Why the F1 super licence system is STUPID 

I don’t think the license itself is dumb. They just need to rethink how many points each category can receive

The system should definitely exist but if a racer wins indycar races 7 times but can't even compete in F1, then the system is clearly not working

This has a super simple solution: Recognize Indy as "equal" to F2 and retroactively fix the allotted points. The system itself works, it just wasn't recognizing Indy properly. If you do that the Heurta has 68 points and all problems are solved.

Mazepin and Latifi were allowed to race so clearly the standards on the grid are not that high

Yeah, don't think we should scrap the system, or set a precedent by granting exemptions, but Indycar should be equal to F2 for points, and so they should retroactively apply them, so Herta would have the required points.

Can we talk about the Finnish driver who was given a temporary 4 race super license after having only competed in 23 races in his entire career before 2001. And that driver became the last driver for Ferrari to win the WDC... Kimi Raikkonen

Everyone brings up how Indycar gets less points than F2, but no one hardly mention how they also get less points than F3. You get the same amount of points for finishing 3rd in F3 as Indycar. And from there, 4th to 10th F3 gets more points. F3!!!! So what happens is, the "solution" for Herta would be to go race at a less competitive series with a top team just to garner some points. Which is silly. Also, there are all kinds of little things that make no sense once you dive down the rabbit whole of the SL points. Like, you can win back to back Super GT series (which a driver did) and have enough points to jump into an F1 car without ever stepping foot in a single seater. Or how you can make your rounds in the F4 series and get enough points in 3 years (which a driver also did) to jump straight to F1.

Just another Max rule. He really left a mark on motorsport.

I think the system makes sense for young drivers working their way up and getting to grips with increasingly powerful/complicated cars. But, established racers in a top-level series who have proven that they can handle the car, race well, and be consistently competitive shouldn't have to jump through such hoops if an F1 team decides to hire them.

The problem with vassuer argument is its idealistic. Nick de Vries and Oscar Piastri won more F2 races than Nikita Mazipan, yet he got a drive without proving he was ready. The superlicense system should definitely stay but indycar (and superformula) should not be getting less points than F2.

Latifi is in and Colton Herta is out, something needs to change. I believe just giving Indy the same point as F2 retroactively would be a good start

I know only of 2 times where a team wanted to sign a guy without the necessary experience and everybody made a fuss about how they are damaging the sport. Kimi Räikkönen and Max Verstappen. Let's just say, when a team is so convinced, it's gonna working.

I don't think its stupid because you are performing at the highest level of motorsport but maybe they should include more categories than others or maybe should make it equal. Its a very competitive sport.

Herta: Gets 7 Indy wins Fred: “We need to avoid drivers with big budgets and no results in the past”

Technically he does have enough points, there is a clause that allows the FIA to accept people with lower points as long as it's over 30 or so. Or something along those lines, The Race did a video on it in much further detail go watch that for more info on it.

Indycar should award same points as F2. It's insulting Indycar drivers otherwise

This coin have two sides, one the one hand we don’t want the grid full of Latifis, Mazepins or worse. But on the other hand we would like to have the possibility for new Max or Kimi to enter F1. Kimi didn’t even have a super license when he entered and had 5 races to prove him self.

The issue the system has now is that it was clearly and blatantly designed to heavily favor, and more importantly, protect, direct F1 feeder series. Anyone that even attempts to state that F2 is remotely as challenging as Indycar is comically kidding themselves. But by making sure the points system favors F2 they ensure that series gets a prestige bump the cars, competition and races it has, absolutely does not deserve. It was done for a reason, which was to keep Indycar in its place. F1 well remembers the 90s when Indycars worldwide expansion, technology and competition levels was starting to give F1 a run for its money; before self-destructive egos within their own series set them back 30 years.

I feel like this should be obvious, Indycar is a direct competitor to F1's expansion in the US.

I think the idea behind super licenses is solid, it just needs tweaking a bit. I also think it should be expanded to the lower categories so that no talent pay drivers can’t just advance up the ladder.

Hey! Don't treat Mr. Super License like that. He's not stupid....kinda, he's just a little misguided >:(

The FIA should change the rules, but they should not make any exemptions. We have all seen what happens when there are rules but they are not followed consequently (2021 season finale)

The system was a kneejerk reaction to having a young, eager driver come into a sport full of adults. Yet within years proved himself worthy of the seat. What's the system protecting against? Teams will only want the best drivers for them and their team. And with several drivers currently nearing retirement age, this system might cause a shortage of drivers in the future, especially if more teams join the grid.

If Mazepin and Latifi got into F1 than Colton Herta should be able to

Considering the system was implemented because of Verstappen, and with it we see drivers like Mazepin, one could argue it's due for an overhaul.

Evidently Mazepin had the required number of points, but look how he did when racing on the circuits. The system needs to be fine-tuned to recognize driver skill.

Only the top few F2 drivers could compete in the top 10-15 in Indycar. Even counting indycar the same as F2 would be a disgrace. If you are a multiple indy race winner or finished in top 10 points you are better than Mazepin or Latifi.

Indycar is considered the top open wheel sport in the US. The fact that they're not even getting the same number points as F2, which would be Indy Lites, for comparison, is wild to me. At least give him a race or two as a fair shake. Allow teams to put up a third entry for development drivers that don't earn points toward a constructor's or driver's championship, but are at least F1 teams. Points are awarded to teams and drivers without the development drivers counting.

The super lisence system is working as intended It continues the tradation of the FIA trying to monopolize the best young driver talent into their perfered feeder series Even If it tells the world and drivers that indy car and or other more competive series are LESSER then F2/F3 with how absurd the points drop off is

I've always thought the Super License was deliberately obtuse.

The only reason I find why F2 give more points than indy is the fact that most of the teams have junior drivers in F2 and wants make them easier get the super licence.

The simplest reason why there must be changes: We all want to see Lord Mahaveer in a F1 car. The legendary driver who achieved the unplanned scenario of getting 12 penalty points twice in a season

I thought I was only the stupid one lol

The bigger question to me is whether AT wants to replace Pierre with another Yuki rather than someone consistent like Felipe Drugovich.

They had an option where you had to drive an F1 car for a certain amount of laps at full speed or something like that... Well bring that back. Even if someone has too much money or not, if he can prove that is as good as or better driver than someone else in the F1 grid then he should have the chance of competing.

Tbh I think Fred’s comments reflect more on the teams. They can choose who drives for them. If Nikita could still get in then the system doesn’t work well at stopping pay drivers.

I'm gonna say it. Indy car gets way less points because it's easier to keep F1 in the European family that way and keep the Americans out. Look at Andretti situation. Wants to pay all the fees like F1 all agreed too, form a team and drivers all American..and suddenly all the Euro F1 teams are like nahh..we changed our minds.

I wonder if Josef Newgarden has ever been approached to go to F1. The guy's been a BEAST. 22 wins in 6 years with championship finishes of 1-5-1-2-2-2(current). He's one of the few people EVER to have triple-digit Super License points (2019 and 2021), and is still sitting on 90 right now. But with how well he's been doing, he's probably quite happy staying in his home country and racing.

I dont think we should be using the "Super License" points system to compare two racing series, but more like an objective way to compare a certain level of "readiness" to race in F1. When it comes to road courses, F1 cars are quite a bit of a jump compared to even F2 or Indycars. A video by driver61 showed an estimate that Indycar would be about 13secs slower than F1 around Spa and only about 3secs faster than F2. And I would think in circuits where there are fewer long straights than Spa, F2 may be faster. But F2 has an advantage in preparing you for F1, because it only races road/street courses and does so at the same tracks as F1. So in that sense I think F2 should be given somewhat higher points than Indycar. Though Indycar performance should be graded higher than F3, because of the significantly higher speeds of Indy. And yes, I am completely discounting the ovals of Indycar. Those are a completely different beast all together, and you cannot compare F1/F2 etc to Indycar on Ovals. If Indy had a "Super License" system for readiness on Ovals, I would put F1 lower than NASCAR. Also, I am not getting into comparing which series has better "talent" of drivers. That is very very difficult to compare. The only thing where I will have an issue with the Super License system is why at higher positions, Indycar is equivalent to F2, but it isnt at lower positions. Again, just to clarify, this is about an objective system of trying to judge readiness. This is not to say whether in "subjective" terms Colton Herta is ready or not for F1. But like Guenther Steiner said, if we have a set of rules we should follow them. And if there is cause for it modify the system as required, but not because of any one person or the other. In that sense I dont think there is any reason to change the system, unless we have more evidence that the system doesnt work outside of Colton Herta.

It’s just a method that proves the FIA are elitists. They want you to go the route they want you to. The current system makes you go up the most expensive (and most profitable for the FIA) route to F1 you can. If you come up from another racing background they want you to fail even if you’re talented enough.

Super Formula is also deserved more points. It's so under rated series

There are only 20 seats in F1 and if you manage to convince one of the 10 teams to hire you, you clearly deserve the drive there. Just look at the driver who caused the SL system to be reformed: Max Verstappen. Back then, he was too young, wouldn't have enough points and I think didn't have his national driver license but he instantly exceeded all expectations and soon will be a two-times Champion.

I feel they should do a test secession where he has to display that he can consistently be under the old 107% rule. If he can that shows he has the experience and skill to be a legitimate F1 driver

Sounds more like the Super License was a way to keep it “Pure” and stop disruptive drivers that are there for merit rather than who knows who.

It's incredibly simple to understand why the points are set out as they are, and it's as simple as *drum roll* The FIA wants F1 drivers coming through the F1 feeder series, and Indycar going through their own US based feeder series. Sure it's unbalanced for Indycar to get less points than F2, but that's what help keep F1 a special category of racing, and doesn't get blown out to be like NASCAR, with 38 drivers. Really not that hard, and completely fair imo.

"keep up standarts on the F1 grid"?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! So Nikita Mazapin, Lance Stroll, Yuki Tsunoda and many more are fine right?

Absolutely disagree. If it changes it will be a detriment to young drivers.

I have yet to hear anyone talk about the affects on the formula feeder series (F2/F3) if you up the super license points for Indycar. Think about it, salaries for and F2 driver are far below their Indycar competitors, if the FIA offers the same points system why would kids go into the F-Feeders series when they can make more else-where with the same result.

Latifi being in F1 is proof this system is horrible.

The indycar does not follow F1 standard as in rules and regulations (idk if they are better or worse) so they should not be given the same points. Also by giving the same points it would mean that the FiA would be making way for other drivers. The move seems more commercial than rather for raw talent. If he's so good he should have no problem in breezing pass F2 in a season. Other drivers have payed the price and entered, he should too. Does the F1 points system need an updated? Yes. Should they make an exception? No.

Herta: **Wins 7 Indycar races** FIA: FIA: "but he might not be a racing driver tho"

Super Formula and Indy Car should get the same point or more than Formula 2. Nice video. Keep up the good work.

Such an easy thing to fix, award the same points for F2 to Indycar finishers. That way drivers have an easier time getting in and F1 can still be super derogatory to IndyCar as a lesser series. Everybody wins!

Meh, I don't think the fact F2 awards more points than Indycar implies that one is regarded as better than the other, it just means that F2 is the propaedeutic category to F1, and as such is considered to be the "canonical" way to get into an F1 seat. The system is far from being stupid, it just should take into consideration the actual achievements of drivers taking part in these competitions. Oh, and by the way, the fact there's no need for tyre management in Indycar is not really something to be "bragging" about...

There's more to being a top racecar driver than performance on the track. F1 and IndyCar put entirely different off-track pressures on the drivers, so ir makes sense to rate them differently on the Super Car license. F2 runs on the same tracks in the same countries as F1. Indycar runs on different tracks (except for 1⭐️ Texas) in only the US and Canada.

But formula 2 is literally made to put you in f1, while Indy car is it’s own racing series. So everything is more similar to F1, to setups to actually racing.

I’ve watched herta race in real life, multiple times. and I’ve even met him. I can say that he could possibly be on the same level as russel, Norris, and on a good day could even challenge verstappen and leclerc, he deserves a seat. This is supposed to be the pinnacle of Motorsport, right?

But why is Colton getting talked about so much instead of one of the other drivers who has more points than him in this years championship?

Why should they have special dispensation? Red Bull knew the rules, which were amended when they signed a driver under the legal age for driving in his home countries.

Well the thing is, it's 40 points no questions asked, or 30 points with a special exemption. Colton missed out on half a season because of Covid, so I think it's reasonable. Worst comes to worst, he does a season of F2 in 2023. Chances are he'd win it by a fair margin.

The top three in Indy Car should be awarded 40.

I agree with the FIA. Indycar is different from F1 in comparison to f2. F2 is very similar to F1 like rules, cars, tracks so the know f1 better. And also because f2 in in house, like if you are a CEO of a multi billion dollar company and you have to choose you heir, your son or a person more deserving who would you choose, most people would choose their son

Just remember, somehow Mazepin got 40 pts. 💀💀💀

Indycar is far superior to F2, and only very so slightly behind F1. Indycar needs almost equal recognition to F1. At minimum Indycar drivers should be allowed to test F1, if they prove they can drive an F1 car with successful test, then licence should be issued. Even if they have an unsuccessful test, they should be awarded double points of F2.

I think the exception should be consistency. Maybe they do not have the race wins, but have they landed on the top 10 consistently? If so then maybe that is a way in. Earn extra points for consistently landing in the top 10 or top 8. Maybe 3 or 4 consecutive top 10 would earn them an extra 6 to 8 points helping their cause.

I thought the system existed prior to Max after all the pay drivers in the 90s that were so bad they made Stroll look like Senna. Max coming in just made them add the "You must be 18" rulle IIRC

Simple solution… fix the system. Award IndyCar more points. BUT don’t grant an exemption for Herta. Besides … the hype he is getting isn’t justified. O’Ward and Palou have been more consistent over the season than Herta has. The media here in America just hypes Herta up so much.

One of the biggest reasons the points system exists is also to dissuade pay drivers by making it impossible for people with no racing experience to just buy a seat on the grid. However, this should be less of a concern now that we're in a new financial era of F1. With a budget cap in place plus more equitable sharing of FOM payouts, there's far less incentive for backmarker teams to accept pay driver money. That's why Haas aren't interested in finding a new one after Mazepin's departure and why Williams aren't looking for one to replace Latifi. That just makes the Super License point system even more untenable. Now that we know teams aren't in a position where they must accept a billionaire's talentless son for a driver or else they go bankrupt, I think the FIA and Formula One can trust teams to sign drivers that they think will give them the best odds of success.

Simple question. If he knew all this, why didn't he race in F2 or F3? Sure, the rules are dated and need updating, but that doesn't mean he gets to break them. He knew them when he chose Indy as his career progression.

The reason Herta doesn't have a superlicense is because his championship results aren't good enough for it. He's own a few Indycar races but hes' never won any important championships and his overall results aren't consistent imo. He never won Indy Lights championship, or Indycar championship, or any of the F3 championships he competed in, he's never competed in F3 or F2. Meanwhile there's Alex Palou who won Indycar championship in 2021 and has superlicense, Nick de Vries won the 2019 F2 championship, Felipe Drugovich is about to win the F2 championship this year. All 3 of them would be more logical choices for a F1 team imo.

Having Indy be the same points as F2 is key here. It needs to happen

The problem with changing the system retrospectively is that drivers have taken decisions about their careers based on the current system, so I am not sure it should change retrospectively. It should change from this season on though.

I completely disagree. Super license is in place for a reason and should be obeyed. They shouldnt make an exception just for the sake of it, and if thats the case, many other drivers could knock on the door demanding an F1 seat

this is one proof that live-streaming and discussing this is actually slightly better than an edited video.. takes less time to produce, put together and put out. You can do it almost ad-hoc with little actual prep and just need talking points... Tommo did it a few days ago.

Makes you think how Nikita Mazispin got a Super License.

I know you have gone 240mph at one of the most prestigious tracks in the world but this is F1. You have to have daddy's money to race.

I looked up "stupid" in the dictionary. The FiA logo was the illustration for it.

Who's this Verstappen guy?? Sounds like who could be championship material

Also you forgot to mention Herta is the youngest race winner in Indycar history and he did it at COTA too a track on the F1 calender.

First things first, Juan Pablo Montoya and Jaqques Villeneue already set precedent that indycar drivers can actually do well in F1, with Max Chilton being the more recent example. We also had Emerson and Christian Fittipaldi going the other way around to victories, and Grosjean recently. So there seems to be two issues here: 1) indycar is not a feeder series and should score higher than those for super licence 2) indycar is not FIA sanctioned, which is a unique characteristic for such a high level series, but also means other standards apply for safety and sporting rules So maybe a portability test for understading what rules change when you move between them? I remember Lando causing an incident in a virtual race in 2020 because he didn't know oval rules for three wide into a corner. Sure there has to be something to learn the other way around as well. And definitely review super licence points attribution for indycar results.

The US motorsports body can request a increase in super license points for Indy. I was on a flight with a FIA official and I asked why we don't see Indy drivers transition to F1 and the super license came up. He said it was on the US and they were not going to make that adjustment on their own.

Imagine you're driving around in an F1 car but you'te not allowed on the streets

Kimi also needed to be granted a super license. He had no real experience in FiA level races up until joining sauber.

What problem did it solve? It was created because of Verstappen and Stroll entering at a young age and they've both done great. Latifi and Mazepin got a license and if the system was in place then, Joylon Palmer would have got one too. In the meantime it costs a lot for promising drivers which creates a hurdle for drivers from poorer backgrounds. It's a moneymaker for the FIA. That's it's main purpose.

Just because 1 driver who seems to be favored by Red Bulls - suddenly the FIA super license point system becomes crap! Well well.... The rule exists for long and I think it should remain in force until the ongoing season ends. After that, make changes or improvements. Personally, to benefit 1 driver and 1 team changing the point system is really unfair for previous contenders. No matter how many Indy races the driver has won - if doesn't fulfils the current criteria - He doesn't. Period. Change the rules next year; and let him be eligible for a contract next year and then whichever team wants him can offer the contract. Till then - we got a lot talent in F2 who are deserving too... and have met the criteria already.

Imagine someone won every motorsport class and not only that also lapped every car twice every race but didn't have enough points bc he simply didn't participate in the classes you need to get superlicence points for.

The super license system should only apply to pay drivers.

What’s even funnier is that NASCAR driver Martin Truex Jr. has enough super license points to be eligible for F1

To be fair, there are plenty of things in F1 that are stupid

So Ilott says no tyre saving required in Indy? Yet tyre management is one of the biggest things in F1. Maybe that's why Indy car isn't rated comparable to F2? Just a thought.

Formula autosport needs this system. Without it, to many people will go to Indy instead of F3 en F2, because that's easier.

There are some comments arguing that Herta should either be passed over and Alpha Tauri should select a different Indy car driver, or Herta should take a year in F2 and then move to F1. I kind of leave it to to AT when it comes to these issues. They have juniors they could pick and there are likely dozens of drives who have the points and would love the AT seat. Red Bull thinks they're all boring. They've watched Herta race, put him in a sim and evaluated him to the best of their abilities and something in all that made them want him more than this crop of F2 drivers or anyone else in Indy car who wants to move to F1. That isn't to say that RB is correct. Lots of drivers have come in to the RB junior team and been horrible disappointments, but it's not as though RB want him in the AT seat for nefarious reasons he's not an oligarch's son paying his was in. RB wants him because they think he'll be more fast and marketable than anyone else they've looked at. I also am a little bothered by the outsized weight of F2 because it's a very expensive series. No one can buy an F2 championship, but a sizable fortune will give you a greater advantage there than it can in Indy car. Herta isn't exactly working class, but he also doesn't have the mountains of familial wealth that someone like Logan Sargent does. If part of the goal of the super license system is to avoid allowing lower quality divers with lots of financial backing taking places that ought to be held by more skilled drivers shouldn't there be space for teams to choose drivers who have done well in relatively high skill low cost series?

F1 should make teams get super license points for race strategies. Ferrari wouldn’t qualify. Ba dum tiss.

I'm still pissed Sébastien Loeb wasn't granted an exemption in 2010 to drive for Toro rosso

Pietro Fittipaldi also got an exception, but back then nobody cared because he was slow in a slow car. Colton Herta would be probably a bigger threat to rival team.

1st Indy is not an FIA championship. nothing more fair for the entity to value the base championships regulated by it. 2nd Marcus Ericsson is one of the championship leaders. When he was in F1 he was a Latiffi level driver. That says a lot about Indy. leave the points as is. 3rd Interesting as I didn't see any revolt movement like this when they denied SL to Pato O'Ward.

Simple solution, just add a rule that gives you the super licence when you won ur 3rd race in either F2 or Indycar.

The idea of keeping standards on the grid disqualifying Herta, when Latifi has struggled mightily in two seasons, Mazepin managed to become a joke to people who don’t even watch Formula 1 and Haas finished the season last year with 0 points (though they’re doing better now), is just stupid. Alfa Romeo can’t manufacture Valterri Bottas into the points, they should be focused on maintaining their standards before criticizing an exemption for a 7-time Indycar race winner.

It's insane to think that there's at least two World Champions who would not have been allowed in F1 under the current rules. Neither Max nor Kimi would have gotten their chance in F1 as young as they did, if ever.

Vasseur bringing up “lack of results” is insulting considering herta has Indycar wins