Toro Rosso could adopt Renault colours

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Renault could have a stronger presence on Toro Rosso’s livery as the engine manufacturer seeks to increase the exposure it gets from Formula One.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Toro Rosso could adopt Renault-inspired livery (F1)

"Marko however says that the most likely option would be a rebranding for Red Bull's sister team."

FIA wants 'proper debate' on Ecclestone's idea for women (USA Today)

"From my own experience as a competitor, I truly believe women want to compete on an equal level with their male counterparts. They have proved through the decades that it is possible, even if only a few."

Endurance series calls time on 'Grid Girls' (Reuters)

"The World Endurance Championship, whose annual highlight is the Le Mans 24 Hours sportscar classic, is getting rid of the 'grid girls'."

Maurizio Arrivabene broke down and cried after text from Michael Schumacher's family (ESPN)

"Ferrari boss Maurizio Arrivabene says a congratulatory text from the family of Michael Schumacher was enough to break his cool demeanour after Sebastian Vettel's Malaysia victory."

Horner: Ferrari shows everything is possible (Crash)

"It demonstrates that everything is possible. Ferrari has done a good job and things can change quite quickly."

Stewart: F1 should stand by traditional European races (AP)

"We have got such total domination, except for the last race, that it has done damage to F1, in the same way as we lost television audiences and attendance figures in the Michael Schumacher days at Ferrari."

Temperaturses in China could hurt McLaren (F1i)

"I think the trickier thing will be it’s cooler, so we will not get the benefit we had (in Malaysia) of having higher downforce than other cars, so they’ll be stronger probably."

Horner: Ferrari gives Vettel right 'feel' (Autosport)

"He's obviously got the feel that he needs from the car that Ferrari are providing him."


Comment of the day

Should Marcus Ericsson have abandoned his car more quickly when he spun off in Malaysia?

It took 80 seconds from him beaching the car until he was out of the car. The crane waited 55 seconds for Ericsson getting out of the car doing nothing before being able to continue recovery. Ericsson should have been out of the car by the time the crane arrived. In that case, the recovery operation would have been complete with the crane off track again within 65 seconds after the car was beached. I think Ericsson deserves a very stern talking to from the Stewards.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Jt19, Shreyas Mohanty and William!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Ten years ago today Fernando Alonso took his second consecutive win of the 2005 season with victory in the Bahrain Grand Prix.

However Michael Schumacher’s record run of most consecutive grands prix without a race-ending technical failure, which had begun in 2001, ended after 58 races.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

148 comments on “Toro Rosso could adopt Renault colours”

  1. I have to say, it’s nice to have a comment from Red Bull where they are not trashing someone else or complaining. Hopefully they’ll get their heads down now and develop a competitive car, along with Renault developing a competitive engine.

    1. Yup, Christian, if Ferrari can do it, so can you. No more excuses. Remember how you nearly caught Brawn in 2009? No rule changes or equalization needed then.

      1. @scalextric – Good point.

      2. @scalextric

        To be honest… catching brawn was more of a chassis (diffuser) implementation, which was still in Red Bull’s hands. Currently, their ability to catch up is in another’s hands

    2. @rayotata But I wouldn’t exactly give them credit for it, after they have been doing it for years, and after having been berated by the fans and people in the paddok, having been called out for their dishonesty, lies and holier than thou attitude. It’s long overdue they toned down a bit. But have they? Don’t know yet.

  2. I’m gonna have to watch some on-board from this gp2 test.

  3. Re cotd….

    Why didn’t they use the virtual safety car to remove Ericcson’s car rather than go full safet car? I mean he wasn’t in such a position that it would’ve taken that long to do.

    1. Tommy Scragend
      3rd April 2015, 11:29

      Good point. I thought they were going to use VSC this season instead of the proper safety car, and that the real car was only going to be used if the field needed to be directed round debris, or through the pit lane or something. If the track is clear but the run off isn’t (like in the Ericsson case), why not just use VSC?

  4. Ericsson obviously wanted the marshalls to push his car out of the gravel trap. I remember Hamilton succeded with the same thing back in 2007 at Nurburgring I think. Does anyone know if there’s been rules added regarding marshalls pushing cars out of gravel traps since?

    1. This is something I’ve been wondering about. I haven’t heard of any rule changes, but it doesn’t happen any more.

      I think CotD was too harsh. F1 drivers will give every last push to try to continue and it only needed a small amount of grip for the car to get moving again.

      1. Possibly it is something to do with the ERS, they may not want to touch the car until it is turned off and the battery isolated, but pit-crew seem to have no such reservations.

    2. I think he doesn’t carry the clout that Ham or Schumi does.
      The stewards were probably just thinking; “Who’s this guy?” I’m sure if it was Rosberg or any other front runner, the stewards would have helped them get back on track.

    3. You’re forgetting that Ericsson spun off at the end of Lap 2 under the Safety Car in Japan last year and got pushed back onto the circuit and continued the race.

      The rule was meant to be put in place after Hamilton at the Nürburgring but apparently it isn’t always enforced.

      1. As far as I remember , the rule states that a driver is not allowed mechanical assistance to help them get back on the track so marshalls pushing the car out of gravel would be okay but you can’t use a crane . In 2007 Hamilton had a crane help him get out of gravel /

      2. Marshals have never been banned from assisting drivers back onto the track – or refusing it, according to their judgement of the safety situation. The rule introduced in Nurburgring 2007 simply meant that if a driver was helped back onto the track and gained from doing so, Race Control was entitled to issue a penalty appropriate to the gain the driver received.

    4. Neil (@neilosjames)
      3rd April 2015, 2:26

      F1 website says it’s the same as it has been for a while (as long as I remember, anyway): “If a car gets stuck in a gravel trap in a potentially dangerous position, marshals are allowed to push it back on to the track provided that it is still in running condition.”

      Ericsson wasn’t in a dangerous place, so wouldn’t be eligible (and had he been pushed, he’d probably have been DQ’d). Why they think it’s OK for the marshals to put themselves in that ‘dangerous position’ to push a car is perhaps a discussion for another day…

      1. And if it wasn’t in a potentially dangerous position why did they suspend racing to remove it?

        1. OmarR-Pepper - Vettel 40 victories!!! (@)
          3rd April 2015, 3:04

          @hohum I think it was principally to remove the debris from Raikkonen tyre / Nasr wings

          1. Simon (@weeniebeenie)
            3rd April 2015, 4:50

            He was definitely in a dangerous place, the run off directly in front of any big stop is always a potentially dangerous place. Direct line of fire for any other incidents, for example a Alonso driven Ferrari with a front wing stuck under it’s wheels.

        2. I have read elsewhere that, after what happened to Jules last year, that they are going to be SUPER cautious whenever recovery vehicles are used. Can’t blame them.

      2. Yes he was in a dangerous place. Don’t agree with the cotd today, the driver has got to do everything he can to stay in the race or else feel the wrath of his/her team.

    5. I think there is always a feeling of unfairness if one driver gets stuck and has to abandon their car, while another gets pushed back onto the track and is allowed to continue the race. There was the case of Michael Schumacher who got stuck in the gravel trap at the Neubergring in 2003, and instead of abandoning his car, he persuaded the marshals to push his car back onto the track, and subsequently scored points in the race, which were just enough to clinch him the world championship.

      1. Being a star always help. Doesn´t matter if is to get your car pushed back on track or to get some chicks.

    6. @oel-f1, the regulations were partially rewritten in 2008 to try and prevent a repeat of the 2007 race.

      Whilst the regulations do allow for a car to be pushed out of a dangerous position by a marshal, if there is any mechanical assistance the stewards have the right to exclude that driver from the final results.
      Furthermore, although the marshals do have the right to push a car away from a dangerous position, I think that the training of the marshals since then has put the emphasis on removing the car from the circuit rather than on trying to push the car back onto it.

    7. @oel-f1, Reading all the comments above, I think it would have been better if the marshals had pushed Ericsson back onto the track. It’s allowed, and it would have been safer as he could have rejoined quickly, without the need for a crane to be dispatched.

      Of course, the safety car made the race more interesting, but that’s not the issue here.

      1. I think part of the problem, if I recall correctly, was that the crane came out very soon as well. Once the crane was in the run off area they had to bring out the SC. Race control may have made the decision to bring out the SC before they assessed whether his car could be pushed out.

        Even then, under the SC, they could have still pushed his car out without using the crane if it was kept running. I don’t know if when the SC came out if his team told him to shut down the car or not.

        1. Why would the crane have anything with the SC to do?
          I know you are thinking about the Jules accident but lets be honest colliding with marshals is even worse than colliding with cranes.

    8. @oel-f1 All I know is China 2007 happened the same year.

  5. Neil (@neilosjames)
    3rd April 2015, 0:28

    Renault livery would bring a bit of colour and variety back to the grid, would be most welcome… but why would Renault want to do that? You get more exposure but only in the form of a team whose very purpose is to act as a training ground and in normal circumstances would never even have a chance at the podium. Could understand if they wanted to Renault-fy the main Red Bulls, but not Toro Rosso.

    Would rather see them buy STR outright and try to bump them up the grid properly as a full Renault works team.

    1. Exactly. They’d still have the same issues if they were sponsoring a backmarker. Makes them look uncompetitive and they wouldn’t get a lot of exposure.

    2. I agree. Changing the livery is more of a band-aid solution to get a quick bump in exposure. Without investing in the team and charging for the front of the grid, a significant jump in brand exposure will remain elusive.

      1. And then Renault will complain to red bull and pull out because of the negative publicity. The way I see it, an engine manufacturer cannot be just a sponsor, they have to bear more weight than that.

    3. After we first saw the RB camp tauting how Renault might buy STR, and now that it seems Renault has told them that they do not see that (buying a team and pooring in endless money AND having to run RBR drivers) they are trying to get them to become sponsors of the smaller outfit @neilosjames. I just am not sure I can see that happen and work for Renault, unless Verstappen and Sainz keep beating the main outfit and start to fight for podiums!

      1. Or STR is beating Red Bull becouse its Renaults new worksteam in making.

    4. Isn’t the tip / nose of RBR yellow in color to denote their partnership with Renault?

      1. No, it’s their logo.

  6. Well done to the WEC for getting rid of grid girls. They feel like a relic from a bygone age. Would anyone here miss them if they disappeared from F1? I know I wouldn’t.

    1. I’ve always thought that they should auction off the grid girl jobs to people like you and me. The money raised could go to a local charity.

    2. If a female (or gay) qualified, would they get a grid guy in front of their car?

      1. Suzie had a dude in her DTM time.

    3. Neil (@neilosjames)
      3rd April 2015, 0:59

      Never really thought about it… but I probably would. Harmless tradition, nice to look at, work for models and an opportunity (in some countries) for a clothing designer to produce a cool ‘national’ outfit.

      Better than a little stand holding the driver number up, anyway.

      But having read the article I’m apparently not being ‘progressive’, so… maybe split it 50/50 with blokes.

      1. I think the same.

        As a woman I have never have a problem with the grid girls, some countries like Japan and India have use the to show native clothes. As long as the wardrobe is tastefull what’s wrong with using models?

        The only thing that will be achieved by getting ride of them is taking work and exposure away from this models,

        1. Modeling can be done at the right places. I am sure these women have other jobs to do after that particular day in the race.

          A male dominated sport with women being objectified as eye-candies is not the way to go forward.

          1. @evered7 and who is to say where is the right place to have models? Men?

          2. @celeste I am puzzled at what ‘modeling’ do they do standing with the number boards :) If they are into modeling, surely they have a lot of avenues to explore than to stand in the hot sun in front of the cars.

            As to your question, Men or Women I don’t bother. As long as the message is nailed home.

          3. A male dominated sport with women being objectified as eye-candies is not the way to go forward.

            That is only if you objectify them like MotoGP does and make a seperate Youtube video about them. In F1 they just hold the numberboard and barely get any screentime.

          4. @xtwl I agree that makes MotoGP worse but it doesn’t make what F1 does acceptable. But I’ve just gone on about that at greater length here.

          5. celeste, men already do say where the right places are to have models, for the most part. The companies that pay for modelling are largely male-dominated – including in motorsport.

      2. And BTW is more offensive to hace Carmen Jordan and Susie Wolff as “test” and “development ” drivers just because of nepotism , money and looks.

    4. Happy that they are gone. I wasn’t sure what purpose they were standing there for in skimpy clothes most of the times.

    5. it is a great move to get rid of an ancient tradition.
      If anyone from wec would make a proposal for a woman series of racing i would listen to their argument, but who here takes eccelstone seriously? If he wanted woman to race he would get rid of grid girls. If F1 would take woman seriously they would get rid of grid girls.
      It’s even worse in motogp and DTM, they future grid girls as a major selling point on their website and youtube channel. pretty sad. Motorsports should stop living in 1950 and accept modern times.

    6. @estesark There is a bigger relic for us to get rid of ‘BERNIE’

    7. My issue is less the grid girls, more the way they make a corridor of them at the end of the race. There’s something very creepy about having them adorn the walls, clapping the drivers as they awkwardly pass through before the podium.

      1. One of my young boys asked me what they were doing. What do you say? This tradition is archaic & better off rid. Good on the WEC for taking that step.

  7. Why are people so bent on convincing themselves and others that men and women are equal physically. That’s absurd. There’s a big difference between equal rights and being identical beings. I mean, when it comes to physical performance and advantages, there’s a significant difference between males themselves, let alone between most men and most women.

    I think the person who convinced women that they aren’t good enough if they can’t do everything men do, did a great insult and disservice to female gender. First of all, it trivializes and devalues everything for which women have better natural physical and psychological disposition. It’s like saying that none of those things are worth anything, and only things important are those in which men excel. It’s not even a fair competition. Men excel in disciplines which require higher levels of testosterone. So why would women feel inferior if they can’t compete in the same disciplines with men, when it’s obviously a matter of natural, inherent disposition. Women have plenty of other advantages over men.

    The first and the most obvious one is the ability to grow a new life inside of you and bring it to this world. To create sentient being out of nothing. And yet, someone, somehow managed to convince women and men that being able to perform at trivial sporting events is more important than being able to create a new life inside of you and bring it to this world…

    When it comes to F1, the difference is probably smaller and over time, some really fast women will come around, but knowing how performance-oriented the teams are, I have no doubt that they will never care whether their driver is either a man or a women. They will only want the fastest driver, so the issue about the sexism or whatever is nonexistent in F1, at least as long as we are talking about racing drivers and engineers.

    It’s a great irony that those who are the loudest supporters of women are basically saying that women will not be good enough until they become men. Men and women are not suppose to be the same physically, we are suppose to be complementary.

    1. +100

    2. Well said Biggsy.

    3. I agree, and infact women like Wilson for example were likely the Fangio of womans racers… but we never even get to see them compete.

      1. Thank you, I forgot how important should I feel because I have a womb and ovaries. I have forgotten about that little fact.

        Sincerely I don’t know what this have to do with motorsport.

        Please argue about how there should or shouldn’t be a different formula for women based on facts, don’t tell women how we should value or fertility about other things.

        From a personal point of view I’m against a different formula for women because of the cost this project will generate. And while there is some logics from some sports (boxeo, soccer…) in making a difference between men and women ther is no prove that a woman wouldn’t do great in motorsport because we don’t generate testosterone or are smaller.

        1. ther is no prove that a woman wouldn’t do great in motorsport because we don’t generate testosterone or are smaller.

          The only proof we have is the fact that no team has a female race driver yet. As I said, teams are 100% performance-oriented, and the fact that none of them have any female race drivers is a proof that at the moment there are no good female drivers.

          The way the teams are setting up young driver programs and parachuting teenagers into race seats based on talent, with very little experience, you can bet they’d get a female on in a heartbeat if there was any good one. At the moment, female drivers really stick out, so if there were any really good female drivers in junior categories, they’d be snapped up by F1 teams in a matter of seconds.

          Now, the reasons why there are none, probably has a lot to do with very small choice of female drivers in the first place, but that again is just a guess. Only thing we know for a fact at this moment, is that there is no female driver who can compete with male ones.

          1. teams are 100% performance-oriented

            seriously? Teams are 100% performance oriented. If this were true we wouldn’t have pay drivers.

            As this moment there isn’t a woman yet in F1, but there’s no reason to believe that there won’t be one in the near future, and there is certainly mo limitation for one to made it. Unless you tell me that you need a different set of genitals to drive a car.

          2. Just like in Tennis or Golf, you dont need balls to have the best performance in the world but it helps… every sport favours one gender over the other at the elite level.

          3. There’s been an increasing amount of sexism here in the last few days, and it seems to me that @celeste is the lone voice of reason daring to counter it.

            F1 is in a ‘cost of living crisis’, so we get Carmen Jorda paying to be the replacement for Jennifer Becks (as far as the FOM TV feed is concerned), while Simona de Silvestro has gone back to Indycar, simply to try and continue her career.

            It’s painfully clear that there is no ‘sponsorship clamour’ for a female driver in F1 – to be honest sponsorship has been declining, as the TV audience figures also decline. The pay driver trend is ironically affecting BOTH genders. Which is very meritocratic/F1 in itself.

          4. @fastiesty thank you.

            Simona is a fine example of a capable driver, and while situation is difficult I hope someday we have her and other young women that are in Jr categories given an opportunity.

          5. Judging by who’s been coming through into F1 recently, all the lack of a female F1 driver on the 2015 grid proves is that women have less access to big sponsors than men (unsurprising, as the business and marketing worlds are very male-orientated) and so far haven’t been getting through the Red Bull programme (because they’ve been getting dropped due to restructuring).

            There is nothing even slightly performance-orientated about the matter.

        2. Celeste, sorry if you are offended, i belive in equality of opotunity and i think women currently have little oppotunity for whatever reason. A womens wdc would address this inequality and would be revenue positive if combined with the mens tour.

          1. Believe me I’m not offended because you believe women should drive in a different series, this is a point of view and everyone is entitled to have one.

            What it is offensive is the notion that I should feel precious and satisfied because I can have children.

          2. @celeste, isn’t the point of the comment just to emphasise that men and women are physically different so let’s not pretend that they aren’t?

            Personally I think a women’s series might work only because the vast majority of other sports (practically all of them) have separate competition BUT crucially also allow women to compete with men if at that level.

            Is the counter argument that male and women’s tennis for example should merge? I would say that is a sport where both sexes have equal opportunity.

            We know in that case it would probably mostly all men at the top? Or is that being sexist to state that?

          3. @john-h not.

            The point is clearly stated:

            Women have plenty of other advantages over men.

            The first and the most obvious one is the ability to grow a new life inside of you and bring it to this world . To create sentient being out of nothing. And yet, someone, somehow managed to convince women and men that being able to perform at trivial sporting events is more important than being able to create a new life inside of you and bring it to this world

            So the poster think that because I can have babies I shouldn’t prioritize other wishes and goals. This is the sexism thing I have ever read in this blog.

            As I said previously, the reason why I don’t think it will work is because of the cost. You can’t compare the cost of create a series for tennis or golf to the cost of creating another series.

          4. @celeste Good point, sorry. When I read that bit again it doesn’t read particularly great does it.

            I also think you’re probably right about cost if it is to be an F1 series (i.e. similar cars). Motor racing is kind of unique in this sense when compared to sports like golf and tennis in that the equipment is so directly linked to business as opposed to golf clubs or a racket. I guess it would have to be a spec series which therefore isn’t f1.

            So in summary, good comment!

      2. This is a good point… Desire is the only female winner of an F1 race – and if there were equal numbers of women participating as men – it’s likely that there would be plenty of women at the top. I’m pretty sure that I recently saw something that gave an estimation of any gender variance being merely down to participation numbers at 98 or 99%.

    4. I agree and would point out that there are women fighter pilots so it is not female physiology handicapping them, in fact all else being equal, a woman of equal talent and determination will be any team principals 1st. choice, the sponsorship potential is so much greater. The answer is for F1 drivers to marry petite athletic women and encourage their daughters as well as their sons to take up karting, many will chose other pursuits but 1 or 2 may go all the way to an F1 WDC.

      1. @hohum We were almost there with Max Verstappen. Son of 2 top karting parents… just needed to get his sister karting! But alas, we will have just Max to rewrite all the history books..

        1. @fastiesty His sister is karting. Google Victoria Verstappen.

          1. @smfreegard True, and I saw the picture of her sat in a kart on Max’s twitter at the time. What I meant was that had there been an equal opportunity i.e. she also started from 3, we could have seen if she would have been as good as her mother/father/brother with similar training.

            She’s starting late.. but could still catch up of course, as e.g. Adrian Sutil has done. It could also be that she simply wasn’t interested until now too, of course, as with a karting mother I doubt they would have not provided an equal opportunity from the outset.

    5. COTD. That’s why we have, for example, men basketball and women basketball.

    6. the problem is as long as you keep marketing motorsports as a boys-sport where a woman’s job is to be eye candy there will never be enough woman in feeder series to filter through to the top series

      if the marketing and support is done right both to female fans and to girls to start racing, then we can talk about woman series or not, i personally don’t think it’s nescesery to have a separate series, but that’s hardly the problem at the moment.

      since sports are all about making money why do they market to at most 50% of the world population?

    7. someone, somehow managed to convince women and men that being able to perform at trivial sporting events is more important than being able to create a new life inside of you and bring it to this world

      No they didn’t.

      This is a tired argument some people reach for whenever they want to stop women encroaching into an area where men have traditionally dominated. Just because women are able to bear children doesn’t mean they shouldn’t also want to be able to do other things.

      1. @keithcollantine exactly. Thank you Keith.

      2. doesn’t mean they shouldn’t also want to be able to do other things.

        Well the post does not say any such thing, so it is rather unfair to hold it against it.
        The post says that the main message the media is sending is weird, that in order to be considered “achiever”, women should do things that attract men. And I find it hard to argue with this observation. For instance, I used to watch Sesame street in the early 00’s and I remember being very much surprised when seeing sketches about women achievers – and they were all in areas like car mechanics, not one of them was in areas that were considered traditionally female. The message was quite obvious – that what women used do do is not worth celebrating. And this message is repeated often and in many places, witness for instance the fuss some “feminist” organizations made a few years back when Lego dared to make a line of toys for girls who like to play like girls. My daughter is rather sensitive to vibes around her and she does comment occasionally about the attitudes she feels. It’s weird that under the flag or women’s liberation we find ourselves in environment where girls feel bad about being girls.

        I believe this is all wrong and it goes deeper than feminism. Our society (as represented by media) fails to honor achievements that actually make it going, namely raising a family and dedicating one’s time to children – and there is no reason to honor only women for it, there are also men who put less emphasis on their careers in order to share more of the parenting burden. The way I see it, being a good father/mother is at least as important as becoming good in business or science or sports. Given how much emphasis is put on making careers, it’s no wonder we (“we” as Europeans) are dying out.

        To go back to F1, there is too much of “women should go into F1” air around for my taste. I believe that the right message should be “women are perfectly free to do whatever they feel like”. If they do not feel like carting, fair enough, who are we to tell them that they are wrong? Why should that be a “problem”? The important thing is to show that F1 is open for them. Given that quite a few women did make it to GP racing on their own merit, starting with the likes of Junkova before the war, this message should not be hard to make.

        So finally we turn to “female F1”. I think that this idea is fundamentally flawed. The reason why there are no F1 drivers now is simple: there are no women capable of taking even on current pay drivers. Thus a “female F1” would become something like a 2nd league in soccer, a statement that women just can’t cut it in F1. Do we really need to do that? It makes much more sense to spend the money in place where the pipe starts, that is, at the carting level: Special sponsorships for girls and a smart PR that would spread the message that carting can be fun for girls as well. I am sure that once we start seeing significant numbers of girls on carting tracks, a deserved F1 female driver would only be a generation away. Or not, and there would be nothing wrong with that.

        1. @ph the original poster is not arguing againts in favor of family values, he is indicating that we women should consider weare so blessed and should be satisfied because we can have babies.

          There is a reason while media is trying to bring forward role models that do great in non traditional fields and is because even now women are told that they should be put this “traditional” role, even our mothers tell us to learn to cook because no men will wants us if we can’t do a pie.

          Recent studies say that even in the work place women are expected to be housekeepers and mother for their coworkers, they are expected to bake muffins are organized the parties and if they don’t do they look bad in front of their bosses.

          Nobody is saying that women, shouldn’t be feminine, but to break away not from our feelings but from the stereotypes tradition has created for us, and for the sake of creating new roles that allows us different fulfillment is why the media is right to shows a different role than the one of mothers.

          Now your daughter has every right to choose the role in her life that will give her the most happiness, but I bet you don’t want those options limited or that the men in their future telling her how she shouldn’t go for whatever dream she has or will have because “she is blessed to be able tocreatenew life”

          1. @celeste I’ve re-read the original post now and I still see no sentence there where the author writes that women should be restricted to their traditional roles. He only disagrees with the attitude that areas that are considered traditionally female are not given equal recognition. Do you not agree with this? Then perhaps there is no reason to argue.

      3. While I agree that women shouldn’t be restricted just because they can bear children, but the biological difference is there and it does affect things whether you like it or not. From purely performance review alone, both sexes have their advantage but I think men have the overall advantage here. I think there’s a reason why men dominating racing and when you only have 20 slot on grid for (theoretically) best drivers, it’s hard to find a woman who is in the top 20 driver in the whole world. Of course it there is one, I really like to see her compete in F1 too, since I don’t follow the sport to see 20 best men or 20 best women, but instead 20 best drivers.

        Coming back to all women series, if what you want is seeing women racing, then this is actually the best short-mid term solution. Will you see a really good driver? Probably yes. Will you see whole grid that can compete in current (male dominated) grid? Most likely no. However you get to watch women drivers and may make girls aiming to be racing driver in the future, which should increase the number and quality of women driver. Of course if we have separate series it would be hard to combine them in the future and probably will always looked as inferior one.

        Personally I prefer what we have now. Nobody is restricting women to enter formula 1. Its just no female has the merit to be in there at this moment, while there’s still lot of male in junior category that looks deserved to be in F1. Speaking of that, can someone name a current female driver that deserve a chance to be in F1? Let’s be honest if we have male driver that on par with Susie Wolff or Carmen Jorda in grid now, we will happily hoping them to be kicked out of F1. Also, getting sponsor is hard even for talented male, so that’s not an excuse. If anything women have it easier since they can tap into large brands that haven’t been in the sport before (like cosmetics?).

        1. Has anyone actually entertained the reason why motorsport is not full of women could be

          “its just a bunch of boys going around and around in circles” ?

          I love my F1 above all other sports ,
          I dont have any other F1 or motorsport buddies,

          my friends laugh and say ” thats cute – he calls F1 a sport”

          I care not , Im an F1 Fan(atic) , I reckon I saw my first race near 30 years ago,
          and more often than not watched those in between,

          I play F1 cars with my boys around the house in their billy carts, we have pits and a red bull pit lollipop,

          but its only a dozen laps and the novelty wears off pretty quick, ( and im knackered)

          F1 is a rich boys playground, there are 20(ish) drives available at any one time, and how many get paid to drive ? and how many pay to drive? 50/50?

          F1 is not the real world, its a tiny little bubble , I dont want my kids to have to pay to do something they love, I want them to get where they want to be on merit,

          When my first boy was born we watched every race I had on video, hundreds of hours of them,( over a few years) in my eyes He was going to be an F1 driver,

          now he’s ten, I asked if he wanted to race F1, he said “No – I want to do something important, half the world is hungry”

          Dont panic, he reads this blog, he loves watching a race with me, he even asked me why Im not an F1 driver ( how cute)
          Same reason I’m not a jockey son,

          F1 is a world of millionaires billionaires bitching about 100 bhp and helmut colors,

          its not the real world,

    8. From reading the comments, I do not think that we can hide behind it that “physically men and women are not equal.” Nor are all women and all men.
      This example – that’s why we have men playing basketball against men and women against women – Yes, I agree with this. But I do not agree with this in case women and men are using “the same equipment.” Well let me explain. One thing is (proffesional level) men and (professional level) women playing against each other on a basketball court, where men are bigger and stronger (well, usually it is the case) and in this case more “motivated” (read: oh, we cannot lose to girls, we just cannot).
      Another is driving/racing in similar cars. A stupid example, but still. Let`s say that we are both driving a Fiat 500 (on a closed circuit yada-yada for legal reasons). In reality I am 6′ 4″ the made-up lady is average height (“For a girl,” says the point guard from that male basketball team) and we start racing and she beats me in our little race. So here we are equal, using the same equipment, she is a better driver than I am.
      When this made-up race involves both of us pushing our cars from one line to another, here is my time to “shine.” Being physically bigger and stronger it is easier for me to push the car.
      End – stupid example.
      There are female fighter pilots. I do not think that there is somebody telling them, “No-no, you need your own little planes, girly ones. The ones we are flying, these need the balls of steel.”

      Talking about the idea of all female racing series. From where are all these drivers coming from? If we look at the current junior series, we do not see loads of ladies out there.
      So does it mean that we will start seeing lovely “oil princesses” – last year oil tycoon father bought a team, this year both of his daughters are driving for him.
      Ladies without no real racing experience, racing/driving against each other in formula-type cars?
      I think an all female karting series would be a good idea for a start. Start them young, as people say.
      When I was a lot younger I do not remember knowing any girls who would have dreamt about becoming a racing driver. But loads of boys dreaming about becoming either a rally or racing driver.
      So yes, somehow find the young karting aces, who after years of racing are developing and when feeling that this is the right thing to do. Start getting better and better results. Then moving up to bigger and bigger formulas, fighting against boys and then maybe as years go by we will see those proper racers fighting in Formula 1.

      1. Sorry for the big link lol but it’s working!

    9. Bit dangerous as that makes it sound like women who can’t have or don’t want children are devalued.

    10. Having had a career in a job with a very similar skill set to F1 (military aviation) I can assure you that any suggestion that women are less capable is absurd, and it isn’t worth any further time discussing it.

      If you want to look at reasons there are no women in the top flight of motorsport, you need to look at the other end of the scale – grassroots level. A gender imbalance at grassroots level gets reinforced and amplified as you go up the ranks (someone mentioned a study into gender imbalance in Chess, where physical prowess has no effect, that demonstrates this perfectly.).

      Creating a new top flight just for women is pointless, and counter productive. Especially as there’s clearly not enough money for the existing teams, let alone whole other championships worth. Women are capable of competing alongside men in motorsport, they just need to be given the opportunity to do so.

      1. Having had a career in a job with a very similar skill set to F1 (military aviation) I can assure you that any suggestion that women are less capable is absurd, and it isn’t worth any further time discussing it.

        The thing is, combining all the air forces of the world, there is more than 20 fighter jets available. On the other hand, there are only 20 seats in F1, so your comment doesn’t prove much. It’s much bigger opportunity and much smaller competition to become fighter jet pilot, than it is to become an F1 driver.

        1. so your comment doesn’t prove much

          On the contrary, it proves (well, suggests) rather a lot. As the capabilities of men and women are similar enough to not be a factor in their success in these fields. Instead, it’s almost entirely down to the numbers the beginning of the pipeline.

          One of my other jobs was as a recruitment Officer. There were a number of women applying, but the vast majority were men. The discrepancy was even greater when it came to aircrew. And this was at point before any kind of aptitude or ability had been measured. The ratio of men to women applying for to become aircrew is almost entirely to blame for the low numbers of female aircrew. And I’d wager a lot of money that the same is true in motorsport.

          As for the “smaller competition” comment, based on the numbers that attempt to become specifically a fast jet pilot against those that make it, and compared to those that actually attempt to become an F1 driver (rather than sitting on their sofa saying “yeah, I could do that”) against those that make it, becoming a fast jet pilot is almost certainly a much tougher ask.

          Finally the very fact that there are more fast jet pilots (or pilots of any ilk) means that the statistical analysis of the gender balance is likely to be more accurate. With only 20 drivers, it’s much harder to draw reliably conclusions from the data.

    11. 1. most sports were created by men, so they have natural advantages
      2. men are “programed” to compete, that´s the natural need to show “who´s the boss”
      3. men are physical stronger than women, and most of the sports needs lots of power
      4. women are usually more sensitive than men, and in most sports being aggressive is the route to victory

  8. I actually prefer the Toro Rosso livery to both Red Bull’s and Renault’s.
    Toro Rosso’s bull is very pretty, it is designed by an Austrian painter/sculptor Jos Pirkner, and I heard that each one is painted by hand, both on the cars and the team trucks. You don’t really get that sort of attention of detail to liveries from any other team on the grid right now.

  9. Jackie Stewart has it right, the national GPs should be protected ! If Bernie is certain that the problem is mismanagement of the circuits and not due to his onerous demands there is a very simple solution, FOM should hire the circuit for the race, do the promotion and collect the income from ticket sales (they already take the rest anyway), that way the circuits get some guaranteed income to help maintain the circuit and Bernie/FOM get the market value return for the show they put on.

  10. If Red Bull’s only option was Honda engines they’d be out of F1 faster than a scalded cat

    1. Le’s re-asses in 6 months… I still have high hopes for the Honda PU.

      1. +one more s

  11. anthony (@substructure)
    3rd April 2015, 1:05

    yes! please do it renault. i’ll give you 5 bucks if you do

  12. The thing with Marcus Ericsson’s incident was that I was happy to see him beached in the gravel. He made a mistake, outbraked himself, spun and got punished for it. That’s the way it should be. There are far too many tarmac run-off areas in F1 which do not punish drivers for their errors. At least with gravel traps, if a car goes into one it can become beached or else lose a lot of time – two things which tarmac run-off areas do not provide.

    1. It also brought out the safety car which did effectively stop the racing for a short while. Another thing about the tarmac run-off areas is that having them allows more cars to stay in the race.

      I don’t think it improved the show one bit to have ericsson stuck there. Sure he made a mistake and got penalized for it but at the same time we got a safety car and lost one car from the race. I think it is better to focus on keeping the cars running in the race instead of moving towards “one mistake and you are out” direction. I think the track side workers should always try to get the car running even if they have to use a crane. It would probably speed up the safety car periods and would allow more cars to finish the race.

      1. +1

        Would be nice to hear the counter to this for once.

  13. Alternate PU ?
    I would like to see Yamaha or even Hyundai provide an ICE and Tesla do the electronics package, CVC could provide the seed money.

    1. CVC? Ha

    2. @hohum I was unaware they also spend money?

      1. @xtwl, about time they did, But in fact they did pay Bernie/Bavaria for F1.

    3. @hohum Would be very interesting to get Tesla in the mix

      1. If Tesla came out with a new formula power unit it would be very counter productive for their brand image as they are 100% electric, that is their USP. They set out to create electric cars that are better than their petrol/diesel counterparts, thus eliminating the need for ICEs. However if it was a partnership of some kind (perhaps Tesla/Yamaha as I don’t think their products compete with another) with the ICE from Yamaha and the ERSs from Tesla, that could be really cool.

        1. Sorry didn’t read the initial post well enough, accidentally came to the exact same conclusions, ignore the reply…

          1. No, I like the reinforcement, great minds……

      2. And as they are open source, everyone can use their technology as of right now. They just have to write a good letter to Tesla on why they are worthy of using the technology and when they approve they can.

    4. It would be interesting if something like that happened, as it would the first solid evidence that the new formula is doing what it aimed to do and is attracting new companies to formula 1 (Honda have a lot of previous history, so not necessarily completely new). If no new companies do come forward then it may suggest that Formula 1 really has lost its appeal.

  14. I don’t understand why McLaren will be disadvantaged by cooler conditions if they have more downforce… Should it not help get more heat into the tyres?

    1. With colder conditions all the teams will also use more downforce than they are when running in hot conditions by opening up for cooling. Mclaren can run more downforce but their Honda Engine is not working at full power so they need to run less efficient Downforce so that they wont be near sitting duck against the teams can run more or less same downforce with having Power advantage . @jaymenon10

  15. How in the name of all that is holy am I supposed to tell which of the cars are the Torro Rossos if they do a color/design change DURING THE SEASON???? Surely this needs to take top priority and the FIA need to create a rule to prevent this from happening and help us poor fans.

    1. @swindle94 It’s already hard enough to distinguish the tracks we’re at because they keep changing the calender.

      1. And in Oz the 10 network have chosen the German GP for 1 of their 10 live broadcasts, distinguishing that track is going to be really difficult.

    2. Don’t worry, the drivers’ helmets have to stay the same…

    3. COTD !!!!!

  16. I honestly think its awkward to have a safety car like that, especially if German last year did not get one.

  17. Whatever about the cooler temperatures negatively affecting McLaren, I’m more interested to see how much those temperatures impact Ferrari’s pace relative to both Mercedes and Williams. Could it be possible that Ferrari lose so much performance through the cooler temperatures that they’ll be battling Williams, with Mercedes off in the distance again?

    1. Its not that Ferrari lose performance in the cold as that Mercedes will have less issues with getting maximum performance without damaging the tyres overly much @colossal-squid, so that relatively it helps Mercedes when its not as hot as in Malaysia.

      But I agree that the thing I am most curious of with McLaren is if they will actually be able to finish the race next time round, its not that important if they finish 11th or 14th in my view.

      1. @colossal-squid If Ferrari are able to consistently use/last the faster tire in more races opting for an alternate strategy, it will lead to interesting outcomes (when it is more than a 1 stop race).

        I don’t think the cold weather will handicap Ferrari as much as the heat accounted for Mercedes, but it will not help them as well.

        That said, I don’t think Williams are in contention for second. That is a place Ferrari have solidified as theirs, after seeing the first couple of races.

        1. I really want to see cars racing against each other, not running around on their own due to tyre strategies. The Ferrari looks to be fast enough to challenge Ros at least, if not Ham, that is how it should be in F1, these tyres are the worst thing for F1 since Max gave Bernie the commercial rights, if people were more interested in tactics than action then Chess would be big on TV.

  18. I don’t know if Bernie is trying to deflect attention away from the shape of F1 by trying to push a female series or if he is that much in denial that F1 is in great shape and thinks there is more than enough money and sponsors around to create a whole new series.

    1. Bernie never says anything like this without a purpose in mind. Even if that’s simply to keep us talking about F1 until the next race

  19. I can understand why they are targeting Toro Rosso for the Renault rebranding instead of Red Bull. First of all, the STR already has a red sponsor in CEPSA which can fill the red spots created by Total of whatever old Renault livery scheme they want to reuse. Another is that Red Bull is already sponsored by Infiniti, the luxury brand of Nissan. Nissan and Renault are strategic partners, actually run by the same CEO, Carlos Ghosn, so they probably want to keep that as is. Infiniti definitely needs the extra attention of running higher in the field that RBR gives rather than Renault.

  20. Re: Buttons quote “I think the trickier thing will be it’s cooler, so we will not get the benefit we had (in Malaysia) of having higher downforce than other cars, so they’ll be stronger probably.”
    I don’t understand what Button is saying here. Are McLaren able to extract more downforce than other teams in higher temperatures? And if so why?

  21. Just thinking, could Ericsson have deliberately beached himself, in order to bring out the safety car and help their engine providing team, a chance to play out their strategy?

    1. Yes, he also held a knife against Merc bosses and told them to bring their cars in.

    2. ‘help their engine providing team’
      As Nasr ‘helped’ Raikkonen !?

  22. Why don’t women, in their everlasting quest for equality, come up with a sport of their own, where they will be dominant, where men will be eyecandy, and where men will strive to enter against all odds.
    This is not a joke, and it’s not sarcasm. I genuinely don’t understand why women have such a big need to become a part of a trivial exerciser, made by men, for men, in order to have fun doing things they like. If they can become part of it, fine, but why does the whole trivial thing that is F1 need to bend over backwards in order to have some women in it, when there is an entire population of Earth (minus F1 personnel), living just fine without F1 in their lives.

  23. We are asking the question “Why don’t women come into F1 as drivers?”
    Research (for military aviation) into G-stress handling:

    “G tolerances of 102 women and 139 men subjected to Standard Medical Evaluation (MedEval) G Profiles were compared. Unpaired t-tests revealed no significant difference between the women and men in either relaxed or straining G tolerance.”


    “Dr. Chelette from Amstrong Laboratory, Us Air Force, did a study with nine female fighter pilots in the Dynamic Environment Simulator (DES). DES is normal fighter simulator situated in centrifuge and these female subjects performed a complex combat flight mission in high + Gz environment (max +9 Gz). Results showed that G-tolerance with fit G-suits is the same compared to male fighter pilots”


    Research for sports-related ergonomics:

    “The findings suggest that the sex difference in muscular strength in equally trained men and women is almost entirely accounted for by the difference in muscle size.”


    So we can rule out G-loading as a real problem. Strength is, on average, greater for men – but not by as much as many seem to believe.

    Let’s not kid ourselves. We have few women in F1 because the culture of motor racing isn’t attractive enough to women.
    And that’s something we can change.

    1. G-forces in jets are not the same with the ones applied on an F1 drivers. I remember watching a full documentary about how forces are similar in force, but much more violent in F1, while more sustained in a jet fighter.

      Well even the latest additional to F1 paddock supports the idea for a women championsip:—carmen-jorda-q-a.html

      Or force the top teams to bring a 3rd car for women only. :)

    2. Good points. Being fast in F1 also favors jockey-sized individuals, rather people Mark Webber sized, so women may have an advantage by being smaller and weighing less on average than men.

      1. And don’t forget the lower centre of gravity!

  24. I always thought Toro Rosso should be more adventurous regarding livery…Like this

    1. Would certainly make it easier to tell them apart from RBR.

  25. I think Renault would only do this as a temporary measure before fully buying Toro Rosso and making it their works team for 2016. As James Allen suggested, this might be just be to dampen the rumours Red Bull is selling the sister team. Funny that only a couple of weeks ago RB were threatening to quit altogether and now they are trying to find a way to avoid selling their junior team.

    I’d love to see the Renault colours back (with a touch of Total red, naturally), although Toro Rosso has always had a nice livery, particularly since 2011 with more gold, even if it is a bit same-old, same-old. We shall have to wait and see.

  26. Women want to compete on equal terms to men in racing. Here’s the thing though, for all the arguments we have female fighter pilots, there’s no physiological reason they can’t in a modern car etc… they aren’t doing.

    There are women dedicating them self to racing, but they are not leading the pack. So is it that these women just aren’t that spectacular and the female drivers that would match men haven’t participated because they have been marginalised or do we have the controversial conversation that maybe these women are actually incredibly talented, but innate differences in the sexes mean they just would never truly compete on level terms?

    I’ve seen no science for either side of the argument, just hyperbole from both sides. The fact is under the current system, no women are breaking through. A female only championship may feel like regression but it would present more opportunity, and you can be damn sure that if it began coming to light there are women who truly compete with male performances, teams would absolutely put them forward for the main championship.

    I think it could be a case of taking that step backwards to see if there is a path forwards.

  27. R30 <3

Comments are closed.