In the round-up: Mark Webber hits out at the rise of pay drivers in Formula One.
Links
Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.
"We have a few guys on the grid who have paid their way into Formula 1 and that’s rubbish — that’s not what we want in the sport."
"The FIA, the sport's governing body, also confirmed on Wednesday they will be launching an investigation into Alonso's crash."
Small F1 teams push for 'core car' plan (Autosport)
"They want to create the idea of a 'core car' - where major components such as the monocoque are jointly developed and shared between them."
Honda unsure over second team (F1i)
"Honda will not actively seek a second team to supply power units to in 2016 as it focuses on its relationship with McLaren."
Mercedes targets big token spend before Melbourne (ESPN)
"Mercedes is planning to spend as many performance tokens on its new power unit as it can ahead of the first race of the season in just over two weeks.
Silverstone chiefs fire FIA warning (The Telegraph)
"My personal feeling is it is a bad thing the cars being quieter. We need to get that adrenaline back into the sport."
1995 Simtek Jos Verstappen Formula 1 (Legends Automotive)
"It was (Jos) Verstappen who extracted maximum potential out of the car. In his hands, at times the car was flying, managing to mix it in the midfield with the Minardis, Tyrrells, Ligiers, Saubers and Arrows."
Tweets
Really happy to confirm that I have signed as a race driver for @ManorF1Team! Can't wait to get to Australia in 2 weeks! #F1 #goodtimes
— Will Stevens (@WillStevens_) February 25, 2015
It’s been a tough week for the whole team, but we’ll be back tomorrow, pushing harder than ever. pic.twitter.com/7Q3Fw5l1tT
— Honda Racing F1 (@HondaRacingF1) February 25, 2015
- Find more official F1 accounts to follow in the F1 Twitter Directory
Comment of the day
Having suffered a concussion on Sunday, Alonso’s absence from the forthcoming test may well be due to concerns he could experience another.
It can take weeks and longer to recover from concussions. I have two players (American Football) currently going through the protocol that three weeks in are still not cleared to practice for instance.
With Alonso the doctors need to ensure that if he tests again next week and has an accident, is his brain ready to deal with that trauma without risking further damage? Clearly they’ve decided not in his case which doesn’t sound particularly unusual due to the risk of a second-impact concussion which are highly dangerous.
@Alec-Glen
From the forum
Happy birthday!
Happy birthday to Madbikerbob!
If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.
On this day in F1
Happy birthday to former F1 racer Rupert Keegan who is 60 today.
Keegan came close to scoring a point in the 1977 Austrian Grand Prix during his first season with Hesketh, but a move to the struggling Surtees outfit the following year made for a frustrating season in which he often failed to make it onto the grid. After a year away he returned in 1980 for a part-season with RAM, and his last drives came in 1982 as a substitute for Jochen Mass at March.
PhilEReid (@philereid)
26th February 2015, 0:26
Okay then Mark, how else do you suggest the smaller teams get their money to go racing? I also call rubbish on his claim that “The depth of the field has dropped off a bit in the last two or three years and all of us drivers at the front are disappointed with that.” One, because I can think of only a small number of pay drivers (Ericsson, Stevens and to some extent Nasr… And that’s it) and two, because Mark wasn’t really at the front for his last couple of years anyway. Maybe in an ideal world teams wont be struggling for money so much that they can race actual talent in their cars… But this isn’t ideal, it’s necessary.
floring (@floring)
26th February 2015, 0:37
9 wins in 13 active years, despite having the best car out there for a few years in a row. Right at the front. Opinionated though.
DR
26th February 2015, 1:45
@ finn g – Thats the same as saying Hamilton is mediocre because in the best car last year he didn’t win every race he finished. Ridiculous to not factor in his 4xWDC teammate whilst at Red Bull & his time working his way up to the best car in bad machinery (see his point, earning his seat through hard work not through ‘connections’ like others have) when quoting those stats.
ngwe23 (@realstig)
26th February 2015, 7:45
No, it is not the same. There is no expectation for any driver including Webber to win every race. It is unreasonable. But when you have the best car and you win 7 races in 4 years in contrast to Vettel how won 34 races then something is up. Lets not forget that Vettel is no Alonso or Hamilton.
Jorge Lardone (@jorge-lardone)
27th February 2015, 0:44
No, Vettel is not Alonso. He is much better.
aka_robyn
27th February 2015, 1:54
@jorge-lardone Now, come on, let’s be realistic! I’m about as militant a Vettel fan as you’re likely to find, and even I wouldn’t say that.* Alonso is probably the best there is right now, IMO — but even if you disagree with that, I don’t see how anyone can make a credible case for another current F1 driver being “much better”!
*Then again, I also don’t think Vettel has reached his peak yet, so… ;-)
Toshnak
27th February 2015, 21:07
Well, it’s pretty clear that for JL Alonso is not only the devil incarnate but also the worst driver in the known universe (and the unknown one also, for good measure)
BTW I have seen JL’s photographs, what a waste!
greg-c (@greg-c)
27th February 2015, 10:23
@floring
fair call in fact mate,
but some perspective, Lewis is the new King, dual World Champion,
correct me if im wrong here, How many times has Lewis beat Webber in the world championship standings since 2007 ?
3 times
2007 2008 and 2012
Webber beat Lewis on points 4 times
2009
2010
2011 and in his last year as well
2013
Sure, lets not forget that Vettel kicked his butt, but lets not forget that Vettel wiped the floor with everyone, also Lewis is 2xWDC now , so in that company i think Webber did very well.
floring (@floring)
28th February 2015, 14:44
I am surely one of the few around here that doesn’t rate Lewis all that highly. I mean everybody rates Vetted pretty badly for winning his championships in the best car out there but yet they praise Lewis for doing the same in 2014. Yes, he had won another one before that, but that doesn’t make him special in my book. He’s good, but no Schumacher or equivalent, as everyone paints him to be. And the fact that he was only slightly better than Nico for the last 2 years is a pretty worrying fact. Don’t get me started on Rosberg, haha! !
Keith Crossley
26th February 2015, 0:37
Standard two-word response: “Niki Lauda”.
socksolid (@socksolid)
26th February 2015, 2:27
Niki was signed by ferrari because of his skills. Not his money.
RogerA
26th February 2015, 2:48
By Ferrari yes, However Niki paid his way into his 1st F1 drive with BRM in 1973.
Clay Regazzoni was his BRM team mate that year & when he left for Ferrari he told Enzo he felt Niki was good & thats what helped Niki get the Ferrari drive.
Tony Hamilton (@tonybananas)
26th February 2015, 13:53
For every Niki Lauda, how many Max Chilton’s have there been?
Ross
26th February 2015, 1:09
Well he was at the front, and when he was Vettels age he was humiliating the likes of Rosberg in the same machinery. Why should a slower driver be able to pay their way into the top echelon of racing purely because they have more sponsorship or a wealthier family, with limited spots available in F1 they should be limited to the fastest drivers, rather than watering down the talent with those that are just mediocre but have the good fortune of a wealthy family or an deep pocketed sponsor.
PhilEReid (@philereid)
26th February 2015, 13:36
But none of the front teams have any pay drivers. As far as I can tell, only Sauber and Manor/Marussia do, the two teams at the very back. So no driver has got in to the top of F1 with just money, that simply hasn’t happened. And as I say, smaller teams need these drivers to survive. In an ideal world we’d have a situation where F1 was sustainable but we are not in that world, and the smaller teams are just doing what they need to do to stay in F1.
Polo (@polo)
26th February 2015, 20:25
@Ross: To be fair to Rosberg, they were only teammates for one season, and that season was Rosberg’s rookie season (while Webber was in his fifth season). I would hardly call outscoring him 7-4 in points a “humiliation” anyway.
Webber is a strange case. To me, he always seemed to be a much quicker driver before the big 2009 aero/tyre rule changes. Perhaps his aggressive driving style required hard, tough tyres – the grooved tyres of 1998-2008 had to be much harder than slicks due to the smaller contact patch with the road. The softer slicks came around in 2009, and then the very fragile Pirellis in 2011 (when Webber really started struggling relative to Vettel, and was much harder on the tyres). In the grooved tyre days, Webber was exceptionally quick – he out-qualified every teammate he ever had until Vettel in 2009.
In his first 3 seasons in F1 he collectively out-qualified his teammates 43-5 (against 5 different teammates over the three years). Between 2007-2008 he comprehensively out-qualified David Coulthard 31-4, which gives him a better qualifying record vs Coulthard than Hakkinen (68-31) or Raikkonen (32-19).
Before 2009, the only teammates who even managed to out-qualify Webber 25% of the time were Heidfeld in 2005 (9-5 to Webber) and Rosberg in his 2006 rookie year (12-6 to Webber).
Let’s not forget that Heidfeld was quick as well, closely matching the greatly talented Robert Kubica 28-29 in qualifying between late 2006-2009. Rosberg has shown that he is extremely quick as well, previously out-qualifying Alex Wurz 15-1, Kazuki Nakajima 27-9, Schumacher 41-17, and matching Hamilton 18-18 so far (if Germany and Hungary 2014 are excluded). Let’s not forget that Nakajima has won two Formula Nippon/Super Formula championships against the likes of Andre Lotterer and a few ex-F1 drivers, that Schumacher – though certainly past his best when partnered with Rosberg – holds the record for most pole positions in history, and that Hamilton has previously out-qualified Alonso 9-8, Kovalainen 26-9 and Button 44-14.
Webber never seemed to have that same spark after the big changes in 2009, although something interesting about Webber’s qualifying record versus Vettel is that it was very topsy-turvy and he was occasionally was much closer to Vettel, e.g. 7-12 in 2010 and 9-11 in 2012 (whereas in he was beaten 3-16 in 2011 and 2-17 in 2013).
Perhaps this suggests that Vettel (like Kimi) can have large fluctuations in speed and form depending on which car he is driving – notably, the 2011 and 2013 cars were the ones that Newey perfected exhaust blowing with (with exhaust blowing being in its infancy in 2010, regulations introduced for 2012 meaning that Newey didn’t perfect it until late season, and it being pretty much completely banned in 2014).
Though Ricciardo is certainly an exceptional driver, I would have been interested to see how Vettel would’ve stacked up against him in the 2011 or 2013 cars – I’d wager it would have been much closer. IMO, Ricciardo seems to be more adaptable than Vettel (as well as having better racecraft), making him a better all-round driver, but for all we know Vettel’s peaks when on-form are just as high, if not higher. You don’t win 9 races in a row by accident, and I think many people have been too quick to slate Vettel’s (and by extension Webber’s) performances in recent years as a result of 2014. With no rematch between Vettel and Ricciardo on the horizon it’ll likely be speculation for the foreseeable future.
Kingshark (@kingshark)
26th February 2015, 1:53
Webber stated a few years ago that the grid was stronger when he made his debut (in 2002) than it was in 2013, which is questionable to say the least.
I mean, we’ve had a lot more top drivers in recent years than we did in 2002. Was there even more than one top driver in 2002? However, the midfield was better back then, and we had less pay drivers.
Robbie (@robbie)
26th February 2015, 12:51
Well of course it is easy to look up. There was, aside from MS of course, WDC Villeneuve, Button (became WDC), Raikonnen (became WDC), Massa (WDC for half a lap), Coulthard, Montoya, Fisichella, Barrichello, etc. I’d say it’s pretty close in terms of strength of grid 02 vs 13 with the difference being greater than ever need for smaller teams to take on pay drivers. There were two tire makers in F1, and they of course didn’t have DRS, and they had refueling.
maarten.f1 (@)
26th February 2015, 5:36
Still, pay drivers is not what you want in F1. I know the reality of things, small teams can’t make end meets, and a pay driver can cover a big gap in the budget. However, what is needed is a budget cap. If pay drivers are necessary, it means that there’s something wrong with F1. Only the FIA can fix this problem, because everybody else seems pretty happy burning through so much money. Unfortunately the FIA squandered away their control of the sport for a big sack of money.
David Not Coulthard (@davidnotcoulthard)
26th February 2015, 13:16
@philereid
It’s not necessary. I mean, if Delta Whatever et al made made F1 sustainable I don’t think you’d have said that.
PhilEReid (@philereid)
26th February 2015, 13:34
@davidnotcoulthard My point is that F1 currently isn’t sustainable. In an ideal world it would be, but right now currently we aren’t at that point, and it doesn’t look likely to change, so it’s absolutely necessary that at this moment in time smaller teams need to take on pay drivers to survive. I’d absolutely love for a time where F1 can hire drivers for talent and talent alone, where F1 is completely sorted, but right now that isn’t happening and doesn’t look like happening, so teams must do what they must do to survive.
mark p
26th February 2015, 0:32
Core car? Go and race GP2 or F3. If you cannot afford to design your own car just leave. Cost saving plans are needed but that is trampling on a USP of F1. Otherwise it becomes like Indy car and the Neweys of the future will not show up. Hell to cost cutting on chassis and the 4 e gine manufacturers are big BUSINESSES they should just develop what they want their accountants will reign them in as as companies they have to make profit. They should just limit engine costs to 4 million a year per customer teams and the manufacturers have to suck up the rest. If it becomes too expensive they will spend less. Any team that cannot spend 80 million or so a year 76/4 split should not be in f1. Next people will demand Harrods becomes a pound store to make it fare on us all.
Rhys L
26th February 2015, 4:17
Yeah I think capping the cost of the engines is a great cost saving measure. Then it’s up to the manufacturers to balance their development vs income. Although it could end up if one manufacturer is stronger and all teams jump onto that bandwagon then they have more funds to further develop than the competition.
Sadly, I don’t think this can be solved in a blog post comment.
drmouse (@drmouse)
26th February 2015, 9:17
To be perfectly honest, I do not believe this should be a problem at all.
F1 brings in an absurd amount of money. If this was shared in a more equitable way, the smaller teams would not be struggling. This is where the core problem is.
For myself, I believe that the total “profit” from the season should be divided up into 3 pots, probably of reasonably equal sizes. The shareholders etc. get one, one is divided equally between the teams, and the last is the prize pot. Every team is guaranteed a payout at the end of the season, as long as they have raced in enough races, regardless of whether they continue next year. This allows the smaller teams to budget on that.
To summarise, cost caps are not what we need, nor are technical limitations or core cars (also known as spec chassis but named differently, something I certainly do NOT want in F1). Equitable distribution of funds will solve all the problems.
George (@george)
26th February 2015, 17:25
Customer cars were a part of F1 for decades, as long as they’re doing some development on them I don’t really mind.
@HoHum (@hohum)
26th February 2015, 0:57
Here in Oz I have seen no promotion of F1 as yet, but to be fair I should point out that I almost never view the network on which it is televised except to watch F1 and MotoGP.
VMaxMuffin (@vmaxmuffin)
26th February 2015, 2:20
We do have quite a bit of promotion, on Foxtel. They’re promoting it hard, alongside MotoGP and V8SC. Using the tag line “best year ever” or something (celebrating their semi-exclusive rights they now have to F1 and V8SC).
@HoHum (@hohum)
26th February 2015, 3:03
1st. the good news, then the bad news. :(
Tristan (@skipgamer)
26th February 2015, 0:59
Everyone pays their way in to F1. It’s absolute rubbish to hypothesize otherwise… Just because some people have more money to pay than others doesn’t make them any less deserving to be there.
All these motorsport elite reckon they’re the best in the world. I can guarantee there are faster drivers out there that haven’t been afforded the opportunity to compete. Look at the GT Academy drivers’ real world comptence as a perfect example, and that’s just people that can even afford a Playstation!
EVERYONE PAYS THEIR WAY IN TO FORMULA ONE!!!
montreal95 (@montreal95)
26th February 2015, 1:51
@skipgamer By that criteria yes. But you know full well that’s not what MW meant here
You know what, I correct myself: you’re wrong even by your own criteria. Hamilton’s father had to work 3 jobs just to pay for his karting. And he was spotted by Mclaren who paid for his junior career based on his talent. Raikkonen’s parents both had to work 2 jobs to pay for his karting, where he stayed quite a long time since he had no money to progress. Then he was spotted and promoted meteorically to F1 via a year of F.Renault because of his talent. Yes someone had paid for his FR season, but not because he was his family member.
You have to have a sponsor to get to F1. Motorsport at any level is just too expensive otherwise. Question is: why did you get sponsored? If it’s because you’re brilliant it’s a meritocracy . But if it’s because you’re Max Chilton and your father is just insanely rich then you’re a pay driver
drmouse (@drmouse)
26th February 2015, 11:17
Exactly.
In most sports, you have at least a semi-meritocracy. The best will rise to the top. However, it still takes an insane amount of training to get there.
Let’s take a runner. He has shown a lot of promise at an early age. However, he comes from a poor background, has to leaves school at 16 and get a job at minimum wage, working long shifts 7 days a week in order to support his family. He may have a lot of talent, but he has no time to train and will never reach his potential, and that’s a sport which costs nothing but time to practise.
F1 (and motor racing in general) is obviously a lot more extreme. Even karting as a hobby is expensive. Taking that further, the costs sky-rocket. For those with rich families, they can progress with their money. For those who don’t have that luxury, they must demonstrate absolute excellence at every stage to attract sponsorship of some description in order to progress.
@HoHum (@hohum)
26th February 2015, 1:09
As to the “core car” issue I would have no objection to any and all teams being able to purchase the basic safety tub from a specialist carbon-fiber builder or another team, then let them design and build their own bodywork and suspension to combine with the PU, gearbox, brakes, wheels and tyres from the same or different suppliers that the other teams get theirs from. A successful team will eventually want to make an improved design of their own.
DR
26th February 2015, 1:57
Common chassis/tub? Ok, they can rename it Formula ‘we gave it all to Bernie & had to pool our resources to even build a single car’. Meanwhile breaking news, Bernie buys the moon, plans to erect a giant ‘Bernie says think before you drive’ advertisment visible from earth, all races now to be held at 10 pm and double points + 1000hp everytime someone passes another competitor using DRS
@HoHum (@hohum)
26th February 2015, 3:14
Not ideal I know, but I am not suggesting a mandatory tub, and let’s face it, how different can they be nowadays given the multiple regulations and dimensions imposed, but if a team can build a better one with a different process like 3D printing in Titanium so be it. Hopefully when Bernie buys the moon he will decide to live there.
Alex Brown (@splittimes)
26th February 2015, 7:24
I don’t think it would work. The suspension pick-up points on the front bulkhead would dictate similar or same geometry there, and likewise if gearboxes are bought it. You would also be buying into someone else’s design concept, and the rest of the aero would have to follow that to extract the most of its potential. If two or three manufacturers did that (a third of the grid), their cars wouldn’t be spec per se, but they would end up making parts (wings, bodywork, suspension) themselves that would be nearly identical to the source teams. They might as well just buy them in, too. Eventually, this just becomes a discussion about customer cars.
I don’t think I’d mind this much (or pay drivers either) if there were 26 cars on the grid.
BasCB (@bascb)
26th February 2015, 10:57
The points you name would be a reason for a team to want to improve and make their own, but I can see some merit in having a “cheap, common and safe” option available. But yeah, quite weary of the customer car thing being goaded in again too @splittimes
James Devon (@tata)
26th February 2015, 1:10
-Mercedes targets big token spend before Melbourne.
Nico Rosberg described Ferrari’s performance and pace revealed, for now, as ‘eye opening’.
With this latest news, can one by any means say that Mercedes are startled? Could it be that they did not expect Ferrari and, who knows, Renault to make as much progress as they have displayed so far?
Jon (@johns23)
26th February 2015, 1:38
I wouldn’t look into it too much. Yes Ferrari have improved from last year (Wouldn’t be too hard seeing how poor it was last year) but personally i believe Mercedes will be at least 1 second faster that the second best team. Would like them to prove me wrong, so we will see
MagillaGorilla (@magillagorilla)
26th February 2015, 6:08
@tata You’ve got to be quite the optimist or a Ferrari fan or both. The reality is the same guy that said what you just quoted was also the same guy that down played the fact that he showed the partial hand of Mercedes by pulling off a single test speed run on mediums breaking into 1:24s (iirc) while the others that did that (not many) were doing it on softs or fastest on super softs.
Mercedes are probably doing this to try and win the championship as quick as possible or force others to follow suit, since they ball is in their court still due to the domination of last year. Everyone is trying to mirror step them and this may give them reason. They either follow suit or sit idle and stick with what they have and then work accordingly as the distance grows in the first few races. It seems Merc want to have this wrapped up by Summer (WCC) or at least soon after to be realistic.
This has nothing to do with meaningless fast times that were put down while Merc teams were doing long distance reliability runs, and consistent stint runs with very little drop off in pace. Sadly this rule change with the tokens works for Mercedes as much as it works against them, but with them already being that many steps ahead from last year, the amount against them is negligible.
Basically people need to realize that right now Mercedes are the dominant force and they should just hope that when Spain upgrades hit some gap begins to close, because to think it has started is laughable thanks to Mercedes easily proving that with some left to prove.
MattDS (@mattds)
26th February 2015, 7:05
@tata Mercedes were going to be ready with their PU by Australia anyway. I’m sure they’ll keep a few tokens for later, but there are big strategic elements to this. One is that, like @magillagorilla has said, they could be trying to win a lot early on.
A second strategic element is their influence on how many tokens Honda will get for in-season development. Basically, spending no tokens before Australia means granting Honda an extra 8 tokens as compared to spending all of their tokens before Australia. Honda are having difficulties so granting them as little tokens as possible may keep them down for the entire season and, who knows, might even impact 2016.
All in all I think they’re running their own course and that they’re confident.
BasCB (@bascb)
26th February 2015, 10:59
Not really @tata. Mercedes has had the target of being able to put almost everything in it from the start. ITs just a desicion to make for them whether they feel everything is reliable enough by that point (or take a risk at it being such) or maybe leave some parts for a later update to work a bit more on their reliability.
It fits with Mercedes not being the one pushing for in season development (and the extra cost/disadvantages/complications it brings with it).
petebaldwin (@)
26th February 2015, 12:05
@tata – I don’t think Nico’s comments mean anything. He was probably asked “which other team has impressed you the most in testing so far” and as Ferrari’s programme involved them doing some quick runs, he mentioned them. He was hardly going to say “impressed? meh… I don’t think anyone is going to be within a second of us
Brian Frank (@brianfrank302)
26th February 2015, 12:20
IMO, Mercedes already knows the’re faster than everyone else. The only unknown is Honda, who’ll get average no. of tokens. Renault and Ferrari have already spend much tokens to improve the engines. Mercedes are already better than them with spending less tokens. If Mercedes are confident that Renault and Ferrari can’t beat over the course of the season, then it’s better they spend the tokens at the start and leave even less scope for Honda to develop their PU in-season. This way, Mercedes will be able to maintain their dominance.
TheBullWhipper (@thebullwhipper)
26th February 2015, 1:45
I’m really happy that Manor F1 seem to be making great progress towards being on that grid come lights out in Melbourne. Signing Will Stevens is another positive step and he’s not a bad young driver, as well as I expect, having a fairly large suitcase full of cash, but at least he is not a all money and no talent.
Graham Lowdown and John Booth are 2 guys who when they speak, you want to hear what they are saying. I have massive respect for both of them, away from F1, Manor Racing have some good success over the years. It’s definitely not lack of motivation and drive and it’s also not for the lack of intelligence or just to show off they are playing with the big boys, it’s just for the sake of the lack of funds, which is a tragedy in it’s self, but that’s a subject for another post on another day.
I’m a McLaren fan from childhood, but I would like to see Manor survive the season, collect their winnings and use that to develop a competitive car with the latest PU for 2016 as they are guaranteed no lower than 10th this year which means they will have reasonable payout next year too.
#ForzaManorF1
@HoHum (@hohum)
26th February 2015, 3:18
Come Monaco and we might be faced with Manor being guaranteed no lower than 9th.
Rousseau (@orpheu)
26th February 2015, 2:30
Well, let´s be honest. Alonso is probably the best driver in the grid but, to every team he goes he takes Santander support. And other drivers bring money through publicity or, with the image they have, companies want to be in that team. What is the real difference between that and Pastor bring Venezuela government or company support.
Of course Alonso is better than Pastor, but I’m not talking about drivers skills, the fact is that, from one way or another, every driver brings money to his team somehow
socksolid (@socksolid)
26th February 2015, 2:47
It is true that it is not a black and white issue. Most of the drivers have some sort of personal sponsors that follow them around. Alonso has santander, bottas has kemppi, pastor has venezuela, perez has.. and so forth. Then some drivers are backed by different driver programmes and academys. Ferrari has their ferrari academy, red bull has big programme with many drivers and so forth. Obviously this is not just free help for the drivers. That money is paid back in some way sooner or later…
I don’t think the term pay driver really means just all drivers who bring money. Pay drivers are the drivers who would not be let anywhere near the car if they didn’t bring lots of money. Chilton is perfect example of that. So is/was stevens, gutierrez and probably kobayashi as well. If santander was not involved at all do you really think alonso would struggle to find a seat? What about chilton or suzi wolff? Without money or close connection to share holders would these two ever drive f1 car in official race, practise or test session? No, obviously not.
Similarly there are drivers who are not able to bring enough money to get a seat. Simona de silvestro lost her chance to drive f1 because of money issues. Same is true for couple other drivers as well.
I think full pay driver teams are thing of the past. Now that caterham and marussia are both hopefully out we’ll see better grids filled with quality drivers all through the field. If the team count stays at 9 or 10 it will allow the f1 grid to stabilize itself economically and if the money distribution is fixed it is quite possible there won’t be any pure pay drivers in 2016 or 2017.
Let’s not forget 10 teams get paid by fom but the 11th team and onwards get nothing. When there are 11 teams it creates uncertainty on the rear end of the grid which can hurt teams like sauber and force india if some of the rich men’s plaything teams happens to score one out of trillion jackpot and scores a point or two by sheer and pure luck.
Corey
26th February 2015, 5:18
In 2013, Luis Razia was announced to be Max Chilton’s teammate at Marussia, Just 23 days later and his contract had been terminated, because his sponsors missed on some payments.
Fletch (@fletchuk)
26th February 2015, 2:54
Alonso better than Pastor? ;)
puneeth Bharath (@puneethvb)
26th February 2015, 3:01
Alonso can always Find a team even without the Santander money but I doubt pastor can without the financial backing he has
patriots_fan (@f1007)
26th February 2015, 3:18
difference is santander started following alonso from 07 when he was already 2xWDC, they started to follow him then on. Which is totally different to other pay drivers. Santander has been a McLaren sponsor since 07, so there is no change in terms sponsors this year.
Rousseau (@orpheu)
26th February 2015, 5:14
My point is that drivers bring money to their teams. Again, I’m not talking about skills. ALO is a 2WDC the argument is useless.
So let’s take it to a more difficult situation. e.g. Perez is a pay driver or not? Grosjean? Nasr? What defines a pay driver? Even Hulkenberg that people praise so much (in my opinion he is just better than average) would be in F1 without bringing money through sponsors?
Taking out obvious cases like Ericsson, Pastor (even if he has a win wich most of the grid can not think about) or Chilton and top drivers in the opposite scenario, it is not that clear.
I just wanna brig this to discussion because everyone talks about pay drivers every day bu the fact is that each drivers has to enter with some money to the team
maarten.f1 (@)
26th February 2015, 5:54
Alonso would find a team with and without a sponsor. McLaren contracted him, not because he brings a sponsor, but because he brings his skills. That for me determines whether you are a pay driver or not.
Yes, everyone probably brings a sponsor along. And perhaps even that sponsor pays for the salary of that particular driver. And it’s definitely true that when you look at the midfield teams, things can become a little bit muddled. But I do think there’s a big difference between most drivers who are active in Formula 1, and someone like Will Stevens. At least Hulkenberg had a junior career to show for, Perez was a Ferrari development driver, Grosjean has multiple championships to his name, Nasr also has a decent career so far, and even Maldonado was a GP2 champion (eventually).
The question is, are these drivers hired for their skill, or just because they bring a big wad of cash?
bull mello (@bullmello)
26th February 2015, 2:46
Formula 1 is the craziest reality show ever. One faction wants common core cars, unenforcible spending limits and other austerity measures to save money and be able to stay in the show. They also need/want pay drivers to help them stay in the show. This angers others who say this is impure even though with no pay drivers many teams would likely cease to exist at all leading to only a few ultra-rich teams left in the sport.
Other factions want more noise, more power (exactly 1000 bhp), bigger tires and wheels, wider cars, less aero, more aero, the list that never ends and costs that would be massively staggering.
Meanwhile, there is the crazy old uncle who runs the show and finds more ways to reap and hoard than nearly all the notable misers throughout history combined, which of course leads many of the teams in the show to go hungry and do without. A look behind the scenes might show him sitting on his pile of gold cackling and drooling while plotting his next coup over hapless race promoters and unwitting citizens around the planet.
You can’t make this stuff up…
PeterG
26th February 2015, 3:00
Easy to forget or ignore the fact that most of these ‘pay drivers’ actually have pretty strong Pre-F1 resume’s & I don’t believe there’s been any driver thats raced in F1 the past few years who has been that bad.
Certainly we haven’t had anyone thats been as truly hopeless & undeserving as a lot of the pay drivers of the past were.
Pretty sure all those labeled as pay drivers won races in the categories immediately below F1 & in a few cases championships & all were competitive in those categories on a regular basis.
PorscheF1 (@xtwl)
26th February 2015, 7:06
Here’s a list of drivers that should have never been able to touch a F1 car: Giedo Van Der Garde, Max Chilton, Esteban Gutierrez, Charles Pic, Adrian Sutil, Narain Karthikeyan, Jerome D’Amrbosio, Vitaly Petrov, Karun Chandok and arguable Bruno Senna.
tonyyeb (@tonyyeb)
26th February 2015, 9:10
@xtwl I’d agree with pretty much all that list except Gutierrez. At least he won the Formula BMW Europe championship and GP3 in his first season in it.
PeterG
26th February 2015, 13:30
Why not?
Senna had a good Pre-F1 resume with a dozen wins in F3 & GP2 & was a championship contender in both.
Same with Petrov he won a couple races in GP2 & finished 3rd then 2nd in the 2 full seasons he took part in. He also scored a podium in F1 when the Lotus was competitive in early 2011.
Gutierrez won the GP3 championship the year before Bottas, Won races in GP2 & was 3rd in that championship in 2012.
Sutil was very competitive against Hamilton when team mates in F3, He won the Japanese F3 title a year later & showed plenty of speed when testing for Midland through late 2006 (Thats what got his the 2007 F1 drive with them).
Van Der Garde won the Renault World Series 3.5 championship in 2008 & won a dozen races in GP2.
Pic won races in both WSBR & GP2 & was a regular front runner in both.
I think Karthekeyan probably shouldn’t have come back in 2011 but he was very well thought of before he entered his 1st F1 season with Jordan in 2005. I remember Jenson Button saying on ITV’s F1 coverage that he was surprised it had taken Narain so long to get to F1 because he’d always been fast when they raced in F3 together. It was also Trevor Carlin who was at Jordan at the time who convinced Eddie to sign him (Last thing EJ did before he sold the team) because Trevor always thought exceptionally highly of Narain.
Polo (@polo)
2nd March 2015, 5:08
Regarding Sutil: It’s true he had some good pace in F3, but he was never really close to Hamilton. When they were teammates in F3 Hamilton outscored him 172-94, with 15 wins, 13 poles and 10 fastest laps (out of 20 races) to Sutil’s 2 wins, 1 pole and 3 fastest laps. Sutil’s wins only came when Hamilton was out of contention (disqualified and 12th).
Though when it comes down to it, even pay drivers are generally skilled drivers with some good junior results (with some exceptions). The only thing is that there are usually drivers out there who were even better but didn’t get a drive because they didn’t have the funds or sponsorship (example being Robin Frijns).
PeterG
26th February 2015, 3:04
Just want to make a point regarding the noise debate.
Despite all the whining about how the quieter engines woudl turn fans off attending races, Ticket Sales for Melbourne are about 10% on what they have been the past few years.
I also recall the BRDC saying ticket sales for Silverstone last year were up so it doesn’t seem like the supposed noise issue is turning people away.
KoosOos (@koosoos)
26th February 2015, 14:33
@PeterG. No one will reply because it is not what they want to hear. Ever one wants ever thing to be fixed in a sort time. Most of the ideas ppl get one here are great for the sort term but in the long term it will be devastating for the sport. When there is good new and this is good news then every one just passe it by. The younger ppl do not want the noise they like the tech that goes in to the cars more but how needs the young ppl.
Solo (@solo)
8th April 2015, 18:49
A promoter that was caught following Bernie last year and saying how worried he is by the show being limited due to lack of engine noise, came out a few days ago and said he now sees it differently since he noticed now families with their kids seem more willing to come and he noticed people with children coming that he never thought will see.
Paul Sainsbury
26th February 2015, 4:42
It has turned me away. I am doing the Goodwood festival of speed this year instead of a GP. I won’t go back and pay F1 money again until it is impressive enough for me to be willing to pay up. If that never happens, Goodwood it is, and F1 will be just TV.
There is not much difference with these current cars watching them live and on TV now, so at least I can save some money and finally have some ‘traditional’ holidays!
Jess (@justblowingofsteam)
28th February 2015, 16:13
The Goodwood festival of Speed has been and always will be money well spent, all though i prefer the Revival purely for the ambiance.
Like Le Mans, you do get excellent value for money, something sadly lacking at modern GP venues, where the corporate image is the one catered for, they should be looking at how the Sports car championship is forging ahead and proving a very very watch-able series.
EnglishSwissBulldog
26th February 2015, 5:23
Although he’s had time to reflect on his career as the consummate journeyman of racing, Webber still appears incapable of saying something that isn’t bleaty, hard-blown and obtuse.
In the final analysis (exercised by the fans and the stopwatch) nobody gives pay-drivers a free pass when they have to perform. They are given a chance in the car. As we’ve seen with Maldonado, when they’re poor, they get no quarter, and unless they improve, they’ll be gone. We seem to forget that it was only around 2011 that Webber finally learned not to smash into people for no reason, by which time he was already eligible for his pension and bus pass.
Now, I would like to write a small obituary for F1 in anticipation of the coffin (for which the sport has already been measured and fitted) being sealed shut with the introduction of so-called ‘Core Cars’ (or Formula Ford with other badges included). The majority of proper F1 fans have simply sat idly by and let Pop impresarios and venal ringmasters pander to a disinterested, transient mass of viewers who know nothing of and care nothing for the principle and soul of what is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport.
When you have no great latitude to wage a technical war, you have no compulsion for a technical mind, and, in the end, you are left with no reason to watch an F1 by name that is F3 by nature.
Around two weeks ago, I wrote here, disparagingly, with a crestfallen portent of what is to come for Formula One. In coining the phrase ‘Clone Car’, I was mocking the regressive and repressive mission of homogenisation and homologation. I get a horrible feeling someone in the FIA has scanned the Web for ideas and decided my Clone Car parody was a template for a desirable future.
I hate to say this, but, it seems there is no future for Formula One except in a titular state.
My proposition for F1B (a new, supra-FIA, supreme Formula, which would beckon back engineering geniuses to their domain on the pit wall with the freedom that F1 previously afforded them) seems ever more compelling, not to say necessary.
In case I lose all interest because of a rush of these new regulations, I’m tempted to say “RIP, F1” now and hope I’m wrong.
Robbie (@robbie)
26th February 2015, 14:26
I don’t think MW has said anything wrong here, and it would seem some of your remarks are as much about your dislike for him as anything from reality. As to core cars…it’s a concept being floated by the smaller teams, which should be of no surprise, and will never fly. It would take for the bigger teams to agree, and they won’t. It’s a non-starter. There will be no ‘introduction’ of core cars.
Sure pay-drivers have to perform and when they don’t they get no quarter. Many such as MW would argue they shouldn’t have been there to begin with, which is really the point. While they are there getting their paid chance, they are diminishing the quality of the grid and taking up a spot a more qualified driver could have. F1 is not supposed to be a training ground. Drivers should come to it having had their training already.
Philip (@philipgb)
26th February 2015, 6:04
So Webber thinks the depth of the field has dropped off? The only name on the grid that isn’t either a proven or promising talent is Ericsson.
The grid has 5 world champions with 10 championships between them and of the other drivers on the grid I would say at least 4 are very real prospects for being world champions in the future.
He refers to himself as a ‘driver at the front’ but in 2010, ’11, ’12 and ’13 he was beaten by people in slower cars than him. I don’t think I’d rank him in the top two thirds of the current grid let alone at the front.
He’s probably a great guy away from the track. He was also always a very clean racer on the track. But I never got the impression he thought his lack of results were his fault and his interview comments after leaving always have a hint of the bitter ex about them. F1 has become better without him as it freed his seat up for a massive talent to break through, that’s always a hard pill to swallow especially for a competitive beast like a racing driver, but I think Mark really needs to have some humility now.
Alex Ward
26th February 2015, 9:55
I like to think when he retires from racing the humility will come.
Paul Sainsbury
26th February 2015, 6:40
Just a further point about the noise, or lack thereof.
I don’t suppose the live viewing figures last year will have been affected, as no one knew what it was like until they actually heard it in person, it is this year we need to look to see if it has made much difference. Naturally, there are circuits where there will always be a big crowd, Silverstone for example, with having the reigning champ being a Brit, and also Jenson to cheer on.
So it will be interesting to see if this issue makes much difference on the gate.
I must say also that I rather fed up with the way people who are fine with F1 cars that sound like strimmers always seem to refer to the concerns of those who care about this as ‘whining’. Okay, fine, so there are differences of opinion on this, but it’s thoroughly disrespectful to be so dismissive.
Patrickl (@patrickl)
26th February 2015, 10:36
The article referred to says that ticket sales are up by 29% right now …
Paul Sainsbury
26th February 2015, 12:33
@patrickl
Well, at some circuits ticket sales are up, some of the others the place is deserted.
The reason I won’t attend is the pathetic noise, for others, it is the ticket cost, or something else, so it is really difficult to ascertain exactly what the situation is.
Patrickl (@patrickl)
26th February 2015, 22:24
So people can’t say you’re “whining” about the sound, but yet you use terms as “pathetic” and “strimmers”.
I can finally take my kid to F1 without worrying about destroying his ears. So attendance might actually double if everybody does that.
Those few “whiners” that find sound more important than the actual race can’t be that many.
spoutnik (@spoutnik)
26th February 2015, 12:30
Better get used to it as it is not going to change anytime soon.
You are talking about being dismissive but forgot that depicting F1s as strimmers is both false and dismissive.
Paul Sainsbury
26th February 2015, 12:37
@spoutnik
It just means I won’t attend races anymore, F1 is TV only as it is now.
The actual noise is, I am afraid, truly awful. A fan over on James Allen’s site took some db readings and the F1 noise was actually at a lower level than his lawnmower. It is not just the volume either, they sound truly appalling.
I get it that lots of people don’t care. I do care, passionately, and I make no apology for that.
Formula1 (@s2g-unit)
26th February 2015, 13:02
i know of aboutb 10 people that wont be returning with their friends t a race inckuding my family. Its no longer exciting at the track. This year we’ll see true attendance…….
spoutnik (@spoutnik)
26th February 2015, 17:10
Good spots will be freed then! :)
Paul Sainsbury
26th February 2015, 22:19
@spoutnik
Depending on the circuit, they may well be empty spaces.
Oh well, as you say, we had ‘better get used to it’.
evered7 (@evered7)
26th February 2015, 7:32
So Mercedes were testing the reliability of the car all these days only to change their engine massively in the last few days of the tests?
Are they completely sure it won’t affect their reliability? Seems a big risk to take especially considering they dedicated most of the tests towards fixing that issue.
Or the news could be false.
Philip (@philipgb)
26th February 2015, 8:07
Aren’t the energy recovery systems limited in the rules as to how much power they can generate and for how long and even the weight of them? Perhaps Mercedes already have the optimal system under the rules and have now solved the reliability problems they had from them last year. Their focus on long run simulations so far would certainly fit with stress testing them.
And last year the ICE and turbo were pretty bomb proof (though unfortunately not fire proof). They can afford to take risks with that solid foundation, plus the rules permit changes for reliability mid season.
evered7 (@evered7)
26th February 2015, 17:03
@philipgb I am not really aware of that fact. But I guess they would still be able to find more performance out of their systems.
I don’t think they would have run their system at 100% in the first year considering the advantage they had.
Patrickl (@patrickl)
26th February 2015, 10:46
The article quotes:
I guess you could call that “last few days”, but it’s two thirds of the days available and possibly they had some updates already on the engine in Jerez.
BasCB (@bascb)
26th February 2015, 11:04
As @patrickl mentions they had most of the upgrades on the car since the first tests this year and will want to test the rest of them in Barcelona @evered7.
For Mercedes its largely an issue of whether they feel the parts are reliable enough that they can let them be homologated from the start of the season. If they have doubts, they might leave some bits to be introduced for the race engines later so they can work on the parts in the factory to improve them.
evered7 (@evered7)
26th February 2015, 16:13
@bascb @patrickl I guess they already have a few updates in the car and testing it in Barcelona in the 2/3 tests. But the idea is to use most of the token in testing due to the PU limitations during the season.
Speaking of reliability, they had a MGU-K failure today. So all is not well in the Merc camp.
BasCB (@bascb)
26th February 2015, 17:31
The real question is how much mileage they had on that MGU-K though @evered7!
Patrickl (@patrickl)
26th February 2015, 22:25
Yeah, it’s all just guesswork for us anyway.
maxthecat
26th February 2015, 13:52
Webber is right and all those banging on about the past, wake up. Yes, they had pay drivers in the 70’s, but they also had 30-35 car grids so you could absorb a dozen pay drivers and still keep the skill level high. You can’t do that with only 18 cars, the quality will drop and will continue to do so.
Patrickl (@patrickl)
26th February 2015, 22:32
BTW funny how yesterday the tone was set for calling everybody, who dared to raise an eyebrow over the odd McLaren PR release about Alonso’s crash, a conspiracist (or worse). Yet what happened was odd enough that the FIA isn’t entirely satisfied with the explanation either.
nickfrog (@nickfrog)
26th February 2015, 23:22
Webber, the new E. Irvine ?