New F1 Superlicence points system

F2 is dead. They canned it because nobody wanted to compete in it.

Also, how utterly retarded to not include Formula Renault 3.5 or 2.0, or any single seater series from Asia. Its also now impossible for a tin top driver not in WEC to get into F1, so no GT drivers, USC drivers, or touring car drivers like DTM.

It would be interesting to see who this would have excluded from F1 of the existing grid.

Edit: actually, could this kill Formula Renault? I expect every driver in both 2.0 and 3.5 has ambitions of being an F1 driver. If they want to make it then they need to jump ship asap!

Edit edit: OK, my bad I miss read. You get points for Formula Renault, but not enough to qualify on it's own. I hadn't scrolled down the article. The exclusion of all non single seater or LMP1 categories is still stupid mind.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
F2 is dead. They canned it because nobody wanted to compete in it.
Click to expand...

Is that not the whole point? Increase the perceived value of an F2 drive, and they will want to compete....

It seems that is it far more to do with keeping younger drivers in the lower formulae longer to allow talent to be nurtured, rather than the alarming precedent of teams having to offer F1 race seats to younger and younger drivers to snap them up.

Seems sensible to me! Clearly there are plans for a re-vamped F2.
 
Last edited:
Apparently from the existing grid Kimi, Alonso and Ricciardo wouldn't have qualified on their debuts.
 
Anyone know how long you can retain a superlicence if you are no longer in F1? I'm wondering how this may affect the ability of drivers to make a comeback after a couple of seasons out of the sport.

EDIT: There also appears to be an error in the table on the Autosport website. At the moment third place in Japan Super Formula is scoring more points than second.
 
Last edited:
I don't think this is a very good idea... Rating the series without any consideration of the people racing in them in a given year doesn't work.

It says this has come about due to Verstappen, but he has got his chance in F1 based on merit it seems to why is that an issue, if he is good enough why not?

Instead we could have money flooding out the 'top' lower formulas to snap up F1 seats after a few years, meanwhile actual talent could be left out in the cold even more if they struggle to get into the correct series.
 
Thats a valid point Guerrilla. For example, you could win F2 in a field of ametures and score more points than finishing in the top 3 in GP2 in a field of 26 Lewis Hamiltons.

Thinking about it, they could fix the whole thing with one rule... "You must be 18 or over". They don't need anything else.
Any young driver thats showing any promise is in car racing by the time they are 16. Putting an age limit of 18 forces them to have at least a couple of years experience in car racing. Maybe add the Sporting Regulations exam too, but otherwise keep the rules as they are.

Once again the FIA are trying to massively over regulate a problem with regulations.
 
Skeeter said:
Thats a valid point Guerrilla. For example, you could win F2 in a field of ametures and score more points than finishing in the top 3 in GP2 in a field of 26 Lewis Hamiltons.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you might, but it does not mean you will be offered a drive by anyone!!

The point is, the FIA are weighting the series they wish to value the most, and the best drivers will naturally try to get to those series to accrue the required FIA points.

The teams will still have discretion about who they sign, just only from a set of 18+ drivers who have met the set requirements.

Sure there may be some odd results in the first year, but it will settle down.
 
Malt_Vinegar said:
The point is, the FIA are weighting the series they wish to value the most, and the best drivers will naturally try to get to those series to accrue the required FIA points.
Click to expand...

The problem is that by association the FIA are defining a ranking of all global single seater motorsport.

Should the FIA be allowed to be in a position where they can define which series are 'better' than others? Especially given that they are clearly going to rank their own series over any rivals, as shown by a non existent FIA series ranking higher than any of the well established non FIA feeder F1 championships. The complete exclusion of all GT and Touring Cars is bizarre too, as some (like DTM) are well established F1 feeders.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
The problem is that by association the FIA are defining a ranking of all global single seater motorsport.
Click to expand...
They are ranking them for their importance to F1 and the FIA.

Skeeter said:
Should the FIA be allowed to be in a position where they can define which series are 'better' than others? Especially given that they are clearly going to rank their own series over any rivals, as shown by a non existent FIA series ranking higher than any of the well established non FIA feeder F1 championships.
Click to expand...

Yes, when the drivers are trying to get into Formula 1, which is an FIA series.
 
Malt_Vinegar said:
They are ranking them for their importance to F1 and the FIA.

Yes, when the drivers are trying to get into Formula 1, which is an FIA series.
Click to expand...

Indeed they are, what I'm questioning is should they be allowed too?

For example, the FIA have decided that, in their eyes, coming 5th in the Italian Formula 4 Championship is worth more to F1 than winning the DTM Championship, any other Touring Car Championship across the globe , any GT Championship, IndyLights, any USC Championship, the LMP2 or LMPC class in WEC or ELMS, based purely on the grounds that the Italian F4 Championship is 'theirs'? Is that fair to the organisers of those other Championships?

Edit: Oh, also, No Formula E either, which is super retarded considering its an FIA series and absolutely rammed full of current and former super license holders.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
Indeed they are, what I'm questioning is should they be allowed too?

For example, the FIA have decided that, in their eyes, coming 5th in the Italian Formula 4 Championship is worth more to F1 than winning the DTM Championship, any other Touring Car Championship across the globe , any GT Championship, IndyLights, any USC Championship, the LMP2 or LMPC class in WEC or ELMS, based purely on the grounds that the Italian F4 Championship is 'theirs'? Is that fair to the organisers of those other Championships?

Edit: Oh, also, No Formula E either, which is super retarded considering its an FIA series and absolutely rammed full of current and former super license holders.
Click to expand...

The omission of Formula E is something that initially I found a bit odd. I am sure there is some reasoning for that...

However to your original question! Yes, of course they should be allowed. F1 is (still) seen as the pinnacle of motorsport, and the FIA is the governing body. If people want to get to F1, they have to qualify to get there. So they have to meet the requirements of the governing body.

The sport is a business, and they will of course look after their own.
 
The pinacle of motorsport, or the pinacle of FIA owned single seater motorsport?

I wonder what the answer to kaiowas's question is? Do you retain a super license once you leave F1? If not, Kimi would have failed to qualify for a super licence on both occasions of joining F1!

Edit: ah no, he might be ok as its 3 years and not only 2 that you collate points over. Schumacher would have not been able to join Mercedes in 2010 though.... LOL!
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
The pinacle of motorsport, or the pinacle of FIA owned single seater motorsport?
Click to expand...

You are making my point for me, thats exactly what I was getting at, right now F1 is considered the pinnacle of both! So they can do whatever they like, and is hard to argue against it.

Skeeter said:
I wonder what the answer to kaiowas's question is? Do you retain a super license once you leave F1? If not, Kimi would have failed to qualify for a super licence on both occasions of joining F1!

Edit: ah no, he might be ok as its 3 years and not only 2 that you collate points over. Schumacher would have not been able to join Mercedes in 2010 though.... LOL!
Click to expand...

It could be an interesting point, but does appendix L still apply to the new rules though?

Quote from Wiki, as I am lazy..

wikipedia said:
Appendix L allows the FIA to award a Super Licence to a driver who does not meet the normal criteria if a vote reveals unanimous agreement by the members, and provided that the driver has completed 300 kilometers of testing at racing speeds in a current car.
Click to expand...

***Slow work day***

I took a look at the 2015 PDF for license rules, and it looks like appendix L still stands for this year, so I imagine that it will stand for 2016 too. Based on that, a returnee F1 driver would likely be issued a license, provided they applied 90 days in advance, and met the 300km testing rules.

http://www.fia.com/sport/regulations?f[0]=field_regulation_category%3A82
 
Last edited:
Yeah, and if that rule remains it makes the whole thing pointless, as drivers have been getting around the current rules on super licenses with big cheques, so there's nothing to suggest they won't just do the same under the new rules.
 
The F2 championship mentioned there is probably related to: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114173

The FIA is continuing to work on a new Formula 2 to complete its ladder from the junior levels to Formula 1, but the project will not be fast-tracked.

Jean Todt, the governing body's president, alluded in his election manifesto late last year to a "redefined F2 class we intend to create as the final stepping stone to truly top-flight competition." But FIA Single Seater Commission President Gerhard Berger said development of the concept has been delayed.

...

The GP2 Series and Formula Renault 3.5 Series jointly fill the "F2" role at present. Berger has no interest in having three categories at this level, and would prefer one or both of the existing series to fall by the wayside.

"If you have three championships, no one's going to look good and it would fail," he said. "For the good of the sport we should not jump into something before we have a real concept that maybe forces things together and we make, out of three, one [series]."
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom