V12-POWER wrote: ↑05 Jan 2025, 16:59
fair enough. some things still taken as granted, ie, saying you only need to be "this" fit and stop. I doubt racing drivers take it easy outside the track, they would push for performance as much as they do on track. When I train I still push for more even if my endurance is already enough, so fitness levels never stop being a differentiator no matter the importance, saying it doesnt matter past a certain point is nonsense, its like saying "im this fast and thats enough, no more improvement needed" which is the mentality that makes athletes lose in all disciplines.
how fast is football evolving?
https://www.facebook.com/FootballFunnys ... 047149985/
so hold your horses. examples like these are many.
"A study that has a pool of one, two or three would be laughed out of any journal"
true, but when every new F1 driver is at least within 2 seconds of the top, one that is 4 seconds (irrelevant of sex) is just not deemed capable. thats how things are as of today. the day a girl can hop in and make similar times, we will talk.
if it hasnt happened in todays age, it is unlikely to happen in the future too
the day a girl can hop in and make similar times, we will talk.
The fact that women aren't in F1 now or close to competitive times has nothing to do with capability (today) unless you can demonstrate it has. But if you don't want to adapt your opinion to all the information presented because you're not ready, that is your prerogative. It's worth saying, I'm not going to argue that women
can be successful in F1. I'm just objectively arguing with some of the reasons posited here. There's still a lot more to consider around the subject if discussed properly. What I am saying, is if there is a reason, I highly doubt it is physicality and because of the sheer difficulty that presents itself to women before they even sit in a kart, it is pretty hard to say it is down to talent.
I don't know what that physical limit limit is, just that it isn't the elite physical sport that many have used as the barrier to women being successful in F1. I'm saying that it appears fairly easy to say it is within reach of enough of a cohort of women to be able to supply F1 with a pool of talent... if women had all the other requisite skills which haven't really been discussed yet because it takes 8 pages for people to start to realise that maybe the girls an push a pedal and steer a wheel for two hours and still maintain mental accuity.
If this thread tried to objectively look at the skills and attributes required, and tried to apply some objective and fact based answers to come to an educated guess, and it seemed against women to do well in F1, then so be it. But there is little chance that this thread will progress objectively rather than just throw up incredibly lazy and abstract reasons why they can't and challenge someone to disprove it.
Watching international football I can see the advancements of womens football, but for sure it is not an even journey across the leagues and teams and as far as women's professional football goes, it is still early days. Girls leagues are still expanding and it is in it's infancy. Look at how long it takes things like the MLS to grow. But women's football is growing, the best international footballers are getting better with training and funding. And this observation is most easily seen when looking at the correlation between Olympic funding and results. Britain is a great example of that. You can have all the talent in the world, and we always had huge Olympic talent, but if you don't fund and support it to the level of your competitors it doesn't matter one bit.
GB decided to prepare for the London Olympics by increasing funding at Beijing, these are the numbers:
It took 8 years for the results to truly start to show, and to nearly double the number of golds we had to increase funding 8 times it's original level in Sydney. Increasing the budget 50% at Athens made almost no perceptible difference. That's how much hard cash and time it takes. 8 times the money for double the results over nearly a decade.
Women in motorsports are not getting this kind of backing even now, it's still just largely for perception with not enough happening at the grassroots.
In the Olympic example, both men and women are heavily into Olympic sports all around the UK. This is not a standing start like Women in 4 wheel track based Motorsports where there are so very few despite the new women's upper categories giving a different perception. The fact that a women got to within 2 seconds of a man in F1, against all the odds, is fantastic. Especially when you consider that when a women last drove an F1 car, the simulators were not even close to todays capabilities.
Be worth looking at male debutants from 15 years ago to see how they did and what the gap was too. Also worth noting that Wolff had barely any Time in F3 due to injury, but even then, she was finishing 9th and 11th in her first season for the only 2 races, that's actually pretty good. The fact that next year she went to DTM was not likely due to talent but other considerations in her life, such as her age.
Imagine what they'd do if they were fully backed like guys were , through driver programs that only recently started to open up properly to women, with a pool of talent and not just the lucky ones that got the once in twenty years opportunity for a girl to drive an F1 car and not just the ones connected to a major shareholder of the day. Don't get me wrong, she earned it, but if it wasn't for media perception and for Toto it wouldn't have happened.
You don't need to say women can be as good as men in F1 (I certainly won't make that conclusion though I think they can compete), just open your mind to some of the reasons they might not be competitive and don't be so rigid in your conclusion.
