The Official 2015 Malaysian Grand Prix Thread ***Spoilers**
Discussion
37chevy said:
Scuffers said:
Drag racing is nothing like the same.
Only upside is they are likely to be lighter.
WRONG!!!Only upside is they are likely to be lighter.
weight isn't an advantage....cars have to be a minimum weight. they compete on a level playing field as the guys and have been champions on merit...amd drag racing isn't easy!...takes balls of steel, huge amounts of concentration and massively quick reaction times to do well
Edited by Scuffers on Thursday 2nd April 19:15
Geoff Stilwell said:
So someone say F1 is exciting with a straight face!!!!
F1 is exciting. Not always for the lead position, but I enjoy at least 70% of races. 100% of the ones I attend. Could it be better? Sure, But so could most things in life. I loved this race.And I quote Gaz for his monologue and being 100%...
Gaz. said:
I predict some seriously thick social lepers are going to drag their saggy arses out of bed to watch another early race and then spend the remainder of the day spamming the forum about how the race they just watched was the most s
t race of all time!!!!!1111!!!1111!11! and they knew it would be st because it's been st for years and they'll still tune in to watch Bernie's Evil Circus live when it arrives at yet another soulless Tilkering while the dear, wonderful, enchanted Imola gathers dust, just to see and hope if the sport has done a 180 and suddenly become 1986 with 5 WDC's fighting tenths apart with no fuel saving, all in the space of a fortnight since Melbourne and bore us fking senseless as one team smash all comers and the rest of the field being spread over three laps as just 10 cars finish, just like the 1980's they are so fond of.
t race of all time!!!!!1111!!!1111!11! and they knew it would be st because it's been st for years and they'll still tune in to watch Bernie's Evil Circus live when it arrives at yet another soulless Tilkering while the dear, wonderful, enchanted Imola gathers dust, just to see and hope if the sport has done a 180 and suddenly become 1986 with 5 WDC's fighting tenths apart with no fuel saving, all in the space of a fortnight since Melbourne and bore us fking senseless as one team smash all comers and the rest of the field being spread over three laps as just 10 cars finish, just like the 1980's they are so fond of.
Paul_M3 said:
Derek,
A lot of this discussion seems to revolve around what you or I feel is 'equal' competition, and whether that justifies rule changes or a separate championship.
Initially in your last post you are talking about the probability of a woman overcoming all the hurdles a man has to. Just because the chance of a woman doing this is statistically smaller (purely because of the lower numbers in motorsport as a whole), I can't see how it means they are not competing equally.
Likewise, they have the disadvantage of naturally less strength. However this is easily overcome by training. Again, just because they have to work a bit harder it doesn't mean they aren't competing equally. On the flip side they won't have to work so hard to keep their size / weight down.
You mentioned athletics, so lets compare it to athletics. It's no secret that most of the record holders for certain running distances are of African origin. You can argue whether this is genetics, upbringing, society or whatever. The fact is that people of African origin seem to have some sort of advantage. (However small)
By your logic, would you therefore say that people of European origin are not competing with them equally?
As you think the F1 regs would need to be changed to make it equal for women, should Europeans get a head start in athletic races to make it equal?
(I'm being slightly silly here, but you can hopefully see the point I'm trying to make)
The fact is that in many different sports, people of different origins or nationalities may have some underlying natural advantage. It doesn't mean others can't overcome their own disadvantages to still win, and it certainly doesn't mean that people say they aren't competing equally.
I'm also curious at what point in the motorsport hierarchy is your personal cut-off point for 'equal competition' between males / females?
I assume you are happy that female touring car drivers compete with men equally? What about endurance sportscars?
Female Indycar drivers theoretically must be competing equally because one of them has won a race.
Now here's where I'm going with this: Let's say (for arguments sake) you think that females are still competing fairly and equally in GP3. One of them wins the championship because of their natural speed and talent, and then gets offered a drive in F1.
Would you honestly say it's no longer a fair / equal competition just because they (may) have to spend an extra few hours in the gym each week from now on?
Sorry for the delay in replying, I’ve had a lot of work with a short deadline.A lot of this discussion seems to revolve around what you or I feel is 'equal' competition, and whether that justifies rule changes or a separate championship.
Initially in your last post you are talking about the probability of a woman overcoming all the hurdles a man has to. Just because the chance of a woman doing this is statistically smaller (purely because of the lower numbers in motorsport as a whole), I can't see how it means they are not competing equally.
Likewise, they have the disadvantage of naturally less strength. However this is easily overcome by training. Again, just because they have to work a bit harder it doesn't mean they aren't competing equally. On the flip side they won't have to work so hard to keep their size / weight down.
You mentioned athletics, so lets compare it to athletics. It's no secret that most of the record holders for certain running distances are of African origin. You can argue whether this is genetics, upbringing, society or whatever. The fact is that people of African origin seem to have some sort of advantage. (However small)
By your logic, would you therefore say that people of European origin are not competing with them equally?
As you think the F1 regs would need to be changed to make it equal for women, should Europeans get a head start in athletic races to make it equal?
(I'm being slightly silly here, but you can hopefully see the point I'm trying to make)
The fact is that in many different sports, people of different origins or nationalities may have some underlying natural advantage. It doesn't mean others can't overcome their own disadvantages to still win, and it certainly doesn't mean that people say they aren't competing equally.
I'm also curious at what point in the motorsport hierarchy is your personal cut-off point for 'equal competition' between males / females?
I assume you are happy that female touring car drivers compete with men equally? What about endurance sportscars?
Female Indycar drivers theoretically must be competing equally because one of them has won a race.
Now here's where I'm going with this: Let's say (for arguments sake) you think that females are still competing fairly and equally in GP3. One of them wins the championship because of their natural speed and talent, and then gets offered a drive in F1.
Would you honestly say it's no longer a fair / equal competition just because they (may) have to spend an extra few hours in the gym each week from now on?
Fair is a difficult word to define in sports. For instance, whilst certain races have distinct advantages with regards endurance running races, the western athlete has many others, not least being access to training facilities and coaches.
I think the only way one can look at it is to work out if one specific classifiable group top the results boards at top level events. This would appear to suggest that there is a degree of ‘unfairness’.
I agree that individuals will, in many circumstances, be able to overcome their disadvantages but overall, the group they are in will not get equal representation in the top results of any high level sport. Now whether that is unfair on the group or not is up for argument and I reckon it would be down to individual preferences.
In any top level, and top level is the important distinction, the best will rise to the top. Take tennis.
The sexes are divided. The female side has a maximum of 3 sets, but someone can win Wimbledon with just 12 games under their skirts. Yet physical strength still plays a massive part, as can be seen by the physique of many of the GS winners. Is that unfair on skinny girls?
I’m not sure the disadvantage of a weaker physique can be overcome at the top level. Sure, the weaker driver can take to the gym for hours a day, but then so can the strong bloke. So with equal effort and dedication, a difference is maintained.
I’m not suggesting that the regs should be changed to accommodate the needs of women. They (the group) can, if they wish, compete in races that are more suited to their abilities. This would probably increase the likelihood of the occasional woman competing in F1.
I used to be a police officer. In my original force, the minimum height for women was 5’6” and men 5’11”. On public order days, we looked cool, all lined up. But this was seen as against certain ethnic groups, so there was no height limit as such.
Then there was pressure to allow women a lower fitness level and they were, it seemed, naturally less athletic. This was later seen as sexist against men, the argument being that if women didn’t have to run anywhere or walk up stairs, then why should men.
We all know where such logic takes us.
Women can compete in saloon cars as it is not, let’s face it, top level sport. There are some unfit blokes putting in results, and the formula is not testing of physical ability. It could be argued that they need to spend more time in the gym to reach the required level, but not a great deal.
The argument is not whether one woman, or a few, can get onto the grid. It is females as a group. The top level of motorsport is a matter of fractions of a tenth. The inherent advantage men have in physique is minor, but where the loss of a bit of the end of a wing plate can knock a tenth of lap times, it is enough to give women a disadvantage.
I have no doubt that a bit of extra effort will put women on an equal footing to men at lower level sports, but at the top, men are putting that extra effort in already and there is no slack to take up.
I was chatting to an F1 mechanic about Eddie Irvine. He wasn’t an Ferrari mechanic - I have standards - and he reckoned he could have been a contender if he had put in a wee bit more effort and avoided distractions. Yet he always seemed to me to be fit, because he was.
I don’t think fairness is attainable at the top level of many sports.
All fair points Derek.
Whilst I still don't completely agree with everything you say, I can see where you are coming from.
It will certainly be interesting to see what the next 5 - 10 years brings.
PS,
It's been nice to have an intelligent discussion on PH with sensible arguments and the thoughts behind them.
I've no doubt normal service will soon be resumed on the next thread with various idiots preferring to talk about gold chains, rappers, and sexual orientation etc.
Whilst I still don't completely agree with everything you say, I can see where you are coming from.
It will certainly be interesting to see what the next 5 - 10 years brings.
PS,
It's been nice to have an intelligent discussion on PH with sensible arguments and the thoughts behind them.
I've no doubt normal service will soon be resumed on the next thread with various idiots preferring to talk about gold chains, rappers, and sexual orientation etc.
I'm seeing constant reference to strength here but I'm not sure how relevant strength is.
As has already been pointed out all F1 cars have had power steering for years.
Everybody save for the morbidly obese can exert a force equal to or greater than their own bodyweight through one leg.
The teams are at liberty to play around with the level of power assistance on the steering, the length of the brake lever, the bore of the brake cylinder and calipers etc etc.
I don't think strength is a significant barrier to female competitors.
As has already been pointed out all F1 cars have had power steering for years.
Everybody save for the morbidly obese can exert a force equal to or greater than their own bodyweight through one leg.
The teams are at liberty to play around with the level of power assistance on the steering, the length of the brake lever, the bore of the brake cylinder and calipers etc etc.
I don't think strength is a significant barrier to female competitors.
I'd agree as well that difference in strength is fairly irrelevant and no more of a factor than it would be for other male drivers. The drivers are very fit but they're not bodybuilders.
It looks to be a bit of a topic at the moment but I saw in another thread (I'd guess covered here as well) there aren't female drivers in lower series- gp2, gp3 and probably several other series appear to be all male grids. I can't see teams having any issue running a female driver with regards to strength or ability, there just aren't as many competing.
Even then, team budgets can come into it as well. Having many teams running pay drivers means that it is very difficult to get an f1 seat on merit alone, male or female. Even between world champions: Fernando/ Jenson this year looked like it was almost one or the other just for financial reasons.
It looks to be a bit of a topic at the moment but I saw in another thread (I'd guess covered here as well) there aren't female drivers in lower series- gp2, gp3 and probably several other series appear to be all male grids. I can't see teams having any issue running a female driver with regards to strength or ability, there just aren't as many competing.
Even then, team budgets can come into it as well. Having many teams running pay drivers means that it is very difficult to get an f1 seat on merit alone, male or female. Even between world champions: Fernando/ Jenson this year looked like it was almost one or the other just for financial reasons.
Paul_M3 said:
All fair points Derek.
Whilst I still don't completely agree with everything you say, I can see where you are coming from.
It will certainly be interesting to see what the next 5 - 10 years brings.
PS,
It's been nice to have an intelligent discussion on PH with sensible arguments and the thoughts behind them.
I've no doubt normal service will soon be resumed on the next thread with various idiots preferring to talk about gold chains, rappers, and sexual orientation etc.
Sentiments I will return.Whilst I still don't completely agree with everything you say, I can see where you are coming from.
It will certainly be interesting to see what the next 5 - 10 years brings.
PS,
It's been nice to have an intelligent discussion on PH with sensible arguments and the thoughts behind them.
I've no doubt normal service will soon be resumed on the next thread with various idiots preferring to talk about gold chains, rappers, and sexual orientation etc.
Thanks for all the effort and thought you put in to our little chat.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff