What is the Racing Steps Foundation?

The Racing Steps Foundation is  a motor sport initiative, founded by successful business man Graham Sharp, to “help talented young British racing drivers realise their dreams…it is for young hopefuls with the ambition, skills and determination to succeed but without the funds to make their way up the ladder”. In practice, the Racing Steps Foundation, under the patronage of Graham Sharp, provides the necessary funding to any driver involved in the programme.

When it launched, the programme initially funded four drivers: karters Jacob Stilp (12) and Jake Dennis (13), karting graduate James Calado (19) and former McLaren Autosport BRDC Award winner, Oliver Turvey.

Oliver Turvey

Oliver Turvey is the most high profile driver currently involved with the programme and has been involved since its inception.

Turvey began his car racing career in 2003 when he contested the Formula Renault UK Winter Series with Mark Burdett Motorsport, finishing 18th.  Following this, he spent three years racing in Formula BMW UK and this saw him finish 7th in 2004, 8th in 2005 and 2nd in 2006. During 2006, he finished 6th in the Formula BMW World Final and also contested two races in the British Formula Three National Class.

After receiving the 2006 McLaren Autosport BRDC Award, Turvey dovetailed a season in Italian Formula Renault and Formula Renault Eurocup during 2007, finishing 9th and 8th respectively.

The Racing Steps Foundation immediately placed Turvey in British Formula Three with Carlin Motorsport. After leading the championship going into the last round, Turvey was to finish 2nd overall following a disappointing weekend at Donington Park and lost the championship to Carlin team mate Jamie Alguersuari. In November 2008, he also finished 8th in the Formula Three Macau Grand Prix.

James Calado

Also involved with the programme since its inception, James Calado made his car racing debut with the Racing Steps Foundation in 2007 after an extensive European karting career.

The Racing Steps Foundation placed Calado immediately in Formula Renault UK with championship winning team Fortec Motorsport. He finished 7th overall in the championship, having taken one win (Snetterton). During the season, he also contested three races in the Formula Renault NEC championship.

Towards the end of 2008, Calado also contested both the Formula Renault UK Winter Series and Formula Renault Portugal Winter Series, winning both.

For 2009, he will continue in the Formula Renault UK championship with Fortec Motorsport.

Jacob Stilp

The first of the two Racing Steps Foundation karters is Jacob Stilp. Despite being just 13 years of age, Stilp has already enjoyed four years of karting, the highlights of which are 3rd place in the 2007 Super 1 Cadet Championship and 3rd in the 2006 British Open Cadet Championship. As well as receiving Race Steps Foundation support, he is also the benefactor of the James Hunter Memorial Fund.

In 2008, the Racing Steps Foundation placed him in the Rotax MiniMax Super 1 National and BRDC Stars of Tomorrow Championships in which he finished 7th.

His 2009 destination is currently unannounced.

Jake Dennis

Jake Dennis (14) is the second Racing Steps Foundation karter and the final member of the 2007-2008 line up. Dennis had completed two notable years of karting prior to his involvement in the programme, which culminated in 5th position in the 2006 Super 1 Cadet championship, 4th position in 2007 whilst in the same year finishing 9th in MSA British Cadet championship.

The Racing Steps Foundation placed Dennis in the Super 1 National KF3 Championship (finishing 5th), BRDC Stars of Tomorrow KF3 championship, which he won.

In 2009, he is to continue racing in UK and European KF3 with Martin Hines’ Zip Young Guns Team.

Wayne Boyd: The one that got away

In October 2008, the Racing Steps Foundation announced that British Formula Ford champion, Wayne Boyd, was to receive a fully funded drive in the 2009 Formula Renault UK championship. However, after competing in the opening two rounds of the Formula Renault UK Winter Series in a Racing Steps Foundation car, it was announced that Boyd and the foundation were to part company.

Boyds management (headed by music impresario Chas Cole, father of British Formula Ford competitor James Cole) decided that they were not yet ready to commit to a season in Formula Renault UK, having received interest from British Formula Three teams. The Racing Steps Foundation would not negotiate on their offer and consequently the two split. Wayne Boyd is still expected to the compete in British Formula Three.

New Racing Steps Foundation addition for 2009: Jack Harvey

Filling the vacancy left by Wayne Boyd, kart racer Jack Harvey is to receive funding during 2009 in the Formula BMW Europe championship with former Formula BMW UK champions Fortec Motorsport. Harvey (15) has enjoyed an elaborate karting career, with highlights including 2008 CIK FIA Asia Pacific KF2 Champion, 2007 CIK FIA European KF3 Champion, 2007 Italian Open Masters Champion (KF3), 2007 Margutti Cup KF3 Champion.

Summary

And so, after its first full year of competition, the Racing Steps Foundation now funds five drivers, three racing cars and two who remain in karts. To this point, I’d estimate that the Racing Steps Foundation has invested somewhere in the region of £1 million during 2008, with what appears to be more than a  further £1 million pledged for 2009.

Related posts:

1. The Racing Steps Foundation… almost.
2. Spreading the wealth: Who’s getting all these scholarships and awards?
3. Introducing the BRDC Superstars initiative

During this spate of announcements, I was wondering: Is it just me, or do many of the same names keep coming up, time after time? I decided to take a look and see what I could find.

I’d like to begin with a disclaimer and to state my objectives. It should be noted, I am, in no way, criticising the recipients of any award, nor their entitlement to them. Similarly, I am not drawing conclusions, merely making observations to what are facts available in the public domain.

I have also only taken into account single-seater drivers (or former single-seater drivers) who have received (or been nominated) for a scholarship or award during 2008. For those recipients, any previous award or scholarship has also been included.

And so, as a chart, it looks like this (below) and is sorted initially by the number of awards received, then alphabetically.

Click to enlarge

Time to extract some facts.

Sam Bird is currently the recipient of the highest number of awards and scholarships, having received six between 2004 and 2008: Formula BMW Scholarship, BRDC Superstar, BRDC Rising Star and two McLaren Autosport BRDC award nominations (2005, 2006 and winning neither time). He is also an MSA British Race Elite member.

Oliver Turvey follows with four honours, having won the McLaren Autosport BRDC Award in 2006. He is also a BRDC Rising Star, a BRDC Superstar and the recipient of the Racing Steps Foundation’s patronage (a fully funded year in British Formula Three with Carlin in 2008).

Youngster and recently crowned British Formula Ford Champion, Wayne Boyd has the support of the BRDC Superstars programme and recently won the patronage of the Racing Steps Foundation for 2009 with a fully funded year in Formula Renault UK. He has also been nominated for the McLaren Autosport BRDC Award this year (and in my opinion is the strongest candidate to win). It’s worth noting that his British Formula Ford campaign was made possible due to the patronage of Boyd’s manager, music impresario Chas Cole (Autosport, p87, 16/10/08).

Currently, all McLaren Autosport BRDC Award nominees (excluding the FPA Shootout) are also members of the BRDC Rising Star and/or Superstar scheme (Boyd, Sims, Christodoulou, Stoneman, Moore).

Furthermore, the only drivers to have received nominations for awards who are not members of either the BRDC Rising Star or Superstar schemes are Aaron Steele (Formula BMW Scholarship, Porsche Carrera Cup GB nominee) and Richard Singleton (Porsche Carrera Cup GB nominee). Every other driver who has received or been nominated for an award is also recognised by the BRDC on one of its two programmes.

You can continue, make further observations for yourself.

I am not concluding anything at all. If these really are the most promising young racing drivers in Britain, then it might make sense for them to share the entirety of the sports honours amongst themselves. And what’s more, if that is the case, it would also make sense for them to be members of the BRDC Rising Star scheme (but note: the BRDC Rising Star programme is invitation only and there is no formal application process).

I think there are many positives to be taken from British motorsport at the moment, especially considering we might be just about to see the first British Formula One World Champion for 12 years. Yet, at the same time, there are some ever deepening problems too. An unnatural amount of young talent is being wasted each year because they simply cannot afford to continue racing. So I guess the question is: are all of these scholarships and awards actually helping the problems they presumably aim to solve or, on the other hand, are they just making it worse?

Related posts:

1. Racing Steps Foundation: 2008 season review
2. 2009 Dunlop Race Academy – Good News for British Motorsport
3. Dunlop Race Academy: Now with Motorsport News

His comments are a question of interpretation. If by young drivers he actually means new drivers, then I agree, that is exactly what the sport needs.

When you think about it, Surtees has actually highlighted two separate problems. First, how does a young driver get to Formula One in the first place? I applaud him for raising the question and to an extent, his contribution is keeping Robbie Kerr in A1 Team Great Britain. I think that I covered the problems associated with this reasonably well previously (Where does all the money go?) and so I wont do so again. However, the second question Surtees has unknowingly raised, and the topic of this article is: how can we make progression to Formula One sustainable for the future? To answer that, let us look at what exactly is the problem.

F1 drivers are around for too long. When the 2007 World Championship begins in Melbourne next month, six drivers will continue long past their 10th season in Formula One. At the same time, the youngest World Champion in history, Fernando Alonso, enters his sixth season and both Jenson Button and Nick Heidfeld are to begin their seventh. What will surely please Surtees is the sight of four debutees: Lewis Hamilton (22), Heikki Kovalinen (26), Robert Kubica (22) and Adrian Sutil (24).

When Fernando Alonso made his F1 debut, he was 20 years old. Jenson Button and Kimi Rƒ¤ikkƒ¶nen were both 21. Sebastian Vettel, who is yet to make his race debut has already become the youngest driver ever to take part in a Grand Prix meeting aged just 19 years and 53 days. When you consider that, it’s hard to conclude that we need more young drivers in Formula One.

The last time Formula One suffered a fatality was the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix. During that weekend, Austrian Roland Ratzenberger and three-times World Champion Aryton Senna were both killed in separate accidents. Since then, almost 13 years have passed and an increased emphasis on driver safety has seen significantly fewer injuries than ever before.

Yet for all its merits, the inadvertent consequence is that Formula One has lost an unpleasant contributor to its driver turnover.

When Michael Schumacher retired he was 38 years old. Mika Hƒ¤kkinen retired when he was 33. Great Britain’s last World Champion, Damon Hill, hung up his overalls at 39. Should David Coulthard retire at the end of 2007, he will have spent 13 of his 37 years racing in Formula One. The point here is: without reason, drivers don’t necessarily need to retire until well into their 30s.

In 2006, Formula One had 11 teams each providing two cars. 12 of the 22 seats were occupied by career drivers, that is, drivers which have had more than two full seasons of racing and who are contractually secure. Other drivers realistically faced little threat but did not satisfy this criteria.

The point is, in my opinion, by introducing more young drivers into Formula One it will in fact reduce the number of opportunities for future talent. If our goal is to ultimately see a greater number of drivers (or talent) reach the pinnacle of the sport we should either be increasing driver turn-over or reducing costs to allow more teams. Otherwise, the two are mutually exclusive.

By increasing the number of drivers of the age of Hamilton, Vettal or even Alonso (in 2001 he was just 19), it is only limiting the number of serious opportunities for new drivers in the future through occupying the limited number of seats for longer.

Correspondingly, by reducing the entry age into Formula One, it is also accelerating the financial prerequisites for national competition. If a driver makes his F1 debut aged 20 or 21, an ideal (and mostly typical) career path suggests at least one year of GP2 (aged 19), probably two years of Formula Three (aged 18 and 17), two years of Formula Renault or similar (aged 17 and 16) and largely, a childhood of karting. Furthermore, encouragement of younger drivers in Formula One, leads to drivers starting earlier and to compete in such highly expensive series at such young ages requires either the support of a generous patron or the benefit of a particularly wealthy upbringing.

In the end, all that happens is that those who needed opportunity, are still without, but instead this time for longer. What we really need is for motor sport to cease its obsession with adolescence and slow down. There is nothing wrong with entering Formula One at 25 or 26. In actual fact, it’s probably better for the sport.

Related posts:

1. In an alternate reality, would we still have Lewis Hamilton?
2. Where does all the money go?
3. The Racing Steps Foundation… almost.

It is first necessary to outline the criteria for the comparisons. Only nations which have scored a World Championship point are eligible. This means wins and podiums can be taken into account but I have explicitly not looked for nations which may have held pole positions or achieved fastest laps yet failed to score any points. This is for practicality’s sake.

I also recognise that the system of awarding points has changed many times over the history of Formula One. Nevertheless, statistics are statistics and considering the majority of points in this era have been scored by just one man (Michael Schumacher, Germany) and that points is just one comparisons, it should even itself out.

So let us get started. This first table shows the total number of World Championship’s won by each nation.

	Nation	World Championships
	Great Britain	11
	Brazil	9
	Germany	7
	Argentina	5
	Austria	4
	Austrailia	4
	France	4
	Finland	3
	Italy	3
	Spain	2
	USA	2
	Canada	1
	New Zealand	1
	South Africa	1

That’s all well and good, but it’s hardly conclusive. Next, we will look at the total number of World Championship points scored by each nation.

	Nation	Total Points
	Great Britain	3818.4
	France	2128.9
	Brazil	2056.5
	Germany	2004
	Italy	1412.5
	Finland	929.5
	Austria	911.5
	USA	640
	Argentina	542.5
	Australia	521
	New Zealand	519.5
	Spain	381
	Canada	335
	Belguim	313
	Columbia	307
	Sweden	294
	Switzerland	277
	South Africa	246
	Mexico	143.2

This provides a little more weight. However, there is the aforementioned problem – over the years the Formula One points system has changed and so it favors drivers in the modern era. Also, points are achieved through consistency and it follows that we look at outright wins.

	Nation	Wins
	Great Britain	186
	Germany	103
	Brazil	90
	France	77
	Austria	41
	Italy	37
	Argentina	36
	Finland	34
	Australia	26
	USA	22
	Canada	17
	Spain	15
	New Zealand	12
	Belguim	11
	South Africa	10
	Sweden	10
	Columbia	7
	Switzerland	7
	Mexico	4

Likewise, a win doesn’t necessarily imply outright speed. The following shows the total number of pole positions.

	Nation	Pole Positions
	Great Britain	168
	Brazil	112
	Germany	77
	France	69
	Austria	46
	Finland	43
	Italy	40
	Argentina	31
	USA	28
	Australia	17
	Canada	15
	Spain	15
	Belguim	14
	Sweden	14
	Columbia	12
	Switzerland	7
	New Zealand	6
	Mexico	3
	South Africa	3

Staying on the subject of outright speed, this shows the total number of fastest laps.

	Nation	Fastest Laps
	Great Britain	170
	Germany	92
	France	80
	Brazil	70
	Austria	48
	Finland	47
	Italy	41
	Argentina	28
	Australia	24
	USA	24
	Switzerland	18
	Canada	17
	Belguim	15
	New Zealand	13
	Columbia	12
	Sweden	9
	Spain	8
	Mexico	5
	South Africa	5

And finally, as a more general measure of success, let us compare the total number of podiums achieved.

	Nation	Podiums
	Great Britain	452
	France	279
	Brazil	249
	Germany	218
	Italy	151
	Austria	115
	Finland	104
	USA	85
	Argentina	80
	New Zealand	71
	Australia	56
	Belguim	40
	Sweden	38
	Spain	37
	Canada	36
	Switzerland	34
	South Africa	33
	Columbia	30
	Mexico	22

Now, to bring some kind of conclusion and amalgamate all of the separate comparisons into one I have weighted each nations position in each of the above tables by awarding a score from 19 to 1 (there are 19 points scoring nations). This, therefore, gives us the final positions.

		Nation
1.		Great Britain
2.		Brazil
3.		Germany
4.		France
5.		Austria
6.		Italy
7.		Argentina
8.		Finland
9.		USA
10.		Australia
11.		Canada
12.		Spain
13.		New Zealand
14.		Belgium
15.		Sweden
16.		Switzerland
17.		Columbia
18.		South Africa
19.		Mexico

So there you have it – Rule Britannia! In each comparison made, statistically, Great Britain has been most successful. It is then followed closely by Brazil, Germany and France. Some nations, such as Germany, are largely being carried by the statistics of one driver (Schumacher). Some, like Argentina, haven’t won a World Championship since 1957 (Fangio) and have only ever had two Grand Prix participants (Fangio and Reutemann). Others, Great Britain, for example, have an even distribution amongst eight world champions and 15 points scoring drivers.

Isn’t it interesting that people always refer to Scandinavians or South Americans as being the most naturally gifted drivers when statistically they are eclipsed by the British? Why is it so often overlooked?

Also worth noting is that no Asian or Middle Eastern nation has ever scored a World Championship point. I anticipate that this will change during the next decade.

And so to conclude, I thought I would preempt the criticisms that I expect. Yes, this isn’t perfect but it does illustrate some interesting points. Motorsport is unfair and especially in Formula One, drivers never have the opportunity to compete in equal equipment. Does that make drawing comparisons irrelevant? Probably not, but it does demonstrate the need for A1GP to control the technology in its own series.

You could also argue that the success of a nation’s motorsport should include construction too. Perhaps, but overall, I would not expect the outcome to be significantly different.

And what about GNP? Isn’t Great Britain’s dominance proportional to the socio-economic opportunities within our country and just another example of the unfortunate economics of motor sport? Again, perhaps. However, the same applies to the motorsport heritage in smaller nations – Brazil or Argentina, for example. Senna, Piquet and Barrichello were all born into large amounts of money.

In some ways I wish the A1GP World Cup of Motorsport was based on Formula One. That way, at least we would have won something.…

If you would like to validate my statistics, feel free. I have provided the script used to generate them here.

Related posts:

1. How is A1GP really doing?
2. Formula Three’s biggest threat
3. How much travelling is in your motorsport season?

Let’s start off by setting the background. For the first time in 18-years, 2005 saw the FIA have a real World Touring Car Championship. Perhaps learning from mistakes made by its predecessors (during 1987 and 1993-1995), nearly every major motor manufacturer pledged its support to the series, underlining its importance to the global automobile industry. Thankfully, after two successful years, the WTCC is healthy and prosperous worldwide. Overall, it is held in incredibly high regard and throughout the motorsport industry it is seen as the second most important circuit-racing championship organised by the FIA (second only to Formula One). What was largely missing, however, was youth.

The best touring car drivers come from single seaters, fact. To support this, you only need to look at the 2006 top-five: Andy Prialux (British Formula Renault, Formula Three), Jƒ¶rg Mƒ¼ller (German Formula Three Champion, Macau Winner), Augusto Farfus (Italian Formula Renault Champion, European Formula 3000 Champion), Yvan Muller (British Formula 2 Champion), Gabriele Tarquini (Formula One). Up until now, the WTCC had no connection to a particular single seater series.

Enter International Formula Master. Beginning this year, it will be a pan-European championship spanning all eight WTCC weekends in Europe. The problem is, that’s already a tightly occupied space.

The Formula Master car uses a carbon Tatuus chassis, Yokohama rubber and a 2-litre 250BHP engine of unannounced origin. It therefore enters in direct competition to both Formula Renault Eurocup and also the Formula Three Euro Series. In order to evaluate how the new Formula Master series weighs up against the two already established series’, let’s start with a brief technical comparison.

Demonstrating a further relationship with the WTCC and its manufacturer’s priorities, Formula Master is, as far as I’m aware, the first single seater series outside of Formula One to explore hybrid technology. Using a combination of regenerative braking and electric motor boost, it could be introduced as early as 2008.

Like Formula Renault, Formula Master uses a carbon fibre Tatuus chassis, made to the latest Formula Three safety regulations. It’s too early to say whether the chassis have any deeper similarities as do Formula Renault and New Zealand’s Toyota Racing Series. The wheelbase is substantially larger than a Formula Renault, so I suspect not.

Engine wise, they’re looking aggressive with more power than both Formula Renault and Formula Three (even if you assume the Mercedes power plant has slightly more than 200BHP) and less weight. Although we don’t know the manufacturer at this point, N.Technology, the series organisers, are best known for developing Alfa Romeo’s WTCC cars. Couple this with Alfa Romeo expressing its desire to introduce its own carbon-friendly technologies into touring cars, it is definitely suggestive. On the other hand, the engine tuner, Heini Mader Racing Components have also previously developed for Metachrome (Renault), BMW, Ford and Honda. All of which are potential suppliers although each seem equally preoccupied with their own programmes.

From photographs you can see that the aerodynamic package is more similar to Formula Three than Formula Renault. Being more aerodynamically efficient, it will almost certainly offer more cornering grip than a Formula Renault and with more power, produce performance closer to Formula Three.

This is, of course, interesting but a car seldom ensures the survival of a series. Look at Formula Superfund. What is more important is the economics of the series and this is where it really stands out.

Now, for another comparison, this time showing the calendar of each championship.

The Formula Renault Eurocup is part of the World Series by Renault tour and therefore visits seven European countries. Similarly, International Formula Master visits eight through every European WTCC round. By contrast, Formula Three Euro Series appears to have an overwhelming Germanic influence and sees the majority of rounds being held on its nation’s circuits. That being said, it also has the busiest schedule with 11 weekends over six different countries.

Just how important is the calendar anyway? If you compare Formula Three Euro Series to Eurocup Formula Renault, the potential demographics of each championship are distinctly different, largely a result of the Euro Series’ German slant. This immediately gives German drivers a commercial advantage and conversely, makes it significantly more difficult for a non-German driver to sell the series. It is therefore positive that the new International Formula Master really is a pan-European series.

Now let’s take a look at the promotional package for each championship.

Having been to the World Series by Renault meeting at Donington Park in 2006, I have to say that the physical promotion was better than anything I’d experienced before. Renault pour millions into the World Series because, after all, it only serves one purpose. Unfortunately though, the Eurocup does not benefit from the substantial European TV coverage that Formula Renault 3.5 (World Series) has and therefore its overall global presence is much lower.

The Formula Three Euro Series championship is covered live in Germany, Finland, Russia and France. According to the Euro Series website they received “more than 75 hours of television time in Germany” with “a cumulative weekend audience of 3.26 million”. Figures outside of Germany are more difficult to come by.

And then we have International Formula Masters trump card: Eurosport. Eurosport will provide live coverage of every single round at a top audience time (1200 on Saturday and 1315 on Sunday) and is guaranteed by a five-year broadcast contract. Eurosport is available to 108 million homes and has more than 23 million daily viewers. Add that to the obligatory magazine summaries which will be syndicated worldwide and its inclusion on an FIA World championship package, I suspect the overall reach for International Formula Master will far surpass both the Formula Three Euro Series and also Eurocup Formula Renault.

Now for the final comparison, cost. As you would imagine, exact figures are impossible to find and typically vary between teams. For Formula Master, I have made estimates based on the official website and some common sense. For the others, I have based them on my knowledge of the UK equivalents.

Refreshingly, Formula Masters has introduced some unique cost cutting guidelines from the offset. These include amortising capital costs over several seasons, limiting one engine change or rebuild each season, allowing just three sets of gear ratios which are not interchangeable and limiting private testing to seven engine hours (monitored by ECU). Obviously, like Formula Renault, a combination of a single engine and chassis manufacturer has its economic benefits. However it is the restrictions and new initiatives that make Formula Master most encouraging.

So let’s get back to the original question. Do we really need another new series? Market saturation is only good if it is temporary and if through it comes long term change. International Formula Master appears to offer Formula Three performance on a Formula Renault budget but with a far greater presence and a much larger pan-European reach. In 2008, it could be the first carbon-friendly single seater series in the world and actively promote hybrid technology, securing its future alongside the WTCC manufacturers. Finally, to attract the young superstars it will also feature a 250,000EUR prize-fund and possible Formula One test for the series champion (think BMW).

In answer to the question, I think we do, if only to bring a much needed change. If I were the Formula Three Euro Series, I’d be more than just a little concerned.

Related posts:

1. The end of Formula BMW in the UK
2. Racing Steps Foundation: 2008 season review
3. Time to talk about me