Jamie Chadwick - First competitive female driver in F1?

[skwdenyer]

RacerMike said:

As the saying goes you need two of three things to succeed in motorsport:

Money, Luck, Talent

It doesn’t matter which two, but one alone won’t do it.

Free Market Capitalism does people a big favour in the US. Why nobody can ever get similar prize funds going in Europe is a bit of a puzzle, but the MX5 Cup there for example is insane. It’s not the cheapest to compete in but honestly if you paid your confidence forward the rewards are there for the taking.

Season entry is around $60,000 from memory. I’d imagine you’d probably be looking at $100,000 all in arrive and drive for the 14 round champ.

However. The Prize fund (yeah, imagine getting money for winning!) is insane:

Per race:

- 1st $6000
- 2nd $5000
- 3rd $4000 and so on down to 6th. You then get $1000 from 6th to 10th!

Then the championship placing are

- 1st $250,000
- 2nd $85,000
- 3rd $50,000 and then $20k, 15k, 12k, 10k, 7.5k, 6k, 5k

So if you just finished 10th in every race plus the championship you’d get $19k back! It’s super competitive but the same names finish high up every race. Realistically I’d imagine the champion will take a few wins and several second places. If you take my championship winning season in Caterham which was similarly competitive I think, from memory I had 7 wins, 3 or 4 2nds, a couple of 3rds a top 10 and one dnf. So over those 14 rounds I’d have taken home $315,000! The following year for British GT4 I could have both bought the car, and paid the entire season with money to spare (probably to race more MX5s as many of the guys do).

People like Gresham Wagner have done the series for about 5 years and regularly race in IMSA GT4 and TCR and win or podium those too. This for sure is the way to promote talent over luck or money….

So the prize fund is paid from the entry fees, which means each entrant has to find *more* money to compete in the first place?

How is that helping those without money? I get that, if they’re really good, they can profit. But the buy-in requires more money…

[ChemicalChaos]

Is the problem for Jamie now that, despite her win recently, she still looks like a busted flush these days compared to, say, Doriane Pin?

[TheDeuce]

ChemicalChaos said:

Is the problem for Jamie now that, despite her win recently, she still looks like a busted flush these days compared to, say, Doriane Pin?

I would say that Pin looks to be the more impressive

Tbh Jamie stayed in w-series for too long and I wish she had managed to improve her fitness level as she obviously now has, a couple of years ago and then got into an F3 seat - which she absolutely could have done.

[732NM]

TheDeuce said:

I would say that Pin looks to be the more impressive

Tbh Jamie stayed in w-series for too long and I wish she had managed to improve her fitness level as she obviously now has, a couple of years ago and then got into an F3 seat - which she absolutely could have done.

She would have been hammered in F3. Indy NXT is the right career move for her, it's more likely to lead to a paid driving job.

Indycars often give a much better paid and longer career, if you can establish yourself as a decent mid field and above runner, age is far less an issue than the FIA Formula series.

[TheDeuce]

732NM said:

TheDeuce said:

I would say that Pin looks to be the more impressive

Tbh Jamie stayed in w-series for too long and I wish she had managed to improve her fitness level as she obviously now has, a couple of years ago and then got into an F3 seat - which she absolutely could have done.

She would have been hammered in F3. Indy NXT is the right career move for her, it's more likely to lead to a paid driving job.

Indycars often give a much better paid and longer career, if you can establish yourself as a decent mid field and above runner, age is far less an issue than the FIA Formula series.

Totally agree actually. I was coming at it more from a fan perspective than from her 'need to pay the mortgage' perspective. Of course, she does need a career and income.

It just made a mockery of w-series that she won it 3 bloody times and still there was no progression to F3. I'm glad that in F1a that progression is now baked in for the winning driver - even if the driver doesn't do very well at the next level. Also glad that the drivers can only compete in the series twice.

[RacerMike]

skwdenyer said:

So the prize fund is paid from the entry fees, which means each entrant has to find *more* money to compete in the first place?

How is that helping those without money? I get that, if they’re really good, they can profit. But the buy-in requires more money…

No the $60-100k is the season cost (tyres, race entry etc). Some of the prize fund must come from the entry fees but you’re supporting ALMS and racing all the big tracks like Daytona on the 24hr weekend, Sebring, Laguna etc. Whelan of NASCAR fame are the series sponsor this year and the prize pot is $1.2m.

For comparison, season cost in the UK for Caterham 420R which is probably the most similar series supporting the occasional British GT and BTCC round is £50,000 plus per season excluding the car and you win a £14.99 chinesium trophy…

[PhilAsia]

RacerMike said:

skwdenyer said:

>snip< and you win a £14.99 chinesium trophy…

...but you do get to slipstream other 420Rs in a 420R, so it's not all doom and gloom...!

[SmoothCriminal]

Surely if chadwick was anywhere close to F1 material one of the lower end teams would take a punt on her for the publicity at least.

[df76]

SmoothCriminal said:

Surely if chadwick was anywhere close to F1 material one of the lower end teams would take a punt on her for the publicity at least.

She’s nowhere near F1 material and doesn’t have significant money to bring.

[RB Will]

SmoothCriminal said:

Surely if chadwick was anywhere close to F1 material one of the lower end teams would take a punt on her for the publicity at least.

A team can’t just take a punt on her or any other promising woman as to get into F1 you need the super licence points and they don’t have them.
I think if any were eligible certainly one of the lower teams would put them in instantly for the marketing alone.

[Leithen]

She doesn’t have any F1 ambitions. IndyCar yes, and there’s a good chance she might get a chance.

[skwdenyer]

RacerMike said:

skwdenyer said:

So the prize fund is paid from the entry fees, which means each entrant has to find *more* money to compete in the first place?

How is that helping those without money? I get that, if they’re really good, they can profit. But the buy-in requires more money…

No the $60-100k is the season cost (tyres, race entry etc). Some of the prize fund must come from the entry fees but you’re supporting ALMS and racing all the big tracks like Daytona on the 24hr weekend, Sebring, Laguna etc. Whelan of NASCAR fame are the series sponsor this year and the prize pot is $1.2m.

For comparison, season cost in the UK for Caterham 420R which is probably the most similar series supporting the occasional British GT and BTCC round is £50,000 plus per season excluding the car and you win a £14.99 chinesium trophy…

Thanks. So the difference is somebody thinks it worth sponsoring the US series? What are the gates like? Is there online coverage? What’s in it for the sponsor?

[SpudLink]

skwdenyer said:

RacerMike said:

skwdenyer said:

So the prize fund is paid from the entry fees, which means each entrant has to find *more* money to compete in the first place?

How is that helping those without money? I get that, if they’re really good, they can profit. But the buy-in requires more money…

No the $60-100k is the season cost (tyres, race entry etc). Some of the prize fund must come from the entry fees but you’re supporting ALMS and racing all the big tracks like Daytona on the 24hr weekend, Sebring, Laguna etc. Whelan of NASCAR fame are the series sponsor this year and the prize pot is $1.2m.

For comparison, season cost in the UK for Caterham 420R which is probably the most similar series supporting the occasional British GT and BTCC round is £50,000 plus per season excluding the car and you win a £14.99 chinesium trophy…

Thanks. So the difference is somebody thinks it worth sponsoring the US series? What are the gates like? Is there online coverage? What’s in it for the sponsor?

Live streaming on the IMSA site...
https://www.imsa.com/tvlive/

[RacerMike]

SpudLink said:

skwdenyer said:

RacerMike said:

skwdenyer said:

So the prize fund is paid from the entry fees, which means each entrant has to find *more* money to compete in the first place?

How is that helping those without money? I get that, if they’re really good, they can profit. But the buy-in requires more money…

No the $60-100k is the season cost (tyres, race entry etc). Some of the prize fund must come from the entry fees but you’re supporting ALMS and racing all the big tracks like Daytona on the 24hr weekend, Sebring, Laguna etc. Whelan of NASCAR fame are the series sponsor this year and the prize pot is $1.2m.

For comparison, season cost in the UK for Caterham 420R which is probably the most similar series supporting the occasional British GT and BTCC round is £50,000 plus per season excluding the car and you win a £14.99 chinesium trophy…

Thanks. So the difference is somebody thinks it worth sponsoring the US series? What are the gates like? Is there online coverage? What’s in it for the sponsor?

Live streaming on the IMSA site...
https://www.imsa.com/tvlive/

And on YouTube worldwide. Arguably very similar to the coverage of the 420R series with a bit of an added level of professionalism in camera work you’d expect from a full blown IMSA event.

Not sure whether the tax offset rules in the US are different, or just that they value the audiences more over there, but of course IMSA is still a fairly fringe motorsport compared to NASCAR and IndyCar. Just seems that the series promotors and the sponsors are more willing in the states than they are here.

[skwdenyer]

RacerMike said:

SpudLink said:

skwdenyer said:

RacerMike said:

skwdenyer said:

So the prize fund is paid from the entry fees, which means each entrant has to find *more* money to compete in the first place?

How is that helping those without money? I get that, if they’re really good, they can profit. But the buy-in requires more money…

No the $60-100k is the season cost (tyres, race entry etc). Some of the prize fund must come from the entry fees but you’re supporting ALMS and racing all the big tracks like Daytona on the 24hr weekend, Sebring, Laguna etc. Whelan of NASCAR fame are the series sponsor this year and the prize pot is $1.2m.

For comparison, season cost in the UK for Caterham 420R which is probably the most similar series supporting the occasional British GT and BTCC round is £50,000 plus per season excluding the car and you win a £14.99 chinesium trophy…

Thanks. So the difference is somebody thinks it worth sponsoring the US series? What are the gates like? Is there online coverage? What’s in it for the sponsor?

Live streaming on the IMSA site...
https://www.imsa.com/tvlive/

And on YouTube worldwide. Arguably very similar to the coverage of the 420R series with a bit of an added level of professionalism in camera work you’d expect from a full blown IMSA event.

Not sure whether the tax offset rules in the US are different, or just that they value the audiences more over there, but of course IMSA is still a fairly fringe motorsport compared to NASCAR and IndyCar. Just seems that the series promotors and the sponsors are more willing in the states than they are here.

The US is just a big country. If you can get 1% of the population watching, that’s over 3m people, nearly 5x as many as in the UK. So the sponsorship rights are likely to be at least as that much more valuable. Added to which, US folk tend to have a lot more disposable income than we do

[Durzel]

RacerMike said:

Peacockantony said:

RacerMike said:

Away from topic slightly, but I’m interested what she’s done to you to elicit quite so much hatred? She’s a nice person and she’s done/doing well enough to get attention for being a minority in a sport dominated by men.

If you’re going to get upset about her making progress, why not get upset about probably 75% of all ‘talent’ that makes it into professional motorsport? I was faster than Jamie in British GT, but my sponsorship ended up falling through. I’m not bitter about her doing well. Quite the opposite.

I wasn’t marketable and I was ‘old’ compared to her and her teammate Ross Gunn who was a real challenge for me to beat and who is in the highest placed Aston GT3 LM this weekend in LeMans. But there are loads of guys out there I could beat who are still racing GT cars now. Jamie is considerably better than many of them and it’s great to see a nice, down to earth person who does have some talent and plenty of appeal push things forward a bit for women in motorsport. Why does her success or otherwise occupy so much space in your brain?

Edited by RacerMike on Friday 14th June 01:41

What hatred? Not kissing the arse of a privileged rich brat is not hatred! People have said a lot worse about Sargeant in the last 6 months, and have said worse about other drivers who are a lot more capable as drivers.

Motorsport is dominated by wealth, and she is one of the most privileged in this regard. He being a woman is of no relevance. Change 'female' to 'male' on her racing record and not a single person would be defending her. The minor class achievements in sportscar racing would not be used to claim she deserved mid-to-top level single seater opportunities with her poor results.

Her lack of success occupies about as much of my mind as Deagen Fairclough's does. Which is far greater than many of the participant's of this thread do considering the level of delusion contained within it.

Spoiled brat? She couldn’t be less of one (see above).

I’m afraid I find the motivation behind your posts hard to believe given that you’ve posted seriously negative comments on other threads about female drivers.

Who hurt you man? Did your Mum tell you, you could be an F1 driver or something?

Attack the argument, not the person. You haven't rebutted anything they've said here, merely inferred misogyny and extrapolated everything from that. "Privileged rich brat" is genderless, imo, and arguably flippant.

"Motivation" suggests some kind of crusade, instead of just expressing a strongly held opinion.

[RacerMike]

Durzel said:

RacerMike said:

Peacockantony said:

RacerMike said:

Away from topic slightly, but I’m interested what she’s done to you to elicit quite so much hatred? She’s a nice person and she’s done/doing well enough to get attention for being a minority in a sport dominated by men.

If you’re going to get upset about her making progress, why not get upset about probably 75% of all ‘talent’ that makes it into professional motorsport? I was faster than Jamie in British GT, but my sponsorship ended up falling through. I’m not bitter about her doing well. Quite the opposite.

I wasn’t marketable and I was ‘old’ compared to her and her teammate Ross Gunn who was a real challenge for me to beat and who is in the highest placed Aston GT3 LM this weekend in LeMans. But there are loads of guys out there I could beat who are still racing GT cars now. Jamie is considerably better than many of them and it’s great to see a nice, down to earth person who does have some talent and plenty of appeal push things forward a bit for women in motorsport. Why does her success or otherwise occupy so much space in your brain?

Edited by RacerMike on Friday 14th June 01:41

What hatred? Not kissing the arse of a privileged rich brat is not hatred! People have said a lot worse about Sargeant in the last 6 months, and have said worse about other drivers who are a lot more capable as drivers.

Motorsport is dominated by wealth, and she is one of the most privileged in this regard. He being a woman is of no relevance. Change 'female' to 'male' on her racing record and not a single person would be defending her. The minor class achievements in sportscar racing would not be used to claim she deserved mid-to-top level single seater opportunities with her poor results.

Her lack of success occupies about as much of my mind as Deagen Fairclough's does. Which is far greater than many of the participant's of this thread do considering the level of delusion contained within it.

Spoiled brat? She couldn’t be less of one (see above).

I’m afraid I find the motivation behind your posts hard to believe given that you’ve posted seriously negative comments on other threads about female drivers.

Who hurt you man? Did your Mum tell you, you could be an F1 driver or something?

Attack the argument, not the person. You haven't rebutted anything they've said here, merely inferred misogyny and extrapolated everything from that. "Privileged rich brat" is genderless, imo, and arguably flippant.

"Motivation" suggests some kind of crusade, instead of just expressing a strongly held opinion.

Lots of people have already attacked the argument including myself…

[Diderot]

RacerMike said:

Durzel said:

RacerMike said:

Peacockantony said:

RacerMike said:

Away from topic slightly, but I’m interested what she’s done to you to elicit quite so much hatred? She’s a nice person and she’s done/doing well enough to get attention for being a minority in a sport dominated by men.

If you’re going to get upset about her making progress, why not get upset about probably 75% of all ‘talent’ that makes it into professional motorsport? I was faster than Jamie in British GT, but my sponsorship ended up falling through. I’m not bitter about her doing well. Quite the opposite.

I wasn’t marketable and I was ‘old’ compared to her and her teammate Ross Gunn who was a real challenge for me to beat and who is in the highest placed Aston GT3 LM this weekend in LeMans. But there are loads of guys out there I could beat who are still racing GT cars now. Jamie is considerably better than many of them and it’s great to see a nice, down to earth person who does have some talent and plenty of appeal push things forward a bit for women in motorsport. Why does her success or otherwise occupy so much space in your brain?

Edited by RacerMike on Friday 14th June 01:41

What hatred? Not kissing the arse of a privileged rich brat is not hatred! People have said a lot worse about Sargeant in the last 6 months, and have said worse about other drivers who are a lot more capable as drivers.

Motorsport is dominated by wealth, and she is one of the most privileged in this regard. He being a woman is of no relevance. Change 'female' to 'male' on her racing record and not a single person would be defending her. The minor class achievements in sportscar racing would not be used to claim she deserved mid-to-top level single seater opportunities with her poor results.

Her lack of success occupies about as much of my mind as Deagen Fairclough's does. Which is far greater than many of the participant's of this thread do considering the level of delusion contained within it.

Spoiled brat? She couldn’t be less of one (see above).

I’m afraid I find the motivation behind your posts hard to believe given that you’ve posted seriously negative comments on other threads about female drivers.

Who hurt you man? Did your Mum tell you, you could be an F1 driver or something?

Attack the argument, not the person. You haven't rebutted anything they've said here, merely inferred misogyny and extrapolated everything from that. "Privileged rich brat" is genderless, imo, and arguably flippant.

"Motivation" suggests some kind of crusade, instead of just expressing a strongly held opinion.

Lots of people have already attacked the argument including myself…

Durzel, what made you change your opinion about the succession of F1 drivers over the years (and recent years) who were ‘privileged rich brats’? Or, through the connections of their rich and celebrated F1 driver fathers, have made it onto the grid (I’m excluding Damon here). We should be supporting Jamie - she won fair and square - rather than finding myriad ways to undermine and belittle her success. Same thing last weekend at Le Mans and every GT Race with the Iron Dames, we need to support them, bring awareness of what they are achieving at all levels. I can’t see any downside to that, can you?

We don’t have kids but both our great nephew and great niece (6 and 4) respectively seem equally obsessed by cars and wheels and exhaust pipes - their father is apretolhead. What are we to do? - if we treat them equally as we should
Will my great niece be a privileged rich brat? ETA we’re not Rich but we will support them.

Edited by Diderot on Monday 17th June 20:27

[Castellet]

I don’t know Jamie Chadwick’s financial position, but her big break into racing came when she won the Ginetta Junior scholarship.

I know this because there was a TV program about it that my daughters watched, and got them following her.

On Sunday, even the Indy commentators said she wasn’t family funded but has support from DHL, Williams, Andretti and their partners
She also appears to have an association with Rolex?

[RacerMike]

Castellet said:

I don’t know Jamie Chadwick’s financial position, but her big break into racing came when she won the Ginetta Junior scholarship.

I know this because there was a TV program about it that my daughters watched, and got them following her.

On Sunday, even the Indy commentators said she wasn’t family funded but has support from DHL, Williams, Andretti and their partners
She also appears to have an association with Rolex?

Had parents provided some assistance to her early career, but speaking with her at LeMans in 2019 she had taken the decision to not self fund in any way, as doing so sets a precedent and marks you out as a pay driver. This completely changes how teams perceive you, and it’s not a perception she wanted.