Women in Formula One

I'm just going by a Wikipedia page that only shows her results under the heading of three initials that represent a circuit I probably don't care much for to begin with. And while she might have picked up the odd placing of fourth or sixth, it doesn't change the fact that most of her bad results have come from street circuits.

And it certainly change the fact that she's just not good enough. If she gets the drive and proves me wrong, I'll be the first person to admit it. But I think she's unspectacular; if she were a guy, she wouldn't be getting nearly as much attention.
 
Let's look at it this way: Auto racing is probably the only sport (that I've seen, at least) that actually allows males and females to compete with each other. Other sports seem so outdated and backwards in this regard. Having females in motorsport is a good thing.

Don't get me wrong though, I really don't give a 🤬 one way or the other, whether she does well or not. :lol: If she delivers, great! But if she turns out to be the next Alex Yoong or Yuji Ide, I won't be shedding any tears if they give her the boot. Judging by the thread, it seems most F1 fans tend to think the same way.
 
I've watched IRL racing live and when Danica gets a good position on a street or road course it is because of pit stop strategy not driving ability. Once there she gets passed by other drivers rather than doing any passing herself. She shows none of the ability she shows on ovals.
 
I guess my real concern is that they're going to sign a woman on purely for the sake of getting sponsors, and when she turns out to disappoint, it's going to destroy the cedibility of women in motorsport. Sure, Danica Patrick, Natacha Gachnang, Vanina Ickx, Susie Stoddart, Katerine Legge and co. probably aren't going to be successes. But they're the first generation of women in motorsport; there might have been people like Lella Lombardi in the past, but there are more women competing in motorsports now than at any other time. And while the temptation is there to go out and sign these women on - because it gets you more sponsorship money, because it makes you look like an equal opportunity employer; whatever - I just think it's too soon. And I think it's wrong that teams will exploit these women by signing them as drivers simply to get sponsorship money when their results to date show them as being unlikely to succeed. They should sign drivers based on talent, and then worry about their sponsors, not take the sponsor money and run whoever paid the most. Fortuantely, I think the era of the problematic pay driver is beyond us. Drivers might pay for a seat, but at least they'll have gone through feeder series first.
 
True. What's needed is the female equivalent of a Michael Schumacher. Someone who's talent will negate any possible accusation that she is there specifically because she's a woman.
 
Tired Tyres
True. What's needed is the female equivalent of a Michael Schumacher. Someone who's talent will negate any possible accusation that she is there specifically because she's a woman.
Click to expand...
And how many Michael Schumachers have there been? That's not going to happen.

Rather, what I think would be better is a woman who can challenge for the points on a regular basis. Even if it's only one here and there, it will help. Out-pacing her team-mate probably wouldn't hurt, either. It has to be taken in small moves, and those moves have to be made at the right time, rather than early.
 
cpp214
Big rant
Click to expand...

Sorry, didn't want to quote a massive wall of text, no offense.

There's also another element to spec racing which I've already mentioned earlier in this thread - it favours certain driver's styles. This is why a driver can be amazing in one series and rubbish in another (as well as differences in the quality of the competition). There are however the few drivers who break rule and are good in anything, but they are the minority.
 
Do you race?
I guess my real concern is that they're going to sign a woman on purely for the sake of getting sponsors, and when she turns out to disappoint, it's going to destroy the cedibility of women in motorsport. Sure, Danica Patrick, Natacha Gachnang, Vanina Ickx, Susie Stoddart, Katerine Legge and co. probably aren't going to be successes. But they're the first generation of women in motorsport; there might have been people like Lella Lombardi in the past, but there are more women competing in motorsports now than at any other time. And while the temptation is there to go out and sign these women on - because it gets you more sponsorship money, because it makes you look like an equal opportunity employer; whatever - I just think it's too soon. And I think it's wrong that teams will exploit these women by signing them as drivers simply to get sponsorship money when their results to date show them as being unlikely to succeed. They should sign drivers based on talent, and then worry about their sponsors, not take the sponsor money and run whoever paid the most. Fortuantely, I think the era of the problematic pay driver is beyond us. Drivers might pay for a seat, but at least they'll have gone through feeder series first.
Click to expand...

Sadly this is bound to happen. The first gen of women in motorsports will be used for financial reasons rather than on their own rights as drivers. The only good thing is that they are pioneering the way for others, and other will come, and they will be acknowledged for their own abilities and be competitive on their own merits.

I expect Danica to come to F1, and I also expect her to be a backmarker, but that is not merely her fault. USGP will be a new team, and they will have niggles, both on and off track. Their main competitors will be the other new teams, and none of the old ones.
 
Do you race?
And how many Michael Schumachers have there been? That's not going to happen.

Rather, what I think would be better is a woman who can challenge for the points on a regular basis. Even if it's only one here and there, it will help. Out-pacing her team-mate probably wouldn't hurt, either. It has to be taken in small moves, and those moves have to be made at the right time, rather than early.
Click to expand...

I said equivalent. That's to say someone who is head and shoulders ahead of the other women racers.

There are usually two of that type per generation as in Schumacher & Hakkinen. Before that Senna & Prost.

Genuine World Class would have been a better way of putting it I suppose
 
Ok, after watching the 2nd race from Formula 2 at Brands Hatch today, I can safely say that Natacha Gachnang is rubbish and doesn't deserve a race seat in F1, she managed to drop from 8th place from the start to 18th at the end, she made a lot of mistakes and seemed to struggle to defend against attacking cars, very twitchy and uncertain driving. Even though the boost buttons make it difficult to tell when drivers have gotten slow exits or when they're just being outrun by boost, it was still fairly obvious she wasn't very confident in her driving.

On the positive, there are several good drivers in the F2 field, Alex Brundle in particular did very well from 25th to 11th (though with help from safety cars and various crashes and spins). I've said this elsewhere but I hope Henry Surtees is ok after that horrible tyre impact.

Also:
http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/090719160933.shtml

I think we can rule out Danica, which means there is little chance of a female driver in F1 next year unless somehow Gachnang gets in at Campos. But certainly this may well happen in future with someone else.
 
Last edited:
Women are in formula one, just look at the grid before the start :p.

Do both the women mentioned, on previous form, deserve a seat? No. I think we'd find that they're a touch too slow.

In other news, Henry Surtees has been killed.
 
Question was asked in thread-reply, I deemed, was necessary.
 
cpp214
After the Takuma Sato's and Alex Yoong's of the world have somehow managed to take up F1 seats...
Click to expand...

Hey, Alex Yoong was pretty good in Asian F3... :lol: Otherwise... I pretty much agree with your post.

I think the big problem, really, is the transition. No amount of open-wheeled racing, no matter how good you are, will prepare you for Formula One. The biggest hurdle for any woman... or, indeed, any North American driver going into modern F1, is that there's no preparation for F1. The racing cultures are different, the backgrounds are different... you're up against young Europeans who cut their teeth on open-wheelers from infancy ( :lol: ), graduate from karts to Formula-specs like Formula Renault or Formula Ford... go on to F3, F2, whatever...

The US big ticket names will come from Indy and NASCAR... simply because that's what's most visible... granted... neither is completely about ovals, but being successful in these series requires a skill set that is slightly different from F1. As Ardius points out, these spec races suit a specific style... which may or may not be the same required for F1.

Actually... changes in specific cars in F1 from year to year show up the advantages and disadvantages of certain drivers against their team-mates... The Renault of his two championships suited Alonso very well... but the McLaren, not so much... not compared to Hamilton's smoother, less aggressive style. I don't know what's up with Kimi, but the current Ferrari seems to suit him less than Massa... although it's possible that the extra edge that made him an 11 out of 10 compared to most other drivers is actually gone (shudder).

-

Could Patrick actually be a competitive F1 driver? Maybe, maybe not. Could any woman be? Depends on how many chances they are given. Women have the reflexes and the coordination to be competitive racers... in racing, the strength and speed advantage of males is not so much a factor... though endurance is a must for F1... the question is whether anyone is willing to make the concerted effort to develop programs that will encourage them to enter racing at a young age and to continue it through until they reach the professional level.
 
Women in motorsport does work and there's proof of that (Michelle Mouton, Shirley Muldowney for example), but would it work for F1?? I say it will, but they currently need to find another diamond in the rough that can become the female version of Lewis Hamilton being quick in her rookie season. Otherwise, you might aswell look at it as nothing more than a PR exercise. ;)
 
Bernie won't allow it--end of story :)

Everybody remembers his comments a few years back, right?
 
Okay everyone, voice of reason stepping in here

Thank you

DP in F1 has it's good points and bad points

A very good point as far as a team is concerned is that she is a marketing machine over in America. She is like what Earnheardt Jr is in NASCAR, So whoever gets her knows that they are going to have money flying in.

On the flip side though, how many American drivers have made it in F1? Andretti? NO!, Speed? NO! American drivers or drivers that have raced in America generally don't do well in F1.

I would like to see her in F1 but with the rumours swirling around that she might sign with Ganassi in a third car and do a part time Nationwide program as well as her IRL commitments, don't see it guys.

Oh, and to clear up a point made earlier, her road course record in IRL goes like this; 22 races, 4 top fives, 6 top ten finishes under fifth place, 12 finishes outside the top ten, her best finish was second at Belle Isles in 2007
 
Michael Andretti scored a podium, but went back to CART. Not all american drivers are bad, Phil Hill is an F1 champ, isn't he?
 
Ian Poole
Okay everyone, voice of reason stepping in here

On the flip side though, how many American drivers have made it in F1? Andretti? NO!, Speed? NO! American drivers or drivers that have raced in America generally don't do well in F1.
Click to expand...

You need to be more specific when you write Andretti.
 
Speed did ok. Never had a good car, and went to NASCAR before his career could take off.
 
Mario Andretti is Italian.

He's also not a woman, so lets get back on topic.
 
There are 2 Andrettis, world champion Mario, and former F1, retired CART driver Michael, currently both american nationality.
 
Are either of them women?

:rolleyes:
 
Ian Poole
Okay everyone, voice of reason stepping in here

Thank you

DP in F1 has it's good points and bad points

A very good point as far as a team is concerned is that she is a marketing machine over in America. She is like what Earnheardt Jr is in NASCAR, So whoever gets her knows that they are going to have money flying in.

On the flip side though, how many American drivers have made it in F1? Andretti? NO!, Speed? NO! American drivers or drivers that have raced in America generally don't do well in F1.

I would like to see her in F1 but with the rumours swirling around that she might sign with Ganassi in a third car and do a part time Nationwide program as well as her IRL commitments, don't see it guys.

Oh, and to clear up a point made earlier, her road course record in IRL goes like this; 22 races, 4 top fives, 6 top ten finishes under fifth place, 12 finishes outside the top ten, her best finish was second at Belle Isles in 2007
Click to expand...
Saying a woman should be allowed into Formula One because of her marketing draw-power is hardly being the voice of reason. In fact, I'd say it's the voice of irrationality. Didn't you read my opening posts? A woman should be allowed into the sport on the basis of her results rather than her sponsorship potential. Otherwise, we're just prostituting her out. Danica Patrick doesn't have what it takes for Formula One; it's pretty telling that her best results are on ovals and her worst are on road courses. How do you think she'd go in a championship that is made up entirely of the latter? The closest she'd come is the final turn at Indianapolis, if that circuit ever returns to the calendar. Do you think investing so much in her knowing her level of performance on road courses is sub-par at best is going to be worth it if there's only one corner she'll be any good at?

Of course not.
 
A woman should be allowed into the sport on the basis of her results rather than her sponsorship potential
Click to expand...

Okay then, i put it back to you that if you are saying that Danica shouldn't be in F1 because of her sponsorship otential that Earnhardt Jr shouldn't be in NASCAR because he is a marketing machine

Do you think investing so much in her knowing her level of performance on road courses is sub-par at best is going to be worth it if there's only one corner she'll be any good at?
Click to expand...

Did I say that? No, I never said that at all sir. I agree with you on the fact that most of her racing has been done on ovals and that she needs to get a hell of a lot better on road courses to even think she can be in F1. The main point that I was trying to point across is how many teams have brought someone in that is a really big name in another sport and then they have completely flopped in Formula 1. Michael Andretii, flopped badly, Sebastien Bourdais, four time Champ Car champion but couldnt even buy a point in F1, i could go on and on but the list is endless.

You could stick Jay Kay in a F1 car and he would probably do better than DP

But look, on a serious note now, if she wants to come and have a go in F1, there is no law stopping her, i just feel, like yourself Do You Race that she should better herself drastically on road courses to get there
 
I'm pretty sure she doesn't want to have a crack at Formula One. She's said she's not interested. Unless this is another Danica Patrick we're talking about.
 
Danica wants to do Nascar.
 
Oh god no, why? Who would turn down the pinacle of motorsport, being payed beyond their wildest dreams, for 500 laps in circles, being watched by drunken rednecks stuffing down barbecued chicken living in their mobile homes?

(no offence to nascar fans)
 
Because she's American and Nascar is the dominant motor sport in America.
 
Back