The pursuit of a Formula 1 dream is a path fraught with challenges, not least among them the stringent requirements of the FIA’s superlicence system. For aspiring F1 drivers, accumulating the necessary points is a critical hurdle, and for IndyCar sensation Colton Herta, this system has become a significant talking point. Despite an impressive record in America’s premier open-wheel series, Herta finds himself just shy of the 40 points needed, sparking widespread debate about the fairness and relevance of the current superlicence regulations. Leading the charge in advocating for Herta, and indeed for IndyCar as a whole, is fellow competitor Patricio O’Ward, who believes the FIA profoundly undervalues the talent and competitiveness of the IndyCar series.

The Formula 1 Superlicence Debate: Why IndyCar Talent Like Colton Herta Deserves More Recognition

Colton Herta’s burgeoning career in IndyCar has consistently demonstrated his exceptional talent and potential. With six wins and seven pole positions already under his belt, the 21-year-old American has cemented his status as one of the most exciting prospects in motorsport. Such a record would typically place a driver in prime position for a Formula 1 seat, especially given his strong links to an F1 future through his Andretti team’s rumoured takeover of Sauber, which operates Alfa Romeo’s Grand Prix outfit. However, the intricacies of the FIA’s superlicence points system currently stand as a significant barrier. Herta remains eight points shy of the crucial 40-point threshold required to qualify for Formula 1, a predicament that has ignited a broader discussion about the equitable assessment of global racing championships.

Patricio O’Ward, a formidable rival of Herta’s in IndyCar and himself a driver with F1 aspirations, has voiced strong agreement with the sentiment that IndyCar is undervalued by the FIA. “For sure, I completely agree,” O’Ward stated when asked about the perceived undervaluation. “I think Colton is more than good enough to be able to compete with the best in the world. And I believe there’s many drivers in IndyCar that are able to challenge the best in the world.” O’Ward’s comments highlight a widespread belief within the IndyCar paddock that the series demands a level of skill and competition comparable to, if not exceeding, many categories that receive higher superlicence points.

The Superlicence System: A Closer Look at Point Discrepancies

The FIA’s superlicence system is designed to ensure that only the most capable and experienced drivers reach Formula 1. Points are awarded based on a driver’s finishing position in various international championships over a three-year period. While the intention is to create a fair and standardized pathway, the allocation of points has long been a contentious issue, particularly concerning the discrepancy between European-based feeder series and other global championships like IndyCar. For instance, a championship winner in Formula 2 receives 40 points – enough to instantly qualify for an F1 superlicence. A champion in Formula 3 is awarded 30 points. In stark contrast, the IndyCar champion receives 40 points, but only 30 for second place, 20 for third, and so on. This means a driver needs consistent top-tier results over multiple seasons in IndyCar just to accumulate the same number of points a single championship win in F2 provides.

This disparity is further illustrated by the total points available across entire seasons. A cumulative total of 124 superlicence points are distributed among IndyCar drivers per season, while Formula 3 offers 128 points, and Formula 2 provides a substantial 201 points. This structural imbalance suggests a hierarchical view within the FIA that prioritizes its own feeder series, potentially overlooking the immense talent and rigorous competition present in championships outside of its direct purview. Critics argue that this system inadvertently creates an artificial barrier for drivers from series like IndyCar, regardless of their proven track record and competitive prowess.

IndyCar’s Unrivaled Competitiveness: A Driver’s Perspective

O’Ward passionately argues that IndyCar stands as one of the most challenging championships globally, a sentiment echoed by many in the motorsport community. “I understand Formula 1 is what people see as the highest tier, which it is in terms of technology and everything,” said O’Ward, who himself was set to test a McLaren F1 car at Yas Marina. “But IndyCar, based off talent, is not far off. And it’s probably the same amount of talent than in Formula 1.” This perspective highlights a crucial distinction: while F1 may lead in technological innovation and budget, IndyCar often leads in raw, wheel-to-wheel competition, demanding an incredibly high level of driver skill and adaptability.

The unique nature of IndyCar racing, featuring a diverse calendar of ovals, road courses, and street circuits, alongside a tightly regulated chassis, ensures that driver talent is truly highlighted. Unlike Formula 1, where performance can often be heavily dictated by car superiority and budgetary advantages, IndyCar thrives on closer competition. “It’s full of very capable guys, and very, very competitive, especially how it’s getting to now,” O’Ward continued. “I really think it’s undervalued.” This level playing field means that success in IndyCar is a testament to a driver’s pure ability to extract maximum performance, manage tires, and execute precise racecraft under intense pressure, often with multiple winners throughout a season, underscoring its brutal competitiveness.

O’Ward elaborated on the contrast: “If there is a championship that is arguably the hardest to win in the world, I’d probably go with IndyCar just because it’s so competitive and there’s no series that’s close to it. In Formula 1 you’ve got very many talented drivers, but you don’t have them in all equal cars so they can’t really compete for championships rather than maybe three or four cars that belong to two different teams.” This statement cuts to the heart of the matter, suggesting that while F1 showcases elite talent in elite machinery, IndyCar offers a more democratic test of driver skill, where the driver’s contribution often outweighs the car’s inherent advantage. His proposed solution is straightforward: “So I do believe that IndyCar is very underrated, very undervalued. If I were to make the rules, I’d say at least the top three in the championship deserve 40 points because it is a very, very hard championship to fight in.” This would effectively recognize the immense challenge and achievement of finishing at the sharp end of such a competitive series.

The Perception of American Racing: A Lingering Issue

The perception of American motorsport, particularly IndyCar, within the European-centric world of Formula 1 has been a long-standing point of contention. Two-time IndyCar champion Josef Newgarden previously articulated this sentiment, suggesting that F1 “looks down” on the standard of competition in America. O’Ward echoed this view, expressing disappointment at the narrow focus often placed solely on Formula 1. “It’s a little disappointing to see how people look down to it, and everything is always ‘Formula 1, Formula 1’,” he noted. “Like why does everything have to be just one championship?”

This perspective points to a broader cultural and historical divide in motorsport. While Formula 1 is undeniably the pinnacle of racing in terms of global reach and technological sophistication, it is not the only crucible where elite talent is forged. IndyCar, with its unique blend of circuit types and fiercely close racing, presents a distinct challenge that hones a different, yet equally valuable, set of driving skills. “There’s so many different series in the world that are very interesting and great and I feel like IndyCar is one of them. I feel like it’s very undervalued for what it is and for how much time and effort and just in general how hard it is to to compete there and to be competitive there it’s really, really tough.” This argument underscores the need for a more inclusive and appreciative view of global motorsport excellence, moving beyond a singular, often biased, focus.

The Crucial Case of Colton Herta: A Missed Opportunity?

The immediate and most tangible consequence of this perceived undervaluation is the potential hindrance to Colton Herta’s F1 aspirations. O’Ward expressed profound concern that the superlicence points system could unfairly prevent Herta from seizing a genuine opportunity to race in Formula 1. “I really hope that doesn’t limit Colton’s chance to get into into Formula 1 because I think he’s more than capable of being competitive there,” he stated, emphasizing Herta’s inherent talent.

O’Ward acknowledges that transitioning to F1 would involve a learning curve, particularly concerning tire management, adapting to new tracks, and adjusting to a different driving style. “It’s not like he’s going to go into it and beat everyone – one, because he’s not going to be in a championship-winning car, but secondly it’s going to take time to understand the tyres and the different tracks and the different driving style. Everything will take time.” This realistic assessment further strengthens his argument, as it recognizes the practicalities of an F1 debut while firmly asserting Herta’s fundamental capability. The issue, in O’Ward’s view, is not Herta’s talent but the bureaucratic barrier.

The core of O’Ward’s frustration lies with the system itself, which he deems “a bit odd.” He believes that the limitation should not be the superlicence, especially when he observes that “sadly, there’s a lot more people that have a superlicence that are not up to the level of many guys that don’t have the superlicence.” This poignant observation suggests that the current superlicence system, while well-intentioned, may not always accurately reflect a driver’s true ability to compete at the pinnacle of motorsport. It raises questions about whether the system truly serves its purpose of identifying the best talent, or if it inadvertently favors certain career paths over others, potentially at the expense of diversity and global talent inclusion in Formula 1.

Conclusion: Re-evaluating the Path to F1

The debate surrounding Colton Herta’s superlicence eligibility and the broader valuation of IndyCar by the FIA’s points system is more than just about one driver; it’s about the future accessibility and fairness of Formula 1. Patricio O’Ward’s compelling arguments highlight a significant disconnect between the perceived competitiveness of IndyCar and its recognition within the F1 qualification framework. A system designed to ensure quality may, in its current form, be inadvertently excluding highly capable drivers and hindering F1’s ambition to attract global talent, particularly from a key market like the United States.

For Formula 1 to truly embrace its global appeal and tap into diverse talent pools, a critical re-evaluation of its superlicence points system is warranted. Recognizing the immense skill, dedication, and fierce competition inherent in championships like IndyCar would not only open doors for deserving drivers like Colton Herta but also enrich the Formula 1 grid with a broader spectrum of racing experience and talent. Ultimately, the goal should be to ensure that the path to F1 is genuinely meritocratic, allowing the best drivers from any legitimate top-tier series to showcase their abilities on the world stage, free from artificial and potentially outdated regulatory hurdles.

IndyCar: Related Articles

• IndyCar driver McLaughlin cleared of injury after crashing through barrier at Barber
• Schumacher says his IndyCar feels like ‘an F2 car, just with better tyres’
• IndyCar “way faster than Formula 1” in some corners, says Grosjean
• FIA to award more F1 superlicence points to IndyCar drivers from 2026
• Schumacher to race full-time in IndyCar with RLL in 2026

Browse all IndyCar articles