F1 engineers better than the drivers

[hoegaardenruls]

Could there be more to Toto Wolff's comment, stemming from last year - basically a veiled comment that one driver is not bigger than the team?

OK, Mercedes aren't starting the year in the same position as they have been recently, but it just depends who gets a decent run of points..

[tommunster10]

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

NJH said:

The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.

Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?

Because they aren't fast enough.

It's because its not actually marketing gold, blokes watching F1 don't want a woman driving around. Women /girls race in Moto 3 and have done in other Motorsports so they can do it. But no, F1 won't push a woman in because it wouldn't do anything for the marketing.
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.

Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.

If there was a woman out there fast enough, she would be driving right now.

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough? How many women have had a solid go in an F1 car? 5? Why would a woman not be fast in say the Merc?
Tennis is a good example, women get less money for a reason. Women footballers most don't get paid i imagine, i maybe wrong, but certainly not getting 350k a week.

Edited by tommunster10 on Thursday 23 February 14:17

[anonymous-user]

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

NJH said:

The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.

Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?

Because they aren't fast enough.

It's because its not actually marketing gold, blokes watching F1 don't want a woman driving around. Women /girls race in Moto 3 and have done in other Motorsports so they can do it. But no, F1 won't push a woman in because it wouldn't do anything for the marketing.
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.

Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.

If there was a woman out there fast enough, she would be driving right now.

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough?

The same way we find out how fast a man is, via the lower formulas then testing/simulator driving roles.

No woman has yet stood out and proven she is good enough for an F1 seat. That includes the wife of one of the team bosses. You cant possibly say they aren't getting the opportunity to prove their ability, including having test and simulator driving roles.

[JNW1]

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

NJH said:

The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.

Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?

Because they aren't fast enough.

It's because its not actually marketing gold, blokes watching F1 don't want a woman driving around. Women /girls race in Moto 3 and have done in other Motorsports so they can do it. But no, F1 won't push a woman in because it wouldn't do anything for the marketing.
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.

Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.

If there was a woman out there fast enough, she would be driving right now.

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough? How many women have had a solid go in an F1 car? 5? Why would a woman not be fast in say the Merc?
Tennis is a good example, women get less money for a reason. Women footballers most don't get paid i imagine, i maybe wrong, but certainly not getting 350k a week.

Edited by tommunster10 on Thursday 23 February 14:17

Actually tennis isn't a good example to pick - rightly or wrongly the women have had equal prize money with the men at Grand Slam events for years!

[NJH]

hoegaardenruls said:

Could there be more to Toto Wolff's comment, stemming from last year - basically a veiled comment that one driver is not bigger than the team?

Always been the case though hasn't it but to be honest it sounds pretty empty since we are a universe away from the days that saw Prost sacked from Ferrari.

[blade7]

jsf said:

blade7 said:

Smokehead said:

Lead singer always gets more than the band.

Not if someone else in the band writes the songs.

The longest lasting and most successful bands split the profits equally.

U2, Rolling Stones and Coldplay being good examples.

Coldplay don't split the song writing royalties equally anymore.

[anonymous-user]

blade7 said:

jsf said:

blade7 said:

Smokehead said:

Lead singer always gets more than the band.

Not if someone else in the band writes the songs.

The longest lasting and most successful bands split the profits equally.

U2, Rolling Stones and Coldplay being good examples.

Coldplay don't split the song writing royalties equally anymore.

I know. They did for many years then agreed as Chris did the writing he should benefit more from that. They still split everything else equally (and include their none band member fixer in that split)

[blade7]

jsf said:

I know. They did for many years then agreed as Chris did the writing he should benefit more from that. They still split everything else equally (and include their none band member fixer in that split)

I saw that programme too. Anyway back on topic I think there's more drivers capable of winning the title in the top car than engineers capable of designing it. Not many titles have be won in inferior cars.

[tommunster10]

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

NJH said:

The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.

Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?

Because they aren't fast enough.

It's because its not actually marketing gold, blokes watching F1 don't want a woman driving around. Women /girls race in Moto 3 and have done in other Motorsports so they can do it. But no, F1 won't push a woman in because it wouldn't do anything for the marketing.
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.

Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.

If there was a woman out there fast enough, she would be driving right now.

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough?

The same way we find out how fast a man is, via the lower formulas then testing/simulator driving roles.

No woman has yet stood out and proven she is good enough for an F1 seat. That includes the wife of one of the team bosses. You cant possibly say they aren't getting the opportunity to prove their ability, including having test and simulator driving roles.

This is my point though, there is no great marketing in having a woman drive an F1 car, if there were they would of done it by now. The F1 fans for the most part don't want to see a woman in an F1 car. I do believe had Suzi Wolff had a drive in the Merc she could of put it into top ten on the grid in Qualy., she can pedal an F1 car and that car was so dominant. Maybe just maybe she could of got higher. All that would do is damage the F1 brand though because as we know only the very select cream of the crop of men can drive an F1 car without spinning it as engineers are given millions to make cars that are impossible to drive but for like 30 odd drivers....

[anonymous-user]

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

tommunster10 said:

jsf said:

NJH said:

The thing I don't understand about the commercial/marketing forces is why on earth they haven't managed to find a fast woman to put in a front running F1 car. The marketing value would be of the scale, like Sharapova times 10. You would think some enterprising manager would have cottoned on by now that it must be worthwhile to hoover around all the lower formulas looking for girls with natural speed to mentor, I know I would and its nowt to do with being liberal minded its the chance of making ludicrous amounts of money.

Sorry for the OT but back on track I am going to mention Newey again, there must be another engineer out there to bring on with a level of talent close to him, maybe some of you could chuck some names in there that might be not far off?

Because they aren't fast enough.

It's because its not actually marketing gold, blokes watching F1 don't want a woman driving around. Women /girls race in Moto 3 and have done in other Motorsports so they can do it. But no, F1 won't push a woman in because it wouldn't do anything for the marketing.
It's not really about being good enough / fast enough as a very good car can make that up. Even football had it, i remember a Japanese player going to Arsenal and what he could sell back to Japan the shirts with his name etc on paid for his transfer fee and more. Also why teams take on Chinese players as well.

Lewis is absolute gold though from a marketing stand point.

If there was a woman out there fast enough, she would be driving right now.

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough?

The same way we find out how fast a man is, via the lower formulas then testing/simulator driving roles.

No woman has yet stood out and proven she is good enough for an F1 seat. That includes the wife of one of the team bosses. You cant possibly say they aren't getting the opportunity to prove their ability, including having test and simulator driving roles.

This is my point though, there is no great marketing in having a woman drive an F1 car, if there were they would of done it by now. The F1 fans for the most part don't want to see a woman in an F1 car. I do believe had Suzi Wolff had a drive in the Merc she could of put it into top ten on the grid in Qualy., she can pedal an F1 car and that car was so dominant. Maybe just maybe she could of got higher. All that would do is damage the F1 brand though because as we know only the very select cream of the crop of men can drive an F1 car without spinning it as engineers are given millions to make cars that are impossible to drive but for like 30 odd drivers....

Your have some very odd ideas on what the engineers are doing and what is required of the drivers.

A fast woman would be hugely marketable, if one was capable of matching and beating the men, she would be signed instantly. Getting 10th in a Mercedes is not good enough, be that a male or female driver.

[NJH]

I hate to disagree but sadly I think you are correct, unfortunately its not helped by the cost of entry barrier thing to getting on the F1 ladder. If anything a few ladies did better many years in the past when you didn't have to be the child of extremely rich and motorsport obsessed parents. There are a few fast girls/ladies out there in club motorsport land but again that sort of thing is way way off the F1 ladder.

[Durzel]

tommunster10 said:

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough? How many women have had a solid go in an F1 car? 5? Why would a woman not be fast in say the Merc?
Tennis is a good example, women get less money for a reason. Women footballers most don't get paid i imagine, i maybe wrong, but certainly not getting 350k a week.

How can they know? For the same reason they know that all of the drivers that currently aren't in F1 aren't (currently) good enough.

I find it hard to believe there is a glass ceiling for women in motorsport when it would certainly be positive from a marketing point of view, even if it wasn't earth shattering as suggested, for a woman to have a competitive seat in F1.

What's far more likely is that F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport where there is simply too much money at stake to experiment or take a punt significantly. F1 drivers need to be single minded, ruthlessly focused, and supremely talented (compared to other motorsport divisions). There are hundreds of professional racing drivers across the country, and 20 F1 drivers... the math isn't difficult.

[Gary C]

hondansx said:

robinessex said:

So shouldn't these engineers be getting racing car driver salaries then?

Surely you already know the answer to this.

Could engineers do perform without a state-of-the-art wind tunnel, or super computer? If not, why doesn't the guy who pours the concrete for the tunnel not get paid £14m a year?

Yes, but the concert pourer can't save .5 s per lap just because they had poured it.

A very good engineer can win gp's and as long as they can do it consistently, do earn huge salaries.

Not talking about an engineer that has a one off idea, but an Adrian newey type that time and time again shows their worth and can demand very large amounts of money, sometimes even more than the drivers.

[tommunster10]

Durzel said:

tommunster10 said:

How can we know if there's a woman fast enough? How many women have had a solid go in an F1 car? 5? Why would a woman not be fast in say the Merc?
Tennis is a good example, women get less money for a reason. Women footballers most don't get paid i imagine, i maybe wrong, but certainly not getting 350k a week.

How can they know? For the same reason they know that all of the drivers that currently aren't in F1 aren't (currently) good enough.

I find it hard to believe there is a glass ceiling for women in motorsport when it would certainly be positive from a marketing point of view, even if it wasn't earth shattering as suggested, for a woman to have a competitive seat in F1.

What's far more likely is that F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport where there is simply too much money at stake to experiment or take a punt significantly. F1 drivers need to be single minded, ruthlessly focused, and supremely talented (compared to other motorsport divisions). There are hundreds of professional racing drivers across the country, and 20 F1 drivers... the math isn't difficult.

Think of the F1 brand. Hunt, Senna, Fangio, Death, danger, cigarettes, boozing, live fast, die young, speed, immortals, impossible to drive, pinnacle, sex, pit girls, grid girls, etc etc..... why in hell would a women driving an F1 car be a marketing master stroke? I think you're lucky if any racing drivers (One has recently all credit to him) came out as being homosexual for the reasons listed above let alone a women being chosen just for marketing reasons... IMO.

The Lewis brand though, well that was genius, credit to Ron for that one, absolute gold.
For the most part people can justify a 16 year driving an F1 car (must be a genius) or a kid whose Daddy paid 20 mil for the pleasure, but 'we' don't want to see a women doing it... remember the idea is F1 is impossible, Richard Hammond kept spinning it remember?!!?....lol.
(even though people do can can drive F1 cars with no problems in historic series etc etc..)

Edited by tommunster10 on Monday 27th February 17:44