Start, Monza, 2015

Monza ‘closing on new seven-year F1 deal’

F1 Fanatic Round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

In the round-up: Monza could be about to extend its deal to host the Italian Grand Prix.

Social media

Comment of the day

F1’s new superlicence system comes into effect this year and its full implications are still being realised.

The examples of Kyvat and Verstappen don’t support the suggestion that a ‘half-decent’ driver wouldn’t make it in F1. Neither of them were anywhere near being eligible for a superlicence on any version of the 2016 Superlicence system (for a start, neither has the “80% of two international racing seasons” that is a cornerstone of the criteria…), yet both seriously impressed on debut, and in Verstappen’s case got considered one of the best non-veteran drivers, despite neither driving notably better than they had in the junior series – where Kyvat took five seasons to produce a top three championship finish and Verstappen only managed third in European F3.

The new superlicense system doesn’t exclude anyone not talented enough to get in under the previous system. All it does is force people to spend at least twice as much to get there – disadvantaging talented drivers who happen not to be very well-connected (one already had to be pretty well-connected to get to F1) enough to get massive sponsorship sustained over a long time.

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Cameron, Nano Rock, Sams, Ryan-Veitch and Euro Brun!

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 Eddie Cheever – the last American F1 driver to stand on the podium at his home race – who is 58 today.

42 comments on “Monza ‘closing on new seven-year F1 deal’”

  1. Thank you for the Comment of the Day award, Keith!

    1. Well deserved, concise and I could not imagine any sane person arguing against it. Spot on.

      1. markp, on the contrary, you can find a sane person to argue against Alianora La Canta given that, as I have previously pointed out, his claims about Kvyat are fundamentally wrong.

        Contrary to what he claims, Kvyat would have easily passed the requirements for a superlicence if the 2016 requirements had been in force at the time. His eligible results from the three years prior to entering into F1 were as follows (with the superlicence points value given in brackets):

        Formula Renault 2.0 NEC: 2nd (7)
        Formula Renault 2.0 Eurocup: 3rd (5)

        Formula Renault 2.0 NEC: 2nd (7)
        Formula Renault 2.0 Alps: 1st (10)

        GP3 Series: 1st (30)

        The points total from those three years would come to 59 points, comfortably exceeding the minimum requirement of 40 points. He would also have clearly satisfied the requirement to complete “80% of two international racing seasons”, having completed full seasons in each of the championships listed above.

        Asides from that, the claim that Kvyat took “5 seasons to produce a top-3 championship finish” is also incorrect given he came 3rd in the Formula Renault Eurocup series in 2011, his second year as a professional racing driver.

        1. I can only assume that they somehow took the 4 series that Kvyat competed in during 2010 as 4 separate seasons, either as an error or to manipulate the stats.

          1. @matt90, your explanation – that they only looked at his results from 2010, for whatever reason, and therefore ignored the bulk of his career – is perhaps the most plausible explanation for that mistake.

            Sadly, it now almost certainly means that, due to the prominence given to this comment, there will be posters on this forum who now wrongly believe that Kvyat’s performance in junior series was worse than it actually was.

      2. Good driving isn’t spectacular driving, so a driver who is “seriously impressive” could be displaying a lack of skill. Verstappen had 4 “classified as retirement” results in the first 10 races of the season and none in the second half of the season, suggesting the presence of skill and ability during the second half of the year that was absent in the first half.
        Yes, Verstappen did get an award for the best overtake of the year, but I do wish the judges had chosen an overtake that was legal. It’s just like Ben Johnson held the world record for the 100 metres for many years (I’m not sure if he still has the world record), but he didn’t get an Olympic Gold Medal for it because he’d taken banned substances before the race. The same should apply to overtaking and such like awards in F1: if it wasn’t legal then it shouldn’t qualify for an award. All the overtake did was show a lack of skill.
        In fact, I think it was Romain Grosjean did an incredibly skillful “overtaking defence” in one race, where Verstappen was expecting to overtake him by virtue of Grosjean having to give way to someone like Vettel under the Blue Flag rule, but Grosjean timed it so that Vettel could pass him on a difficult to pass corner, so a “window of opportunity” appeared for Vettel to pass, which he took, and then almost immediately the “window of opportunity closed” and Verstappen was stuck behind Grosjean. The racing commentators called it one of the top ten overtaking defences of all time.

  2. Paul (@frankjaeger)
    10th January 2016, 0:17

    God knows why McLaren consistently have a naff paint job every season post-2012. Yeah the old McLaren monochrome was kinda nice, nothing special.

    I’ve been under the impression McLaren were waiting to become competitive to bring a proper paint job into the mix but it seems they are happy with light grey-dark grey combinations, it’s quite tragically dull. Gimme some orange/yellow/deep blue/gold/green ect

    1. Silver with a (MacLaren) tartan fern leaf to honour their roots ?

    2. Grey is a perfect colour for them it reflects Ron’s face and the public perception of them. Orange was from the founder and their past was washed away in a sea of grey when Ron got them. It gives the image of teutonic efficiency although they are not German and no matter how hard Ron wants this image they are more like keystone cops over the majority of years. They have the image of a stereotypical German company rather than a charming Brit company sadly for them their operational skills are more British Leyland than Mercedes, they have themselves all back to front. Funny to watch though.

      1. Ok, as a McLaren fan I’m sick of this orange heritage… poop. The first Mclaren car was white with green, the next two were red, and only orange from 1968 to 1972. It was white with a little hint of orange in 1973. Just because some of the can-am cars and cars for the indy 500 like the M16C were also orange in that period doesn’t make orange a heritage colour. The f1 cars were in the Marlboro red and white for over 20 years, from 1974 until 1997, with the West colours of silver/black until 2007 and the rest in the chrome/black/red combinations until the black and red in 2015.

        So I wish people would stop going on about the ‘heritage orange’ when there is no basis at all to establish it as a ‘heritage colour’ over anything else. It wasn’t the first, it wasn’t the most common, and it wasn’t the best.

        1. @selbbin Well said, and McLaren orange seems to become the prototype / testing color now, even that not really used anymore because the current trend is camo paint for prototypes.

        2. @selbbin It was only white and green in 1966, ironically to mimic the ‘Honda’ (for the movie Grand Prix); it was really the first livery ‘sponsorship deal’. Not sure about red in ’67, but orange was NZ racing colours, which went with Bruce & Denny.

          Considering that Ron’s liveries reflect the major sponsor, which it’s fair to say right now is Honda, they could run a livery bringing back the McLaren-Honda ‘glory days’, or just those of Honda, while mimicking the well-known Marlboro livery, e.g. how Lotus ran black and gold ‘JPS’ colours, before searching for a synergy with a title sponsor.

          Now, instead of white, we have black. Ron must feel that black has been the team’s colour since 1997.

          1. @fastiesty The problem is McLaren white-red livery is not Honda colors, but Marlboro. Like @selbbin said, McLaren doesn’t really have “default” color and if anything the most non sponsor color they used is “rocket red” victory shirts instead of McLaren / papaya orange. Likewise, Honda itself doesn’t have default color, and if they have it’s probably white with red letters – not white-red.

            To be honest, I’m not a fan of Lotus black-gold colors because Lotus (the original car company) color is green-yellow. Common mistake by people is thinking sponsor color as team color.

          2. @fastiesty, Selbbin is indeed correct – the McLaren M4B and the M5A were both originally painted in a shade of dark red (with a dark blue stripe in the case of the M5A) that was actually quite close to that of Ferrari.

            It should also be pointed out that, although it is true that the final paint scheme was agreed with the makers of “Grand Prix”, the original livery of the M2B was going to be silver and green, the actual national racing colours of New Zealand. Orange is, in fact, the national racing colour of the Netherlands – that was why Spyker painted their car orange in 2007.

            As it happens, McLaren’s use of silver and black is probably closer to what Bruce McLaren original plan for painting his first car in the national racing colours of New Zealand – an alternative national colour scheme for NZ is silver and black.

        3. @selbbin – As a longtime fan of the original team began by Bruce McLaren, I think most true McLaren fans wish to see a McLaren that is colored fast.

          1. Lol, that’s right. I don’t care what the colour is as long as it’s quick.

        4. Paul (@frankjaeger)
          10th January 2016, 9:55

          Heritage or no heritage, Orange would be sexy

          1. Ironically I agree. I like the orange, don’t get me wrong. It’s just not ‘heritage’. I have a model of the MP4-21 in orange testing livery on my desk and like it.

            But I also liked the second livery on last year’s MP4-30.

        5. And they’d look like Arrows. I think that was the most recent exclusively orange livery that stuck in memory.

          1. What about spyker?

  3. I think Perez actually needs to start being thankful McLaren took him on and then dumped him when they did, it was the best thing that could have happened for his career.

    Think about it if McLaren hadn’t taken him he would have stayed with Sauber for 2013, and given the performance of the Sauber in 2013 probably finished in pretty much the same position in the championship as he did with McLaren. Come 2014 do we really think given Ferrari signing Raikkonen rather than another up and coming driver that Perez would have been in the running? No he would have still been with Sauber and best case that year maybe he would have snagged some scrap points that Sutil couldn’t manage. He’d then still have been with them for 2015 as well and quickly be dropping off most peoples radar.

    Getting that year with McLaren when everyone could clearly see the car wasn’t up to scratch by the lack of results achieved by Button, and then positioned with Force India right as they were passing Sauber and now McLaren in performance has honestly been the best career events he could have hoped for.

    McLaren 2013 may not have been the best team to be in, but it wasn’t worse than Sauber. They were incredibly fair to him getting him placed with Force India which has been a far better team to be in than Sauber would have been. I can’t think of a hypothetical better career path he could have had as I just don’t believe Ferrari was realistically on the cards for him.

    1. Given Sauber’s poor dealings with drivers, despite Telmex backing, who knows if he would have been one of the drivers to win the lucky dip for 2015.

    2. Being sacked by McLaren was the best thing that happened to him.

  4. Perez is better than the current McLaren drivers.

    1. RaceProUK (@)
      10th January 2016, 0:50

      Not going to explain?

      1. @raceprouk, Fan worship is a religion, all you need is faith, no explanations required.

        1. RaceProUK (@)
          10th January 2016, 0:58

          That’s no justification for, let’s face it, pointless hate

          1. Its pointless hate becouse i think Perez is better than Button/Alonso? whatever man.

          2. Better than Button? Maybe but on the evidence of their year together not so but then 1 year does not reveal all I suppose Button also beat Hamilton over 1 year (2011) and he beat Alonso last year…hell the over hyped smiler at Redbull got one of his only 2 victories over a teamate against a 4 time champ so over a year any freak event can happen. On results over a good period of time at the sharp end of the grid I however would take Button and Alonso over a guy that was very good in the midfield on a consistent basis in the latter half of the most recent F1 season.

          3. RaceProUK (@)
            10th January 2016, 1:49

            If it’s not hate, then maybe @rethla, you could explain why you think Perez is better than a World Champion and a double World Champion?

          4. Becouse @raceprouk I have seen nothing but whine and uninspired driving with silly mistakes all season long from those two. Meanwhile Perez has overperformed in an underperforming car and thoroughly beaten a renowned driver such as Hulkenberg.
            Even if you dont agree with anything i say and you dont have to, how could admiration for a driver ever be pointless hate? Get a grip on reality.

            @markp Those are valid points and i guess it still remains to be proven if Perez can be a dependable driver for a WDC run. Even so on the account of McLaren i still dont see a point with Button and Alonso in that team other than maybe those two are good for PR in a time when thats all thats needed from the drivers. Perez, Magnussen, Vandoorne or anyone that can bring some youth spirit and a raw talent to shape into that team makes more sense to me than two past champions that are both looking for their last run.

          5. RaceProUK (@)
            10th January 2016, 2:37

            When you’re deliberately ignoring someone’s accomplishments just to fit your agenda, then yes it is mindless hate. @rethla, maybe you should get a grip on reality; start by reading @anto‘s post below.

          6. “Hate”? Where’s the hate? This isn’t Facebook or the Daily Mail. Try and come up with better words to describe things.

        2. @rethla So I assume you weren’t watching when Alonso got the McLaren up to 5th in Hungary? Or when Button finished 6th at Austin? They performed as best as possible in poor machinery. Yes, there was a lot of complaining, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t doing the best job possible in an underpowered car. Senna did his share of complaining about Williams having a superior car in 1992-93, yet 1993 is considered his best season. Yes, Pérez did an excellent job at Force India, but that’s a completely different environment to McLaren, a team that sets a very high standard for itself, so that doesn’t really work as evidence of Pérez being better than two of the most experienced world champions in the sport.

    2. LOL. Alonso is considered by many drivers, owners, commentators and fans as the current best driver on the grid. Perez has flashes of talent and I was excited when McLaren signed him, but c’mon!

    3. Paul (@frankjaeger)
      10th January 2016, 9:53


      I like Checo but whaaat. He’s been clocking up some good results and keeps tires well but he’s no Alonso/Button.

      1. Raikkonen was awseome at Lotus but when he moved up to Ferrari against true top quality look what happened. The thing with this comparison is that Perez did have a season against Button and was soundly beaten. He was very good this year but until he is in a big team again against a proven world title driver or even race winner then it is nothing more than a good midfield show.

        McLaren have confidence they will soon be back at the sharp end so they do not want to get to that point and hope they can sign a world title driver at that stage as there maybe non available. If they can afford to they should have drivers like Button and Alonso so the drivers are already in place and they just need to sort the car.

        1. Perez was so badly managed by McLaren, they pushed him to be an aggressive driver telling him to stick his elbows out and expected him to overdrive the car like Hamilton can but this just isn’t what he’s good at.

          It would have been like assigning Prodromou to the suspension development team rather than aero.

          Perez has always gotten his best results by conservative driving and making long stint strategies work, with the state the 2013 tyres were in he was possibly one of the best drivers on the grid to make that challenge work. In Button McLaren also had another driver often sited as being smooth and good at preserving tyres and they wasted them both. The car didn’t have outright speed and couldn’t qualify near the front, rather than doing their best to go after tyre life they expected both drivers to do what they aren’t best at and overdrive the car to fight for mid field positions.

          Saubers podiums in 2012 were the perfect example of how to make the most of Perez, and McLaren wasted an asset.

          1. @philipgb Not to mention that they didn’t seem to learn from that, and kept encouraging Magnussen to be aggressive, earning further penalties, including some which dropped him out of the points altogether. Ron then said recently that he didn’t match their expectations, same as Perez!

  5. I’m glad to this!

  6. I don’t really buy Perez’s comments that he was not ready for Mclaren. When the time comes you step up no matter what. Unfortunately hes just not good enough and is perfect for a midfield team

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.