|
Yeah, we have covered the weight ground already. But I am fascinated about what having makeup on has to do with her marketability? Have you ever seen Dan Wheldon without his makeup on? Geez, I remember Gordon Johncock wouldn't leave the house until he was just so. Why? Because all of you expert racing fans out there make your decisions based on what is superficial, not what the person is actually doing on the track. I remember the headlines: "Johncock Applies Too Much Mascara, Loses Pole at Indy!" What a horrible year that was! Rick Mears tried to wear something off-the-shoulder at the annual awards banquet and almost lost his ride with Penske...
Then of course we now have to make the driver's weight an issue. Well, even if you have a minimum weight requirement, all you physics fans out there should be well aware that the less the driver weighs, the better you can favorably ballast your car to achieve optimum handling. Further, F1 likes 'em short (Alex Wurz lost his race ride because of this, I have heard) as tall drivers have their stupid heads sticking up into the airbox impeding airflow.
So before the usual suspects come blundering back into this thread telling us that Danica's weight is a big advantage (while failing to explain how Sam "Tubby" Hornish could ever win one at a positively obese 160 lbs), lets try to keep in mind that minimum weights do not really solve the problem nor does 20 lbs (difference between DP and CDM, for example) make a huge difference in power-to-weight ratios. I mean think about it: How could PT or Michael Andretti EVER have won a race? both of them were closer to 180 lbs during their prime years...yet somehow they managed to win...
Like Robby Gordon, Danica is good looking and can drive. I suspect some of you lot are neither good-looking nor as capable behind the wheel as you want to think you are. Being slow, ugly and proud of it allows me the freedom to make rational assertions based on logic rather than my own unfulfilled aspirations/fantasies.
|