planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:18 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
Zoue wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Zoue wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
So knowing there is a clear ladder is great.


Why? How?
Why does the FIA need to "create" a clear ladder by undervaluing the series they don't like but have proven to be a great training school for F1 drivers?

Typically drivers started out at national level, then surface either in European F3 or European FR2.0 level, go on to GP3 and GP2 or take the FR3.5 route. It wasn't that difficult. You could follow drivers.

It's like having the choice between two products (one imported, one local) and being glad the imported product gets slapped by ridiculous import fees because the imported one is now cheaper than the other (even though becoming somewhat more expensive because the competition has gotten considerably weaker) and "at least now it's clear which product to take".

Yes, I don't see why the FIA has to interfere here, except for self-interest.

I can't think of any other sport where you have to serve a formal "apprenticeship" before you are admitted to the big leagues. Wayne Rooney didn't have to serve his time in the lower leagues in football, for example. Talent will be propelled into the spotlight wherever you are. The fact that we would have been deprived of both Kimi in 2001 and Ricciardo in 2011 shows there is a downside to this, not to mention that this could be the slow death knell for non-approved series as ambitious drivers avoid them in order to maximise their F1 chances. I can see why they've done it, but I don't think it's of benefit to either the fans or motorsport in general.


It seems you are not familiar with american sports then, which all have ladders and career progression that are not only great at nurturing talent, they create amazing junior categories, protect young and developing athletes and bring more money into the sport. The main sport which in this case is F1.

Things are different in this modern age of the internet, but living in Australia it was really hard to follow the junior categories, so I just gave up. Have a read through wikipedia and it is a mess. F1.267 was replaced by Junior Renault series which then merged with F3.2 and GP6 to become Formula Confuse the hell out of me. You read histories of drivers in the past and they have come from series that have failed or not been financially viable. If we can have a clear set of championships that lead into the sport I think it is great and because they are officially supported they will be around for a long time to come, creating a great history and legacy.

Also, what if Jules Bianchi was 16 years old when he had his accident? F1 would be #%!ked! They would be held liable for injury and possible death to a minor. But no, lets get kids racing in a sport where death is a real possibility all the time. Genius

I'm not against junior categories, but what the FIA is doing is effectively shutting out competitor junior categories out of self interest. What about e.g. DTM? There are many talented drivers in there. Now that pool is either shut out or drivers have to exit the series. That is not fair on series like DTM IMO

Young drivers shouldn't be in the DTM in the first place they should be in single seaters.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Kimi and Ricciardo would have got the necessary points, what about the drivers its stops getting into F1 based purely on money like the Chiltons, Pics, van der Gardes, Ericssons etc.?


Merely playing advocate of the devil here: as much as it pains me, a case can be made for saying that in the current F1, those drivers are needed as well in order to keep smaller teams afloat, and even then it's hard for them as evidenced by the financial struggles of a lot of teams.

Also van der Garde did, at one point, qualify for a SL by virtue of scoring 41 points in FR3.5 and GP2.

That depends on what rating FR3.5 would have been given back then, the F3 Euroseries was very strong

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 12, 2015 9:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am
Posts: 236
I'm not against junior categories, but what the FIA is doing is effectively shutting out competitor junior categories out of self interest. What about e.g. DTM? There are many talented drivers in there. Now that pool is either shut out or drivers have to exit the series. That is not fair on series like DTM IMO[/quote]
Young drivers shouldn't be in the DTM in the first place they should be in single seaters.[/quote]

But they are not completely shutting them out. They have a clause that will allow certain drivers in at their discretion. This will allow great drivers from Indycar etc to get into the sport if they want to. Its just creating a more solid foundation and strong junior categories for getting into F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 6:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
Lupin wrote:
But they are not completely shutting them out. They have a clause that will allow certain drivers in at their discretion. This will allow great drivers from Indycar etc to get into the sport if they want to.


You know as well as I do that drivers who want to reach F1 will want to take the FIA-backed series in order to maximize their chances.

Quote:
Its just creating a more solid foundation and strong junior categories for getting into F1.


It's really not. It's just favoring the series THEY want to back and keeping the others in a terrible stranglehold, just for the sake of money. Always money.

I'll repeat myself:
Quote:
So what you're basically saying is that it's entirely acceptable for the FIA to try and extinguish perfectly viable racing series that have given us a lot of good F1 drivers, because you understand it better that way? Even though the situation at the moment isn't even really that hard to grasp and even if the Renault-backed series have existed for longer than GP2 and GP3? They deserve to be relegated to a spot in the sidelines just for your understanding?

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 6:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am
Posts: 236
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
But they are not completely shutting them out. They have a clause that will allow certain drivers in at their discretion. This will allow great drivers from Indycar etc to get into the sport if they want to.


You know as well as I do that drivers who want to reach F1 will want to take the FIA-backed series in order to maximize their chances.

Quote:
Its just creating a more solid foundation and strong junior categories for getting into F1.


It's really not. It's just favoring the series THEY want to back and keeping the others in a terrible stranglehold, just for the sake of money. Always money.

I'll repeat myself:
Quote:
So what you're basically saying is that it's entirely acceptable for the FIA to try and extinguish perfectly viable racing series that have given us a lot of good F1 drivers, because you understand it better that way? Even though the situation at the moment isn't even really that hard to grasp and even if the Renault-backed series have existed for longer than GP2 and GP3? They deserve to be relegated to a spot in the sidelines just for your understanding?


Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.

It may ruin the other series, it may not, that is not my problem nor my argument.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 12:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am
Posts: 236
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?

Well it stops drivers simply being able to buy their way into F1, but then again it could be a bad thing because the smaller F1 teams need paydrivers :?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?

Well it stops drivers simply being able to buy their way into F1, but then again it could be a bad thing because the smaller F1 teams need paydrivers :?


We're not talking about the system itself but about the way the points are attributed between series, heavily underrating the Renault series. I still don't see how this would make F1 stronger. Especially since GP2 is vastly more expensive than FR3.5 and helps tip the scales towards richer yet somewhat lesser skilled drivers who can afford to stay in the series for several years.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 3846
As others have pointed out, pay drivers are nothing new. Even Schumi had to pay Jordan for a drive (!) but pay drivers seem to becoming more important as time goes on :( .

The FIA have come up with a new points system that results in FIA approved (i.e. they're benefiting) getting more points than other series - big suprise :( .

The FIA are becoming more venal as time goes on. Disappointing, but hardly suprising.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12378
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?

Well it stops drivers simply being able to buy their way into F1, but then again it could be a bad thing because the smaller F1 teams need paydrivers :?


Unless the proposed F2 series is cheap then it will mean drivers have to buy there way in. GP2 is so expensive that only drivers with serious backing can drive there. It is why we have average drivers like Palmer winning the championship.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2015 6:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am
Posts: 236
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
Its got nothing to do with my understanding of the sport, or understanding where drivers come from. Your argument there is just ill informed and reading the wrong thing into what I am saying. Its just better for F1 to of this. This is a good move for F1 and a smart one.


Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?


I feel like I have explained many reasons for this already, but just one of them is staying in control of and owning junior categories, which in turn keeps money and talent within the FIA and F1 system. Which makes F1 stronger.

I have not once said this is not bad for Renault 3.5. It is. But it is good for F1, which is what I care about.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 7:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
Sorry man, you have not "explained many reasons". Like I said, the only thing I've really gotten from your posts is "it confused me".

You have not substantiated your statements. Nowhere in your posts have I found something that would indicate F1 will be made stronger because "money and talent is kept within the FIA and F1 system". Nowhere do I read why the unfair distribution of points will help improve things over what we saw up until 2014 - in fact, you've indicated you never stated something was broken. So if nothing is broken, what can be improved?

I have indicated I don't feel this would be an improvement. I have argued that by tipping the scaled towards the very expensive series GP2 is, it actually stands to reason that not incredibly talented drivers who do have a lot of money to stay afloat in GP2 are benefiting from this more than they already did in GP2. I have said that up until now, FR3.5 did a great job to deliver F1-ready drivers at a fraction of the cost of GP2 and that I don't see how a mandatory pass through GP2 would help F1.

Now if you can tell me WHY, then please do. But please, give some proper arguments instead of blanket statements.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am
Posts: 236
mds wrote:
Sorry man, you have not "explained many reasons". Like I said, the only thing I've really gotten from your posts is "it confused me".

You have not substantiated your statements. Nowhere in your posts have I found something that would indicate F1 will be made stronger because "money and talent is kept within the FIA and F1 system". Nowhere do I read why the unfair distribution of points will help improve things over what we saw up until 2014 - in fact, you've indicated you never stated something was broken. So if nothing is broken, what can be improved?

I have indicated I don't feel this would be an improvement. I have argued that by tipping the scaled towards the very expensive series GP2 is, it actually stands to reason that not incredibly talented drivers who do have a lot of money to stay afloat in GP2 are benefiting from this more than they already did in GP2. I have said that up until now, FR3.5 did a great job to deliver F1-ready drivers at a fraction of the cost of GP2 and that I don't see how a mandatory pass through GP2 would help F1.

Now if you can tell me WHY, then please do. But please, give some proper arguments instead of blanket statements.


If mine are blanket statements then yours are just the same. I have highlighted other sports, such as baseball and the NFL which keep the career ladder progression within the family and the impact that has on keeping money within the sport and ensuring the safety and correct development of young athletes.

Just because things aren't broken, doesn't mean you can't make them better.

And by all means keep focusing on one thing that I have said, and disregard the rest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21002
I think the system is there to benefit the FIA, not F1 or the fans. As has been pointed out, leaving less financially well-off young drivers with fewer avenues to get on the ladder doesn't really resolve the issue of pay drivers - it just moves it further down the food chain. If the FIA were truly serious about this as an issue, they would remove the barriers to entry, not simply impose them elsewhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
Lupin wrote:
I have highlighted other sports, such as baseball and the NFL which keep the career ladder progression within the family and the impact that has on keeping money within the sport and ensuring the safety and correct development of young athletes.


"System A works for Sport X, so it will reinforce sport Y".
Surely you must see how the first part does not prove or even imply the second part at all.

Now, are you even sure baseball and NFL work that way? A ladder that is kept solely within the family? So there are no foreign drivers transfering to NFL or MLB? They first have to pass through the NFL/MLB-appointed junior ranks?

For the rest, I agree with Zoue. By handicapping the cheaper series (who have proven to stand up very well and deliver great talent) you're actively disadvantaging talent with less money. How does that make F1 stronger?

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:

Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?

Well it stops drivers simply being able to buy their way into F1, but then again it could be a bad thing because the smaller F1 teams need paydrivers :?


We're not talking about the system itself but about the way the points are attributed between series, heavily underrating the Renault series. I still don't see how this would make F1 stronger. Especially since GP2 is vastly more expensive than FR3.5 and helps tip the scales towards richer yet somewhat lesser skilled drivers who can afford to stay in the series for several years.

Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5 so i'm happy with the ranking points based on that premise.

I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
mds wrote:

Don't blame me for understanding it that way. I've reread your earlier post and all I'm getting from it is "it was confusing me".

So then tell me: why exactly is an unfair attribution of points good for F1? Which broken situation exactly does it fix?


I'm not sure it fixes a broken situation, it just makes a stronger situation for F1, which in my opinion is a good thing.


How does it make F1 stronger?

Well it stops drivers simply being able to buy their way into F1, but then again it could be a bad thing because the smaller F1 teams need paydrivers :?


Unless the proposed F2 series is cheap then it will mean drivers have to buy there way in. GP2 is so expensive that only drivers with serious backing can drive there. It is why we have average drivers like Palmer winning the championship.

Yes i do see that point of view GP2 is too expensive

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2015 9:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:59 am
Posts: 236
mds wrote:
Lupin wrote:
I have highlighted other sports, such as baseball and the NFL which keep the career ladder progression within the family and the impact that has on keeping money within the sport and ensuring the safety and correct development of young athletes.


"System A works for Sport X, so it will reinforce sport Y".
Surely you must see how the first part does not prove or even imply the second part at all.

Now, are you even sure baseball and NFL work that way? A ladder that is kept solely within the family? So there are no foreign drivers transfering to NFL or MLB? They first have to pass through the NFL/MLB-appointed junior ranks?

For the rest, I agree with Zoue. By handicapping the cheaper series (who have proven to stand up very well and deliver great talent) you're actively disadvantaging talent with less money. How does that make F1 stronger?


Players from other countries are allowed into the american sports because they are older and have proven themselves jn other series. Much like the rule F1 has in allowing certain drivers in if they meet certain criteria.

Also, if a team wants a player from another country/series, they often place them in their junior series, AA or AAA in MLB for example so they can get up to speed on the american scene before they get into the sport.

I am fine for you to disagree with me, and it was a good try but your arguments for why are flawed. Also you are assuming GP2 will be flooded with pay drivers etc. You don't know if this will happen. You are completely making this up and assuming what will happen in the future. I, on the other hand, can make a case that this move will benefit F1.

I do agree with you though that it will greatly hurt 3.5. That we can agree on. The rest we will just have to disagree on and leave it at that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12378
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.


In recent years more often than not FRENAULT 3.5 has had a stronger field than GP2. Their champions are certainly of a much higher quality. GP2 is won by the most experienced decent driver. I have watched both series for the last 5 years or so and GP2 is the inferior series driver talent wise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
Lupin wrote:
Players from other countries are allowed into the american sports because they are older and have proven themselves jn other series.


Ah so now you're saying the career ladder progression doesn't strictly have to be kept within the family nor does the matter of the safety and correct development of young athletes.

Quote:
I am fine for you to disagree with me, and it was a good try but your arguments for why are flawed.


Just because you say they are flawed, does not make them so. You haven't actually refuted anything I said. I'm perfectly OK with hearing you out, but at some point you're going to have to start with actual arguments. Why is my vision wrong according to you, why is yours correct?

Quote:
Also you are assuming GP2 will be flooded with pay drivers etc. You don't know if this will happen. You are completely making this up and assuming what will happen in the future.


I haven't made anything up. I've said that a few things stand to reason. One of them being that drivers with big budgets are favored when everyone has to make a mandatory pass through GP2 which is the single most expensive feeder series.
GP2 already is a playground for drivers with big budgets who stay in the series for far too long. With this system, I don't see that changing.

Quote:
I, on the other hand, can make a case that this move will benefit F1.


So then make your case! To this point, after this lengthy discussion, you have still failed to support your case decently.
"System A works for sport X, so it will reinforce sport Y". Correct me if I'm wrong but that's basically what you've said and that is not a sound foundation. The first part does not prove nor imply the second part.

Remember that you're the one actively advocating this unfair distribution of points, which forms a change over the current system that doesn't actively benefit or disadvantages one series over the other, somehow reinforces F1. I don't have to predict what would have happened if the points were distributed fairly, because we've seen that in the past decade: drivers from GP2 and FR3.5 had chances to go on to F1, we've got some of both and we've gotten some outstanding drivers from both.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 8:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
pokerman wrote:
I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category


Sure but that would have been his second year. Comparing both his years as a rookie in FR3.5 and GP2 he probably was the most impressive in GP2.

Quote:
Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?


That's undoubtedly one of the things making GP2 so attractive: you're getting a lot of visibility by being in the support program for F1 races.

Quote:
I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2.


I'm not sure. GP2 drivers haven't graduated to F1 very easily these past years. Chilton and Ericsson basically bought their way in, Gutierrez and Nasr are decent drivers but I suspect their funding was equally important if not more.
On the other hand, Red Bull and McLaren seem to think FR3.5 is a good measure for their drivers.

GP2 seems like more of an "end station" - either as an incubator for those that are deemed good enough but without a free seat in F1 (like Vandoorne), or as the end of the line for hopefuls who have budget but aren't in demand by the teams.

Quote:
Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.


Well there was a wait before they made it public... We don't really know when the discussion was taken. Sainz/Verstappen is a special case, I'm pretty sure that if Verstappen hadn't blitzed his rookie car racing season the way he did, there would

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 8:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7706
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.

GP2 is for drivers who weren't good enough to get F1 seat earlier.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12378
Just to compare the the top 6 finishers in each series over the past 5 years:

2014

GP2/Renault 3.5
Jolyon Palmer/Carlos Sainz
Stoffel Vandoorne/Pierre Gasley
Felipe Nasr/Roberto Mehrl
Mitch Evans/Oliver Rowland
Johnny Cecotto/Sergey Sirotkin
Stefano Coletti/Will Stevens

2013

Fabio Leimer/Kevin Magnussen
Sam Bird/Stoffel Vandoorne
James Calado/Antonio Felix Da Costa
Felipe Nasr/Will Stevens
Stefano Coletti/Nico Muller
Marcus Ericcson/Nigel Melker

2012

Davide Valsecchi/Robin Frijns
Luis Razia/Jules Bianchi
Esteban Guitierrez/Sam Bird
Max Chilton/Antonio Felix Da Costa
James Calado/Nick Yelloly
Giedo Van Der Garde/Marco Sorrensn

2011

Romain Grosjean/Robert Wickens
Luca Fillipi/Jean Eric Vergne
Jules Bianchi/Alex Rossi
Charles Pic/Albert Costa
Giedo Van Der Garde/Daniel Ricciardo
Sam Bird/Kevin Korjus

2010

Pastor Maldanado/Mikhail Aleshin
Sergio Perez/Daniel Ricciardo
Jules Bianchi/Esteban Guirrerri
Dani Clos/Stan Pentus
Sam Bird/Alberto Costa
Oliver Turvey/Steffano Coletti


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.


In recent years more often than not FRENAULT 3.5 has had a stronger field than GP2. Their champions are certainly of a much higher quality. GP2 is won by the most experienced decent driver. I have watched both series for the last 5 years or so and GP2 is the inferior series driver talent wise.

I think in 2012 FR3.5 was stronger but then you had GP2 drivers Bianchi and Bird driving who finished 2nd and 3rd so how could you sort of say GP2 was weaker in the other years as neither Bianchi or Bird were able to win the GP2 title and they had 5/6 years in GP2 between them?

The GP2 champions that made it too F1 are Grosjean and Maldonado, the FR3.5 champions are Magnussen and Sainz jnr.

I think last year GP2 was stronger and it will be this year for instance we have FR3.5 runner-ups Vandoorne and Gasly competing in GP2 along with GP3 champion Lynn. FR3.5 was strong for 3 years but now the balance is certainly in GP2's favour although i guess for this year it might have something to do with the new F1 super license system.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category


Sure but that would have been his second year. Comparing both his years as a rookie in FR3.5 and GP2 he probably was the most impressive in GP2.

Quote:
Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?


That's undoubtedly one of the things making GP2 so attractive: you're getting a lot of visibility by being in the support program for F1 races.

Quote:
I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2.


I'm not sure. GP2 drivers haven't graduated to F1 very easily these past years. Chilton and Ericsson basically bought their way in, Gutierrez and Nasr are decent drivers but I suspect their funding was equally important if not more.
On the other hand, Red Bull and McLaren seem to think FR3.5 is a good measure for their drivers.

GP2 seems like more of an "end station" - either as an incubator for those that are deemed good enough but without a free seat in F1 (like Vandoorne), or as the end of the line for hopefuls who have budget but aren't in demand by the teams.

Quote:
Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.


Well there was a wait before they made it public... We don't really know when the discussion was taken. Sainz/Verstappen is a special case, I'm pretty sure that if Verstappen hadn't blitzed his rookie car racing season the way he did, there would

Well McLaren were obviously of the opinion that there was more for Vandoorne to learn racing in GP2 against more experienced drivers than leaving him in FR3.5 to race against less experienced drivers.

As for Sainz if FR3.5 is so prestiguous and hard to win then he should really have walked into the STR drive instead of being gazumped by a then 16 year old, i wonder if that would have happened if Sainz had been a rookie GP2 Champion?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
dizlexik wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.

GP2 is for drivers who weren't good enough to get F1 seat earlier.

Like Hamilton, Rosberg, Hulkenberg, Grosjean and Perez in particular?

Edit: Also lets not forget Bianchi

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Tue Feb 17, 2015 1:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mikeyg123 wrote:
Just to compare the the top 6 finishers in each series over the past 5 years:

2014

GP2/Renault 3.5
Jolyon Palmer/Carlos Sainz
Stoffel Vandoorne/Pierre Gasley
Felipe Nasr/Roberto Mehrl
Mitch Evans/Oliver Rowland
Johnny Cecotto/Sergey Sirotkin
Stefano Coletti/Will Stevens

2013

Fabio Leimer/Kevin Magnussen
Sam Bird/Stoffel Vandoorne
James Calado/Antonio Felix Da Costa
Felipe Nasr/Will Stevens
Stefano Coletti/Nico Muller
Marcus Ericcson/Nigel Melker

2012

Davide Valsecchi/Robin Frijns
Luis Razia/Jules Bianchi
Esteban Guitierrez/Sam Bird
Max Chilton/Antonio Felix Da Costa
James Calado/Nick Yelloly
Giedo Van Der Garde/Marco Sorrensn

2011

Romain Grosjean/Robert Wickens
Luca Fillipi/Jean Eric Vergne
Jules Bianchi/Alex Rossi
Charles Pic/Albert Costa
Giedo Van Der Garde/Daniel Ricciardo
Sam Bird/Kevin Korjus

2010

Pastor Maldanado/Mikhail Aleshin
Sergio Perez/Daniel Ricciardo
Jules Bianchi/Esteban Guirrerri
Dani Clos/Stan Pentus
Sam Bird/Alberto Costa
Oliver Turvey/Steffano Coletti

So which years would you say that FR3.5 was stronger?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12378
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Just to compare the the top 6 finishers in each series over the past 5 years:

2014

GP2/Renault 3.5
Jolyon Palmer/Carlos Sainz
Stoffel Vandoorne/Pierre Gasley
Felipe Nasr/Roberto Mehrl
Mitch Evans/Oliver Rowland
Johnny Cecotto/Sergey Sirotkin
Stefano Coletti/Will Stevens

2013

Fabio Leimer/Kevin Magnussen
Sam Bird/Stoffel Vandoorne
James Calado/Antonio Felix Da Costa
Felipe Nasr/Will Stevens
Stefano Coletti/Nico Muller
Marcus Ericcson/Nigel Melker

2012

Davide Valsecchi/Robin Frijns
Luis Razia/Jules Bianchi
Esteban Guitierrez/Sam Bird
Max Chilton/Antonio Felix Da Costa
James Calado/Nick Yelloly
Giedo Van Der Garde/Marco Sorrensn

2011

Romain Grosjean/Robert Wickens
Luca Fillipi/Jean Eric Vergne
Jules Bianchi/Alex Rossi
Charles Pic/Albert Costa
Giedo Van Der Garde/Daniel Ricciardo
Sam Bird/Kevin Korjus

2010

Pastor Maldanado/Mikhail Aleshin
Sergio Perez/Daniel Ricciardo
Jules Bianchi/Esteban Guirrerri
Dani Clos/Stan Pentus
Sam Bird/Alberto Costa
Oliver Turvey/Steffano Coletti

So which years would you say that FR3.5 was stronger?


All of them bar 2010 and I would probably call 2011 a tie.

Don't get me wrong GP2 is a harder championship to win but that is not down to it having better drivers. It is because it gets clogged up with decent drivers who drive in the series for years gaining massive experience. All the champions in the last 5 years had massive experience. The trouble is it throttles young talent. You need to be a pay driver to afford to do it in the first place and the championship places are not indicative of the most talented drivers because the talented youngsters struggle to compete with guys that have been driving round near the back for years and years.

Palmer is nowhere near as good as Vandoorne yet beat him easily for example. GP2 is just not fit for purpose IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 4:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Just to compare the the top 6 finishers in each series over the past 5 years:

2014

GP2/Renault 3.5
Jolyon Palmer/Carlos Sainz
Stoffel Vandoorne/Pierre Gasley
Felipe Nasr/Roberto Mehrl
Mitch Evans/Oliver Rowland
Johnny Cecotto/Sergey Sirotkin
Stefano Coletti/Will Stevens

2013

Fabio Leimer/Kevin Magnussen
Sam Bird/Stoffel Vandoorne
James Calado/Antonio Felix Da Costa
Felipe Nasr/Will Stevens
Stefano Coletti/Nico Muller
Marcus Ericcson/Nigel Melker

2012

Davide Valsecchi/Robin Frijns
Luis Razia/Jules Bianchi
Esteban Guitierrez/Sam Bird
Max Chilton/Antonio Felix Da Costa
James Calado/Nick Yelloly
Giedo Van Der Garde/Marco Sorrensn

2011

Romain Grosjean/Robert Wickens
Luca Fillipi/Jean Eric Vergne
Jules Bianchi/Alex Rossi
Charles Pic/Albert Costa
Giedo Van Der Garde/Daniel Ricciardo
Sam Bird/Kevin Korjus

2010

Pastor Maldanado/Mikhail Aleshin
Sergio Perez/Daniel Ricciardo
Jules Bianchi/Esteban Guirrerri
Dani Clos/Stan Pentus
Sam Bird/Alberto Costa
Oliver Turvey/Steffano Coletti

So which years would you say that FR3.5 was stronger?


All of them bar 2010 and I would probably call 2011 a tie.

Don't get me wrong GP2 is a harder championship to win but that is not down to it having better drivers. It is because it gets clogged up with decent drivers who drive in the series for years gaining massive experience. All the champions in the last 5 years had massive experience. The trouble is it throttles young talent. You need to be a pay driver to afford to do it in the first place and the championship places are not indicative of the most talented drivers because the talented youngsters struggle to compete with guys that have been driving round near the back for years and years.

Palmer is nowhere near as good as Vandoorne yet beat him easily for example. GP2 is just not fit for purpose IMO.

For me if you take it driver against driver than GP2 comes out on top

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
pokerman wrote:
Well McLaren were obviously of the opinion that there was more for Vandoorne to learn racing in GP2 against more experienced drivers than leaving him in FR3.5 to race against less experienced drivers.


Well, he had mastered FR3.5, so not much left to learn. Putting him in GP2 means letting him learn yet another series.
The point was that McLaren put both Magnussen and Vandoorne in FR3.5 and that it was good enough for them to promote Magnussen to a McLaren racing seat.

Quote:
As for Sainz if FR3.5 is so prestiguous and hard to win then he should really have walked into the STR drive instead of being gazumped by a then 16 year old, i wonder if that would have happened if Sainz had been a rookie GP2 Champion?


Pretty much the same, probably. Verstappen being promoted does not reflect badly on FR3.5, it just shows how much they wanted Verstappen for themselves and keep him out of the grasp of Mercedes.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Just to compare the the top 6 finishers in each series over the past 5 years:

2014

GP2/Renault 3.5
Jolyon Palmer/Carlos Sainz
Stoffel Vandoorne/Pierre Gasley
Felipe Nasr/Roberto Mehrl
Mitch Evans/Oliver Rowland
Johnny Cecotto/Sergey Sirotkin
Stefano Coletti/Will Stevens

2013

Fabio Leimer/Kevin Magnussen
Sam Bird/Stoffel Vandoorne
James Calado/Antonio Felix Da Costa
Felipe Nasr/Will Stevens
Stefano Coletti/Nico Muller
Marcus Ericcson/Nigel Melker

2012

Davide Valsecchi/Robin Frijns
Luis Razia/Jules Bianchi
Esteban Guitierrez/Sam Bird
Max Chilton/Antonio Felix Da Costa
James Calado/Nick Yelloly
Giedo Van Der Garde/Marco Sorrensn

2011

Romain Grosjean/Robert Wickens
Luca Fillipi/Jean Eric Vergne
Jules Bianchi/Alex Rossi
Charles Pic/Albert Costa
Giedo Van Der Garde/Daniel Ricciardo
Sam Bird/Kevin Korjus

2010

Pastor Maldanado/Mikhail Aleshin
Sergio Perez/Daniel Ricciardo
Jules Bianchi/Esteban Guirrerri
Dani Clos/Stan Pentus
Sam Bird/Alberto Costa
Oliver Turvey/Steffano Coletti

So which years would you say that FR3.5 was stronger?


All of them bar 2010 and I would probably call 2011 a tie.

Don't get me wrong GP2 is a harder championship to win but that is not down to it having better drivers. It is because it gets clogged up with decent drivers who drive in the series for years gaining massive experience. All the champions in the last 5 years had massive experience. The trouble is it throttles young talent. You need to be a pay driver to afford to do it in the first place and the championship places are not indicative of the most talented drivers because the talented youngsters struggle to compete with guys that have been driving round near the back for years and years.

Palmer is nowhere near as good as Vandoorne yet beat him easily for example. GP2 is just not fit for purpose IMO.

For me if you take it driver against driver than GP2 comes out on top


Why take driver against driver? Just look at the talent in each year. I'd say GP2 in 2010 and 2011, FR3.5 in 2012 and 2013, and a tie in 2014.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm
Posts: 7706
pokerman wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well i wouldn't disagree with the expense side of things but it has to be said that the drivers in GP2 were much stronger in FR3.5


I don't know. Vandoorne sets a good example of that not necessarily having to be the case.

Quote:
I guess if the two series were given equal ranking points then drivers would flock to the cheaper FR3.5 series and GP2 would fold.


Well no. Because essentially, up until now we had a system where drivers could choose freely between GP2 and FR3.5, which means it was pretty much the equivalent of equal ranking points between both series. And GP2 didn't fold even though FR3.5 has always been way cheaper.

I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.

GP2 is for drivers who weren't good enough to get F1 seat earlier.

Like Hamilton, Rosberg, Hulkenberg, Grosjean and Perez in particular?

Edit: Also lets not forget Bianchi

After Hulk they were mostly average drivers. RoGro was F1 reject when he went to GP2.

_________________
eeee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Well McLaren were obviously of the opinion that there was more for Vandoorne to learn racing in GP2 against more experienced drivers than leaving him in FR3.5 to race against less experienced drivers.


Well, he had mastered FR3.5, so not much left to learn. Putting him in GP2 means letting him learn yet another series.
The point was that McLaren put both Magnussen and Vandoorne in FR3.5 and that it was good enough for them to promote Magnussen to a McLaren racing seat.

Quote:
As for Sainz if FR3.5 is so prestiguous and hard to win then he should really have walked into the STR drive instead of being gazumped by a then 16 year old, i wonder if that would have happened if Sainz had been a rookie GP2 Champion?


Pretty much the same, probably. Verstappen being promoted does not reflect badly on FR3.5, it just shows how much they wanted Verstappen for themselves and keep him out of the grasp of Mercedes.

I just want to correct you that Vandoorne put himself into FR3.5, also getting beat in a series is not mastering a series, Hamilton was held back a year in F3 because he did not win it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
Just to compare the the top 6 finishers in each series over the past 5 years:

2014

GP2/Renault 3.5
Jolyon Palmer/Carlos Sainz
Stoffel Vandoorne/Pierre Gasley
Felipe Nasr/Roberto Mehrl
Mitch Evans/Oliver Rowland
Johnny Cecotto/Sergey Sirotkin
Stefano Coletti/Will Stevens

2013

Fabio Leimer/Kevin Magnussen
Sam Bird/Stoffel Vandoorne
James Calado/Antonio Felix Da Costa
Felipe Nasr/Will Stevens
Stefano Coletti/Nico Muller
Marcus Ericcson/Nigel Melker

2012

Davide Valsecchi/Robin Frijns
Luis Razia/Jules Bianchi
Esteban Guitierrez/Sam Bird
Max Chilton/Antonio Felix Da Costa
James Calado/Nick Yelloly
Giedo Van Der Garde/Marco Sorrensn

2011

Romain Grosjean/Robert Wickens
Luca Fillipi/Jean Eric Vergne
Jules Bianchi/Alex Rossi
Charles Pic/Albert Costa
Giedo Van Der Garde/Daniel Ricciardo
Sam Bird/Kevin Korjus

2010

Pastor Maldanado/Mikhail Aleshin
Sergio Perez/Daniel Ricciardo
Jules Bianchi/Esteban Guirrerri
Dani Clos/Stan Pentus
Sam Bird/Alberto Costa
Oliver Turvey/Steffano Coletti

So which years would you say that FR3.5 was stronger?


All of them bar 2010 and I would probably call 2011 a tie.

Don't get me wrong GP2 is a harder championship to win but that is not down to it having better drivers. It is because it gets clogged up with decent drivers who drive in the series for years gaining massive experience. All the champions in the last 5 years had massive experience. The trouble is it throttles young talent. You need to be a pay driver to afford to do it in the first place and the championship places are not indicative of the most talented drivers because the talented youngsters struggle to compete with guys that have been driving round near the back for years and years.

Palmer is nowhere near as good as Vandoorne yet beat him easily for example. GP2 is just not fit for purpose IMO.

For me if you take it driver against driver than GP2 comes out on top


Why take driver against driver? Just look at the talent in each year. I'd say GP2 in 2010 and 2011, FR3.5 in 2012 and 2013, and a tie in 2014.

2013 FR3.5, Will Stevens, Nico Muller, Nigel Melker?

In 2014 the European F3 Champion Marciello could not even make the top 6 in GP2, he actually competed against Sainz in European F3 and the F3 Euroseries in 2012 and beat him both series managing 13 race wins against the 1 race win for Sainz, they both started in single seaters in 2010.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 23901
dizlexik wrote:
pokerman wrote:
dizlexik wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think Vandoorne is exceptional and would have easily won FR3.5 if he had stayed in the category

Fair enough, maybe the attraction of GP2 is it being the support race for F1 so it's easier to attract sponsors even though it is more expensive?

I think GP2 is seen as more of a proving ground for drivers than FR3.5 by F1 teams, hence Vandoorne was moved from FR3.5 to GP2. Also despite Sainz being FR3.5 Champion there didn't seem any rush by Red Bull to give him a F1 drive, he got gazumped by Verstappen, and when Vettel decided to leave Red Bull there was quite a wait before they decided between Sainz and Vergne.

GP2 is for drivers who weren't good enough to get F1 seat earlier.

Like Hamilton, Rosberg, Hulkenberg, Grosjean and Perez in particular?

Edit: Also lets not forget Bianchi

After Hulk they were mostly average drivers. RoGro was F1 reject when he went to GP2.

FR3.5 Champion Magnussen is now a F1 reject, post 2010 we have GP2 drivers Grosjean, Perez and Madonando in F1 as opposed to just Ricciardo from FR3.5, new entries are Nasr from GP2 and Sainz from FR3.5.

Next year in GP2 the pick of the crop will be:-

Vandoorne 2014 GP2 Runner-up, 2013 FR3.5 Runner-up
Marciello 2013 European F3 Champion
Evans 2012 GP3 Champion
Lynn 2014 GP3 Champion
Gasly 2014 FR3.5 Runner-up

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 10784
pokerman wrote:
I just want to correct you that Vandoorne put himself into FR3.5,


He joined the McLaren program well ahead of the 2013 FR3.5 season start. McLaren could have placed him in GP2 just as easily as RBR have placed Gasly and Lynn in GP2 a few weeks ago.

Quote:
also getting beat in a series is not mastering a series


He'd done enough and with Magnussen gone he was going to be just about the strongest driver in the series with a year of experience to boot. He was always going to learn more in a new environment again.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group