Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Simona!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sweaty Teddy
    replied
    Originally posted by rrrr View Post


    Is she a Alfa Romeo test driver in the same way Simona was a Sauber test driver? Sauber's commitment was inexpensive, just a couple of Polo shirts.

    In fairness to everyone, there isn't much test driving allowed in Formula One. It is overwhelmingly simulator work, with the rare Friday session or tire test thrown in for PR purposes.

    Leave a comment:


  • rrrr
    replied
    Originally posted by Sweaty Teddy View Post

    Tatiana is another example of a female driver getting attention more for being female than for being good.

    Is she a Alfa Romeo test driver in the same way Simona was a Sauber test driver? Sauber's commitment was inexpensive, just a couple of Polo shirts.


    Leave a comment:


  • Sweaty Teddy
    replied
    Originally posted by DaveL View Post

    I looked her up. 26 years old, highest finish in 22 F2 races this year was 13th. No championship points, 22nd in the drivers standings.

    Not a lot of promise there.
    Tatiana is another example of a female driver getting attention more for being female than for being good. She was pretty good in Star Mazda back in 2011, but she hasn't done much since.

    As I alluded to earlier in this conversation, the biggest obstacle to a woman someday winning races and championships in IndyCar, Formula One, or any other top level racing series is that there aren't enough girls and young women trying to compete, and the ones that are aren't making the inroads they need to, for whatever reason. Be it talent, funding, the right situation or some combination of the three.

    Leave a comment:


  • DaveL
    replied
    Originally posted by flatlander_48 View Post

    You are forgetting Tatiana Calderone in F2 this year and an Alfa Romeo test driver.
    I looked her up. 26 years old, highest finish in 22 F2 races this year was 13th. No championship points, 22nd in the drivers standings.

    Not a lot of promise there.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spike
    replied
    Originally posted by flatlander_48 View Post

    Sorry, you ask silly questions. See message #90.
    Okay. I've looked at it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spike
    replied
    Good post, Sweaty Teddy. Well said.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sweaty Teddy
    replied
    Originally posted by flatlander_48 View Post

    Functionally there is very little difference between what you said and what the W Series is currently doing. Right now, there were 9 Red Bull Junior drivers (8 after O’Ward was cut loose). Other than Auer in Super Formula, the rest are F3 and lower. The W Series is getting exposure for 22 drivers.

    So, to your thinking, what is the goal of the W Series?
    There is a huge difference. Instead of taking 2-3 of the best women drivers out there and putting them in the best possible equipment against the strongest competition, they're putting those 2-3 best drivers (who are willing to submit to this process) against a field they can scrape together. It exposes the fact that there isn't a particularly deep field of female drivers trying to compete in the top levels of open-wheel racing. The fact that W Series seriously thought that Katherine Legge was considering participating at 39 speaks volumes. The biggest thing the W Series has done is shown that there aren't 20 competitive women racing drivers willing to participate in the W Series.

    Until proven otherwise, my thinking is that the W Series is meant to make this point, while taking up some otherwise excess capacity at Tatuus.

    Leave a comment:


  • flatlander_48
    replied
    Originally posted by Spike View Post

    And that points out the fallacy of your logic.

    Your conclusion is flawed as you cannot logically connect the size of the prize money offered by the series, and the budget needed to run an entry in a higher level series, to the difficulty faced by one particular gender in acquiring funding from potential sponsors.

    Consider the fact that he money received by the winner (Champion) of the Indy Lites series does not provide complete funding for a full season at the next level as it is but a fraction of a full season's budget in the ICS. Likewise, the money awarded to the ICS series champion is but a fraction of a full season's budget in the ICS. Using your logic, shouldn't that "say to you" that it is still hard for men to find proper funding?

    More difficult than what, exactly? More difficult than it was ten years ago? Twenty? More difficult than it is for men today? The lack of specificity (among other things) does not help your argument.



    Sorry, you ask silly questions. See message #90.

    Leave a comment:


  • flatlander_48
    replied
    Originally posted by rrrr View Post

    Your statement implies there is a misogynistic bias across the entire sport and in the companies that sponsor it, conspiring to deny women drivers access to the funding necessary to compete on an equal basis with male drivers.

    Could it be possible the actual reason for that absence of women drivers and lack of sponsorship is because no female has demonstrated the ability to compete and win at the top levels of single seat open wheel and other road course centric racing series?

    Of those women that have competed in IndyCar, Danica Patrick was arguably the best of her gender to do so. Years of kart racing begun at an early age, living in Europe and competing in legitimate junior series, and driving for one of the best teams in IndyCar, she was able to finish in the top ten in points for multiple years, but garnered just one win.

    Perhaps something more than lack of sponsorship is in play.


    I believe that there is a subtle form of sexism going on. Consider how long it took for women to become police officers, fire fighters, fighter pilots, etc.

    SS-DD...

    And for the record, I think Sarah Fisher was better on ovals than Danica. With proper funding her record would have been much better.

    Leave a comment:


  • flatlander_48
    replied
    Originally posted by DaveL View Post

    Finding a driver of either gender with the rare and special talent needed to win at a top level isn't easy. You have to go through a lot of drivers before you find one with the winning talent. Many male drivers come and go, few stick around. Very few women have tried so far, so it's not surprising we haven't found one with winning talent because such talent is rare.

    Sorry to say in the single seaters the wait for a woman with the talent to win is going to have go on a little longer. F3 has Sophia Floerch who, while being strikingly pretty, is also not very fast. I don't know what her future is, but it's not F1.
    You are forgetting Tatiana Calderone in F2 this year and an Alfa Romeo test driver. As far as I know, she is the highest placed female on the Euro ladder.

    Leave a comment:


  • flatlander_48
    replied
    Originally posted by Sweaty Teddy View Post

    If the goal is to actually promote and develop women racers, there are more cost effective ways of going about it. I imagine that for the cost of operating a fleet of race cars for a single-marque series like this the organizers could set up a Red Bull-like driver development program, but exclusively for female drivers. Partner with established teams, invest in the engineering, scout drivers, and place them in no-excuse situations with every opportunity to succeed without the pressures of bringing sponsorship or family money.

    If that were in fact the goal.
    Functionally there is very little difference between what you said and what the W Series is currently doing. Right now, there were 9 Red Bull Junior drivers (8 after O’Ward was cut loose). Other than Auer in Super Formula, the rest are F3 and lower. The W Series is getting exposure for 22 drivers.

    So, to your thinking, what is the goal of the W Series?

    Leave a comment:


  • DaveL
    replied
    Originally posted by rrrr View Post

    Could it be possible the actual reason for that absence of women drivers and lack of sponsorship is because no female has demonstrated the ability to compete and win at the top levels of single seat open wheel and other road course centric racing series?
    Finding a driver of either gender with the rare and special talent needed to win at a top level isn't easy. You have to go through a lot of drivers before you find one with the winning talent. Many male drivers come and go, few stick around. Very few women have tried so far, so it's not surprising we haven't found one with winning talent because such talent is rare.

    Sorry to say in the single seaters the wait for a woman with the talent to win is going to have go on a little longer. F3 has Sophia Floerch who, while being strikingly pretty, is also not very fast. I don't know what her future is, but it's not F1.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sweaty Teddy
    replied
    Originally posted by rrrr View Post

    In what way? Are you suggesting talented female drivers were ignored because they might have objectionable character traits like Patrick did? That's a somewhat sexist observation, and most certainly unverifiable.
    I'm suggesting - and I believe the numbers bear this out - that Danica Patrick did little to nothing to help the cause of women in racing. We're far enough down the road from when she made her debut that if her participation, often in top-level equipment, were to have any influence on anything, we'd be seeing more girls and young women racing. Yet we're not.

    Regardless of one's opinion of Patrick, her average finish in championship points was better than 60% of the field. Car owners tend to ignore character flaws if a driver produces results. Her reputation as a loose cannon and a source of toxicity on the teams that employed her was primarily the invention of internet forum posters. Three members of her team that were friends of mine and interacted with her daily told me she was no more difficult to deal with than several drivers they had worked with, so I discount stories of her intractability.
    Irrelevant to this conversation.

    Leave a comment:


  • rrrr
    replied
    Originally posted by Sweaty Teddy View Post

    I'm not sure I'd use Danica Patrick as much of an example of anything other than how to be Danica Patrick, because I'd argue she did more harm than good to the prospects of those who - or did not - follow her.
    In what way? Are you suggesting talented female drivers were ignored because they might have objectionable character traits like Patrick did? That's a somewhat sexist observation, and most certainly unverifiable.

    Regardless of one's opinion of Patrick, her average finish in championship points was better than 60% of the field. Car owners tend to ignore character flaws if a driver produces results. Her reputation as a loose cannon and a source of toxicity on the teams that employed her was primarily the invention of internet forum posters. Three members of her team that were friends of mine and interacted with her daily told me she was no more difficult to deal with than several drivers they had worked with, so I discount stories of her intractability.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spike
    replied


    Originally posted by flatlander_48 View Post
    Is there a series anywhere that offers the winner complete funding for a full season at the next level? Offhand, I don’t think so.
    And that points out the fallacy of your logic.

    Originally posted by flatlander_48 View Post
    Thee W Series winner gets $500,000. A year in F2 is on the order of $2,000,000 I think. What that says to me is that it is still hard for women to find proper funding.
    Your conclusion is flawed as you cannot logically connect the size of the prize money offered by the series, and the budget needed to run an entry in a higher level series, to the difficulty faced by one particular gender in acquiring funding from potential sponsors.

    Consider the fact that he money received by the winner (Champion) of the Indy Lites series does not provide complete funding for a full season at the next level as it is but a fraction of a full season's budget in the ICS. Likewise, the money awarded to the ICS series champion is but a fraction of a full season's budget in the ICS. Using your logic, shouldn't that "say to you" that it is still hard for men to find proper funding?

    Originally posted by flatlander_48 View Post
    However, the fact remains that it is STILL harder for women to raise sponsorship after all these years.
    More difficult than what, exactly? More difficult than it was ten years ago? Twenty? More difficult than it is for men today? The lack of specificity (among other things) does not help your argument.




    Leave a comment:

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X