2019 W Series

[eran0004]

I didn't say women, in general, have less tolerance to G forces though.

Then why did you mention G forces as the reason why women wouldn't be able to compete in F1?

That's the same as saying women can run a 110m hurdles race with men because they can jump and run too.

No. That's the USAF shooting down the argument than women wouldn't be able to cope with the G forces. The study has no bearing what so ever on 110 m hurdles.

It's not about the G forces per se, that's only one of the many factors.

Do elaborate, in what way are G forces a factor and what are the other factors?

Also, the study you mention focus on 1) tolerance to G forces in a passive state and not while racing an F1 car and 2) on regular people not top athletes.

1) How do you propose that G forces are different in an "active state"? And how would it affect women different than men?

2) In what way would differences in G tolerance increase when you look at top athletes?

It doesn't mention the methodology either.

Pages 746 to 748.

F1 drivers are all but passive subjects to G forces and are subject to these forces for 90min, continuously. It's not a taking off, making some loops in the sky and landing situation, while seated on a seat without doing nothing.

No. They are subject to these forces for brief periods of time, in particular during initial braking from high speeds and about halfway through the fastest corners. It's not a continuous 3 to 5G for 90 minutes.

That seems the equivalent of saying women and men can run a 40km marathon together because there's no significant difference between them. Sure, a fraction of women will run faster than most men in the world, but when you put them in direct competition with the fastest of the fastest male runners, they don't stand a chance.

For that to be equivalent you need a study that says that among top athletes, men have significantly better G tolerance than women. All you have now is a study that says that there's no significant difference and from that you draw a hypothesis that perhaps there will be a difference if you look at athletes. It's all guesswork and no data.

Women can (and have) drive F1 cars under the current model and regulations. But, they won't be able to compete for wins IMO, even if the cars would be the same for everyone. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

The keyword there is of course IMO, because it's just speculation.

I don't have a specific study at hand. Just the reality of every other highly demanding sport and a basic knowledge of biological differences between both sexes.

And which of those other highly demanding sports revolve around piloting a machine? Do you have any example that even comes close to motorsport? What biological differences do affect G tolerance?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Well next year we will find out Ocon hasn't dominated Perez in the way Button did has he? On Rosequist he did win an F3 championship which included Charles Leclarc , Giovanazzi ,Stroll & Russell so don't think there is any certainty Ocon is on the top of that list

Considering Stroll won his in his second year, and Felix took (again) four years shows why he didn't progress. It's hard to claim a missed talent if you take that long to win in F3, GP2 perhaps you could take that long and move on. Especially if you have money to bring.

Ocon has been consistently better than Perez this season. The only reason Perez really held a lead over Ocon before Japan was due to the podium finish he had. Button dominated Perez? You mean the same team where Perez's fate of not being retained had been decided long before the season ended and had struggles meshing with the team especially management...? Anyways this really doesn't have much to do with the subject at this point.

 

[twitcher]

I don’t think you read my reply.

i think I did read your reply.

I take it as you’re saying that WS will increase the number of women at the F3 level, thus increasing the likelyhood of a woman making it to F1.

In very basic principle, I can see the logic behind that arguement. My point is, if delve into that idea a little deeper, in my opinion, no F1 team will take a serious look at any of the women in the WS. Any woman that ends up in the WS would already be known by F1 scouts, and would end up in the WS because these scouts looked passed them.

Legge currently runs in IMSA for MSR and has won races in the GTD class and is currently in a very close battle to win the GTD championship. There is also Christina Nielsen who has won two GTD championships and the first woman to win in a major American Sports Car championship. So more to what you're saying they're out there.

Isn’t Ashley Freyberg (with Trent Hidman) also an IMSA champion in the Conti series? I know they’ve at least won a few races, can’t fully remember if they won a title or not.

 

[RHODRIEWILLIAMS]

Considering Stroll won his in his second year, and Felix took (again) four years shows why he didn't progress. It's hard to claim a missed talent if you take that long to win in F3, GP2 perhaps you could take that long and move on. Especially if you have money to bring.

Ocon has been consistently better than Perez this season. The only reason Perez really held a lead over Ocon before Japan was due to the podium finish he had. Button dominated Perez? You mean the same team where Perez's fate of not being retained had been decided long before the season ended and had struggles meshing with the team especially management...? Anyways this really doesn't have much to do with the subject at this point.

When you stay in F3 for a number of years its probably to do with a lack of funds to move on rather than talent Which is hopefully what Formula W will give girls the funding to move up the ladder

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

When you stay in F3 for a number of years its probably to do with a lack of funds to move on rather than talent Which is hopefully what Formula W will give girls the funding to move up the ladder

Not quite considering there are many drivers that move up from F3 to GP2 and do it based on merit and time span of gaining it. I would hope that same action takes place with this series. If a driver take five years in W-Series to win, I'd hope teams further up the ladder take that into account.

Isn’t Ashley Freyberg (with Trent Hidman) also an IMSA champion in the Conti series? I know they’ve at least won a few races, can’t fully remember if they won a title or not.

No clue, IMSA itself gets horrible live coverage from time to time, and Conti is far worse so I haven't been able to follow the series for the past few years.

 

[zzz_pt]

Then why did you mention G forces as the reason why women wouldn't be able to compete in F1?

Because it was the first that came to mind and one that is not so present (not as intensely) in any other sport or motorsport afaik. Maybe Air Bull Air Races but those are more of a fun thing than a serious sport.

No. That's the USAF shooting down the argument than women wouldn't be able to cope with the G forces. The study has no bearing what so ever on 110 m hurdles.

I didn't say women can't cope with G forces. I pointed out the 100 hurdles because you seem to be arguing that, because regular women and men have the same tolerance to G forces in a passive state, somehow, that means the fastest and best women and men driving an F1 car on the limit wouldn't also experience any difference. Women can do everything men can. But if you compare the top athletes of both genders, you'll find differences in every sport.

Of course I'm starting from the idea that driving an F1 car is akin to a top sport in terms of physical work.

Do elaborate, in what way are G forces a factor and what are the other factors?

I don't know for a fact it is a factor. I suspect it is based on everything we know about how male and female bodies endure and perform physical demanding activities. Other factors? Spacial awareness, maybe? On average, men have better spatial awareness than women, which comes in handy when driving an F1 car among other F1 cars at 250km/h average for 90m. Some studies also suggest men have faster reaction times than women and can maintain those reaction times for a longer period of years until they, obviously, start to increase. That's why I think F1 is on a category of its own. Driving the fastest cars on the planet and making split second decisions with your inputs.

1) How do you propose that G forces are different in an "active state"? And how would it affect women different than men?

I don't know. I'm basing my opinion on the fact that, on the limit of athleticism, and on average, men over-perform compared to women. Being under G-forces, under water, under higher or lower temperatures, etc. This is not saying women suck. I'm just leaving the disclaimer here because I'm under the impression you're thinking I'm implying women suck compared to men, when it's not the case.

2) In what way would differences in G tolerance increase when you look at top athletes?

I don't know. But other factors in highly physically demanding activities seem to increase the gap between males and females results. As the top level, the difference is in the details.

Pages 746 to 748.

On my phone I could only see the first 3 pages.

No. They are subject to these forces for brief periods of time, in particular during initial braking from high speeds and about halfway through the fastest corners. It's not a continuous 3 to 5G for 90 minutes.

I didn't say it's continuous... But it's something that happens several per lap, for dozens of laps.

For that to be equivalent you need a study that says that among top athletes, men have significantly better G tolerance than women. All you have now is a study that says that there's no significant difference and from that you draw a hypothesis that perhaps there will be a difference if you look at athletes. It's all guesswork and no data.

I didn't draw my hypothesis from that study but, as I've said, from a basic knowledge of the biological differences between men and women; from the fact that every other highly physically demanding sport separates male and female athletes; and from the fact that I haven't seen a top F1 female driver yet.

We're both guessing. I guess that it's hard for any female F1 driver to compete with male drivers (and again, examapls from karting or dragracing or gt series are not quite the same IMO for the reasons I've given previously). You're guessing that the fact women and men being biologically different wouldn't have any effect on the results of an F1 race where men and women would compete against each other.

We just have different opinions.

The keyword there is of course IMO, because it's just speculation.

I didn't state it as a fact.

And which of those other highly demanding sports revolve around piloting a machine? Do you have any example that even comes close to motorsport? What biological differences do affect G tolerance?

They're all highly physically demanding. Piloting a machine is secondary imo. Driving an F1 car is not the same as playing on a controller nor it's a brain inside a helmet doing all the work, without a body attached.

 

[baldgye]

Because it was the first that came to mind and one that is not so present (not as intensely) in any other sport or motorsport afaik. Maybe Air Bull Air Races but those are more of a fun thing than a serious sport.



I didn't say women can't cope with G forces. I pointed out the 100 hurdles because you seem to be arguing that, because regular women and men have the same tolerance to G forces in a passive state, somehow, that means the fastest and best women and men driving an F1 car on the limit wouldn't also experience any difference. Women can do everything men can. But if you compare the top athletes of both genders, you'll find differences in every sport.

Of course I'm starting from the idea that driving an F1 car is akin to a top sport in terms of physical work.



I don't know for a fact it is a factor. I suspect it is based on everything we know about how male and female bodies endure and perform physical demanding activities. Other factors? Spacial awareness, maybe? On average, men have better spatial awareness than women, which comes in handy when driving an F1 car among other F1 cars at 250km/h average for 90m. Some studies also suggest men have faster reaction times than women and can maintain those reaction times for a longer period of years until they, obviously, start to increase. That's why I think F1 is on a category of its own. Driving the fastest cars on the planet and making split second decisions with your inputs.



I don't know. I'm basing my opinion on the fact that, on the limit of athleticism, and on average, men over-perform compared to women. Being under G-forces, under water, under higher or lower temperatures, etc. This is not saying women suck. I'm just leaving the disclaimer here because I'm under the impression you're thinking I'm implying women suck compared to men, when it's not the case.



I don't know. But other factors in highly physically demanding activities seem to increase the gap between males and females results. As the top level, the difference is in the details.



On my phone I could only see the first 3 pages.



I didn't say it's continuous... But it's something that happens several per lap, for dozens of laps.




I didn't draw my hypothesis from that study but, as I've said, from a basic knowledge of the biological differences between men and women; from the fact that every other highly physically demanding sport separates male and female athletes; and from the fact that I haven't seen a top F1 female driver yet.

We're both guessing. I guess that it's hard for any female F1 driver to compete with male drivers (and again, examapls from karting or dragracing or gt series are not quite the same IMO for the reasons I've given previously). You're guessing that the fact women and men being biologically different wouldn't have any effect on the results of an F1 race where men and women would compete against each other.

We just have different opinions.



I didn't state it as a fact.



They're all highly physically demanding. Piloting a machine is secondary imo. Driving an F1 car is not the same as playing on a controller nor it's a brain inside a helmet doing all the work, without a body attached.

Susie Wolff completed ~50 laps (in one session) in a modern F1 car during a pre-season test in 2015. Which is almost a full race distance and her times weren’t that bad (ie she wasn’t just chilling in 4th gear the whole time).

I’m not sure why you think a woman would physically struggle in a current car if one from a few years ago posed no issue?


Edit: she did in total 86 laps (more than a full race distance) though I’m not sure how many sessions that was spread over. Via

 

[RHODRIEWILLIAMS]

Not quite considering there are many drivers that move up from F3 to GP2 and do it based on merit and time span of gaining it. I would hope that same action takes place with this series. If a driver take five years in W-Series to win, I'd hope teams further up the ladder take that into account.

Who are these drivers that move up without funding I look at the Leclarc vs Giovanzzi situation why were they not team mates in Formula 2 in 2017 Did Prema think Fuoco was better than the 2016 runner up ? Look at the true funding situation McLaren have not payed for Lando Norris to race in F2 this year

 

[twitcher]

Because it was the first that came to mind and one that is not so present (not as intensely) in any other sport or motorsport afaik. Maybe Air Bull Air Races but those are more of a fun thing than a serious sport.



I didn't say women can't cope with G forces. I pointed out the 100 hurdles because you seem to be arguing that, because regular women and men have the same tolerance to G forces in a passive state, somehow, that means the fastest and best women and men driving an F1 car on the limit wouldn't also experience any difference. Women can do everything men can. But if you compare the top athletes of both genders, you'll find differences in every sport.

Of course I'm starting from the idea that driving an F1 car is akin to a top sport in terms of physical work.



I don't know for a fact it is a factor. I suspect it is based on everything we know about how male and female bodies endure and perform physical demanding activities. Other factors? Spacial awareness, maybe? On average, men have better spatial awareness than women, which comes in handy when driving an F1 car among other F1 cars at 250km/h average for 90m. Some studies also suggest men have faster reaction times than women and can maintain those reaction times for a longer period of years until they, obviously, start to increase. That's why I think F1 is on a category of its own. Driving the fastest cars on the planet and making split second decisions with your inputs.



I don't know. I'm basing my opinion on the fact that, on the limit of athleticism, and on average, men over-perform compared to women. Being under G-forces, under water, under higher or lower temperatures, etc. This is not saying women suck. I'm just leaving the disclaimer here because I'm under the impression you're thinking I'm implying women suck compared to men, when it's not the case.



I don't know. But other factors in highly physically demanding activities seem to increase the gap between males and females results. As the top level, the difference is in the details.



On my phone I could only see the first 3 pages.



I didn't say it's continuous... But it's something that happens several per lap, for dozens of laps.




I didn't draw my hypothesis from that study but, as I've said, from a basic knowledge of the biological differences between men and women; from the fact that every other highly physically demanding sport separates male and female athletes; and from the fact that I haven't seen a top F1 female driver yet.

We're both guessing. I guess that it's hard for any female F1 driver to compete with male drivers (and again, examapls from karting or dragracing or gt series are not quite the same IMO for the reasons I've given previously). You're guessing that the fact women and men being biologically different wouldn't have any effect on the results of an F1 race where men and women would compete against each other.

We just have different opinions.



I didn't state it as a fact.



They're all highly physically demanding. Piloting a machine is secondary imo. Driving an F1 car is not the same as playing on a controller nor it's a brain inside a helmet doing all the work, without a body attached.

When we talk about women driving F1 cars, the notion of female fighter pilots often gets brought up to demonstrate that females can operate a machine under high stress conditions, make split second decisions, and can handle the sustained G-forces.

Now, if I’m reading you correctly, your saying that F1 and a fighter jet are not the same, as the peak forces in F1 are higher, and that flying a fighter jet is basically just “sitting there”.

Unless you actually have first hand experience sitting in a fighter during combat maneuvers, you really don’t know what you’re talking about. I never got a ride in a fighter, but have had a ride in a Tutor jet trainer (was with the Canadian Snowbirds during a practice run), and I had friends who got rides in the back seat of CF-18s. I’ve also never driven an F1 car, so don’t have first hand experience of the breaking forces, but no one is passing out from F1 braking forces.

While the peak G forces in F1 are high, they’re not insanely higher than that experienced in a fighter jet. The sustain corner forces are no where near the sustained forces in a fighter while completing a high banked turned or pulling out of a dive.

How long does a corner in F1 last? A few seconds tops? A single dog fight can last 20+ minutes. That’s 20 minutes of non-stop, make-you-pass-our-if-you-don’t-breath-and-flex-properly, body crushing G-forces....all while someone is actively trying to kill you.

So women can handle that, but they can’t handle a 90 minute stint in an F1 car? C’mon.


Here’s a funny aside. At the Bathurst 1000, de Silvestro completed her triple stint no problem. Reynolds could not withstand the physical exertion, his body completely collapsed, and it cost him the win.

Edit: @Famine, forgot to mention yesterday...thanks for correcting me on the proper title of the series, good to see you’re right on the ball with making sure people are 100% accurate. Question though, do you plan on leaving the thread title as is, or no? Must’ve missed it when you went straight for my post eh

 

[zzz_pt]

Susie Wolff completed ~50 laps (in one session) in a modern F1 car during a pre-season test in 2015. Which is almost a full race distance and her times weren’t that bad (ie she wasn’t just chilling in 4th gear the whole time).

I’m not sure why you think a woman would physically struggle in a current car if one from a few years ago posed no issue?


Edit: she did in total 86 laps (more than a full race distance) though I’m not sure how many sessions that was spread over. Via

That's not a race though, is it?

When we talk about women driving F1 cars, the notion of female fighter pilots often gets brought up to demonstrate that females can operate a machine under high stress conditions, make split second decisions, and can handle the sustained G-forces.

Now, if I’m reading you correctly, your saying that F1 and a fighter jet are not the same, as the peak forces in F1 are higher, and that flying a fighter jet is basically just “sitting there”.

What? Where have your read that? Do you think I'm that stupid?

Click the pdf of the study and read the first pages. Men and women in the air force were not piloting most of the times, but seating in the back, as the majority of them had other responsibilities, like being doctors, nurses, mechanics and other types of support roles. I'm not saying pilots are just seating there... You're putting words in my posts that I haven't written.

Air Bull Air Races record higher G forces than F1. But the races are very short (1 min?) and it's not seen as a top competitive sport, so it's hard to compare.

How long does a corner in F1 last? A few seconds tops? A single dog fight can last 20+ minutes. That’s 20 minutes of non-stop, make-you-pass-our-if-you-don’t-breath-and-flex-properly, body crushing G-forces....all while someone is actively trying to kill you.

When was that a sport?

So women can handle that, but they can’t handle a 90 minute stint in an F1 car? C’mon.

I refer back to my 110m hurdles analogy. The fact that women can handle it doesn't mean the most well prepared women can handle it as well as the most well prepared men.

By the same token, if women can run a 110m hurdles race, that doesn't mean they'll be able to compete directly with the fastest male runners. Is that point that hard to get?

Here’s a funny aside. At the Bathurst 1000, de Silvestro completed her triple stint no problem. Reynolds could not withstand the physical exertion, his body completely collapsed, and it cost him the win.

Anecdotal evidence? Great. Compare their career results. Races, podiums, wins, points, etc.

And in my original post I was clear to differentiate between F1 and other motor sports, but if you brought up those names in that particular category, you could as well bring their respective accomplishments.

 

[Famine]

Edit: @Famine, forgot to mention yesterday...thanks for correcting me on the proper title of the series, good to see you’re right on the ball with making sure people are 100% accurate. Question though, do you plan on leaving the thread title as is, or no? Must’ve missed it when you went straight for my post eh

If someone else has started the thread that the blog post feeds into, I tend to leave the title alone. It's their thread.

 

[baldgye]

That's not a race though, is it?

 

[Spurgy 777]

Aren’t the effects of G forces in fighter jets and F1 cars fairly different? As far as I understand the forces on a pilot are mostly vertical relative to the pilot because of how planes turn. This pushes you down into your seat and can make it difficult for your blood to be pumped to your head which is why you could pass out. In a car the forces are horizontal pushing you to the side of the car and putting heavy strain on your muscles to keep your head, legs and arms straight. I’ll admit I’m no expert on physical strains of pilots and F1 drivers, but from my understanding of the forces you experience comparing the two is nonsensical.

 

[twitcher]

If someone else has started the thread that the blog post feeds into, I tend to leave the title alone. It's their thread.

Ok, I just find it curious that you would go out of your way to correct my usage of “Formula Woman,” but you don’t seem to want to correct the official thread title. So the posts in a thread must be 100% accurate, but the title is meh, whatever? Ok then I guess.

 

[Famine]

Ok, I just find it curious that you would go out of your way to correct my usage of “Formula Woman,” but you don’t seem to want to correct the official thread title. So the posts in a thread must be 100% accurate, but the title is meh, whatever? Ok then I guess.

There is no official thread, nor a requirement for all posts within it to be 100%. I was giving you information that you didn't seem to be aware of, because you kept conflating the two rather different series.

But hey, if you aren't receptive to new, correct information, I'll keep that in mind.

 

[twitcher]

There is no official thread, nor a requirement for all posts within it to be 100%. I was giving you information that you didn't seem to be aware of, because you kept conflating the two rather different series.

But hey, if you aren't receptive to new, correct information, I'll keep that in mind.

I was just going off the thread title According to the thread title, this entire thread is about the New Formula Woman, so that’s the term I used.

If the thread title would have said W-Series, I wouldn’t have made the mistake. I appreciate you giving me the correct info (which I was receptive to, hence why I changed the terms I was using after you mentioned it...or did you not notice that I received your input?), I just find it odd and interesting that you would take the time to correct me personally, but don’t care to point out a correction to the thread title that could perhaps prevent others from making the same mistake I did.

 

[zzz_pt]

Don't you think it's relevant? Or is a practice session the same as a race? Lots of male and female athletes train together. Does that mean they achieve the same results when they go on to the Olympics?

Aren’t the effects of G forces in fighter jets and F1 cars fairly different? As far as I understand the forces on a pilot are mostly vertical relative to the pilot because of how planes turn. This pushes you down into your seat and can make it difficult for your blood to be pumped to your head which is why you could pass out. In a car the forces are horizontal pushing you to the side of the car and putting heavy strain on your muscles to keep your head, legs and arms straight. I’ll admit I’m no expert on physical strains of pilots and F1 drivers, but from my understanding of the forces you experience comparing the two is nonsensical.

Yeah, I also have the same impression. I didn't bring that comparison up though. Better yet, the comparison brought up was between G-forces experienced by an F1 driver and air force staff who're either seated on a plane (who experienced high G forces), or trainer pilots (who experience moderate G forces). Not jet pilots.

"In this study, 102 USAF women, either students obtaining professional training at USAFSAM or military personnel permanently assigned to Brooks Air Force Base, underwent +G,-tolerance testing on the USAFSAM centrifuge. The majority were student flight nurses; medical technicians, student flight surgeons, and miscellaneous others comprised the remainder."

Spoiler: Not particularly important but any way

There's also this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11506236?dopt=Abstract

RESULTS:
There was no gender difference in 4.5-7 SACM endurance. Male 5-9 SACM endurance exceeded that of females in the unmodified CSU-13B/P (p < 0.05), but gender parity was achieved when females wore the AL Mod. Fit modifications of developmental G-protective equipment were not required, but smaller sizes of the standard CSU-13B/P and a developmental anti-G suit were indicated and developed.

CONCLUSION:
In properly fitted anti-G suits, gender parity in SACM endurance is achievable; however, full accommodation of female aircrew in the high-G environment will require the AL Mod and/or smaller sized anti-G suits.

 

[Famine]

I just find it odd and interesting that you would take the time to correct me personally, but don’t care to point out a correction to the thread title that could perhaps prevent others from making the same mistake I did.

The only mention of Formula Woman in this thread was your post, and subsequently only your posts and mine. As you were the only person that mentioned it, and I was responding to your post, I let you know that it's not the same thing.

As before, the thread title is the title given to it by the thread creator. As before I tend not to do anything with those (even the ones that have grammatical errors) unless there is an AUP issue in play. It's of no particular relevance to people visiting the thread from the front page.

 

[twitcher]

Don't you think it's relevant? Or is a practice session the same as a race? Lots of male and female athletes train together. Does that mean they achieve the same results when they go on to the Olympics?



Yeah, I also have the same impression. I didn't bring that comparison up though. Better yet, the comparison brought up was between G-forces experienced by an F1 driver and air force staff who're either seated on a plane (who experienced high G forces), or trainer pilots (who experience moderate G forces). Not jet pilots.

"In this study, 102 USAF women, either students obtaining professional training at USAFSAM or military personnel permanently assigned to Brooks Air Force Base, underwent +G,-tolerance testing on the USAFSAM centrifuge. The majority were student flight nurses; medical technicians, student flight surgeons, and miscellaneous others comprised the remainder."

Spoiler: Not particularly important but any way

There's also this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11506236?dopt=Abstract

RESULTS:
There was no gender difference in 4.5-7 SACM endurance. Male 5-9 SACM endurance exceeded that of females in the unmodified CSU-13B/P (p < 0.05), but gender parity was achieved when females wore the AL Mod. Fit modifications of developmental G-protective equipment were not required, but smaller sizes of the standard CSU-13B/P and a developmental anti-G suit were indicated and developed.

CONCLUSION:
In properly fitted anti-G suits, gender parity in SACM endurance is achievable; however, full accommodation of female aircrew in the high-G environment will require the AL Mod and/or smaller sized anti-G suits.

So their conclussion was that smaller people need smaller clothes in order for them to fit properly and do the required task? Bloody brilliant

Anyways, let’s get back in topic and continue discussing the New Formula Woman.

 

[zzz_pt]

So their conclusion was that smaller people need smaller clothes in order for them to fit properly and do the required task? Bloody brilliant

I have no idea what the "AL Modification" means but it's basically the same results as the pdf posted before. Little to no difference. With high G forces men tend to show a bit more tolerance but women showed better recovery after the fact. Of course this is all relative to common people. Healthy people, yes, but not athletes, which was my main point.

 

[DR_MOJO91]

So their conclussion was that smaller people need smaller clothes in order for them to fit properly and do the required task? Bloody brilliant

Dont fall for it mate. Don't fall for the bait avoid at all cost. O

 

[twitcher]

The only mention of Formula Woman in this thread was your post, and subsequently only your posts and mine. As you were the only person that mentioned it, and I was responding to your post, I let you know that it's not the same thing.

As before, the thread title is the title given to it by the thread creator. As before I tend not to do anything with those (even the ones that have grammatical errors) unless there is an AUP issue in play. It's of no particular relevance to people visiting the thread from the front page.

@Famine, I’ve edit my post so as to convey the same point without changing the wording of the quote.

Correction, the only mention of Formula Woman was my posts, and THE THREAD TITLE. You responded to the thread several times before responding to me, but only chose to correct my mistake, dispite having posted in a thread with the exact same mistake in the thread title...a mistake you have claimed to not care about. I’m just curious why you would care to point out my mistake exclusively, and why you don’t care to correct the thread title. Like I’ve said, I just find it an interesting way to go about doing your job as a mod.

Furthermore, you and I were not conversing. You engaged in conversation with me specifically to point out my error. That’s fine in and of itself, but if pointing out errors is what you’re trying to do, why not the error in the thread title?

The thread title is relevant to those who access the page from the motorsport forum, such as myself. Why that seems to not matter to you is a mystery to me. Like I said, if that’s the way you want to run your site, fine...I just find it, interesting

Also, you kind of messed up your edit job of the post above mine.

Dont fall for it mate. Don't fall for the bait avoid at all cost. O

zzz’s bait, or Famine’s bait? I don’t think either is baiting me...if they are, it’s a very poor attempt, and I can’t imagine what they would be trying to bait me into. Famine’s just letting me know he’s checking my posts, he’s got my back

 

[baldgye]

Don't you think it's relevant? Or is a practice session the same as a race? Lots of male and female athletes train together. Does that mean they achieve the same results when they go on to the Olympics?

It’s werid that F1 test sessions have literally nothing to do with driving an F1 car around a track.

I guess you’re inane comparisons of Olympic sports and motor-racing still hold up. My bad.

 

[zzz_pt]

It’s werid that F1 test sessions have literally nothing to do with driving an F1 car around a track.

I guess you’re inane comparisons of Olympic sports and motor-racing still hold up. My bad.

I'm not the one arguing that there's no difference between how a male body handles a 90m F1 race vs a female body handles the same race at the top level.

If you want to put women driving in F1, be my guest. I don't mind. I just think we won't see one being champion or fighting for podiums, which is the main reason to be in the sport in the first place, giving all the money poured into having a seat.

I'd prefer to see women competing against each other in W F1 and actually winning and accomplishing something than seeing them in practice sessions in the current F1 model.

My comparison is only inane if you have the opposite opinion to my own, which I understand, but don't agree.

 

[baldgye]

I'm not the one arguing that there's no difference between how a male body handles a 90m F1 race vs a female body handles the same race at the top level.

Neither am I?
I’m saying, using the available evidence, that women can compete with men (physically) in a modern F1 car.
I’m not suggesting women and men are physically identical, because that would be as absurd as trying to compare the Olympic track sports to F1...

 

[zzz_pt]

Neither am I?
I’m saying, using the available evidence, that women can compete with men (physically) in a modern F1 car.
I’m not suggesting women and men are physically identical, because that would be as absurd as trying to compare the Olympic track sports to F1...

What evidence do you have that women can accomplish a good or great career in F1 as it is? A practice session and poor results from former female drivers of the past? That's just as absurd imo.

Women can compete with men in every sport. That doesn't mean they can be competitive. IMO F1 is as physically demanding as other Olympic sport (well, maybe not curling and equestrian dressage). That's why I think it would be pretty much impossible for a women to be World Champion competing against men.

Women can make just as good or better mechanics, race directors, strategists, etc. But a racing driver is a top athlete and, at that level, physical differences between men and women will manifest in results.

 

[baldgye]

What evidence do you have that women can accomplish a good or great career in F1 as it is?

When did I say they could?

 

[zzz_pt]

When did I say they could?

So, do you think they can't?

 

[baldgye]

So, do you think they can't?

If they could, then this series wouldn’t need to exist...

 

[zzz_pt]

If they could, then this series wouldn’t need to exist...

You seem to be contradicting yourself then.

You said above,

...using the available evidence, women can compete with men (physically) in a modern F1 car.

And now you say they can't?