Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Former F1 champion John Surtees calls for new racing structure
By Jamie O'Leary Thursday, January 10th 2013, 15:04 GMT
John Surtees John Surtees has called for a radical revamp of single-seater racing to ensure that talent always triumphs over money on the way up to Formula 1.
The 1964 F1 world champion, who also won four titles in 500cc grand prix motorcycle races, believes that personal backing now plays too big a role in a driver's rise through the ranks.
Speaking at AUTOSPORT International on Thursday, Surtees said that a scholarship system, such as the one used by IndyCar in the USA, should be employed to take the best youngsters all the way to grand prix racing.
"What we need is a structure whereby you have success rewarded by the advancement of career," Surtees said on the AUTOSPORT Stage with KX.
"Where else other than in motorsport can you win one series and then be rewarded by a team at the next level telling you 'that will be £550,000 for a season please'? It's terrifying."
"We need a specified number of formulas laid down and recognised internationally so that if you win one, you get a scholarship to move into the next category, and keep that going all the way to Formula 1."
While Surtees agreed that costs have become increasingly out-of-control since his careers as a racing driver and team boss came to an end over 30 years ago, he believes things can still change.
"When I ran my team, I was frustrated by having to take pay-drivers, but I always tried to make sure I paired them with a driver I really believed in," he added.
"But back when I raced, the stopwatch was far more important. When I made the transition from bikes to cars, I did races all over the world on each, and it didn't cost me a penny because people offered me drives an rides that were already paid for.
"Even when I started my team I put our car on the grid for the British Grand Prix at a cost of £23,000. That included £7500 for the Cosworth engine - a very competitive engine at the time, and £500 for the gearbox.
"It's a very different technological age now."
I think that both points are valid. There should be an affordable ladder leading young high achievers to F1 and there should be a cost cap on how much teams can spend on cars and engines.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
This would be largely irrelevant if these talent worthy drivers get to the top of the feeder series structure and find that the F1 teams still want more than half the grid to be bringing millions a season with them to get a drive.
The real solution would be for the teams to get together, put aside attempts at personal gain and get ahold of more of the revenue F1 generates, and agree to real cost cutting. Make the teams profitable and they won't be forced (some, of course may well choose to keep going the pay driver route) into going for cash over talent.
Beyond that if a simplified structure could be created and brought under one roof, money could be filtered down, as tends to happen in football, with top division money being distributed to lower leagues. F1 teams could be encouraged to run full junior operations or support teams in junior formulae etc with the extra money they'd be bringing in.
Ultimately at the moment, most F1 teams don't make enough money, and I'd be amazed if there were more than a few teams in any junior formula running profitably without driver cash.
If John Surtees can just manage to challenge Bernie to a fist-fight, and win, we can completely change the monetary structure of F1 so that the teams (essentially the "actors" in "the show") can get a bigger cut of the pie and thus invest more in the entire effort. This would also be an evident indicator to other constructors of F1's direct profitability for them, rather than lining a few pockets. What's keeping the makers out is the draw of actual profit (rather than just advertisement and the season prizes).
I do think that lower formulae need better organisation. We had what? Three "just one step lower" series last year? C'mon!
But all in all, there was a thread about feeder series and from it, it seems if you are really good you will be called in. In that way I don't think the cost of lower series is that much of a threat. The bigger problem IMO is lack of testing, so even fast guys come to F1 unprepared.
John Surtees is a man I have a huge respect for and I think he makes a very good point with what he says.
The sponsorship that the drivers have to bring has gone a bit out of control and it is a way bigger part than it should be in the whole "having a seat" equation. I think that the teams should be the ones who have to scramble and work their asses off to get the main sponsorships and funding, then to get a good and talented driver that can make a difference and bring the attention to him and the respective team, thus leading to TV exposure, exposure for the sponsors and so on.
We are close to reach the point in which, no matter if you are talented and passionate about it or not, it almost seems like you come with the sponsorship (money) to rent your seat in order to drive for a season or two, and if you run out of money and don't make a good impression in order to get picked up by a bigger team that doesn't ask you for a lot of sponsorship (if it exists) you are out of the game, no matter how good you are.
"...and there, very much in flames, is Jacques Laffite's Ligier. That's obviously a turbo blaze, and of course, Laffite will be able to see that conflagration in his mirrors... he is coolly parking the car somewhere safe."Murray Walker, San Marino 1985
stefan_ wrote:I think that the teams should be the ones who have to scramble and work their asses off to get the main sponsorships and funding, then to get a good and talented driver that can make a difference and bring the attention to him and the respective team, thus leading to TV exposure, exposure for the sponsors and so on.
In the ideal world -- yes. But the reality is that driver offers better brand identity and is better marketed. A driver can already make a name for himself in the lower formulae and get some publicity, while a teams from F3 or GP2 or whatever can only create the buzz within a sport. Of course there is a problem in F1 that sponsor interest is not enough for a lower teams to sustain their living. But it was pretty much so for years.
stefan_ wrote:We are close to reach the point in which, no matter if you are talented and passionate about it or not, it almost seems like you come with the sponsorship (money) to rent your seat in order to drive for a season or two, and if you run out of money and don't make a good impression in order to get picked up by a bigger team that doesn't ask you for a lot of sponsorship (if it exists) you are out of the game, no matter how good you are.
Well, with all my respect to Senna or Petrov or Maldonado (each of whom I think is quite fast and promising driver) and others I think we have not seen someone of Alonso/Raikkonen/Hamilton/Vettel calibre lately.
