Why it's not just the FIA's bizarre superlicence tinkering undermining the modern path to F1

“The FIA has been refining the single-seater pyramid."

The words of Formula 1 CEO Stefano Domenicali from March 2018 there, in his former capacity as president of the governing body’s Single-seater Commission.

But it was clear then that instead, the junior single-seater scene was being completely redesigned. The pyramid was replaced by a ladder. And with ‘Game of Thrones’ prequel ‘House of the Dragon’ now back on screens, we can reflect that in motorsport’s case, chaos is indeed a ladder.

Those set on the climb to F1 still set off from karting, but the next step these days is a dragon’s wing-span wide base of Formula 4 championships. These quickly squeeze into a much narrower Formula 3 rung (Formula Regional, of which the European championship is worth most in superlicence points terms). FIA Formula 3 is the following step up – on the F1 support bill.

Next comes the Formula 2 category also run by F1 itself and then the big time. Or so the theory goes.

Because following the news that the FIA has altered Appendix L of its International Sporting Code, which in effect means highly-rated Mercedes junior Andrea Kimi Antonelli can make his F1 bow before he turns 18 in August, the junior single seater scene must be viewed differently.

There are two sides to consider. The first argument poses how five years on from the DTM-supporting European Formula 3 championship being merged with GP3, the results of the decision to streamline the junior categories finally stand out starkly.

The streamlining of junior formulae has lessened manufacturer involvement at lower levels

Photo by: Formula Motorsport Ltd

The proliferation of spec categories at a junior level – remember, European F3 had Mercedes and Volkswagen badged engines that involved development and higher downforce aerodynamic loads that tested drivers early – means there are now fewer marques directly assessing potential factory drivers on their way upwards. It’s not unheard of for some juniors to pay to be on the books of F1 teams these days.

Plus, as one F1 team technical director told me this week, with Tatuus and Dallara essentially supplying almost all junior single-seater cars these days, drivers (and young engineers) are missing out on developing the skills that in bygone eras came with adjusting to cars built by varying suppliers.

Say, back in the day, Ralt, March, Lola, Reynard etc. When these marques thrived in motorsport, talented drivers could also negotiate better deals because the constructor wanted to use their success on the climb as advertising to sell more cars. These days, the machines just cost what they do.

To some, Drugovich and Pourchaire not making F1 matters little when drivers of Fernando Alonso’s calibre are keeping seats past 40

The move to widespread spec championships falls neatly under the modern drive to cut costs. A fine aim, although somewhat at odds with motorsport’s place as the elites’ playground – budgets worth a king’s ransom not exactly uncommon.

But the cost reduction drive also hurts young drivers. In the most visible junior categories – F3 and F2 – two-year budgets are now typically required for a driver stepping up the ladder. Only after such a period can they accrue anything like the experience levels of in the past. This boosts drivers with wealthy backers.

And so, the same names stick around at such levels for quite a while – the last two F2 champions (Felipe Drugovich and Theo Pourchaire) being in their respective third seasons in the category when clinching the title.

Stacked against this is a view – shared by some insiders from the joint F2/F3 paddock – on how costs are just of a different magnitude now compared to when there were multiple routes to F1, across previous generations.

Costs have risen significantly since F3 and F2 became the direct routes into F1 seats

Photo by: Formula Motorsport Ltd

The reduction in track time that comes with the essentially FIA-stipulated path is a factor contextualised in the impressive rise of McLaren’s Oscar Piastri – subject of a merciless power struggle for his services worthy of Westeros between his current team and Alpine in 2022.

That Piastri succeeded in clinching back-to-back rookie F3 and F2 titles shows how top talents can still win out and that in the years since, these two championships have just had weaker fields overall, allowing the more experienced to more sedately finish the climb.

To some, Drugovich and Pourchaire not making F1 matters little when drivers of Fernando Alonso’s calibre are keeping seats past 40, when in previous ages such brilliantly fire-spraying behemoths would’ve flown away to pastures new by this stage in their lives.

But if F2-F1 champion progression is the metric to assess the overall health of the current junior single-seater scene – and many would argue that that shouldn’t be the case – then there is a more powerful master pulling the strings in the background murk.

In changing the rules to allow under-18 F1 drivers at its “sole discretion”, the FIA has made a bad move. Not 'Robb Stark insulting the Freys' bad, but then, few strategic choices really are. This is just flawed logic.

Having altered the superlicence points system to its current format in 2015 and adopted the rule that means F1 drivers typically must be 18 (and have completed at least 80% of two full seasons in a single-seater series) in the aftermath of Max Verstappen’s dragon-ride-rapid ascent to F1, the FIA forged the narrow ladder climb.

In 2022, this all meant IndyCar star Colton Herta missed out on an F1 switch with Red Bull’s backing. The FIA was actually right to stick to its guns in that instance. Why have the 40-superlience-points requirement, which Herta lacked, if it’s not going to be enforced?

The FIA wasn't as accommodating in creating an exception when AlphaTauri looked to hire Herta

Photo by: Geoffrey M. Miller / Motorsport Images

But the reverse is true now with the discretionary move to allow 17-year-olds into F1, amid Antonelli’s tale.

In response to Autosport's request for comment on this article, the FIA sent the following response: “At the sole discretion of the FIA, a driver judged to have recently and consistently demonstrated outstanding ability and maturity in single-seater formula car competition may be granted a superlicence at the age of 17 years old. The amendment followed due process and was ratified by Safety Commission and World Motor Sport Council.”

Even so, the governing body has still perplexingly undermined its own rules.

These are rules that Verstappen himself immediately proved to be ill-conceived. They’d been brought in to stop young, inexperienced racers entering F1 and potentially causing havoc by running out of their depth. Verstappen’s story showed how misplaced that fear was and therefore how unnecessary the rules became.

There hasn’t been a glut of drivers making as big a jump up the categories, until Antonelli’s expected case and here it must be acknowledged just how much power F1 teams hold behind this game.

All the chapters of this epic, often unnecessarily exposition-packed muddle, piles pressure on Antonelli

Of the drivers entering full-time grand prix racing since 2021, Piastri aside, these are Zhou Guanyu and Logan Sargeant. Their promotions had far more to do with the off-track requirements of Sauber and Williams respectively. Nyck de Vries arrived amid Red Bull’s ruthless junior programme missteps and was treated so savagely that he must be considered a special case.

Now, it's still unknown exactly how many ladder rungs Antonelli might miss on his climb as the young pretender to Verstappen’s legendary crown. But an F1 promotion for 2025 is now near-certain.

Yet, as his Mercedes benefactor waits to see if the now remote chance of Verstappen being lured from Red Bull finally vanishes, it’s still unclear if Antonelli will be placed at a smaller team to learn, such as Williams a la George Russell. A move straight to the top with Mercedes from the F2 step Verstappen famously skipped to join Russell at the Silver Arrows just seems more likely.

Mercedes boss Toto Wolff had seemingly quelled the idea of Antonelli getting F1 experience in 2024 – possibly in place of Sargeant at Williams, as was rumoured around May’s Miami F1 round. This is what makes the FIA’s recent rule change even more unfathomable.

Antonelli appears set to join Mercedes as Lewis Hamilton's replacement in 2025

Antonelli will make the leap sooner or later. It’s widely expected that so too will his F2 Prema Racing team-mate Ollie Bearman. In his case, Haas team principal Ayao Komatsu is happy to say his F1 FP1 results (of which he’ll extend in Nico Hulkenberg’s VF-24 at Barcelona on Friday) have “more weight” than the results Bearman secures in F2.

These positions surely undermine the junior single-seater ladder overall and the top rungs of it particularly They also show the true scale of the king-making power F1 teams possess, if they are so disposed to use it.

All the chapters of this epic, often unnecessarily exposition-packed muddle, piles pressure on Antonelli.

He’s been impressing his Prema with his ability to shut out the hyperbole about to follow and focus on learning the F2 ropes – around the team’s season-opening struggles with the category’s new car.

Whether he makes his F1 debut before turning 18 or not, climbs in in2024 or 2025, all this attention inevitably fans the flames of expectation. This is why Antonelli’s media appearances are being so tightly controlled this year.

Verstappen shouldered it all brilliantly, even wielding the thrust of his abilities with brutal efficiency when it became just how good he was at the highest level – having shown F1 rule changes to be folly.

A decade later, will Antonelli rise, or will he fall?

Will Antonelli rise or will he fall?

Photo by: Andy Hone / Motorsport Images