Formula 1, Rich Daddies indulging their spoilt sons?

[_Rodders_]

Zetec-S said:

_Rodders_ said:

Who was the last Champion to come from regular means? I'd guess it's probably Hamilton.

I wonder if he would have made it if he was 8 years old today. Probably not I'd guess. Wouldn't matter how many jobs his dad worked.

I stand to be corrected, but I don't think either Vettel's or Raikkonen's parents were particularly rich.

Similar era, I just don't think it's possible today unless they're picked up by one of the development programmes almost immediately.

There must be stories out there of parents going all in and things not working out.

[Sway]

_Rodders_ said:

hondajack85 said:

Willy wonka and the golden f1 ticket seems to be the dream.
What I find odd is some cheap sport like tennis seems to be fenced off from normal people without lots of money.
State Schools should be ashamed of themselves.

You've no idea about state schools then.

Ineos have just pulled a bit of funding to my OHs school. So she's just told 2 teaching assistants they don't have a job in September.

Laughable that you think they'd have enough for a tennis court.

Most state schools have a playground. There's a ready made tarmac court or three.

Lots of tennis skills can be taught with nothing more than a wall to return the ball.

A lot of getting state schools kids into elite level sport is introduction. If they fall in love with it, then there's fairly cheap ways for them to 'play properly'.

Sports like rowing, swimming, track cycling and fencing have high bars to entry for schools (and many public schools don't offer them), but tennis is a cheap sport - just like badminton or table tennis (which are fairly common in state schools).

[HardtopManual]

Sway said:

Sports like rowing, swimming, track cycling and fencing have high bars to entry for schools (and many public schools don't offer them), but tennis is a cheap sport - just like badminton or table tennis (which are fairly common in state schools).

They don't necessarily have high barriers to entry for parents though, unlike motorsport. Parents have to want to take their kids though, and the kids have to want to do it. As you say tennis doesn't have to be expensive - there are loads of council courts and, while they'll be full at the moment, for 11 months of the year they are dead. Swimming clubs really don't charge much at all for kids, at least here in London. Cycling clubs are the same. One of my lot is in Welwyn Wheelers. Saturday morning velodrome & cyclocross session costs a fiver, and she does it on a bike that a friend gave us.

[_Rodders_]

Cycling can be expensive but it's the kit. The actual sessions for ours are either free (via council initiative) or £3 for coached sessions on a proper cycle track run by our local club.

Absolute bargain compared to swimming and martial arts.

[bergclimber34]

I would say the last guy who got a ride through sheer talent alone was Raikkonen, I would say Antonelli seems have been picked up super early, don't know his back story.

Lewis obviously got picked up very early on and had a very managed career once in cars,but his early years were very hard fought in karts.

Guys like Mansell cane at it from a very working class background, which sort if explains his slightly odd approach

[Castrol for a knave]

_Rodders_ said:

the-norseman said:

On the above about football, its very much the same, the money isnt the same level but you still need to be "rich" and very dedicated to get there.

I have a friend whos kid was in academies from an early age, he lives in Burnley and at one point was playing for 3 or 4 academies at one time, I think it was Burnley, Everton, Man Utd and Leeds, Constantly having to drive the lad around, last time I met up with him he said he had spent £££££ on it all and then the time on top. His lad was actually starting to get somewhere and get recognition and then his lad decided he didn't want to do it anymore and stopped it all.

It's not the same. You could easily do all that and spend less in a year than a top level kid will spend in a weekend motor racing, by several factors no doubt.

Rodders is right. sure, it can be a big time commitment shuttling your kids to various academies, but, academies are a small part. They are also notoriously poor at showcasing talent. Kids are often "hot housed" or simply reach a skills plateau, whereas a club will often pick up on a younger player in a local team, maybe in Northern / Southern Counties or similar.

A full time academy place is generally subsidised by the club, so effectively school, but with togger.

[sjc]

the-norseman said:

On the above about football, its very much the same, the money isnt the same level but you still need to be "rich" and very dedicated to get there.

I have a friend whos kid was in academies from an early age, he lives in Burnley and at one point was playing for 3 or 4 academies at one time, I think it was Burnley, Everton, Man Utd and Leeds, Constantly having to drive the lad around, last time I met up with him he said he had spent £££££ on it all and then the time on top. His lad was actually starting to get somewhere and get recognition and then his lad decided he didn't want to do it anymore and stopped it all.

He wasn't in academies then, probably in development squads. You are not allowed to play any football at other clubs, or school,district, county etc once signed at that level.And if the lad is good enough, they'll be help getting him to training, free boots and under the counter payments if need be etc if the family are really struggling, a club isn't missing out on a potential windfall because of that.

[Evanivitch]

Sway said:

Most state schools have a playground. There's a ready made tarmac court or three.

Couldn't play tennis on any of my school playgrounds.

Sway said:

Lots of tennis skills can be taught with nothing more than a wall to return the ball.

Tennis balls don't bounce well off brick...

Sway said:

Sports like rowing, swimming, track cycling and fencing have high bars to entry for schools (and many public schools don't offer them), but tennis is a cheap sport - just like badminton or table tennis (which are fairly common in state schools).

Static rowing on Concept2 is pretty well established sport in many schools, and yeah some like Monmouth comps have actual boat clubs. I used to see fencing in the roughest comprehensive in Swansea, because the equipment isn't all that expensive for learning, it's just the skills are pretty scarce.

Track cycling... Depends if you mean velodrome or pump/BMX tracks! Loads of the latter popping up.

[Evanivitch]

_Rodders_ said:

It's not the same. You could easily do all that and spend less in a year than a top level kid will spend in a weekend motor racing, by several factors no doubt.

Not everything is about cash. Time also has a value, because the time a parent spends driving to and from various football activities is time they're not earning.

Demands on young footballers and swimmers are often 4-8 sessions a week. Including mornings, evenings and weekend competitions.

[_Rodders_]

sjc said:

the-norseman said:

On the above about football, its very much the same, the money isnt the same level but you still need to be "rich" and very dedicated to get there.

I have a friend whos kid was in academies from an early age, he lives in Burnley and at one point was playing for 3 or 4 academies at one time, I think it was Burnley, Everton, Man Utd and Leeds, Constantly having to drive the lad around, last time I met up with him he said he had spent £££££ on it all and then the time on top. His lad was actually starting to get somewhere and get recognition and then his lad decided he didn't want to do it anymore and stopped it all.

He wasn't in academies then, probably in development squads. You are not allowed to play any football at other clubs, or school,district, county etc once signed at that level.And if the lad is good enough, they'll be help getting him to training, free boots and under the counter payments if need be etc if the family are really struggling, a club isn't missing out on a potential windfall because of that.

Private school too, probably the best perk for the 99% that don't make it as a footballer.

[CT05 Nose Cone]

bergclimber34 said:

I would say the last guy who got a ride through sheer talent alone was Raikkonen, I would say Antonelli seems have been picked up super early, don't know his back story.

Lewis obviously got picked up very early on and had a very managed career once in cars,but his early years were very hard fought in karts.

Guys like Mansell cane at it from a very working class background, which sort if explains his slightly odd approach

Ocon comes from a working class background, although his family sold their house and lived in a caravan to fund his career, which rather understandably 99.99% of people would not take the risk of doing.

[WombleCate]

Reaching the pinnacle of most individual sports requires talent, commercial value and luck all at the right time. While money and/ or commercial value are possibly more important in Motorsport (which is pricey at the lowest level) than others.

Whether we like them or not, every one of the current F1 drivers is an extremely talented athlete. There are around 10k race license holders in the UK alone and I would wager <1% could complete a race.

I'm 50+, and know I don't have the can control or physical and mental stamina required.

[TheDeuce]

the-norseman said:

RSstuff said:

It's always been the case that talent counts for little, if the car is off the pace. But with very well funded and supported Verstappen and now Antonelli running away with championships, what's the chance of the likes of Nigel Mansell and James Hunt getting to the top now?

That era of motorsport has long gone, but, Max is a talent. You only have to look at how he gets into other non F1 cars and beats their regular drivers to see that.

Its the likes of Stroll that need to foxtrot oscar.

That era so far as F1 and most other major motorsport series is long gone, but in the wider sphere of motorsport, talent gets results and if the results are strong enough then sufficient sponsorship to self fund is still possible. Such drivers will never become household names, but they can make a career of driving if they're good enough to win and keep bums on seats watching.

As for F1 specifically, sure it's a hell of a lot more likely you'll get a shot if your family can bankroll you endlessly, but you'll still only get so far if you have talent - because there are far more rich kids out there than there are places in F1, or F2/3 before that.

The obvious exception is Lance, but there's always an extreme example is there... It's not typical for a rich kids Dad to buy the team their son races for, or have the funds for whatever manipulation occured during Lance's F2 career... It has happened for Lance, but for most drivers they won't get near F1 no matter how rich their folks are unless they have at least a reasonable level of talent.

Thankfully the cost cap has helped too. It makes of far less likely a team will need to take an obviously crap driver for the same of sponsorship - thinking of Mazepin...

Although whilst I don't think the current situation is particularly bad, I would love to see more early in life opportunities for talented young drivers, and for the sport to subsidise those that perform best - those that can't afford to self fund. There have to be very talented young drivers that are currently completely unable to gain access for long enough to shine, and I would support the sport investing more directly in such promising young talents.

[StevieBee]

_Rodders_ said:

Zetec-S said:

_Rodders_ said:

Who was the last Champion to come from regular means? I'd guess it's probably Hamilton.

I wonder if he would have made it if he was 8 years old today. Probably not I'd guess. Wouldn't matter how many jobs his dad worked.

I stand to be corrected, but I don't think either Vettel's or Raikkonen's parents were particularly rich.

Similar era, I just don't think it's possible today unless they're picked up by one of the development programmes almost immediately.

There must be stories out there of parents going all in and things not working out.

Schumacher. Alonso and Vettel also came from quite 'normal' working families.

Not yet a WDC but George Russel's dad had a small pea farm which he sold to fund his son's early racing. His mother was still a Hairdresser until quite recently.

[oyster]

Weird thread.
Selling a farm to pay for a child’s motor racing dream is considered behaviour of normal folk and not that of rich people.

[TheDeuce]

oyster said:

Weird thread.
Selling a farm to pay for a child s motor racing dream is considered behaviour of normal folk and not that of rich people.

I think quite a lot of people in the UK probably have some sort of asset they could sell for several hundred thousand pounds - enough to pay for the early racing career of their child, I'd they believed said child was talented enough to eventually get signed/sponsored.

And most such people wouldn't be considered rich, they just have some money they can release and sufficient faith in their offspring to invest in them.

It depends on your definition of rich really! I'm trying to scrape together 500k for a new business venture right now, but I still fly economy and there's no Ferrari on the drive. Am I rich..? (I'm really not )

[RichB]

bergclimber34 said:

<clip> Guys like Mansell cane at it from a very working class background, which sort if explains his slightly odd approach

My son hosted Nigel Mansell for a days golf at his club in Orlando. Said he was a really nice chap, and an entertaining magician! He also gave my son a few bit and bobs for me because he said I was a big fan of his, which I am.

[CT05 Nose Cone]

TheDeuce said:

oyster said:

Weird thread.
Selling a farm to pay for a child s motor racing dream is considered behaviour of normal folk and not that of rich people.

I think quite a lot of people in the UK probably have some sort of asset they could sell for several hundred thousand pounds - enough to pay for the early racing career of their child, I'd they believed said child was talented enough to eventually get signed/sponsored.

And most such people wouldn't be considered rich, they just have some money they can release and sufficient faith in their offspring to invest in them.

It depends on your definition of rich really! I'm trying to scrape together 500k for a new business venture right now, but I still fly economy and there's no Ferrari on the drive. Am I rich..? (I'm really not )

Even if they could, it's still an enormous risk considering that motor racing relies on luck and sponsorships as much as skill, and you believing your child is talented enough is different from a team thinking your child is talented enough. Top level sports is the 1% if the 1%, and countless talented kids don't make it for all manner of reasons.

[TheDeuce]

CT05 Nose Cone said:

TheDeuce said:

oyster said:

Weird thread.
Selling a farm to pay for a child s motor racing dream is considered behaviour of normal folk and not that of rich people.

I think quite a lot of people in the UK probably have some sort of asset they could sell for several hundred thousand pounds - enough to pay for the early racing career of their child, I'd they believed said child was talented enough to eventually get signed/sponsored.

And most such people wouldn't be considered rich, they just have some money they can release and sufficient faith in their offspring to invest in them.

It depends on your definition of rich really! I'm trying to scrape together 500k for a new business venture right now, but I still fly economy and there's no Ferrari on the drive. Am I rich..? (I'm really not )

Even if they could, it's still an enormous risk considering that motor racing relies on luck and sponsorships as much as skill, and you believing your child is talented enough is different from a team thinking your child is talented enough. Top level sports is the 1% if the 1%, and countless talented kids don't make it for all manner of reasons.

Yes it's a risk, but that says more about a parents faith in their child than their wealth level.

We know Lewis's Dad put more than he could really afford to gamble into his son's career.

Being a good parent and investing in the right thing for your kids is it's own talent.

[thegreenhell]

How many parents have sold the family home to fund a child's racing that subsequently went nowhere and they were left with nothing? They can't all be success stories. The odds must mean there are far more failures that we don't hear about.