen
While big buzz around certain driver is unneccesary (Herta might just not fit into F1 "window"), at the end of day teams are what pays for drivers and their performance (a.k.a crashes) not FIA directly. So having decent but not "protective" safety net so any amateur driver (like me who suddenly would have 50M and would "buy" seat in F1) couldn't get seat unless doing pretty good job before for few years seems reasonable. On other hand, making some series exclusive entry door to F1 is a bit questionable.
Buuuut if it is all about excluding exclusions - I"m fine with having no exception unless overall rule package is changed to something else for future. Either point limit or distribution (didn't realize that 3rd place in F2 gets same as winner... FIA could change this that F2 champion gets 10M bonus if F1 teams hires that driver as main driver)
Red Bull will pay Herta but the FIA doesn’t like Indy because they don’t run it and it’s basically American and they want our money but not our influence on the sport
@WTF1 Why did Nyck de Vries use different driver numbers in Monza? I know he can't use 17 because that number is made unavailable by the FIA, but why did he have two different driver numbers in his FP1 appearance with Aston (34) and when he drove in the Williams (45).
I thought the system existed prior to Max after all the pay drivers in the 90s that were so bad they made Stroll look like Senna. Max coming in just made them add the "You must be 18" rulle IIRC
I still remember that newspaper I read about Max's interview when he's about to take his driving license test.
Yes an interview by a legit sport newspaper from my country Indoneisa to Max Verstappen and they talked about Max about to finally get his regular driving license. XD
So Ilott says no tyre saving required in Indy? Yet tyre management is one of the biggest things in F1. Maybe that's why Indy car isn't rated comparable to F2? Just a thought.
Meh, I don't think the fact F2 awards more points than Indycar implies that one is regarded as better than the other, it just means that F2 is the propaedeutic category to F1, and as such is considered to be the "canonical" way to get into an F1 seat. The system is far from being stupid, it just should take into consideration the actual achievements of drivers taking part in these competitions.
Oh, and by the way, the fact there's no need for tyre management in Indycar is not really something to be "bragging" about...
Well, this weekend is Indy's last race of the year, so Herta could race in other categories to get the extra points for the next 3 months. He could try to find a seat for the final F2 race in november...
I looked up "stupid" in the dictionary. The FiA logo was the illustration for it.
Also you forgot to mention Herta is the youngest race winner in Indycar history and he did it at COTA too a track on the F1 calender.
Just because 1 driver who seems to be favored by Red Bulls - suddenly the FIA super license point system becomes crap!
Well well....
The rule exists for long and I think it should remain in force until the ongoing season ends. After that, make changes or improvements. Personally, to benefit 1 driver and 1 team changing the point system is really unfair for previous contenders.
No matter how many Indy races the driver has won - if doesn't fulfils the current criteria - He doesn't. Period.
Change the rules next year; and let him be eligible for a contract next year and then whichever team wants him can offer the contract. Till then - we got a lot talent in F2 who are deserving too... and have met the criteria already.
Sounds more like the Super License was a way to keep it “Pure” and stop disruptive drivers that are there for merit rather than who knows who.
But formula 2 is literally made to put you in f1, while Indy car is it’s own racing series. So everything is more similar to F1, to setups to actually racing.
The US motorsports body can request a increase in super license points for Indy. I was on a flight with a FIA official and I asked why we don't see Indy drivers transition to F1 and the super license came up. He said it was on the US and they were not going to make that adjustment on their own.
Change Indy Points (keep current for ovals, but add same as F2 for Circuit/Road Courses.
I do believe that the system needs to recognize IndyCar more in terms of SL points awarded. I don't necessarily believe it should be EQUAL to F2 (since F2 and F3 for that matter tend to run on the same circuits as F1, which gives more immediately relevant experience on those courses to drivers), but something along the lines of 40/30/25/20/15/10/8/6/4/3 should work.
Also, even though most drivers are either former F1 drivers or have already accumulated enough SL points to have a superlicense, I believe that Formula E should be equal to or greater than Formula 3 due to said experience level.
F4 gets more points than Indy car and they race a lot longer and on different tracks with perhaps even more challenging elements on those tracks than current F1 circuits.
Jacques Villeneuve had never driven on 99% of the tracks on the F1 calendar when he showed up for his rookie season and still managed to prepare himself well enough to mount one of the best rookie campaigns of all times - AND he did this before simulators were really a thing.
The track discrepancy is a very weak point of contention.
@@chrismdb5686 Bad comparison. The 90's still had unlimited test runs making simulators obsolete. Why drive in a simulator when you can drive the actual car on a circuit. He had thousands of miles under his belt before running his rookie season.
@@Xiphros First of all, Villeneuve never went to any of the tracks to prepare.
Second of all, he's stated multiple times in interviews that he used archaic racing games (such as the PC game Grand Prix) to get a basic understanding of the tracks. The games he used could barely qualify as a simulator and we're far more akin to the first Gran Turismo than an actually accurate Sim.
@Rachel Wood See my other comment. I've never seen any interviews from drivers of that period mention it so I'm far more inclined to say the drivers weren't using them if they were around. The fact Villeneuve was using PC games equivalent to the first Gran Turismo speaks to that.
The top three in Indy Car should be awarded 40.
i think it’s very funny that Vasseur said that re: the quality for the grid when he’s given Marcus Ericsson and Giovinazzi multiple drives each lmfao. I personally would be fine with getting rid of the SL and instead replace it with a system where if a driver can’t get 50% of their teammates points (with consideration for race starts just in case we have an Albon 2019), then the drivers candidacy heads to the CRB and the team must argue successfully for why that happened and that their driver is not a hindrance to the competitiveness of the grid
2015: Teenagers are driving in F1! We need a super license system.
2022: The super license system is stupid!
Here's a solid way to change the rules fairly: 40 points = automatic super license issue. 30 points = driving test. The test must be done in an F1 car used within the last 3 years of competition, and the driver must be within 10% of cars from that same year on the same track.
The license is also for we do not have another Yuji Ide racing in F1...I also don't think that Indy should give as many points as F2... Remember Alessandro Zanardi? A legend in Cart (Indy) but a zero in F1
Seems like it's working just fine. It's helping maintain the value of the feeder series.
Why should they have special dispensation? Red Bull knew the rules, which were amended when they signed a driver under the legal age for driving in his home countries.
By all means keep the current points system but adding to what you said allow the teams to apply for up to let's say 5 points to be added. The team should have to pay a financial element to the FIA to hear their appeal and reason why they want a certain driver. The FIA then award points based on race performance. Make it so it can happen but the teams have a financial impact. That way they won't just try and get anyone in. If the FIA don't see anything in the driver then only the team applying would lose out.
Imagine a super licence system as today would have let Max out.
They should think of a way to measure talent, take a test in a reasonable priced car on a track and set a time. Then the best 20 go for a single seater lap on a track and set a time under a cut-off minimum time, which must be achieved 10 times.
Of course more experienced drivers in several series would do better at this test, and it take out the equation of diferences between racing series.
1st Indy is not an FIA championship. nothing more fair for the entity to value the base championships regulated by it.
2nd Marcus Ericsson is one of the championship leaders. When he was in F1 he was a Latiffi level driver. That says a lot about Indy. leave the points as is.
3rd Interesting as I didn't see any revolt movement like this when they denied SL to Pato O'Ward.
To be honest, I agree when I first saw the video, but consider the fact that some of the tracks are oval, and most IndyCar to F1 driver have not been successful, also considering Ericsson and Rossi both have one win, same as Herta, this season. There are drivers whose way more accomplish just this season alone, why not them? Simply put, the difference between IndyCar and F1 is more than people think, reason why F2 is the feeder series of choice. Just like you selecting only valid points for you own narrative, not the whole picture, your Channel name should change to WTR2. As for what the "R" stands for is up to your imagination, but something defiantly not fancy by youtube brass.
As for the 2, you are not even First as a "R"
It's a great idea that needs to be amended as situations change. Max & Colton seem to be 2 of those situations.
Imagine someone won every motorsport class and not only that also lapped every car twice every race but didn't have enough points bc he simply didn't participate in the classes you need to get superlicence points for.
if such a driver existed he or she woukd have enough points for the super license. Also if Colton Hayes had won Indy outright he would have enough points.
@@betaich I said every class where you don't get super licence points. So no...he won't have enough superlicence points
@@guenthersteiner9252 what races would that be? Local tractor pulling competition? Everything recognised by the FIA gets super license points even down to amateur IMSA drivers.
@@betaich get your point...thats why I said "Imagine"
It should be changed so f2 still has the best payout for points but indycar should get an increase 2 5 points maybe less if they want it keep f2 as the main way through but they need to make it so other series are closer to f2