[Driver] Max Verstappen should NOT race in F1 for 2015

[Paradise City]

Originally Posted by wnut

So in essence you have developed from, I don't like minors in F1 and "I'll wait and see how he goes" to Max deserves to be in F1 but should be excluded because he is not the FIA's arbitrary 18, and it sends out the wrong message to the youth and encourages boy racers on the public roads.

How is Mike's post wrong?

"But Paradise City thinks that he is too young because he believes that the FIA thinks that it sends out the wrong message to the public.

He seems to be fighting a lonely battle. "

I've expressed by positions in two distinct areas. And it has remained fixed.

*I think the sport is currently trivialised and too easy with reliance on software/gimmicks..etc. Not easy outright. But still too easy. Limiting it to adults is a way of trying bolster its credibility in contemporary terms. In otherwords, I marginally favour an age-cap with an unhappy heart.

*That doesn't necessarily preclude that Verstappen or specific talents don't deserve to be in F1. I could drive a road car at 12, that doesn't mean we should lower the age where we are handing out licenses to 12 year olds. It's not incongruent to impose restrictions for the common good even if it imposes a certain costs on a few special individuals.

*I don't think imposing an age-cap, which detains a 17 for one year, is a cruel and unusual restriction.

*My ideal preference is for cars that need overall strength to manhandle and that has no software, no gimmicks and in that context no age restriction.

========================

The rationale behind the age-cap from the FIA appears to me that it doesn't want to showcase to a global audience what might be spun by interest groups and such like, as boy racers; minors who race on the edge without consequence. They don't want to glamourise minors racing.

This isn't my rationale. Political/popular considerations don't faze me personally.

[Mike Harte]

Paradise City, are you a budding politician, because you can certainly answer a question without answering the question.

I have a number of problems with your current stance, and I will expand on a few of them. Firstly, you keep reiterating what you believe to be the FIA's position on this matter, and although they have stated that from next year Super Licences will only be granted to those who have attained the arbitrary age of 18, I am not aware that they have actually announced their reasoning behind the new rule. In my opinion, they have just reacted to media opinions who claim that they are responding to views held by some members of the F1 circus. I believe the new rule to be nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to placate certain voices, and it would not surprise me in the least if it were to be rescinded in the future. Furthermore, I am not aware of having seen one statement from the FIA that states that it is concerned about a potential "boy-racer" reaction from any interested party or body.

Moving on to your point about the cars, I have argued on here that I would ban virtually all the electronic gimmicks and the like from the cars. However, one area I would leave alone is that the cars should retain power-steering. I don't see why a Formula 1 driver should become a muscle-bound individual just to get the cars around a corner. I drove cars and trucks in my youth that lacked assisted steering, and it not something that I would like to go back to. The car in my avatar is the first car that I built to race, and it had 12 inch front wheels and a ridiculously small and stupid steering wheel, combined with 15 inch wheels at the back on a locked differential. After just 10 laps of driving that car on a near freezing Boxing Day meeting, I would get out of the car with sweat pouring out of every orifice. To prove that people can drive a F1 car, we don't need to reduce them to physically wrung out wrecks at the end of a Grand Prix.

More importantly, you also seem to be implying that females should not be driving in F1, unless of course they have been through a body-building course. Driving skill does not, nor should it ever, equate to physical abilities; yes, drivers should be fit, and virtually without exception the current breed certainly are. That is as far as it should go.

Anything else aside, you need to decide what your position actually is. Is it that the FIA is right and drivers should be 18, and you agree with the ruling? Or is it that the FIA is right, but you disagree with the new rule? Or then again, is it that you believe that the FIA is wrong, and young Max is proving your point?

From the keyboard of one whose head is spinning trying to follow your thought process

[Paradise City]

I elaborate point by point what my position is and 18 is not an arbitrary figure for the last time. In many jurisdictions it is the cut off point between being a minor and entering majority - ergo not arbitrary - a very definitive age. You on the otherhand post long winded passive aggressive tracts simply because I did not fall into the collective Max Verstappen pom-pom routine.

I never said anything about women. Stop inventing things out of thin air, fella.

Anything else aside, you need to decide what your position actually is. Is it that the FIA is right and drivers should be 18, and you agree with the ruling?

This isn't my rationale. Political/popular considerations don't faze me personally.

Always helps to actually read the post before barrell rolling into a response to that given post.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

I elaborate point by point what my position is and 18 is not an arbitrary figure for the last time. In many jurisdictions it is the cut off point between being a minor and entering majority - ergo not arbitrary - a very definitive age. You on the otherhand post long winded passive aggressive tracts simply because I did not fall into the collective Max Verstappen pom-pom routine.

I never said anything about women. Stop inventing things out of thin air, fella.





Always helps to actually read the post before barrell rolling into a response to that given post.

Firstly, nowhere have you written whether you agree with the FIA's new rule. All you have said is that you are not fazed by political thinking, etc.

Secondly, I couldn't give a damn whether Max Verstappen races in F1 or not, but I do care about arbitrary age limits being introduced because some quarters believe that he is too young. Whether 18 is the age of majority in some countries is not the point. In England, he could take his driving licence test at 17 and, if he could get insurance, legally drive the fastest road car available. He could have already have been in one of our Armed Forces for at least a year at 17 (OK, he couldn't be posted to an armed conflict until he was 18) and he could have legally making babies at the same time. He could also have consented to a gay relationship from the time of his 16th birthday, and if he was living in Spain he could actually have been married at the age of 12. So in my opinion, and it would seem most on this thread, 18 is an arbitrary age.

I am more than aware that you never said anything about females, which is why I wrote that you imply by your postings that participants should be strong - your words "the cars need overall strength to manhandle" can only mean that slighter males and females are unlikely to be able to drive them. That is no test of the driving abilities of anybody, no matter what their gender.

And I have read your posts thoroughly which is why I wrote earlier that I had to go back a few pages to make sure that I wasn't confusing what you had just posted considering what I remembered you to have written before.

And yes I may be long-winded, but passive aggresive? You never met my late wife! All I'm trying to do is understand what your true position is.

[Paradise City]

Sorry, fella. Using the word "imply" doesn't give you open license to chuck any old invention at me.

Women such as Janet Guthrie and Desire Wilson have done very well in very high level, intensive, genuinely authentic levels of this sport, so nowhere can it be said that I "implied" that I don't want women in the sport. The idea that we should keep the sport trivialised so as to allow women in - now that can be said of you.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

*I think the sport is currently trivialised and too easy with reliance on software/gimmicks..etc. Not easy outright. But still too easy. Limiting it to adults is a way of trying bolster its credibility in contemporary terms. In otherwords, I marginally favour an age-cap with an unhappy heart.

Then why not simply advocate that the cars should be harder to drive and let that sort out the boys from the men?

only allowing adults to do this without fundamentally changing the nature of the cars only serves to trivialize things more. Its just be another illusion heaped onto the pile of smoke and mirrors we have now.

Too much of this kind of band aid thinking already imo.

Yes I know you think 'they don't want to glamourize minors racing'...well if that's at all true then why the heck are they in the business of supporting numerous racing series involving minors?

[Paradise City]

Without going over old ground...

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Then why not simply advocate that the cars should be harder to drive and let that sort out the boys from the men?

Originally Posted by me

I wish F1/FIA was immune from politics. Existed in isolation. Had cars that wasn't packed with stupid gimmicks and garbage software - cars that needed to be manhadled about so then if a 13 world Motorsport Mozart took to the wheel, we'd know that he was a serious deal in a serious F1. That's what I "want". But I'm wise enough to know I ain't gonna get it.

Originally Posted by me

*My ideal preference is for cars that need overall strength to manhandle and that has no software, no gimmicks and in that context no age restriction.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Yes I know you think 'they don't want to glamourize minors racing'...well if that's at all true then why the heck are they in the business of supporting numerous racing series involving minors?

Originally Posted by me

Perception is king . And boy-racers is not something the FIA wants for the flagship series, a series unique in that it is their only series that takes place under a truly global audience and has a truly global following.

Originally Posted by me

F1 is the representative of motorsport before a global audience and is splashed extensively across several media platforms and they want adults not minors as participants. The ladder system isn't glamourous, it's pitched as a training process, it's hidden within the trade media, and the specialist press so it doesn't get the global scrutiny F1 does

.

Originally Posted by me

That's what perceptions are. In the mind. Perceptions are prejudicial and unfair and they don't obey "cut off points" or often stand empirical inspection.

[Biscuits In A Red Bull]

It's all okay justifying your perception on what you think the FIA's perception is but what if you're wrong

Seriously, you justify it as you like, however explicitly or vaguely (a lot of inconsistencies here) but I'm fairly sure that the FIA have never stated this. And imo I feel that's what Mr Harte is attempting to get at. I'm all with the view that the FIA imposed this age-cap in order to quiet down some of the seemingly endless critical voices within the F1 circus. Likewise, they implemented the points license system to try and remove FR out of the junior single seater equation so that their F4-F3-F2 model could replace it. This, like your posts, is just an opinion.

And btw, I've done it before, posted things on here that don't reflect my true opinions just to stir up discussion. It's funny to see some reactions (and some are a bit scary!!!) but you do get a very good sense of who's reasonable around here, and imo it's interesting to see some of the more reasonable members asking of your posts.

PS don't use loads of entirely irrelevant quotes to answer

[Paradise City]

Originally Posted by Biscuits In A Red Bull

It's all okay justifying your perception on what you think the FIA's perception is but what if you're wrong

Seriously, you justify it as you like, however explicitly or vaguely (a lot of inconsistencies here) but I'm fairly sure that the FIA have never stated this. And imo I feel that's what Mr Harte is attempting to get at. I'm all with the view that the FIA imposed this age-cap in order to quiet down some of the seemingly endless critical voices within the F1 circus. Likewise, they implemented the points license system to try and remove FR out of the junior single seater equation so that their F4-F3-F2 model could replace it. This, like your posts, is just an opinion.

And btw, I've done it before, posted things on here that don't reflect my true opinions just to stir up discussion. It's funny to see some reactions (and some are a bit scary!!!) but you do get a very good sense of who's reasonable around here, and imo it's interesting to see some of the more reasonable members asking of your posts.

PS don't use loads of entirely irrelevant quotes to answer

I do stir the pot of course but in so doing I make sure that I never tell a lie nor have I been ever dishonest with my views. Truth hurts more often than it doesn't, that's how life is. I'm typically vindicated when I do a solo run on unpopular positions because I don't follow the herd - even if that upsets excitable people. Kimis unfancied success recently has been a case in point. Not that anything I've said on this thread should be particularly controversial.

And I shall continue to respond to posts addressed to me as I have done hitherto - honestly and to the point but I won't be rewriting posts constantly. Your "opinion" on that is neither desired nor required.

[Mike Harte]

Paradise City, even some of your "facts" can be disputed, such asking us to believe that females have competed to the same level as their mail counterparts. Although it is true that Janet Guthrie did have some success, as AJ Foyt proved, her true worth was never really established because her racing was financially underfunded. You may have a point with her.

As for Desire Wilson, she competed in about 100 odd races and to the best of my recollection she never won one of them, but she did achieve about 10 podiums On, I believe, her only attempt to compete in a WDC Grand Prix, she failed to qualify because in those days there were more cars entered than there were spaces on the grid. I would not quantify that as a truly successful overall racing career when you consider that some of the other drivers at that time will have competed in almost that number of races in the course of a year or two.

My point, which you have chosen to totally ignore, is that, as a generalisation, the female of your species tends to be slighter than their male counterparts, and by making cars that require extra strength to drive quickly you will make it even more difficult for females to participate.

[Biscuits In A Red Bull]

Often not following the herd is very beneficial. But often it's wrong

I disagree with your opinions on the FIAs position on Max Verstappen racing in F1, and I'm not sure about F1 being what you want (I'm all for more tech, as it has and probably always will be a showcase for the difficult stuff - even if it seems too difficult for many fans right now!)

But I'm fine with the rest so you won't hear from me unless there's something fundamentally wrong

Shall we attempt to get back on topic or continue a fairly meaningless argument on the consistencies of arguments put forward...

[Paradise City]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Paradise City, even some of your "facts" can be disputed, such asking us to believe that females have competed to the same level as their mail counterparts. Although it is true that Janet Guthrie did have some success, as AJ Foyt proved, her true worth was never really established because her racing was financially underfunded. You may have a point with her.

As for Desire Wilson, she competed in about 100 odd races and to the best of my recollection she never won one of them, but she did achieve about 10 podiums On, I believe, her only attempt to compete in a WDC Grand Prix, she failed to qualify because in those days there were more cars entered than there were spaces on the grid. I would not quantify that as a truly successful overall racing career when you consider that some of the other drivers at that time will have competed in almost that number of races in the course of a year or two.

My point, which you have chosen to totally ignore, is that, as a generalisation, the female of your species tends to be slighter than their male counterparts, and by making cars that require extra strength to drive quickly you will make it even more difficult for females to participate.

Women are quite capable of building up sufficient strength to manhandle cars. They can be weightlifters. I don't envision that level of strength but a good threshold of strength and power to manhandle genuinely challenging cars is was what is proper. More dependency on human strength less on software garbage, other assistants..etc

I don't believe in calibrating the sport to support women specifically. It should be invisible to gender considerations in respect to calibrating sporting rules and technical regulations.

And dragging women into this thread with your "implications" is miles off topic and I take it as a deceitful attempt to poison the well and attack me without grounds.

[chillibowl]

to your credit PC, you have imo answered every post and i find that commendable. while i might disagree with you, you are defending what you believe in even though you are alone in your views and yeah maybe in time you will be vindicated.

back to the thread,

agree with Biscuit's point, since the FIA has not actually given a reason for this rule is why some of us (or just me) are confused as to why you seem so certain about this connection between 'ease of driving' and fear of public criticism.

acceptable if you think you have already answered it but i am still not understanding the connection. all things being equal, as the cars have become easier to drive there has been a corresponding reduction in injuries.

for the most part that is the FIA's doing. after decades of pursuing safety on the road and in race cars (including programs aimed at making driving a more inclusive and easier activity for all ages and genders) wouldnt creating the illusion of 'f1 being harder' or 'too dangerous' be counterproductive to pursuing their mandate on safety?

additionally, your position does not explain (to my liking anyways) why, given your feelings about the current status quo, you think its preferable to not include the best possible drivers available period! surely letting in the best of the best in does more to promote the scope of this challenge and does more to alleviate your belief that F1 is too easy to drive in more than the alternative the FIA have chosen?

my perspective is that at the end of the day i want those most capable of driving and excelling in an F1 cars to be driving in F1 cars irrespective of their age, gender weight etc etc.

[S griffin]

Desire Wilson competed in 100 odd races and never won one of them? Do me a favour! She is famous as being the only woman to win an F1 event, in the Aurora British championship. She also won the 1980 Monza 1000kms and the Silverstone 6 hours the same year

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Desire Wilson competed in 100 odd races and never won one of them? Do me a favour! She is famous as being the only woman to win an F1 event, in the Aurora British championship. She also won the 1980 Monza 1000kms and the Silverstone 6 hours the same year

Whoops!

However, please look at who the other participants were, because it was only a National event rather than one of the World Championship races. As for the other two races, my memory of that was that although she drove well, the wins were down to Alain de Cadanet who drove for a substantial part of each race. He certainly was a quick driver.

[wnut]

So who believes that Max Verstappen did not deserve his place in F1 in 2015?

[S griffin]

He certainly deserves a place with a top team

[p-matt]

He deserved his place no doubt. But for his long term development and avoiding child star burn out in his mid 20s, he'd have been better off in gp2 or 3.5 this year.

His petulance in not being a team player, accusing Grosjean of brake testing him and his and general sense of entitlement were ugly to see for someone his age. Hopefully he'll grow out of that as he's driven terrifically this year

[gert]

There was nothing wrong with his driving.

The few mistakes are of the kind and frequency that everyone makes, so no complaints there.

His behavior off-tracks (and sometimes on-track as well) show a lack of experience (not necessarily driving experience, but the how-do-I-work-in-a-team and the how-do-I-behave-in-this-competitive-environment kind of experience)
Something he could have learned more about when passing through the junior ranks.

For that matter I think people like Vandoorne, Magnussen, Palmer, even Sainz are more 'complete' drivers than Max.
Not necessarily faster, but they have completed their education.
Max has been rushed into this, and missed part of that education.

I expect this will come in the next few years, though...

[Nikki Katz]

Did max really get penalty points for overtaking off the track? It being a penalty at all was only marginal, but I understand why he had to give the space back / get a small penalty. But to threaten race bans over it is ludicrous. He didn't even really do anything wrong, was just a pass that didn't quite work but didn't lead to an accident.

[FIRE]

He had a great debut season. From race one he showed he's ready for F1.
Except for not apologize to Grosjean after Monaco there's not much negative to say.

Originally Posted by Nikki Katz

Did max really get penalty points for overtaking off the track? It being a penalty at all was only marginal, but I understand why he had to give the space back / get a small penalty. But to threaten race bans over it is ludicrous. He didn't even really do anything wrong, was just a pass that didn't quite work but didn't lead to an accident.

He should have given place back but a points penalty is unfair. Points penalties should only be given for dangerous moves.

It's many years ago since watching a full season but all these penalties is one of the things I don't like on current F1.

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by Nikki Katz

Did max really get penalty points for overtaking off the track? It being a penalty at all was only marginal, but I understand why he had to give the space back / get a small penalty. But to threaten race bans over it is ludicrous. He didn't even really do anything wrong, was just a pass that didn't quite work but didn't lead to an accident.

he also got penalty points for ignoring blue flags, but if you look at the lap chart here it's very hard to find a lap where Lewis would have lost time behind Max

http://thejudge13.com/2015/11/30/f1-...nd-gap-charts/

[Mike Harte]

The rules are almost quite clear; you don't overtake by using parts of the circuit that are beyond the white lines, and also that drivers must release a lapping driver after the 3rd blue flag is shown to him regardless of whether you believe that he is impeeding the lapping driver. To disregard that is a school-boy error, and needs to be punished.

You can't pick and choose which rules you like and will observe, and those that you dislike that you ignore. And that should apply to all drivers, no matter what class of racing that they are competing in.

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

and also that drivers must release a lapping driver after the 3rd blue flag is shown to him regardless of whether you believe that he is impeeding the lapping driver..

if you look at Lewis his lap times he did not loose time and he should be able to pass a Renault engine powered car very easy.

the penalty was ridicoulus, the penalty points on the license are insane

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

The rules are almost quite clear; you don't overtake by using parts of the circuit that are beyond the white lines, and also that drivers must release a lapping driver after the 3rd blue flag is shown to him regardless of whether you believe that he is impeeding the lapping driver. To disregard that is a school-boy error, and needs to be punished.

You can't pick and choose which rules you like and will observe, and those that you dislike that you ignore. And that should apply to all drivers, no matter what class of racing that they are competing in.

That sums it up very well really.