Why F1 is no longer ignoring its feeder series

Formula 1's explosion on social media since Liberty Media took over running the championship from Bernie Ecclestone is one clear example of how a more open-minded approach has transformed the experience for fans.

Where once Twitter, Facebook and YouTube were viewed as threats to the F1 business model, now they are embraced - a way of opening up grand prix racing to a new audience and increasing engagement.

But such bigger-picture thinking has not just happened off track, because there has also been a major change taking place at grands prix when it comes to how F1's chiefs view its main support series.

Rather than ignore Formula 3 and Formula 2, seen as an inconvenience on a race weekend, Liberty has encouraged them.

It sees huge benefits from having the two direct F1 feeder series being as strong as possible. This is both in terms of building up the support race package on event weekends and also broadening the appeal for fans following the rising stars.

F2 drivers now feature heavily on F1's broadcasts. They speak to guests in the Paddock Club, and they are given help and encouragement in return. It is clear that Liberty wants them to feel part of the F1 family.

"One of the things we want to do is engage the fans with these drivers at every stage," says Brawn. "So we think there's a great deal of enthusiasm and interest for fans to recognise these drivers as they come through. It's rather like seeing your favourite player in a junior team and seeing them come through. It just adds such a dimension to fan interest.

"And that's why, from the coverage point, we're doing as much as we can to expose these drivers."

"The visibility and the awareness of our categories have been raised absolutely massively over the last two years" Bruno Michel

This season, the single-seater pyramid became more structured for the first time. GP3 - which had previously run in support of F1 - was merged with the DTM-supporting European F3 series to form the FIA Formula 3 Championship, the new top level of F3.

The new name and new car duly delivered a thrilling season of packed grids and great racing.

The name change made things much simpler for fans to understand. But that aspect is not the standout for F3 and F2 CEO Bruno Michel as he reflects on where the feeder series fit in these days.

"In the past, when it was GP2 and GP3, we were running alongside F1, but integration with that world was not existing," he says.

"We were doing our job, and we love bringing drivers to F1, but it was not perceived the same way as it is now. The visibility and the awareness of our categories have [been] raised absolutely massively over the last two years."

Trying to thrust feeder series to a wider audience brings an interesting philosophical debate regarding what qualities a championship needs to be viewed a success. Is the priority about preparing drivers with a purity of competition, or is it more about entertaining fans and driving up audience figures?

In the 1990s, F3 was a great series for rising talent - with good cars, quality fields and lots of testing. But the racing was often pretty boring.

A racing series could not get away with that now if it wanted good coverage. Fans demand entertainment from all levels of sport. Just look at MotoGP - where Moto2 and Moto3 sometimes have more spectacular races than the top category.

This is why F3 and F2 both feature elements that F1 has used to spice up racing - including DRS and degrading tyres. Some purists may not like it, but for both Michel and Brawn the categories have to be entertaining.

Brawn says: "A point you can't underestimate in all of these formulae is that they thrive on the quality of the racing. If the racing is no good [then it's a problem].

"And we see great racing. I know people in F1 try to find time to watch the F2 race because it is great racing. Yes, there are occasional processions but you get that with most categories."

Michel adds: "You mention the tyre degradation, but we know what we want to get for those races: to get them exciting and to get the best drivers winning.

"The two things are really completely related. And we can work with Pirelli, because it's going to be the same for everybody so nobody can complain and say it's unfair because the tyres are doing this or doing that. The tyres are exactly the same.

"One area where I think we have opportunities is with the racing format - safety car restarts and all that. F2 is definitely an easier environment to try to develop and change and then demonstrate to the people in F1" Ross Brawn

"It is the same for the car: we know what we want from Dallara, we know exactly how we want to achieve that. But I am not saying that it works all the time because, after four generations of car that we've done since the inception of GP2, three cars were great for overtaking, and one was not - and we never understood why."

Brawn says having F3 and F2 so integrated at grand prix events provides a great opportunity for F1 to learn and benefit.

The move to 18-inch tyres in F2 next year comes one year before F1 makes the switch: and important lessons will likely be learned from that.

It is hard for F2 to be used as an arena for car experiments - because of the risks of costs getting out of control - but Brawn does sense a chance to trial race format ideas there.

"One area where I think we have opportunities is with the racing format - safety car restarts and all that," he explains. "F2 is definitely an easier environment to try to develop and change and then demonstrate to the people in F1.

"In F1, unfortunately, it's not an autocratic dictatorship. Although I wish it was sometimes, it is a democratic process. So you have to convince the majority that it is the right thing to do.

"So having experience from F2, and being able to demonstrate what has worked in F2, is very helpful."

One issue that is an ever present in motor racing is costs; and F3 and F2 have not escaped from climbing budgets. If they are really going to have much chance of funding their way through the categories, drivers now need to either find a multi-million dollar sponsor, or have the backing of an F1 team.

Both Michel and Brawn are mindful that they have to keep a lid on spending. But, equally, they argue that F2 and F3 cannot be dumbed down if they are going to serve their purpose as proper stepping stones to F1.

Michel says: "Costs are incredibly important. So we always have to balance the fact that we want to have a car that is performing as well as possible and is as close as possible to what we have in F1, and the costs remain as low as possible."

Brawn thinks it is a pipe dream to have an international series of high-level racing cars that can prepare drivers for F1 being run on bargain basement costs.

"One thing we should recognise is that if you are going to do 12 international races with cars which are high performance and safe, there is a cost," he explains. "If you want to have representative F2 cars so that an F2 driver can get into F1, then it needs to perform at an adequate level for him to make that transition."

So while driving down the actual costs may not be easy, what could change things in the longer term is that F1's investment in building up the profiles of F3 and F2 could serve to increase the commercial attraction. That would mean more sponsors, more income for teams and then, potentially, more freedom for them to pick the best drivers rather than those with the most resource.

Factors such as F1's rules forcing teams to give rookie drivers two FP1 outings from 2021 will also help in making sure grand prix squads are paying close attention to the cream of the crop in F2 and F3.

"We want the guys in F1 to have really shown that they can do the job. There are very few forms of sport where money counts. Nobody can buy their way into Man Utd, and at supreme levels of sport, people are there because they have shown capability" Ross Brawn

As Michel says: "We cannot be in a situation where you're a talented driver but are in a situation where you cannot continue your career because you don't have the funding for that.

"We give prize funds to the teams, not to the drivers. We give a prize with Pirelli for the winner of F3 to access into F2. So we're trying to develop this kind of thing. But obviously it is not enough and it's never going to be enough.

"But, on the other end as well, it's not only our job and we have to be quite clear about that. It's also the job of the F1 teams.

"Some of them are doing it perfectly. We have five Ferrari drivers in F2 next year, which is 25% of the grid. Renault has a big academy as well that is providing drivers in F3 and F2. So some teams are doing the job really, really fantastically."

It is F1 teams watching, supporting and promoting drivers from the junior categories that is perhaps the ultimate judge of the job that F3/F2 does.

The two series must be a showcase for the best up-and-coming drivers. They have to prepare drivers to be able to make the step up to F1 and, above all else, be categories where the best talent wins and goes on to show that in grand prix racing.

"We want the guys in F1 to have really shown that they can do the job," says Brawn. "There are very few forms of sport where money counts. Nobody can buy their way into Man Utd, and at supreme levels of sport, people are there because they have shown capability.

"It is fair to say that in the past in F1, there were occasions where there were drivers who were there who shouldn't [have been] there. So, by developing the [super]licence point system that [means] people have to come through F2/F3 or the equivalent series, at a high level, then we are improving the quality of the drivers who are allowed to compete in F1.

"In the end it has to produce great racing, and produce great drivers. And if you look at the recent track record of the drivers that got to F1, they are completely ready."

F2 graduates Charles Leclerc, Alex Albon, Lando Norris and George Russell would certainly agree.