F1 Journalists

[Alextrax52]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread has inspired this one. Talk about the best and worst Journalists and the best and worst pieces ever written.

[takagi_for_the_win]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread...

...is boring the tits off everyone.

[Alextrax52]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread...

...is boring the tits off everyone.

HEY!!!!

[good_Ralf]

OIIIIII !!!!

Fixed.

I don't mind F-O-K's criticism as long as he comments on other journalists as well e.g. Gary Anderson who I think is good.

[dr-baker]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread...

...is boring the tits off everyone.

Tits?



Just don't type great tits into Google Image search, as I just did.

[Shizuka]

Tits?



Just don't type great tits into Google Image search, as I just did.

That'd totally be my sig, if it wasn't for that picture.

[dr-baker]

Tits?



Just don't type great tits into Google Image search, as I just did.

That'd totally be my sig, if it wasn't for that picture.

But I prefer boobies!





And be careful to add 'blue-footed' in your Google Images search!

[pasta_maldonado]

Tits?



Just don't type great tits into Google Image search, as I just did.

That'd totally be my sig, if it wasn't for that picture.

But I prefer boobies!





And be careful to add 'blue-footed' in your Google Images search!

Ah, dr-baker - endless fun at Uni parties I presume

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread...

...is boring the tits off everyone.

HEY!!!!

Yep. I've known marathon beige paint drying contests, in a square room with no windows and beige carpets, with a re-run of all Indian Grand Prixs to have ever taken place running back-to-back in the background, with the only sustenance being cucumber sandwiches and water, to throw up more interesting talking points.

Nothing personal. Just constant bashing of anyone is boring......

[dr-baker]

Tits?



Just don't type great tits into Google Image search, as I just did.

That'd totally be my sig, if it wasn't for that picture.

But I prefer boobies!



And be careful to add 'blue-footed' in your Google Images search!

Ah, dr-baker - endless fun at Uni parties I presume

Yeah, gotta love all the birds while at uni!

And I think the expression of the booby on the left says it all...

[good_Ralf]

Symonds has already proved his worth. Ahead of the Hungarian Grand Prix, Symonds asked for many of the latest upgrades to be taken off the Williams FW35 so he could get a sense of what was and wasn't working on a more fundamental level.
It was almost certainly not a coincidence that Budapest proved to be vital breakthrough, with Pastor Maldonado scoring Williams' first point of the season.

Wasn't that point scored more down to the team's strategy and Rosberg's late blow-up? Is Benson right or is this quote another example of why he needs to be sacked?

[takagi_for_the_win]

Symonds has already proved his worth. Ahead of the Hungarian Grand Prix, Symonds asked for many of the latest upgrades to be taken off the Williams FW35 so he could get a sense of what was and wasn't working on a more fundamental level.
It was almost certainly not a coincidence that Budapest proved to be vital breakthrough, with Pastor Maldonado scoring Williams' first point of the season.

Wasn't that point scored more down to the team's strategy and Rosberg's late blow-up? Is Benson right or is this quote another example of why he needs to be sacked?

True, but Maldonado still had to be in a position to profit from Rosberg's problems. You're being far too harsh on Benson; he has to write about something, he's not paid to sit and scratch his arse all day.

[Alextrax52]

Symonds has already proved his worth. Ahead of the Hungarian Grand Prix, Symonds asked for many of the latest upgrades to be taken off the Williams FW35 so he could get a sense of what was and wasn't working on a more fundamental level.
It was almost certainly not a coincidence that Budapest proved to be vital breakthrough, with Pastor Maldonado scoring Williams' first point of the season.

Wasn't that point scored more down to the team's strategy and Rosberg's late blow-up? Is Benson right or is this quote another example of why he needs to be sacked?

True, but Maldonado still had to be in a position to profit from Rosberg's problems. You're being far too harsh on Benson; he has to write about something, he's not paid to sit and scratch his arse all day.

To be fair to Benson Williams were having their most competitive weekend of the year in the dry as both cars made it to Q2 and Maldonado was on for 11th or 12th without attrition anyway so it's unfair to say he should be fired after that because I think he's right Symonds's arrival has helped Williams in some way as Pastor outqualified Di Resta on merit last time out at Monza and Spa was just blind luck of course but overall i think Benson has done something good here.

[good_Ralf]

OK, I was being harsh and a little ignorant. Otherwise I had no problems with AB's article, which was on F1 designers James Allison, Paddy Lowe and Pat Symonds, all of whom being Oxbridge educated (Benson forgot to mention that!).

[Wallio]

I personally can't stand Peter Winsdor. How someone who has failed to buy/start/takeover an F1 not once, not twice, but THREE BATHPLUGGING TIMES is still considered "credible" is beyond me.

[Bleu]

I personally can't stand Peter Winsdor. How someone who has failed to buy/start/takeover an F1 not once, not twice, but THREE BATHPLUGGING TIMES is still considered "credible" is beyond me.

What was third one. I remember him planning new team in mid 1990s, then obviously USF1 but what else?

[Wallio]

He tried to by Brabham in the late 1989 with a bunch of people, Greg Norman among them.

http://www.grandprix.com/gpe/cref-winpet.html

[dr-baker]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread has inspired this one. Talk about the best and worst Journalists and the best and worst pieces ever written.

Time to revive this thread and get it back onto the topic it was originally intended to discuss! (And don't try linking it to my earlier posts in this thread - it might get me into trouble!)

Last Wednesday, I managed to get a copy of the Daily Telegraph for free and inside, I found a article by Beverley Turner, which I have scanned below (I don't know how clear it is on others' monitors - I'm currently on my 10" netbook and the text isn't clear - maybe it's better on a proper-sized computer screen?):



If that is not readable (eg if you're on your mobile...), it's also available on the Telegraph's website(that I accessed for free via Google):

Why I fear Susie Wolff is fuel for Formula One’s PR machine

Susie Wolff is being offered a few practice sessions at the British and German Grands Prix - not a chance to race with Felipe Massa


Get ready to pop your corks: Formula One racing is waving the flag for a female driver. Susie Wolff, 31, will stand beside Felipe Massa and Valtteri Bottas as the Williams team drivers for 2014-15. What an extraordinary victory for women. Finally, breasts are no barrier to tearing round a track at 170mph.


Except, I fear that none of that will come to pass. We’re in danger of falling – yet again – for the PR engines that make F1 go round. Wolff has been a development driver at Williams since 2012, following seven years racing in the German Touring Cars Championship. All Williams is offering her is a few practice sessions at the German and British Grands Prix (the two races, incidentally, at which there will be the most national press). Do not expect to see Wolff – who happens to be very pretty and also married to Toto Wolff, who in turn happens to be a Williams shareholder – on the grid.


It pains me to knock a woman who is taking up an offer from a highly respected racing team. For Wolff, who has been go-karting since the age of eight and whose parents have run a motorbike shop in Scotland for the last 33 years, has petrol in her blood. But every time F1 dangles these seemingly equitable carrots they do every deserving female driver a disservice through a petrol-fumed cloud of artifice.


Ten years ago I wrote a book, The Pits: the Real World of F1, after three seasons feeling like Lemuel Gulliver in the land of the Yahoos as an ITV pit-lane reporter. Like the only sane person on an island of randy lunatics, I soaked up the anachronistic misogyny of a world in which men ''did’’ and women ''adorned”; a world at the cutting edge of technology that still used women in bras to hold parasols over perspiring male drivers on the grid. F1 magazine had recently run a piece on the “50 most powerful people in F1” and they all possessed a penis. There is no other sport that could match that level of antediluvian hierarchy.


Very little has changed – in fact, things used to be better. Although dismissed as a stunt, romantic novelist Barbara Cartland backed female drivers with a team who raced at the Brooklands circuit in 1931. F1 had its first woman driver in 1958: Italian Maria Teresa de Filippis who raced four times and failed to reach the qualifying time for two other Grands Prix including Monaco (14 men also failed to make that grade, including one little chap called Bernie Ecclestone).

Between 1975 and 1976, another Italian, Lella Lombardi, raced in 12 Grands Prix and became the only woman to score a championship point with a sixth finish. Briton Divina Galica also drove between 1975 and 1976 but failed to qualify in any of her three races, and between 1978 and 1981 South African Desire Wilson struggled to make the grade, but did qualify for her home Grand Prix, famously overtaking Nigel Mansell before spinning out on lap 51.

Recently, the much-loved Maria de Villota died in October 2013 as a result of the head injury she sustained in a practice session crash 15 months earlier. It’s fair to say that women in F1 have a poor record. But apart from the sadly missed de Villota they all had one thing in common: incomparably slow and underfunded cars.

But maybe F1 is just too tough for girls? While researching my book, several physiologists told me that wasn’t true. F1 is not man versus woman. It is human versus car and many women could train themselves to withstand those rigours. Women actually fare better in events that involve extreme temperatures and could meet the sport’s demand for lighter drivers.

So the problem must be mind-set. Not so, according to psychologist Professor Adrian Moran. “Concentration under pressure, hand-eye co-ordination, effective peripheral vision, the ability to control anxiety, visualisation skills and motivation are not gender-related,” he says. “There is no reason why women could not be as good, if not better, than men.”

Even Michael Schumacher agreed in 2004 that the lack of women drivers was “cultural: too few women coming up the ranks.” He was partly right. The most influential factor in discouraging girls is lack of financial support. Parents don’t believe a girl could earn a living as a driver in the way that a boy could. Which of course is true – although she stands a chance if she’s a looker.

One McLaren Mercedes executive told me: “We have good female drivers. The problem is they are just not pretty. They look like men. Women must be more beautiful, more feminine. That’s how it is.”

F1 needs to grow up. It’s losing female and younger fans. A woman in a competitive car would re-energise the sport and attract a new fan base. We can only hope Wolff turns out to be more than a publicity pawn.

While recent posts in Turbogirl's fictional GT series shows that she and I are two of the few Susie Wolff fans around here, and while I appreciate Beverley Turner trying to stand up for her, I find it hard when the article above bends the truth in places, and omits other information. Like failing to mention Giovanna Amati at all in the list of former F1 drivers, making it seem as though it has been more than 30 years since the last female F1 GP entrant, rather than 'just' 20-odd years. And she failed to highlight that when Desire Wilson qualified for her home race in 1981, it was a non-championship event! Plus it is interesting to see that the online version has been edited so that it no longer states that Maria de Villota was a Williams test driver, as the print version of the article clearly states! Big mistake, Beverley! Sloppy journalism does not help make your point. Rather it detracts from it, which for a Susie fan like myself, is a great shame, as I would like to see more articles in favour of female drivers, with proper facts and no misleading/missing information...

[Turbogirl]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread has inspired this one. Talk about the best and worst Journalists and the best and worst pieces ever written.

Time to revive this thread and get it back onto the topic it was originally intended to discuss! (And don't try linking it to my earlier posts in this thread - it might get me into trouble!)

Last Wednesday, I managed to get a copy of the Daily Telegraph for free and inside, I found a article by Beverley Turner, which I have scanned below (I don't know how clear it is on others' monitors - I'm currently on my 10" netbook and the text isn't clear - maybe it's better on a proper-sized computer screen?):

If that is not readable (eg if you're on your mobile...), it's also available on the Telegraph's website(that I accessed for free via Google):

Why I fear Susie Wolff is fuel for Formula One’s PR machine

Susie Wolff is being offered a few practice sessions at the British and German Grands Prix - not a chance to race with Felipe Massa


Get ready to pop your corks: Formula One racing is waving the flag for a female driver. Susie Wolff, 31, will stand beside Felipe Massa and Valtteri Bottas as the Williams team drivers for 2014-15. What an extraordinary victory for women. Finally, breasts are no barrier to tearing round a track at 170mph.


Except, I fear that none of that will come to pass. We’re in danger of falling – yet again – for the PR engines that make F1 go round. Wolff has been a development driver at Williams since 2012, following seven years racing in the German Touring Cars Championship. All Williams is offering her is a few practice sessions at the German and British Grands Prix (the two races, incidentally, at which there will be the most national press). Do not expect to see Wolff – who happens to be very pretty and also married to Toto Wolff, who in turn happens to be a Williams shareholder – on the grid.


It pains me to knock a woman who is taking up an offer from a highly respected racing team. For Wolff, who has been go-karting since the age of eight and whose parents have run a motorbike shop in Scotland for the last 33 years, has petrol in her blood. But every time F1 dangles these seemingly equitable carrots they do every deserving female driver a disservice through a petrol-fumed cloud of artifice.


Ten years ago I wrote a book, The Pits: the Real World of F1, after three seasons feeling like Lemuel Gulliver in the land of the Yahoos as an ITV pit-lane reporter. Like the only sane person on an island of randy lunatics, I soaked up the anachronistic misogyny of a world in which men ''did’’ and women ''adorned”; a world at the cutting edge of technology that still used women in bras to hold parasols over perspiring male drivers on the grid. F1 magazine had recently run a piece on the “50 most powerful people in F1” and they all possessed a penis. There is no other sport that could match that level of antediluvian hierarchy.


Very little has changed – in fact, things used to be better. Although dismissed as a stunt, romantic novelist Barbara Cartland backed female drivers with a team who raced at the Brooklands circuit in 1931. F1 had its first woman driver in 1958: Italian Maria Teresa de Filippis who raced four times and failed to reach the qualifying time for two other Grands Prix including Monaco (14 men also failed to make that grade, including one little chap called Bernie Ecclestone).

Between 1975 and 1976, another Italian, Lella Lombardi, raced in 12 Grands Prix and became the only woman to score a championship point with a sixth finish. Briton Divina Galica also drove between 1975 and 1976 but failed to qualify in any of her three races, and between 1978 and 1981 South African Desire Wilson struggled to make the grade, but did qualify for her home Grand Prix, famously overtaking Nigel Mansell before spinning out on lap 51.

Recently, the much-loved Maria de Villota died in October 2013 as a result of the head injury she sustained in a practice session crash 15 months earlier. It’s fair to say that women in F1 have a poor record. But apart from the sadly missed de Villota they all had one thing in common: incomparably slow and underfunded cars.

But maybe F1 is just too tough for girls? While researching my book, several physiologists told me that wasn’t true. F1 is not man versus woman. It is human versus car and many women could train themselves to withstand those rigours. Women actually fare better in events that involve extreme temperatures and could meet the sport’s demand for lighter drivers.

So the problem must be mind-set. Not so, according to psychologist Professor Adrian Moran. “Concentration under pressure, hand-eye co-ordination, effective peripheral vision, the ability to control anxiety, visualisation skills and motivation are not gender-related,” he says. “There is no reason why women could not be as good, if not better, than men.”

Even Michael Schumacher agreed in 2004 that the lack of women drivers was “cultural: too few women coming up the ranks.” He was partly right. The most influential factor in discouraging girls is lack of financial support. Parents don’t believe a girl could earn a living as a driver in the way that a boy could. Which of course is true – although she stands a chance if she’s a looker.

One McLaren Mercedes executive told me: “We have good female drivers. The problem is they are just not pretty. They look like men. Women must be more beautiful, more feminine. That’s how it is.”

F1 needs to grow up. It’s losing female and younger fans. A woman in a competitive car would re-energise the sport and attract a new fan base. We can only hope Wolff turns out to be more than a publicity pawn.

While recent posts in Turbogirl's fictional GT series shows that she and I are two of the few Susie Wolff fans around here, and while I appreciate Beverley Turner trying to stand up for her, I find it hard when the article above bends the truth in places, and omits other information. Like failing to mention Giovanna Amati at all in the list of former F1 drivers, making it seem as though it has been more than 30 years since the last female F1 GP entrant, rather than 'just' 20-odd years. And she failed to highlight that when Desire Wilson qualified for her home race in 1981, it was a non-championship event! Plus it is interesting to see that the online version has been edited so that it no longer states that Maria de Villota was a Williams test driver, as the print version of the article clearly states! Big mistake, Beverley! Sloppy journalism does not help make your point. Rather it detracts from it, which for a Susie fan like myself, is a great shame, as I would like to see more articles in favour of female drivers, with proper facts and no misleading/missing information...

Interesting read, although there are several mistakes in this article, where better research might have helped the case. Desire Wilson has actually won a race in the British Aurora F1 Series and has a grandstand at Brands Hatch named after her because of that. She fared pretty well in Aurora in general. I'm bringing this up, because the series featured F1 cars from that decade and Desire's results (also Divina Galica's results!) in Aurora should be proof enough, that women are capable of driving F1 cars: http://www.teamdan.com/archive/gen/aurora.html

And it's not only parents, who don't believe in their daughters having racing talent, it's also many sponsors. Miss Turner (and everyone else interested) should read this article about Sarah Kavanaugh and her problems finding sponsor backup: http://atlasf1.autosport.com/2000/san/preview/magan.html (it's a very good read and F1 related, in case you don't know, who Sarah Kavanaugh is)

I especially like the McLaren Mercedes executive. "Good female drivers aren't pretty". Does he expect supermodels to drive racing cars competitively? If so, he might want to take a look at the Hungarian Lotus Ladies Cup. There are at least one or two models there (more like ALL). And besides that, there are definitely some gals out there, who spring into my mind, when I think of pretty and capable racing drivers: Katherine Legge, Rahel Frey, Danica Patrick, Simona de Silvestro, Cyndie Allemann... this list goes on for a while. And that's not my personal preference either (because I'm a straight female...)! Just google around a little bit, visit a couple of forums - the usual stuff - and you'll find many threads about the "hotness" of certain female drivers. Not a very profound statement there, Mister McLaren executive. Even on f1rejects we have a hotness list: TOTB best looking female racers. You can't tell me, McLaren has never even heard of these ladies before...

But the point stands: As long as we have no competitive lady in F1, many people will continue to claim, that women wouldn't withstand the pressure or something like that. Strangely, even Sir Stirling Moss said something along that line, although his sister Pat and his mother Aileen were competitive racing drivers. He should know better. But I digress...

The whole PR thing is a reasonable fear, because Susie had been such a pawn in DTM before. Vanina Ickx, Katherine Legge and Rahel Frey for Audi, too. Williams used the Toto-Wolff-Connection to their advantage, and rightfully so (but that's another topic altogether). But what comes after that? And let's face it: Poor Maria de Villota was only at Marussia because of the Giovanna-Amati-effect (small team in financial trouble plus good looking female driver equals media attention). Has a VERY bitter taste, when you think about it too long. Miss Turner makes this point abundantly clear, and that's a good thing. Unfortunately, she asks the wrong question after that, instead of pointing the finger at the real issue: Only underfunded teams with slow cars are willing to hire female drivers. Why? For the media attention. If that's the only reason for hiring a woman, something is terribly wrong. The situation at DTM could have served to make a point here, while the situation in Indycars (Danica, Simona, Ana Beatriz, Katherine) could have proven, that the opposite of the DTM and F1 mentality is possible. Sad, that this article doesn't even mention the US serieses and their approach to female drivers at all.

And this article is new, for crying out loud! Why doesn't it bother to mention Sauber or Simona de Silvestro? And what about Claire Williams and Monisha Kaltenborn? 50 important people in F1 have a dick, sure. But then at least mention the two powerful ladies without one, because they could be the ones many hopeful female drivers were waiting for to give them a well deserved chance after so long.

Well, I think, I've already gone on far too long on this topic. My opinion on this article is almost longer than the article in question...

Overall, interesting read, but it lacks too many strong arguments for female drivers, which could have been found pretty easily, and it also bends the truth too often or just skips certain valuable information, as dr-baker has already pointed out. I would let it pass as an opinion piece, but not as a well-crafted attempt on representing the strengths of female racing drivers for F1 or in general.

P.S.: I think, Miss Turner skips over Giovanna Amati's attempts on purpose, because 3 DNQs in 3 events doesn't make her look too good. But then again, Amati never got the chance to test the Brabham before Kyalami (there is an interview with Amati in an issue of a certain german motorsports magazine about that topic, but I'm not allowed link to it or translate it because of copyrights), Damon Hill also needed a lot of attempts to qualify that lump of iron and a closer look at Amati's later career would have proven her to be a rather capable driver after all. One glance at her profile on f1rejects would have helped this article...

[Londoner]

There's a reason why the Telegraph is colloquially known as the Torygraph.

[mario]

My complaining over Andrew Benson's inept writing in the BBC thread has inspired this one. Talk about the best and worst Journalists and the best and worst pieces ever written.

Time to revive this thread and get it back onto the topic it was originally intended to discuss! (And don't try linking it to my earlier posts in this thread - it might get me into trouble!)

Last Wednesday, I managed to get a copy of the Daily Telegraph for free and inside, I found a article by Beverley Turner, which I have scanned below (I don't know how clear it is on others' monitors - I'm currently on my 10" netbook and the text isn't clear - maybe it's better on a proper-sized computer screen?):

If that is not readable (eg if you're on your mobile...), it's also available on the Telegraph's website(that I accessed for free via Google):

Why I fear Susie Wolff is fuel for Formula One’s PR machine

Susie Wolff is being offered a few practice sessions at the British and German Grands Prix - not a chance to race with Felipe Massa


Get ready to pop your corks: Formula One racing is waving the flag for a female driver. Susie Wolff, 31, will stand beside Felipe Massa and Valtteri Bottas as the Williams team drivers for 2014-15. What an extraordinary victory for women. Finally, breasts are no barrier to tearing round a track at 170mph.


Except, I fear that none of that will come to pass. We’re in danger of falling – yet again – for the PR engines that make F1 go round. Wolff has been a development driver at Williams since 2012, following seven years racing in the German Touring Cars Championship. All Williams is offering her is a few practice sessions at the German and British Grands Prix (the two races, incidentally, at which there will be the most national press). Do not expect to see Wolff – who happens to be very pretty and also married to Toto Wolff, who in turn happens to be a Williams shareholder – on the grid.


It pains me to knock a woman who is taking up an offer from a highly respected racing team. For Wolff, who has been go-karting since the age of eight and whose parents have run a motorbike shop in Scotland for the last 33 years, has petrol in her blood. But every time F1 dangles these seemingly equitable carrots they do every deserving female driver a disservice through a petrol-fumed cloud of artifice.


Ten years ago I wrote a book, The Pits: the Real World of F1, after three seasons feeling like Lemuel Gulliver in the land of the Yahoos as an ITV pit-lane reporter. Like the only sane person on an island of randy lunatics, I soaked up the anachronistic misogyny of a world in which men ''did’’ and women ''adorned”; a world at the cutting edge of technology that still used women in bras to hold parasols over perspiring male drivers on the grid. F1 magazine had recently run a piece on the “50 most powerful people in F1” and they all possessed a penis. There is no other sport that could match that level of antediluvian hierarchy.


Very little has changed – in fact, things used to be better. Although dismissed as a stunt, romantic novelist Barbara Cartland backed female drivers with a team who raced at the Brooklands circuit in 1931. F1 had its first woman driver in 1958: Italian Maria Teresa de Filippis who raced four times and failed to reach the qualifying time for two other Grands Prix including Monaco (14 men also failed to make that grade, including one little chap called Bernie Ecclestone).

Between 1975 and 1976, another Italian, Lella Lombardi, raced in 12 Grands Prix and became the only woman to score a championship point with a sixth finish. Briton Divina Galica also drove between 1975 and 1976 but failed to qualify in any of her three races, and between 1978 and 1981 South African Desire Wilson struggled to make the grade, but did qualify for her home Grand Prix, famously overtaking Nigel Mansell before spinning out on lap 51.

Recently, the much-loved Maria de Villota died in October 2013 as a result of the head injury she sustained in a practice session crash 15 months earlier. It’s fair to say that women in F1 have a poor record. But apart from the sadly missed de Villota they all had one thing in common: incomparably slow and underfunded cars.

But maybe F1 is just too tough for girls? While researching my book, several physiologists told me that wasn’t true. F1 is not man versus woman. It is human versus car and many women could train themselves to withstand those rigours. Women actually fare better in events that involve extreme temperatures and could meet the sport’s demand for lighter drivers.

So the problem must be mind-set. Not so, according to psychologist Professor Adrian Moran. “Concentration under pressure, hand-eye co-ordination, effective peripheral vision, the ability to control anxiety, visualisation skills and motivation are not gender-related,” he says. “There is no reason why women could not be as good, if not better, than men.”

Even Michael Schumacher agreed in 2004 that the lack of women drivers was “cultural: too few women coming up the ranks.” He was partly right. The most influential factor in discouraging girls is lack of financial support. Parents don’t believe a girl could earn a living as a driver in the way that a boy could. Which of course is true – although she stands a chance if she’s a looker.

One McLaren Mercedes executive told me: “We have good female drivers. The problem is they are just not pretty. They look like men. Women must be more beautiful, more feminine. That’s how it is.”

F1 needs to grow up. It’s losing female and younger fans. A woman in a competitive car would re-energise the sport and attract a new fan base. We can only hope Wolff turns out to be more than a publicity pawn.

While recent posts in Turbogirl's fictional GT series shows that she and I are two of the few Susie Wolff fans around here, and while I appreciate Beverley Turner trying to stand up for her, I find it hard when the article above bends the truth in places, and omits other information. Like failing to mention Giovanna Amati at all in the list of former F1 drivers, making it seem as though it has been more than 30 years since the last female F1 GP entrant, rather than 'just' 20-odd years. And she failed to highlight that when Desire Wilson qualified for her home race in 1981, it was a non-championship event! Plus it is interesting to see that the online version has been edited so that it no longer states that Maria de Villota was a Williams test driver, as the print version of the article clearly states! Big mistake, Beverley! Sloppy journalism does not help make your point. Rather it detracts from it, which for a Susie fan like myself, is a great shame, as I would like to see more articles in favour of female drivers, with proper facts and no misleading/missing information...

Interesting read, although there are several mistakes in this article, where better research might have helped the case. Desire Wilson has actually won a race in the British Aurora F1 Series and has a grandstand at Brands Hatch named after her because of that. She fared pretty well in Aurora in general. I'm bringing this up, because the series featured F1 cars from that decade and Desire's results (also Divina Galica's results!) in Aurora should be proof enough, that women are capable of driving F1 cars: http://www.teamdan.com/archive/gen/aurora.html

And it's not only parents, who don't believe in their daughters having racing talent, it's also many sponsors. Miss Turner (and everyone else interested) should read this article about Sarah Kavanaugh and her problems finding sponsor backup: http://atlasf1.autosport.com/2000/san/preview/magan.html (it's a very good read and F1 related, in case you don't know, who Sarah Kavanaugh is)

I especially like the McLaren Mercedes executive. "Good female drivers aren't pretty". Does he expect supermodels to drive racing cars competitively? If so, he might want to take a look at the Hungarian Lotus Ladies Cup. There are at least one or two models there (more like ALL). And besides that, there are definitely some gals out there, who spring into my mind, when I think of pretty and capable racing drivers: Katherine Legge, Rahel Frey, Danica Patrick, Simona de Silvestro, Cyndie Allemann... this list goes on for a while. And that's not my personal preference either (because I'm a straight female...)! Just google around a little bit, visit a couple of forums - the usual stuff - and you'll find many threads about the "hotness" of certain female drivers. Not a very profound statement there, Mister McLaren executive. Even on f1rejects we have a hotness list: TOTB best looking female racers. You can't tell me, McLaren has never even heard of these ladies before...

But the point stands: As long as we have no competitive lady in F1, many people will continue to claim, that women wouldn't withstand the pressure or something like that. Strangely, even Sir Stirling Moss said something along that line, although his sister Pat and his mother Aileen were competitive racing drivers. He should know better. But I digress...

The whole PR thing is a reasonable fear, because Susie had been such a pawn in DTM before. Vanina Ickx, Katherine Legge and Rahel Frey for Audi, too. Williams used the Toto-Wolff-Connection to their advantage, and rightfully so (but that's another topic altogether). But what comes after that? And let's face it: Poor Maria de Villota was only at Marussia because of the Giovanna-Amati-effect (small team in financial trouble plus good looking female driver equals media attention). Has a VERY bitter taste, when you think about it too long. Miss Turner makes this point abundantly clear, and that's a good thing. Unfortunately, she asks the wrong question after that, instead of pointing the finger at the real issue: Only underfunded teams with slow cars are willing to hire female drivers. Why? For the media attention. If that's the only reason for hiring a woman, something is terribly wrong. The situation at DTM could have served to make a point here, while the situation in Indycars (Danica, Simona, Ana Beatriz, Katherine) could have proven, that the opposite of the DTM and F1 mentality is possible. Sad, that this article doesn't even mention the US serieses and their approach to female drivers at all.

And this article is new, for crying out loud! Why doesn't it bother to mention Sauber or Simona de Silvestro? And what about Claire Williams and Monisha Kaltenborn? 50 important people in F1 have a dick, sure. But then at least mention the two powerful ladies without one, because they could be the ones many hopeful female drivers were waiting for to give them a well deserved chance after so long.

Well, I think, I've already gone on far too long on this topic. My opinion on this article is almost longer than the article in question...

Overall, interesting read, but it lacks too many strong arguments for female drivers, which could have been found pretty easily, and it also bends the truth too often or just skips certain valuable information, as dr-baker has already pointed out. I would let it pass as an opinion piece, but not as a well-crafted attempt on representing the strengths of female racing drivers for F1 or in general.

P.S.: I think, Miss Turner skips over Giovanna Amati's attempts on purpose, because 3 DNQs in 3 events doesn't make her look too good. But then again, Amati never got the chance to test the Brabham before Kyalami (there is an interview with Amati in an issue of a certain german motorsports magazine about that topic, but I'm not allowed link to it or translate it because of copyrights), Damon Hill also needed a lot of attempts to qualify that lump of iron and a closer look at Amati's later career would have proven her to be a rather capable driver after all. One glance at her profile on f1rejects would have helped this article...

The twisting of facts in places did rather annoy me as well, and the fact that the author completely disregarded de Silvestro's appointment at Sauber was something that frustrated me quite a bit. Then again, given the political leanings of the Telegraph I wonder whether the decision to completely neglect de Silvestro was intentional.
What is also a little curious is her quote from the anonymous McLaren executive - whilst it is plausible that they could have said that, it does strike me as a little odd. Given McLaren's famed focus - indeed, their entire ethos - revolves around their fastidiousness and obsession with eking out performance gains, the idea that their executives would turn down a potentially competitive female driver solely because of their looks jars a little with their corporate ethos, though perhaps it is just me.

The other aspect that undersells the value of women in motorsport is that the writer concentrates solely on female drivers - which, to be honest, is just one element of the whole situation. What about figures like Kaltenborn or Claire Williams for example? It is only in passing that she mentions those behind the scenes, not just in the cockpit, and even then it is only in a manner that, to be honest, comes across as a bit demeaning to both sexes.
Given Claire Williams is responsible for the commercial operations of the Williams team, amongst other duties, you would have thought that she would have praised her for the fact that, given Williams have been struggling financially recently and looked to be in peril when losing out on PDVSA's substantial sponsorship to Lotus, Williams have managed to sign multiple sponsorship deals over the past year. If anything, Williams have secured some heavyweight sponsors - Martini and Petrobras (from 2015), along with smaller deals such as Esquire (it seems that part of the reason for the blank spaces on the car during the press launch is that they are still signing additional sponsors). Some acknowledgement of those efforts wouldn't go amiss...

Coming at the sport from a technical point of view, what I would also like to see would be more emphasis on encouraging talented female engineers - given that the engineering sector has struggled to encourage more women into the field (although things are improving now that there are more concerted efforts from the professional bodies to promote engineering), it would perhaps help inspire people if we could see a strong female engineer within the sport.
Sadly, the only really high profile female engineer that I can think of within the sport would be Antonia Terzi, and whilst she worked with two major teams (Ferrari and Williams), she never really recovered her reputation after the "walrus tusk" FW26 proved to be nowhere near as competitive as expected (leading to her leaving F1 altogether after the 2004 season).

[Turbogirl]

The twisting of facts in places did rather annoy me as well, and the fact that the author completely disregarded de Silvestro's appointment at Sauber was something that frustrated me quite a bit. Then again, given the political leanings of the Telegraph I wonder whether the decision to completely neglect de Silvestro was intentional.
What is also a little curious is her quote from the anonymous McLaren executive - whilst it is plausible that they could have said that, it does strike me as a little odd. Given McLaren's famed focus - indeed, their entire ethos - revolves around their fastidiousness and obsession with eking out performance gains, the idea that their executives would turn down a potentially competitive female driver solely because of their looks jars a little with their corporate ethos, though perhaps it is just me.

The other aspect that undersells the value of women in motorsport is that the writer concentrates solely on female drivers - which, to be honest, is just one element of the whole situation. What about figures like Kaltenborn or Claire Williams for example? It is only in passing that she mentions those behind the scenes, not just in the cockpit, and even then it is only in a manner that, to be honest, comes across as a bit demeaning to both sexes.
Given Claire Williams is responsible for the commercial operations of the Williams team, amongst other duties, you would have thought that she would have praised her for the fact that, given Williams have been struggling financially recently and looked to be in peril when losing out on PDVSA's substantial sponsorship to Lotus, Williams have managed to sign multiple sponsorship deals over the past year. If anything, Williams have secured some heavyweight sponsors - Martini and Petrobras (from 2015), along with smaller deals such as Esquire (it seems that part of the reason for the blank spaces on the car during the press launch is that they are still signing additional sponsors). Some acknowledgement of those efforts wouldn't go amiss...

Coming at the sport from a technical point of view, what I would also like to see would be more emphasis on encouraging talented female engineers - given that the engineering sector has struggled to encourage more women into the field (although things are improving now that there are more concerted efforts from the professional bodies to promote engineering), it would perhaps help inspire people if we could see a strong female engineer within the sport.
Sadly, the only really high profile female engineer that I can think of within the sport would be Antonia Terzi, and whilst she worked with two major teams (Ferrari and Williams), she never really recovered her reputation after the "walrus tusk" FW26 proved to be nowhere near as competitive as expected (leading to her leaving F1 altogether after the 2004 season).

Not quite. There was Marianne Hinson at Lotus/Caterham from 2010 to 2012. http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/marianne-hinson/29/63a/3ba She was Head of Aerodynamics of the team and would have almost designed the CT03, if I remember correctly, but she was let go before she could. But you're right, besides her and Terzi, I can't think of any woman in the technical department either. And that seems to be a problem in the United States, too. While doing research for my fictional GT series, I came across very few female race engineers, Technical Directors or aerodynamicists in general. And few of them worked in professional racing leagues.

Come to think of it, Terzi's idea might have inspired Lotus' actual fork nose to a certain extent. The real tragic story is, that Terzi had developed the Walrus nosecone for Ferrari when she was still working for them. Michael Schumacher stated, that Ferrari had actually tested that solution, but it hadn't worked there either. Williams, in a desperate attempt to weaken their main rival Ferrari, lured several aerodynamicists to the Grove factory and Terzi managed to convince Head and Michaels of her Walrus nose this time around. The rest is F1 history...

[dr-baker]

Fixed the link in my last post to include the scan of the print edition, which reads even worse than the online version of the article...

And this debate just proves what a shoddy bit of writing it was, where it detracts from her point more than it draws people into her idea. Puts me off the idea of buying any book she writes if this is the quality of her output. Which is a shame, because if only there were also good female print journalists to draw women into the sport...

[Turbogirl]

Fixed the link in my last post to include the scan of the print edition, which reads even worse than the online version of the article...

And this debate just proves what a shoddy bit of writing it was, where it detracts from her point more than it draws people into her idea. Puts me off the idea of buying any book she writes if this is the quality of her output. Which is a shame, because if only there were also good female print journalists to draw women into the sport...

I think, the main problem with this article is the simple fact, that Miss Turner comes to the wrong conclusions at the wrong time with the wrong facts in hand (or simply ignoring the real facts, which can easily be researched, like I did). Pointing out that F1 is misogynistic and sexist ("50 important people have dicks") is nice and all, but if you do it like she did, you make yourself look like a total buffoon. That doesn't help our case in any way.

And I noticed by reading the article again, that most if not all the "arguments" she makes have been made a million times before, every time the topic "women in motorsports" is brought up. As mario and I have pointed out, there are tons of new arguments she could have made, but she didn't. Let's just see, if her predecessor (whoever that will be) fares better, when Button or Moss or whatshisface says something irredeemably stupid about women in motorsports again. It'll happen, just wait for it.

P.S.: I'm not very proud of my curly hair, though. It's natural, so I can't do much about it and most hair styles I've tried so far look like shite. I have no idea, why Rahel Frey sports such a mane intentionally...

[Jocke1]

I have no idea, why Rahel Frey sports such a mane intentionally...

Because she is awesome, beautiful and awesome.

[good_Ralf]

The real tragic story is, that Terzi had developed the Walrus nosecone for Ferrari when she was still working for them. Michael Schumacher stated, that Ferrari had actually tested that solution, but it hadn't worked there either. Williams, in a desperate attempt to weaken their main rival Ferrari, lured several aerodynamicists to the Grove factory and Terzi managed to convince Head and Michaels of her Walrus nose this time around. The rest is F1 history...

I think this is the Ferrari design.

[dinizintheoven]

Something looks suspicious there, especially the Marlboro logo in the wrong font (which looks more like Times New Roman from here) and the Bridgestone B on the winglet...

Anyone at Sutton Images going to own up to the Photoshop job?

[AndreaModa]

Something looks suspicious there, especially the Marlboro logo in the wrong font (which looks more like Times New Roman from here) and the Bridgestone B on the winglet...

Anyone at Sutton Images going to own up to the Photoshop job?

Look at the nose tip as well. The left (right as we look at it) pylon looks like it merges into the nose at a much earlier point than the opposite pylon. I'm calling foul.

[Turbogirl]

Something looks suspicious there, especially the Marlboro logo in the wrong font (which looks more like Times New Roman from here) and the Bridgestone B on the winglet...

Anyone at Sutton Images going to own up to the Photoshop job?

Look at the nose tip as well. The left (right as we look at it) pylon looks like it merges into the nose at a much earlier point than the opposite pylon. I'm calling foul.

This picture can't be genuine. As far as I know, Ferrari tested their walrus nosecone in secret. There shouldn't exist any photo at all. I also found this exact picture on grandprixgames.org, so I suppose it must be fake. Too bad actually, cause I would have loved to see the real thing...

[takagi_for_the_win]

The real tragic story is, that Terzi had developed the Walrus nosecone for Ferrari when she was still working for them. Michael Schumacher stated, that Ferrari had actually tested that solution, but it hadn't worked there either. Williams, in a desperate attempt to weaken their main rival Ferrari, lured several aerodynamicists to the Grove factory and Terzi managed to convince Head and Michaels of her Walrus nose this time around. The rest is F1 history...

I think this is the Ferrari design.

Fakesies. The left pylon (right from how we see it) completely ignores the lighting and the fact it should be in shadow, almost as if someone has drawn it on in Photoshop...

[Jocke1]

I think the photo is legit.

[dr-baker]

I think the photo is legit.

Says the in-house conspiracy theorist.

[FMecha]

Thoughts on Joe Saward?
Captain Hammer isn't here anymore, so...

[good_Ralf]

I've beem reading David Coulthard's thoughts on the Chinese GP and I get the feeling, like SgtPepper, that he's biased.

It's early days, but this is already reminiscent of Raikkonen's first spell at Ferrari, when he was not that impressive.
Okay, he won the world title in 2007, but that was largely because the McLaren guys tripped over each other. And Raikkonen still needed to be gifted the win in the final race of the season by team-mate Felipe Massa to seal it.

Raikkonen did very well at Lotus in the last two years, but was that just a very good package coupled with the fact that Romain Grosjean is just not that good? Or did it all just work for Raikkonen? It's very difficult to judge.

Is Coulthard being harsh on Raikkonen because he got thrashed by Kimi when they were teammates at McLaren? And anyway Raikkonen was very good in 2007 thank you very much. Plus there is also evidence, if ever needed, that he is against Grosjean as well, as I thought. Grosjean is actually very good, otherwise he wouldn't be transcending the abilities of his Lotus at the moment, like he did in China.

I'm not trying to discredit Raikkonen, because he is clearly a very talented racing driver.

OK, Coulthard is trying to be fair, but that comment is over-weighed by his other comments about Kimi. Of course Kimi is underperforming badly at the moment but I'm sure he will pick up some speed eventually, otherwise Coulthard might be right. I had to include this so that I'm not so biased myself.

This post, much like my opinion on Ferrari, might be completely wrong, but this is my opinion on DC's media skills.

[watka]

I think the Ferrari comments are reasonably fair and the Lotus comments are not so on the money.

Raikkonen would not have won the 2007 season had McLaren, both as a team and as drivers, had not made so many mistakes. Alonso and Hamilton were forever taking points off of each other and some specific instances come to mind of individual errors that would not have occurred if they had not been in such an instance battle with each other - Alonso's penalty at Hungary for his qualifying antics in the pit-lane, Hamilton binning it in the pit-lane gravel in China. Raikkonen was undoubtedly the beneficiary and had the full support of the team from about the British Grand Prix onwards whereas McLaren failed to pick sides. Alonso and Hamilton were fundamentally faster than Raikkonen despite Raikkonen being the pre-season favourite for the title. In 2008, Massa, who was not particularly rated, had the better of him. So you could say that it took all of one and a half seasons to lose team leader status despite Ferrari having him marked for the position as early as 2005. As such, it is fair to say that he failed to meet expectations at Ferrari (especially as the car was reasonably good) and hence "not that impressive".

At Lotus, the car was clearly good and suited Kimi. But we all know from the second half of 2013 that Grosjean is a very good driver indeed, so to come back from rallying and have the beating of him I think at least shows that Raikkonen was very comfortable in that environment and at most shows that he never lost the speed that he had in his early days.


I'm not sure I can see any bias if I'm honest.

[CoopsII]

Thoughts on Joe Saward?
Captain Hammer isn't here anymore, so...

Floats around the paddock inflated on his own self importance? Mistakes his own opinion for news? Thinks his poxy Grand Prix Plus online magazine is better than the Internet. Believes if he constantly refers to how well known and respected he is within the F1 paddock it'll somehow become true? Uses a stupid selfie of himself with Mark Webber in the distant background to promote the idea of him being part of F1?

Never heard of him......

[dr-baker]

I read an article that was linked to on Twitter and it just mildly annoyed me. "Esquire editor from New York who doesn't drive, so drives a Formula E car."

The electricity for the machines is supplied by generators modified to run on glycerine, a byproduct of biodiesel production that's safe to eat. (I can attest—I tried it.)

All because something is safe to do, you have to go ahead and do it?!?!?

For a variety of reasons, I felt it was important not to crash the car.

Really, why's that? Please, do enlighten me!

The FIA, the international body that oversees professional racing leagues, limits Formula E cars to around 145 miles per hour.

First time I have heard of that. I simply thought it was limited by modern electric and battery technology. I wish there was a source for that piece of information.

Nelson Piquet, a Brazilian Formula E pro whose father was a three-time Formula 1 champion, is an avid skydiver, and he routinely drives more than 160 miles an hour on the European superhighways near his Monaco home.

He does 160 mph not just on the German Autobahnen but also on the European superhighways? What are these mystical roads? Where are they? I wanna drive fast too! And legally! Just like Piquet appears able to do!

When they accelerate, it's with an electric squeal rather than the guttural roar of a stock car or a diesel-powered indycar.

A diesel-powered IndyCar? Seriously? Stop living in the past...

And to top it all...

My troubles began right out of the gate, when I failed to switch the car—which had been described to me as a "souped-up go-kart"—out of "pit mode," a setting that limited me to first gear. (I also forgot to put my helmet visor down—a bit of a self-own when you're continually kicking up dust clouds as you navigate the track.)

...He admits to being a muppet.

[Rob Dylan]

I must say that was quite an entertaining read! Gives hope to the wannabe journalists such as myself, that in some circles there really isn't much strong competition!

[Ataxia]

I must say that was quite an entertaining read! Gives hope to the wannabe journalists such as myself, that in some circles there really isn't much strong competition!

If I can do it, anyone can I guess...

[dr-baker]

Now THIS is how the last article should have been written: http://blackflag.jalopnik.com/i-drove-a ... 1795560249

[Scrap Thistlethwayte]

As a member of an entirely shite journalist union I feel moderately conflicted about this thread. No one is above criticism on the other hand there are plenty of things that get on my nerves.

Rather than single out individuals I'd like to point the finger at the BBC TV news programs who always tell viewers to "look away if they don't want to know the score" for the sports they hold the rights to but blurt out the winning drivers name in the opening two words of their F1 report.

Similarly Channel 4's reports are read by just about anyone who didn't forget their reading specs that day.

Also why does David Coulthard say Key-me? Is that how it's pronounced? I don't know but he's the only one who does it?

Grrr