I would love to see a woman in F1 but...

[peanutaxis]

I don't get why guys you use Yuki as an example. He is perfectly fit for the analogy of his size especially on the neck. The point is that you need to carry in corner's and breaking your own body and Yuki is fine imo
If a woman can be like him then its doable to be able to race.

Yeah, claiming Yuki is not that strong is nonsense. Guys just have a lot more strength than you realise. Again have a look at this link I provided earlier. An extremely small percentage of women are stronger than the average male. But we're not talking about the average male. We're probably talking about the top 1%. It's just impossible for a woman IF strength is important.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautifu ... /almost_al

[peanutaxis]

Thanks for engaging, peanutaxis. I have no intention of pushing my views over some one else’s.

About head rest for the sustained high lateral G forces:
viewtopic.php?p=1204275#p1204275
viewtopic.php?p=1204274#p1204274


And just to throw a last spanner on the works: Zanardi. I’ll just leave that there.

No probs.

Without reading those threads I would bet that the point of those [presumably padded] protrusions is that they are to soften the blow if your head hits the sides, not to actually rest your head against. Perhaps Suzuka is particularly bumpy? They are small diameter meaning that when your head hits it it crushes it and dampens the blow more than hitting the flat, large area of the mandatory foam inserts.

[PlatinumZealot]

Well if you ignore the title and statements surrounding the actual points, the argument set up to be answered was that women can't compete in F1.

I have no issue with that discussion though others might. But the better question is what are the abilities that separate out the good drivers from the best. It's not just have a few ms better reaction time, there is a lot more to it than that. The skills would be different between race and Q also, where in a race experience and racing intelligence are invaluable and the ability to have a technical proficiency that allows you to understand how to manage the tyres through your steering input and settings and the ability to be able to feel and understand how the tyres are evolving are skills second to none. I can't imagine this has anything to do with gender.

In Q, you need short burst concentration and no, not strength, but you will need fast twitch muscles that can allow your body to react quickly with steering input when you are on the edge. Women tend to have more slow twitch muscles and and men more fast. This is more likely to be an actual impairment than any minute cognitive differences. There will be some women who break the mold, but the pool of potential drivers would be much smaller as a result and this may well be a reason as to why it is harder for women to get into racing, and for those that are capable to succeed in it.

But you simply can't answer the question of who is capable of competing in F1 until you agree what are the ways in which this can be measured and what are the different skills and attributes they need, otherwise it is just devolve into a largely meandering post.

Just take any sport where strength is part of the equation like cricket, tennis, football, basketball etc. and apply it to F1 as to why men and women don't compete against each other. The arguments are not going to be any different.

People would love to take the physicality of racing out of a debate when it is convenient for them.

It's not convenient for me, I just don't think strength is as much a factor, I think the ability to translate good racing decisions into steering input quickly is more important. Physical endurance can come into it as tiredness could affect your ability to be able wrestle the car for a full race distance at the same level of muscle response of those around you.

Why do you think peak physical strength is such a big deal in F1? Even the neck gets a lot more support these days with the headrests. What level of strength is required to drive an F1 car that you are so readily able to say it is beyond a woman?

I really don't think strength is much to do with this and if you look at the physical attributes of women, you need to look at their weight too. Drivers actually don't build muscle as weight is so important. If women are on average lighter , are they able to simply build the muscle they need because they would need additional ballast anyway due to the rules? Wouldn't that equation possibly just balance out, I certainly think so, and I do think there are a lot of quick and easy and ill thought out assertions being made.

Not agreeing with the lighter and muscle theory.

Males have a disproportionately higher power to weight ratio. (see sprinting for example).
Males aslo have more neurons for spatial processing and motion detection.

What this means is that the female driver would feel more neck pain, more tiredness in her arms and and her coordination will start to degrade faster (normal as men were the hunters) as the the race wears on. Hmm come to think of it... LeMans might be a better ground foster female participation.

It would take a special woman or women to be competing tenth for tenth and and keeping race pace with the men though. I think such a woman would have to go through intense development from child to adult stage.

[hollus]

It would take a special woman or women to be competing tenth for tenth and and keeping race pace with the men though.

Errr.. special like the current F1 drivers, which are in the 0.001% in terms of innate talent?

I think such a woman would have to go through intense development from child to adult stage.

I see, like Alonso, Hamilton or Schumacher, then.

[mwillems]

Just take any sport where strength is part of the equation like cricket, tennis, football, basketball etc. and apply it to F1 as to why men and women don't compete against each other. The arguments are not going to be any different.

People would love to take the physicality of racing out of a debate when it is convenient for them.

It's not convenient for me, I just don't think strength is as much a factor, I think the ability to translate good racing decisions into steering input quickly is more important. Physical endurance can come into it as tiredness could affect your ability to be able wrestle the car for a full race distance at the same level of muscle response of those around you.

Why do you think peak physical strength is such a big deal in F1? Even the neck gets a lot more support these days with the headrests. What level of strength is required to drive an F1 car that you are so readily able to say it is beyond a woman?

I really don't think strength is much to do with this and if you look at the physical attributes of women, you need to look at their weight too. Drivers actually don't build muscle as weight is so important. If women are on average lighter , are they able to simply build the muscle they need because they would need additional ballast anyway due to the rules? Wouldn't that equation possibly just balance out, I certainly think so, and I do think there are a lot of quick and easy and ill thought out assertions being made.

Not agreeing with the lighter and muscle theory.

Males have a disproportionately higher power to weight ratio. (see sprinting for example).
Males aslo have more neurons for spatial processing and motion detection.

What this means is that the female driver would feel more neck pain, more tiredness in her arms and and her coordination will start to degrade faster (normal as men were the hunters) as the the race wears on. Hmm come to think of it... LeMans might be a better ground foster female participation.

It would take a special woman or women to be competing tenth for tenth and and keeping race pace with the men though. I think such a woman would have to go through intense development from child to adult stage.

Why would it take a special woman? This all all anecdotal with no actual metric or measure even in opinion that demonstrates where the bar rests for endurance and strength and why woman can't reach it.

I could read your reply and totally forget that women compete in elite sports already. If I watch any elite racket sport it becomes really clear that women have plenty of strength and endurance at the top level. At tennis grand slams they will play for an average of 1 hour and 40 minutes up to 8 times over the course of two weeks at an intensity that seems at face value at least the equal of what an F1 car would take.

I've no doubt that Men are stronger than women. The question is, does that extra strength really count or are they strong enough? Surely once you have enough strength and endurance, any extra isn't really going to add anything? There's a limit to what you need. And I don't think it is the limiter in terms of how an F1 driver can perform.

As for people that train their whole lives, isn't that what a large portion of male and female elite athletes do? I'm not quite sure why you mention this.

Some factual differences between men and women:

Womens marathon record is 2hrs 9 mins and the mens is 2 hours on the dot. Nothing much in it. Mens 100m record is 9.58 and womens is 10.49. The Women's time is only 9% greater. I think that once you get to the elite level where body architectures are quite different from the average that you are summarising, the difference is not always as big as you think.

The same pool of elite physical female specimens are available to F1 like they are to every other sport.

[FW17]

It's not convenient for me, I just don't think strength is as much a factor, I think the ability to translate good racing decisions into steering input quickly is more important. Physical endurance can come into it as tiredness could affect your ability to be able wrestle the car for a full race distance at the same level of muscle response of those around you.

Why do you think peak physical strength is such a big deal in F1? Even the neck gets a lot more support these days with the headrests. What level of strength is required to drive an F1 car that you are so readily able to say it is beyond a woman?

I really don't think strength is much to do with this and if you look at the physical attributes of women, you need to look at their weight too. Drivers actually don't build muscle as weight is so important. If women are on average lighter , are they able to simply build the muscle they need because they would need additional ballast anyway due to the rules? Wouldn't that equation possibly just balance out, I certainly think so, and I do think there are a lot of quick and easy and ill thought out assertions being made.

Not agreeing with the lighter and muscle theory.

Males have a disproportionately higher power to weight ratio. (see sprinting for example).
Males aslo have more neurons for spatial processing and motion detection.

What this means is that the female driver would feel more neck pain, more tiredness in her arms and and her coordination will start to degrade faster (normal as men were the hunters) as the the race wears on. Hmm come to think of it... LeMans might be a better ground foster female participation.

It would take a special woman or women to be competing tenth for tenth and and keeping race pace with the men though. I think such a woman would have to go through intense development from child to adult stage.

Why would it take a special woman? This all all anecdotal with no actual metric or measure even in opinion that demonstrates where the bar rests for endurance and strength and why woman can't reach it.

I could read your reply and totally forget that women compete in elite sports already. If I watch any elite racket sport it becomes really clear that women have plenty of strength and endurance at the top level. At tennis grand slams they will play for an average of 1 hour and 40 minutes up to 8 times over the course of two weeks at an intensity that seems at face value at least the equal of what an F1 car would take.

I've no doubt that Men are stronger than women. The question is, does that extra strength really count or are they strong enough? Surely once you have enough strength and endurance, any extra isn't really going to add anything? There's a limit to what you need. And I don't think it is the limiter in terms of how an F1 driver can perform.

As for people that train their whole lives, isn't that what a large portion of male and female elite athletes do? I'm not quite sure why you mention this.

Some factual differences between men and women:

Womens marathon record is 2hrs 9 mins and the mens is 2 hours on the dot. Nothing much in it. Mens 100m record is 9.58 and womens is 10.49. The Women's time is only 9% greater. I think that once you get to the elite level where body architectures are quite different from the average that you are summarising, the difference is not always as big as you think.

The same pool of elite physical female specimens are available to F1 like they are to every other sport.

You probably the only person in the world to think 9% difference abilities of competitors is going to be an exiting match up or even allowed to match up.

[mwillems]

Not agreeing with the lighter and muscle theory.

Males have a disproportionately higher power to weight ratio. (see sprinting for example).
Males aslo have more neurons for spatial processing and motion detection.

What this means is that the female driver would feel more neck pain, more tiredness in her arms and and her coordination will start to degrade faster (normal as men were the hunters) as the the race wears on. Hmm come to think of it... LeMans might be a better ground foster female participation.

It would take a special woman or women to be competing tenth for tenth and and keeping race pace with the men though. I think such a woman would have to go through intense development from child to adult stage.

Why would it take a special woman? This all all anecdotal with no actual metric or measure even in opinion that demonstrates where the bar rests for endurance and strength and why woman can't reach it.

I could read your reply and totally forget that women compete in elite sports already. If I watch any elite racket sport it becomes really clear that women have plenty of strength and endurance at the top level. At tennis grand slams they will play for an average of 1 hour and 40 minutes up to 8 times over the course of two weeks at an intensity that seems at face value at least the equal of what an F1 car would take.

I've no doubt that Men are stronger than women. The question is, does that extra strength really count or are they strong enough? Surely once you have enough strength and endurance, any extra isn't really going to add anything? There's a limit to what you need. And I don't think it is the limiter in terms of how an F1 driver can perform.

As for people that train their whole lives, isn't that what a large portion of male and female elite athletes do? I'm not quite sure why you mention this.

Some factual differences between men and women:

Womens marathon record is 2hrs 9 mins and the mens is 2 hours on the dot. Nothing much in it. Mens 100m record is 9.58 and womens is 10.49. The Women's time is only 9% greater. I think that once you get to the elite level where body architectures are quite different from the average that you are summarising, the difference is not always as big as you think.

The same pool of elite physical female specimens are available to F1 like they are to every other sport.

You probably the only person in the world to think 9% difference abilities of competitors is going to be an exiting match up or even allowed to match up.

Ahh bless you I think you've failed to understand. You probably need to go back and reread.

I said I doubt that the level of strength and endurance in elite tennis is required for F1 and that women at the elite level have more than enough for F1s requirements, not that it would be exciting to pit men against women in their respective sports that rely much more heavily on the physical condition.

I also said that I suspect that once you reach a certain level of strength and endurance that I doubt that even if you had extra of both it wouldn't do you much good in F1.

In terms on strength, it looks like the 2 key strength requirements are in the neck and grip.

https://www.businessinsider.com/f1-how- ... -be-2022-6

[PlatinumZealot]

Ahh bless you I think you've failed to understand. You probably need to go back and reread.

I said I doubt that the level of strength and endurance in elite tennis is required for F1 and that women at the elite level have more than enough for F1s requirements, not that it would be exciting to pit men against women in their respective sports that rely much more heavily on the physical condition.

I also said that I suspect that once you reach a certain level of strength and endurance that I doubt that even if you had extra of both it wouldn't do you much good in F1.

In terms on strength, it looks like the 2 key strength requirements are in the neck and grip.

https://www.businessinsider.com/f1-how- ... -be-2022-6

So why don't we see this competitiveness in the feeder categories then?

It's not only being strong enough to complete a race an F1 car, i think it's about being competitive.

The physically weakest formula 1 driver in recent times would likey be a 17 year old max, an 18 year old Lando Norris? Or even a 19 year old Yuki Tsunoda. We can also mention a rookie Fellipe Massa and Kimi Antonnelli? As the smallest likely weakest drivers. And even considering those, there are countless videos where a teenage boy is proving stronger than an elite woman in a certain sports.

Now does this difference in strength and endurance matters over a race distance? Hmm. I think yes because the steering wheel is not the only force being resisted ovee two hours. ( G force, braking leg, mental accuity, reactions).

It would be interesting to see what sport comes close to this? How did Danica Patrick do in IndyCar if anyone knows? At one point she looked to be taking all sorts of spicey stuff, she was super ripped! Lol

[mwillems]

In the moment it took to look at several championship standings to answer that question it's clear there are no girls in them.

[V12-POWER]

It's not convenient for me, I just don't think strength is as much a factor, I think the ability to translate good racing decisions into steering input quickly is more important. Physical endurance can come into it as tiredness could affect your ability to be able wrestle the car for a full race distance at the same level of muscle response of those around you.

Why do you think peak physical strength is such a big deal in F1? Even the neck gets a lot more support these days with the headrests. What level of strength is required to drive an F1 car that you are so readily able to say it is beyond a woman?

I really don't think strength is much to do with this and if you look at the physical attributes of women, you need to look at their weight too. Drivers actually don't build muscle as weight is so important. If women are on average lighter , are they able to simply build the muscle they need because they would need additional ballast anyway due to the rules? Wouldn't that equation possibly just balance out, I certainly think so, and I do think there are a lot of quick and easy and ill thought out assertions being made.

Not agreeing with the lighter and muscle theory.

Males have a disproportionately higher power to weight ratio. (see sprinting for example).
Males aslo have more neurons for spatial processing and motion detection.

What this means is that the female driver would feel more neck pain, more tiredness in her arms and and her coordination will start to degrade faster (normal as men were the hunters) as the the race wears on. Hmm come to think of it... LeMans might be a better ground foster female participation.

It would take a special woman or women to be competing tenth for tenth and and keeping race pace with the men though. I think such a woman would have to go through intense development from child to adult stage.

Why would it take a special woman? This all all anecdotal with no actual metric or measure even in opinion that demonstrates where the bar rests for endurance and strength and why woman can't reach it.

I could read your reply and totally forget that women compete in elite sports already. If I watch any elite racket sport it becomes really clear that women have plenty of strength and endurance at the top level. At tennis grand slams they will play for an average of 1 hour and 40 minutes up to 8 times over the course of two weeks at an intensity that seems at face value at least the equal of what an F1 car would take.

I've no doubt that Men are stronger than women. The question is, does that extra strength really count or are they strong enough? Surely once you have enough strength and endurance, any extra isn't really going to add anything? There's a limit to what you need. And I don't think it is the limiter in terms of how an F1 driver can perform.

As for people that train their whole lives, isn't that what a large portion of male and female elite athletes do? I'm not quite sure why you mention this.

Some factual differences between men and women:

Womens marathon record is 2hrs 9 mins and the mens is 2 hours on the dot. Nothing much in it. Mens 100m record is 9.58 and womens is 10.49. The Women's time is only 9% greater. I think that once you get to the elite level where body architectures are quite different from the average that you are summarising, the difference is not always as big as you think.

The same pool of elite physical female specimens are available to F1 like they are to every other sport.

A “9% difference” over a theoretical 1 minute lap is about 5.5 seconds. unacceptable in a sport where you fight for Miliseconds. Is this enough difference for you?

It also matches the difference of Calderons time vs qualy times of the sauber car from 2018.

if it hasn’t happened today with the global push for diversity, it’s most likely undoable

[Hoffman900]

Have any of you ever been around athletic women? It sure doesn’t read like it.

Having been around a bunch of collegiate rugby and field hockey players, not only are they definitely strong enough, but they’ll also rip your heads off.

<personal comments removed>

The barrier of entry is money. It takes something like $30mil (USD) to even get to the point of F2. So they would have to be the kid of someone very rich or be sponsored. Seeing how a lot of Middle East and other oligarch money, I don’t see that happening, because those are not groups that are known for their gender equality.

People want to think F1 is a British sport, and while it started and is based there, it’s all Middle East money floating the whole ship now.

So not only do they need talented, they need the money behind them, and it’s just a numbers game at that point.

[peanutaxis]

Why would it take a special woman? This all all anecdotal with no actual metric or measure even in opinion that demonstrates where the bar rests for endurance and strength and why woman can't reach it.

There has been plenty of evidence brought up suggesting why men have a significant advantage in an F1 car. And what metric or measures have you come up with? The link you provided earlier is evidence for the OP. F1 drivers are "elite athletes" where "strength" matters.
https://www.redbull.com/us-en/formula-o ... ness-plans
You just seem to be stuck on the idea that racing in F1 doesn't require strength. And you are wrong.
And in order to prove your point you need to address the OP. But you can't and so you won't.

I could read your reply and totally forget that women compete in elite sports already.

Irrelevant unless they are successfully competing with men. See the OP.

If I watch any elite racket sport it becomes really clear that women have plenty of strength and endurance at the top level. At tennis grand slams they will play for an average of 1 hour and 40 minutes up to 8 times over the course of two weeks at an intensity that seems at face value at least the equal of what an F1 car would take.

An ant has plenty of strength and endurance. They can lift ten times their own weight! An ant would easily be able to compete in F1 and wipe the floor with everybody.
It has been estimated that the top woman tennis player might be about rank 300-400 in the men's, and that's being generous. There have been 770 odd Grand prix drivers in history. IF tennis is at all comparative to F1 (doubtful), then we would expect about 2.5 women to have been able to compete in F1 in the entire history of F1.

I've no doubt that Men are stronger than women. The question is, does that extra strength really count or are they strong enough? Surely once you have enough strength and endurance, any extra isn't really going to add anything? There's a limit to what you need. And I don't think it is the limiter in terms of how an F1 driver can perform.

Google says there are 8,000 different sports in the world. If you are correct then surely there are at least a few other examples of sports where the competitors are described as elite athletes where women can compete with men. For myself I am honestly open to there being examples, but I suspect there will not be.

Womens marathon record is 2hrs 9 mins and the mens is 2 hours on the dot. Nothing much in it. Mens 100m record is 9.58 and womens is 10.49. The Women's time is only 9% greater. I think that once you get to the elite level where body architectures are quite different from the average that you are summarising, the difference is not always as big as you think.

7% (marathon) and 9% is quite a lot. Again for the purposes of this discussion what is relevant is what rank the fastest woman would be on the men's ranking.
For the marathon it might not be as bad because it is an endurance sport. (It will still be bad because if you are a man and are 7% slower than the fastest man then you are not getting anywhere near the Olympics or world championship; the top runners will all be within a few % of each other on the world stage)
But when it comes to muscle strength - a lot more important in sprinting - many male team sports players, for instance, can run 10.5 which means that a 10.49second female sprinter will be waaaaaay down the list of professional male sprinters.

This all all anecdotal with no actual metric or measure even in opinion that demonstrates where the bar rests for endurance and strength and why woman can't reach it.

And so, even in just this post I have come up with plenty of evidence that is far from anecdotal to suggest that women would not likely be able to compete in F1. I look forward to your evidence.

[Hoffman900]

Have any of you ever been around athletic women? It sure doesn’t read like it.

Having been around a bunch of collegiate rugby and field hockey players, not only are they definitely strong enough, but they’ll also rip your heads off.

Kind of funny seeing a bunch of keyboard touchers...

Again, an ant can lift ten times it's weight. Can it therefore be competitive in men's weighlifting?

But I can do even better: I have spent plenty of time around ants.

Now that. Is funny.

I watched a 145lb female squat 285lbs at my gym this week. There are females this strong in many gyms and in many sports. . Another female local, former velodrome racer, squatted 275lbs at 134lbs of bodyweight at a local power lifting competition.

Having been within arms length of Bottas, and spending most of my life around athletes, I can tell you he can’t do that. His neck is as big as mine was when I was a high schooler and wrestled. Not uncommon at all.

F1 drivers have extremely quick reflexes and processing power, but strong powerful people they are not.

https://www.autoweek.com/racing/indycar ... ycar-test/

Grosjean had to bulk up, and there have been multiple women compete in these cars. A F1 car would not be a problem, physically, for an athletic female.

My guess most on here could barely squat 135lbs (ass to grass).

And remember, the often quoted 300lbs of brake force is that, a force. This isn’t the same as squatting. Force can be measured on force plates. F1 drivers have the advantage too of being assisted with higher g forces.

[Rodak]

Gotta say, it's not a strength or reflex issue, it's an interest issue. I offered my daughter, who watched F1 with me and knew the drivers et al, the chance to drive a race car. She was not interested. Women have different interests than men so there are not as many of them interested in racing. Women are not as interested in racing as men so there will not be as many woman drivers vs men drivers. The issue is not ability, it's interest. Certainly there are women who could be successful F1 drivers, it's just that there are fewer of them than men which makes it much more difficult for a good woman driver to shine.

Ice dancing anyone?

[Airshifter]

Have any of you ever been around athletic women? It sure doesn’t read like it.

Having been around a bunch of collegiate rugby and field hockey players, not only are they definitely strong enough, but they’ll also rip your heads off.

Kind of funny seeing a bunch of keyboard touchers and people’s who hobby is sports spectating talk about strength and competiveness. Two groups of people who athletic women typically don’t spend much time around.

The barrier of entry is money. It takes something like $30mil (USD) to even get to the point of F2. So they would have to be the kid of someone very rich or be sponsored. Seeing how a lot of Middle East and other oligarch money, I don’t see that happening, because those are not groups that are known for their gender equality.

People want to think F1 is a British sport, and while it started and is based there, it’s all Middle East money floating the whole ship now.

So not only do they need talented, they need the money behind them, and it’s just a numbers game at that point.

I'd suspect that many of the comments of those so biased against women being able to compete in F1 have zero reference as to how fit many women are these days. Comparisons of world records and such fly, and nobody slows down enough to realize how few men will ever come close to such records either... They don't want to compare anything relative other than to say men outperform women in sports, so it applies to racing as well.

I don't think F1 drives are even close to "elite athletes" in any sport other than F1, and then only because only a handful get to drive F1 cars. There are rare exceptions but the cars themselves don't hold a high physical demand except in specific areas. There are probably loads of non elite level athletes of both sexes that could easily withstand the physical rigors of driving an F1 cars.

I think most of your comments are spot on, with interest and financial backing there would be many more women in motorsport. And this thread is a prime example of why many wouldn't be interested, even if they liked racing. The sexist attitudes of many would just make it a hostile place that few would want to be in.