F1 Pay Drivers - Right or Wrong?

[zippy_the_cat]

Have you seen his actual results? He might have seriously struggled in 2010 and 2011, but loo[k] at what he achieved in GP2 this year: two race wins, two podiums, a pole position and regular points-scoring finishes - sixteen in twenty-four races. He demonstrated a significant improvement in form this year; where he finished 20th in 2011, he was 4th overall this year. He has also met the minimum three hundred kilometres' worth of testing with a Formula 1 car to qualify for a superlicence.

Maybe he does have a rich father who only owns a racing team so that his son can be a racing driver - but Chilton has certainly done enough this year to justify a seat with some backing.

Given that the two most controversial drivers in F1 this year have been recent GP2 champs Maldonado and Grosjean, I'm not necessarily impressed by a guy coming in with just a 4th-place GP2 finish.

I will admit a bias against Chilton that relates to one of the larger concerns about pay drivers, namely that they take spaces from drivers that are more deserving from a talent standpoint. Max may be personally blameless but his family certainly had a role in damaging Tom Onslow-Cole's career in BTCC. And remember that Max is considered the less talented of the Chilton brothers.

Personality-driven rant complete, I'd observe that the whole F1 pay driver discussion conflates the search for sponsorship, common to motorsport at all levels, with the idea of those of limited or even dubious talent simply buying a ride. Chilton's is the only case in F1 currently where that might even be an issue. But for the rest, it's simply a given that you're either going to be pitching for the team's sponsors (i.e. Vettel with Red Bull and Infiniti) or bringing some of your own to the table (i.e. Alonso with Santander at Ferrari). Certainly in the U.S. that's nothing new. Maybe it's a bit more obvious now than it has been previously in F1, but times are tight and as they say, no bucks, no Buck Rogers.

The only times either form of pay driver becomes objectionable are:

1). If a top talent simply can't get through the door (and no, I don't count Kobayashi, he's had his chance and, a pass on Alonso and a couple of good home-cooking showings at Suzuka aside, hasn't shown he deserves to stay); and ...

2). If someone who does make it through the door is so obviously unqualified as to be unsafe. Remember that one of the worst accidents/fiascos in U.S. racing history was triggered by a pay driver.

Edit: Re Chilton, his two wins and four podiums in GP2 compare most directly to the records of Chandhok and Buemi (each two wins and five podiums). Not exactly the fastest drivers in the paddock, them. The only GP2 guys who made F1 with clearly worse records were Speed, Nakajima, Yamamoto and, yes, Kobayashi. I will give you this, however: Chilton at 21 is still very young and has several years of athletic improvement still ahead of him.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Nevertheless, you're still ignoring a critical element: so long as it costs $400 million a season to be competitive, teams are going to keep needing paying drivers to help make up their budgets.

 

[zippy_the_cat]

Nevertheless, you're still ignoring a critical element: so long as it costs $400 million a season to be competitive, teams are going to keep needing paying drivers to help make up their budgets.

No argument, except with the F1 argot that a driver with sponsorship is "paying." It's a bit quaint to American ears used to hearing drivers in the two main domestic series beginning and ending every sentence with the name of the company that pays the bills for them.

 

[Alan_G]

Well what's a "pay driver" though? If it's simply an aggregate financial bias either in the team's favour, or the driver's favour, then I don't think "pay driver" is a suitable term.

A classic example of "pay driver" in the true sense would be Giovanni Lavaggi, who literally paid for drives around 1995. He had no big sponsorship that I was aware of; just a wealthy man.

But if a driver is arriving to a team with more sponsorship money than the team is paying the driver, then I don't think "pay driver" is an appropriate term.

And as for whether it's right or wrong (driver bring a large amount of financial backing to secure a driver) - F1 is a costly business. It costs teams millions and millions to survive for a season, never mind actually being competitive. So that's just the way it works. If people are looking for the sport to be completely fair, with the best talent always getting a chance - forget about it.

 

[Liquid]

Most 'sponsorship drivers' get paid by their sponsors, not the team.

That's the entire point of the pay driver.

 

[SKIDMARX]

What are your views on pay drivers in F1? Surely F1 is a sport where only the most talented and fastest guys should race? Not the guys who bring a massive sponsorship deal to the team...

This year had 6 pay drivers: Maldonado, Senna, Petrov, Perez, Karthikeyan and Pic.
Out of that six, only Perez has shown that he has more to offer than his sponsorship?

Put it this way, if you were a team owner and 2 drivers come forward but you only had room for 1 of them would you:

A. Hire the driver that has been successful in GP2, GP3 or F3 but there is no chance of big performances in Formula 1 and neither is there a big chance of getting any high paying sponsors.

B. Hire a driver that does (or doesn't) have a well known name, e.g Senna, and will bring money to the team not through great races but from big sponsorship deals and will give the team enough money to develop the car and driver to give them a higher chance to win races.

Another thing to remember is that these 'pay' drivers haven't just arrived in Formula 1 from driving taxi's or something, they have earned there way into the higher ranks of motorsport one way or the other, so I would say Right.

Edit: Also countries like Venezuala will be more than happy to advertise and promote their countries on one of, if not the most well known motosport series in the whole world, especially as some have had pretty bad times recently.

 

[Ardius]

Most 'sponsorship drivers' get paid by their sponsors, not the team.

That's the entire point of the pay driver.

I don't agree, technically Alonso is paid by Santander. But he is not a "pay driver" by any stretch.

As I've said earlier in this thread, the original use and meaning of "pay driver" is to refer to a driver so bad that they are clearly only there thanks to their money. It was originally a derogatory term.

Nowadays people change the definition to fit whatever agenda they have for complaining about a driver. They focus on the "pay" part and not the "driver" part. Just the same as people using the good old "he only won because he had the best car".

If "pay driver" just means someone who is paid by sponsors and not the team, almost every driver is a pay driver...seeing as the team themselves do not bring money, they also rely on money raised from sponsors and investors. Even McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes rely on substantial sponsorship deals to create their F1 budget.

 

[Liquid]

Good points Arduis, I agree with you, I was just trying to get across, as we have already said numerous times in the thread, that there is a difference in class between paydriver Karthikayan and paydriver Ide. A massive one.

But some people, as you say, seem to focus on the 'pay' part more than the 'driver' part. And by extension, if you are at the back, you are therefore a terrible driver who is only there because of money. Is de la Rosa in the class of bad pay drivers? I don't think so.

The sport would be worse off if we had just 8-10 drivers on the grid. Pay drivers always have, and always will be pat of the sport. I refer you all to a previous point I made;

I don't get why people think pay drivers are something new and evil, it's like people think that the sport prior to 2004 was run on pixie dust and unicorn tears. There have always been pay drivers, they're nothing new [...]

Relatively new fans to the sport, I guess.

 

[MonSpaNur]

Real pay drivers are:
Pedro Lamy, Ricardo Rosset, Pedro Diniz (though he did get better later), Alex Yoong, etc.

Pedro Lamy?????
Is better to learn about a sportsman, before attempt to comment about him, i suppose.
Why you do not did that?

http://www.teamdan.com/archive/www2/gerf3/92gerf3.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_International_Formula_3000_season
(with a 1 year old car, against guys with new cars)

http://www.driverdb.com/drivers/pedro-lamy/
(wining rate 26.47%)

 

[Tired Tyres]

Pedro Lamy?????
Is better to learn about a sportsman, before attempt to comment about him, i suppose.
Why you do not did that?

http://www.teamdan.com/archive/www2/gerf3/92gerf3.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_International_Formula_3000_season
(with a 1 year old car, against guys with new cars)

http://www.driverdb.com/drivers/pedro-lamy/
(wining rate 26.47%)

You have fallen into the trap of assuming because someone does well in lesser categories then that means guaranteed success in Formula 1.

It doesn't. Nor does having a middling career in the lower categories preclude you from success in Formula 1.

Only what you do in Formula 1 matters in Formula 1.

http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1995/130/

One whole point.

 

[MonSpaNur]

You have fallen into the trap of assuming because someone does well in lesser categories then that means guaranteed success in Formula 1.

It doesn't. Nor does having a middling career in the lower categories preclude you from success in Formula 1.

Only what you do in Formula 1 matters in Formula 1.

http://www.formula1.com/results/season/1995/130/

One whole point.

What your comment have to do with what i said?
You read it?

I answer to this:

Real pay drivers are:
Pedro Lamy, Ricardo Rosset, Pedro Diniz (though he did get better later), Alex Yoong, etc.

Real paid drivers, not F1 successful drivers.

Lamy did not have the money to pay for a team with a new F3000 car to race in 1993 and somebody thinks that him have the money to pay for F1 in that year.
And one point in a Minardi, never forget.

 

[avens]

Real paid drivers, not F1 successful drivers.

If him or his sponsors pay to get get him into driving for a certain team then it's a pay driver. It has nothing to do with actual results or skills. As it's been said on this thread, lots of top notch drivers were (Schumi and Senna) or are (Alonso) pay drivers.

It's just how motorsports work since it is the most expensive sport to run and to practice, hence why most drivers are sons of wealthy people + a huge network since the moment the activity went pro (the 3 named drivers for example). I don't think we will ever see a truck driver going into f1 once again.

 

[MonSpaNur]

If him or his sponsors pay to get get him into driving for a certain team then it's a pay driver. It has nothing to do with actual results or skills.

As it's been said on this thread, lots of top notch drivers were or are pay drivers.

They are pay drivers, not real pay drivers.

Lamy reach F1 because is talent, not is money, so as a pay driver, not a real pay driver.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Lamy did not have the money to pay for a team with a new F3000 car to race in 1993 and somebody thinks that him have the money to pay for F1 in that year.
And one point in a Minardi, never forget.

Yes but THREE laps down. After two years in a Lotus.

 

[MonSpaNur]

Yes but THREE laps down. After two years in a Lotus.

Two years in a Lotus?
Four races in 1993 and another four in 1994?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Lamy

That`s what happen when people try to talk about what they ignore, but pretending they are talking about something they know...

Lamy can not be included in a list of real pay drivers.

Remember, we are talking about real pay drivers (guys without the skills and results good enough to justify a chance in F1) not guys who paid to start a career in F1.
Or Michael Schumacher, who did worst than Lamy in the feeder series, as a real pay driver and not a pay driver?

 

[Liquid]

Look, there's too much ambiguity here. Here's what I propose;

Pay Driver

Ricardo Rosset, Taki Inoue, Olivier Beretta, Paul Belmondo

Sponsorship Driver

Fernando Alonso, Michael Schumacher, Ayrton Senna, Pastor Maldonado

Let's take note of the differences.

 

[CasNuerburg]

Herr Lamy has won two times the 24h Nürburgring. You can not buy that. That`s talent.👍

Oh, Yes you can buy success: Audi tried for some years now to get their Nürburgring victory.Even outsmarted Porsche (Manthey Team) behind the scenes. But that must have costed HUGE amounts of serious cash...

back to topic:
F1 Racing is a very expensive show. If you want to take part, you first have to get the financial backup.
So, pay drivers are ok.

 

[Pupik]

Two years in a Lotus?
Four races in 1993 and another four in 1994?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedro_Lamy

That`s what happen when people try to talk about what they ignore, but pretending they are talking about something they know...

Lamy can not be included in a list of real pay drivers.

Remember, we are talking about real pay drivers (guys without the skills and results good enough to justify a chance in F1) not guys who paid to start a career in F1.
Or Michael Schumacher, who did worst than Lamy in the feeder series, as a real pay driver and not a pay driver?

Seriously, if you're this worked up about Pedro Lamy, perhaps you need a little more perspective than "well, he comes from the same nation as I do". He scored one point due to attrition of others. While he was far from one of the worst drivers on the grid (1994-96 had some very talent-poor drivers, by comparison), it's fair to say his sponsors helped a lot for securing his drive, but was essentially a mediocre driver, average on his best days.

With that said, don't make ridiculous demands of other members of our site, MonSpaNur, or you're history.