F1 Paydrivers - A good thing for Motorsport in general?
Discussion
OK, bear with me on this...
There has been much derision recently of the seemingly current increase in the number of paydrivers in F1. There is no doubt that many of the poorer teams have unashamedly made use of them and even the top teams seem to be considering sponsorship deals along with talent when looking for new drivers. As a consequence we have witnessed the 'loss' to F1 of several drivers who deserved a longer career in the top flight.
However, what F1 has lost, other series (most noticeably endurance racing) has gained. Along with the paydriver situation, the lack of testing a reserve driver now gets to do has undoubtedly led to several drivers 'giving up' on chasing the F1 dream and instead switching to sportscars. Interestingly it's not even the prototypes that the F1 drivers have gone to, but GT's.
Suddenly the up and coming stars are appearing in sportscars, rather than being lost in the obscurity of F1 testing until a race seat becomes available. We now have the mouthwatering prospects of 'sportscar specialists' duelling it out with the single seat names in exotic machinery at some of the great circuits of the world.
Who knows, with this renaissance of sports car racing, maybe when the F1 superstars reach veteran status, perhaps they'll also switch to extend their careers. And with that, maybe the stars of other series might also want to pitch into battle.
I'm genuinely excited by what may be developing.
There has been much derision recently of the seemingly current increase in the number of paydrivers in F1. There is no doubt that many of the poorer teams have unashamedly made use of them and even the top teams seem to be considering sponsorship deals along with talent when looking for new drivers. As a consequence we have witnessed the 'loss' to F1 of several drivers who deserved a longer career in the top flight.
However, what F1 has lost, other series (most noticeably endurance racing) has gained. Along with the paydriver situation, the lack of testing a reserve driver now gets to do has undoubtedly led to several drivers 'giving up' on chasing the F1 dream and instead switching to sportscars. Interestingly it's not even the prototypes that the F1 drivers have gone to, but GT's.
Suddenly the up and coming stars are appearing in sportscars, rather than being lost in the obscurity of F1 testing until a race seat becomes available. We now have the mouthwatering prospects of 'sportscar specialists' duelling it out with the single seat names in exotic machinery at some of the great circuits of the world.
Who knows, with this renaissance of sports car racing, maybe when the F1 superstars reach veteran status, perhaps they'll also switch to extend their careers. And with that, maybe the stars of other series might also want to pitch into battle.
I'm genuinely excited by what may be developing.
davepoth said:
The big manufacturers have realised that all of the money they spunk away on F1 doesn't do them too much good - racing something that at least looks a bit like one of their road cars seems to be a better investment, and it has a lower price anyway.
That idea and trend has come and gone many times over the years, but not since the 80's have we had numerous F1 capable drivers in sportscar racing. I think the two need to come together to have an enduring following, which hopefully is happening now.My answer to the basic question…
No, 'paydrivers' are not good for motorsport in general, since in an ideal world, quality (driving ability alone) would be the only consideration.
However, it is not an ideal world; and if 'paydrivers' – who have always existed in one form or another in F1 – keep the thing afloat where it may otherwise flounder, perhaps it should be viewed as a 'necessary evil', especially when economics circumstances present a greater threat than normal (as is still the case at present).
No, 'paydrivers' are not good for motorsport in general, since in an ideal world, quality (driving ability alone) would be the only consideration.
However, it is not an ideal world; and if 'paydrivers' – who have always existed in one form or another in F1 – keep the thing afloat where it may otherwise flounder, perhaps it should be viewed as a 'necessary evil', especially when economics circumstances present a greater threat than normal (as is still the case at present).
cosicave said:
My answer to the basic question…
No, 'paydrivers' are not good for motorsport in general, since in an ideal world, quality (driving ability alone) would be the only consideration.
However, it is not an ideal world; and if 'paydrivers' – who have always existed in one form or another in F1 – keep the thing afloat where it may otherwise flounder, perhaps it should be viewed as a 'necessary evil', especially when economics circumstances present a greater threat than normal (as is still the case at present).
Totally agreeNo, 'paydrivers' are not good for motorsport in general, since in an ideal world, quality (driving ability alone) would be the only consideration.
However, it is not an ideal world; and if 'paydrivers' – who have always existed in one form or another in F1 – keep the thing afloat where it may otherwise flounder, perhaps it should be viewed as a 'necessary evil', especially when economics circumstances present a greater threat than normal (as is still the case at present).
But rich blokes who aren't necessarily the best are part of F1s history - always been there...not necesarily a defence but just pointing out it is not, and nor has it ever been a new phenomenon.
One other theory behind the increasing quality of sportscar drivers has been that races like Le Mans have now received more cache amongst youngsters as they have decided finishing 14th in the Bahrain is not the be all and end all of motorsport...the proliferation of grand prix...and in not terribly historic locations...has eroded the mystique.
One other theory behind the increasing quality of sportscar drivers has been that races like Le Mans have now received more cache amongst youngsters as they have decided finishing 14th in the Bahrain is not the be all and end all of motorsport...the proliferation of grand prix...and in not terribly historic locations...has eroded the mystique.
Football is actually a good comparison - several really talented players happily sit on the bench rather than actually play football in a lower league.
That isn't good for the non premiership clubs.
Likewise, it isn't good for motorsport if all the good (but not potential champions) drivers just spend their time chasing a gig in the simulator room.
If pay drivers are needed to be the wake up call to solid drivers like Ant Davidson then that's fine with me.
That isn't good for the non premiership clubs.
Likewise, it isn't good for motorsport if all the good (but not potential champions) drivers just spend their time chasing a gig in the simulator room.
If pay drivers are needed to be the wake up call to solid drivers like Ant Davidson then that's fine with me.
MrKipling43 said:
Interesting perspective, OP.
But no, pay drivers are not good for F1. Can you imagine someone paying to play for a premiership football team? Ridiculous.
But what if no players willing to pay to play in the premiership meant there were only 3 or 4 teams in the league?But no, pay drivers are not good for F1. Can you imagine someone paying to play for a premiership football team? Ridiculous.
I could see that getting very boring very quickly.
Racing has always been expensive but in the formulae that count never more so than now. The figures involved are frankly grotesque. Back in the day if you could scrimp and save and get a FF1600 or F3 car and get some results you might get somebody noticing you and bankrolling your drive . Same now- you just need proportionately far more than ever before for the top echelons of the sport.
So except in the case of an absolute prodigy somebody is paying to get you where you want to be. And there have been some shockingly quick drivers who because of lack of funds, primarily, have not progressed to where their talent could have taken them- people like Dave Coyne, Maurizio Sandro Sala,Martin O'Connell and Tommy Byrne were all guys who had talent to throw away but who never got as far as some of their less able - but richer- peers.
Pay drivers of note included Mike Hailwood (supported by rich family until he was established ) and Niki Lauda- the ultimate pay driver who borrowed huge amounts, was dismissed by many until he had blagged a BRM drive and he started to be noticed.
The sport has never been fair in this sense- never down to pure ability- and it is none the worse for that. If Maldonado is a pay driver so what- he won a GP in a car which was not the class of the field and that is good enough for me.
You can go right back to the 30's- the Bentley Boys were rich playboys in the main, Prince Chula was royalty and in the 50s even Stirling Moss had the support of a comfortably off family to get him started.
So except in the case of an absolute prodigy somebody is paying to get you where you want to be. And there have been some shockingly quick drivers who because of lack of funds, primarily, have not progressed to where their talent could have taken them- people like Dave Coyne, Maurizio Sandro Sala,Martin O'Connell and Tommy Byrne were all guys who had talent to throw away but who never got as far as some of their less able - but richer- peers.
Pay drivers of note included Mike Hailwood (supported by rich family until he was established ) and Niki Lauda- the ultimate pay driver who borrowed huge amounts, was dismissed by many until he had blagged a BRM drive and he started to be noticed.
The sport has never been fair in this sense- never down to pure ability- and it is none the worse for that. If Maldonado is a pay driver so what- he won a GP in a car which was not the class of the field and that is good enough for me.
You can go right back to the 30's- the Bentley Boys were rich playboys in the main, Prince Chula was royalty and in the 50s even Stirling Moss had the support of a comfortably off family to get him started.
Without pay drivers there simply wouldn't be motorsport, so in general they aren't just good for racing : they are essential. However, while there is IMHO nothing wrong with a few pay drivers in the number 2 car of the teams in the back half of the grid (provided of course that they are at least good enough to do the job if not actually good enough to get there purely on merit) I personally think that if there are too many it does undermine the premise of F1 supposedly being the pinnacle of the sport.
All said though - I agree with the OP on the premise that if it increases the quality of the racing in endurance formulae then nobody could call it a bad thing in itself. After all - there is SO much more to motor racing than Bernie's circus.
All said though - I agree with the OP on the premise that if it increases the quality of the racing in endurance formulae then nobody could call it a bad thing in itself. After all - there is SO much more to motor racing than Bernie's circus.
Only 20 years ago it would be possible to have a half serious go at FF1600 and maybe even a few races in F3 without being seriously wealthy. Now the entry costs from karting onwards are huge which means that the field of prospective F1 drivers who have this funding to even get up to GP2 etc must be very small, that must over time diminish the level of talent.
The last time I watched karting I could see some very talented kids dominate their respective races but who would ultimately never go anywhere as they did not have the funding.
The last time I watched karting I could see some very talented kids dominate their respective races but who would ultimately never go anywhere as they did not have the funding.
Everyone in motorsport pays at some point.
Sometimes you can raise sponsors, sometimes it's a rich friend/family member, but generally they have talent of some degree. What you have to remember that motorsport doesn't require a lot of talent. It doesn't require a particular athletic prowess it's a skill that can be learnt but requires a lot of money to buy the track time to be good and to progress *
However, Chilton is the worst case of it in F1 and is a total joke. No one takes him seriously in the paddock and it really questions where F1 is heading.
(* they are some drivers that are naturally more talented than others )
Sometimes you can raise sponsors, sometimes it's a rich friend/family member, but generally they have talent of some degree. What you have to remember that motorsport doesn't require a lot of talent. It doesn't require a particular athletic prowess it's a skill that can be learnt but requires a lot of money to buy the track time to be good and to progress *
However, Chilton is the worst case of it in F1 and is a total joke. No one takes him seriously in the paddock and it really questions where F1 is heading.
(* they are some drivers that are naturally more talented than others )
Edited by woof on Wednesday 13th March 22:20
woof said:
Everyone in motorsport pays at some point.
Sometimes you can raise sponsors, sometimes it's a rich friend/family member, but generally they have talent of some degree. What you have to remember that motorsport doesn't require a lot of talent. It doesn't require a particular athletic prowess it's a skill that can be learnt but requires a lot of money to buy the track time to be good and to progress *
However, Chilton is the worst case of it in F1 and is a total joke. No one takes him seriously in the paddock and it really questions where F1 is heading.
(* they are some drivers that are naturally more talented than others )
Yeah, tney don't call it the Piranha Club for nothing; they said similar things about Lauda too but words were later eaten. My view is that if you can drive a GP car within a second or so of what it's capable of then your ability is on an entirely different level to punters like me who sit at the trackside and pontificate. I was talking to a team owner(not F1) a few months ago who had run one of the recent back markers in F1 . He said that his ability to learn the track and his outright speed was astonishing.And yet here was a guy who Joe Public thought couldn't drive because he had a crap car.We are all very quick to pass judgements but I know I wouldn't last more than a couple of laps in an F1 car and I wpould not be touching any of its ability. Sometimes you can raise sponsors, sometimes it's a rich friend/family member, but generally they have talent of some degree. What you have to remember that motorsport doesn't require a lot of talent. It doesn't require a particular athletic prowess it's a skill that can be learnt but requires a lot of money to buy the track time to be good and to progress *
However, Chilton is the worst case of it in F1 and is a total joke. No one takes him seriously in the paddock and it really questions where F1 is heading.
(* they are some drivers that are naturally more talented than others )
Edited by woof on Wednesday 13th March 22:20
coppice said:
woof said:
Everyone in motorsport pays at some point.
Sometimes you can raise sponsors, sometimes it's a rich friend/family member, but generally they have talent of some degree. What you have to remember that motorsport doesn't require a lot of talent. It doesn't require a particular athletic prowess it's a skill that can be learnt but requires a lot of money to buy the track time to be good and to progress *
However, Chilton is the worst case of it in F1 and is a total joke. No one takes him seriously in the paddock and it really questions where F1 is heading.
(* they are some drivers that are naturally more talented than others )
Yeah, tney don't call it the Piranha Club for nothing; they said similar things about Lauda too but words were later eaten. My view is that if you can drive a GP car within a second or so of what it's capable of then your ability is on an entirely different level to punters like me who sit at the trackside and pontificate. I was talking to a team owner(not F1) a few months ago who had run one of the recent back markers in F1 . He said that his ability to learn the track and his outright speed was astonishing.And yet here was a guy who Joe Public thought couldn't drive because he had a crap car.We are all very quick to pass judgements but I know I wouldn't last more than a couple of laps in an F1 car and I wpould not be touching any of its ability. Sometimes you can raise sponsors, sometimes it's a rich friend/family member, but generally they have talent of some degree. What you have to remember that motorsport doesn't require a lot of talent. It doesn't require a particular athletic prowess it's a skill that can be learnt but requires a lot of money to buy the track time to be good and to progress *
However, Chilton is the worst case of it in F1 and is a total joke. No one takes him seriously in the paddock and it really questions where F1 is heading.
(* they are some drivers that are naturally more talented than others )
Edited by woof on Wednesday 13th March 22:20
Same goes for Antony Davidson and a few others. I'm looking forward to seeing how Kobayashi gets in in the WEC.
are pay drivers good for motorsport?
No. Not at any level.
The question I would ask is this, if there was no sponsorship available for racing tomorrow, would motorsport end? No. Not a chance. It would be different, granted, but it would still happen. The Bernie's of this world would ship out, leaving the sport to find a different way to be funded at the top level. This could be TV revenue, circuits would be charged less, and able to make money from gate receipts, team's would have to reduced their costs, this would mean redundancies of course ( not good) but there again the whole cost of running an F1 team would reduce, so maybe there would be more teams, which means experienced people work elsewhere, maybe meaning more competitive teams, all limited by TV revenue as their income.
If it is cheaper at the top, it stands to reason it will be cheaper all the way up too. You can't charge €2m for GP2, if an F1 drive is free. Equally club racing would be cheaper as all the 'nice to haves' such a motor homes or endless testing will stop. Then we can go back to 70's racing where all you needed was a second hand race car, a trailer and a van - and be competitive.
The less money there is available in motorsport, the better chance there is of talent being rewarded. However I except that my citizen Smith utopia will not happen.
No. Not at any level.
The question I would ask is this, if there was no sponsorship available for racing tomorrow, would motorsport end? No. Not a chance. It would be different, granted, but it would still happen. The Bernie's of this world would ship out, leaving the sport to find a different way to be funded at the top level. This could be TV revenue, circuits would be charged less, and able to make money from gate receipts, team's would have to reduced their costs, this would mean redundancies of course ( not good) but there again the whole cost of running an F1 team would reduce, so maybe there would be more teams, which means experienced people work elsewhere, maybe meaning more competitive teams, all limited by TV revenue as their income.
If it is cheaper at the top, it stands to reason it will be cheaper all the way up too. You can't charge €2m for GP2, if an F1 drive is free. Equally club racing would be cheaper as all the 'nice to haves' such a motor homes or endless testing will stop. Then we can go back to 70's racing where all you needed was a second hand race car, a trailer and a van - and be competitive.
The less money there is available in motorsport, the better chance there is of talent being rewarded. However I except that my citizen Smith utopia will not happen.
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff