The current pathway for young drivers aspiring to reach Formula 1 has come under sharp criticism from four-time world champion Max Verstappen, who argues that the FIA’s superlicence points system has created an overly rigid junior category structure. Speaking alongside Kick Sauber rookie Gabriel Bortoleto, the Red Bull Racing driver highlighted how regulatory changes have funnelled all emerging talent through Formula 2, regardless of whether the championship truly serves their development needs. The debate raises fundamental questions about whether the sport’s gatekeeping mechanisms are identifying the best talent or simply rewarding those fortunate enough to secure seats with the strongest teams.
How the superlicence system reshaped junior motorsport
A decade ago, the FIA introduced a superlicence points framework requiring drivers to accumulate 40 points across three seasons before earning eligibility for a Formula 1 race seat. While intended to ensure minimum competency standards, the system assigned significantly fewer points to championships outside the FIA’s direct governance, even when those series offered comparable or superior competition levels.
The consequences proved dramatic. Historic breeding grounds for F1 talent including Formula Renault 3.5 and 2.0, Formula BMW, and Formula Ford either ceased operations or became irrelevant to career progression. The original FIA Formula 3 European Championship, where Verstappen competed in 2014, disappeared shortly after the superlicence system took effect. Young drivers now face a prescribed route through Formula 4, Formula Regional, Formula 3, and Formula 2 with little room for alternative paths.
Verstappen questions whether Formula 2 reveals true potential
The four-time world champion expressed reservations about Formula 2’s ability to accurately showcase driver capabilities. “Formula 2 is a very difficult championship to show all your talent in,” Verstappen told Brazilian media outlet Pelas Pistas. “The really big talents will always end up in the spotlight, but if you need that extra year, Formula 2 is not the right place for it.”
Verstappen pointed to the disappearance of alternative series that once provided varied development opportunities. “Everyone gets pushed towards Formula 3 and Formula 2 nowadays. There’s no Formula Renault 3.5 anymore and… Super Formula is fantastic, but it’s so isolated in Japan, even though it’s a brilliant car,” he explained. The Japanese championship, which features high-downforce machinery and attracts international talent, offers significantly fewer superlicence points despite its technical demands.
Team performance overshadowing driver ability
Bortoleto, who claimed the 2024 Formula 2 title before stepping up to Kick Sauber, supported Verstappen’s assessment by citing examples where results failed to reflect underlying talent. “Kimi [Antonelli] reached Formula 1, [Oliver] Bearman is in Formula 1, and they’re doing well. But if you hired drivers based purely on Formula 2 results, Bearman wouldn’t belong in F1 at all,” the Brazilian observed.
Verstappen immediately agreed: “No, and Kimi neither.” Both Mercedes‘ teenage sensation Andrea Kimi Antonelli and Haas driver Oliver Bearman secured Formula 1 seats despite finishing sixth and twelfth respectively in the 2024 Formula 2 standings whilst racing for Prema, traditionally the championship’s strongest operation. Their promotion underscored how team principals and technical directors evaluate broader performance context rather than raw championship positions.
The discussion highlighted a structural problem within Formula 2, where equipment disparities between teams can mask genuine talent or flatter mediocre drivers. “There have been plenty of drivers who never reached Formula 1 even though they deserved it, but they simply weren’t at an actually good [Formula 2] team,” Bortoleto noted.
The isolated excellence of alternative championships
Verstappen’s reference to Super Formula reflects a broader tension in the current system. The Japanese championship features sophisticated machinery with high downforce levels and powerful engines, providing technical challenges arguably closer to Formula 1 than Formula 2’s spec chassis and engine package. Yet geographic isolation and limited superlicence point allocation mean talented drivers rarely consider it a viable pathway.
Similarly, other regional championships offering high-quality competition remain sidelined. The system’s Eurocentric focus leaves drivers from emerging markets facing additional barriers, as success in local series often fails to generate sufficient superlicence points regardless of the competition standard. This structural bias has concentrated the development pipeline around a narrow set of European-based championships.
What this means for future talent identification
The conversation between Verstappen and Bortoleto arrives as Formula 1 welcomes its largest rookie class in years, with five first-year drivers on the 2025 grid. Their varied paths to the sport—from Antonelli’s accelerated Mercedes programme to Bortoleto’s championship-winning campaign—demonstrate that teams increasingly look beyond simple Formula 2 results when evaluating potential.
However, the fundamental structure remains unchanged. Unless the FIA recalibrates superlicence point allocation to recognise alternative championships or Formula 2 addresses competitive imbalances between teams, the pathway Verstappen critiques will continue channelling all aspiring drivers through the same narrow funnel. The risk remains that exceptional talent may slip through the gaps, unable to showcase their abilities without access to the championship’s top-tier teams.
