I disagree. The added corners looked Mickey Mouse and too slow. The higher speed entrance to the banking will make it hairier for the drivers (just give it a go in iRacing).

I’m saying there’s going to be some point where women are prevalent (and successful) enough in the sort that those barriers will essentially dissolve as there’s interest for the young drivers and money from sponsors. We’re not anywhere close yet, but I’m optimistic if the right moves (like Pippa’s scholarship) are…

My understanding is that this is part of the mentorship. Lynn St James used to run a course like this as well, but wasn’t able to keep it funded.

Pippa isn’t racing anywhere outside the 500 right now, she spends the rest of her year hustling for sponsors and doing other related activities to make sure she has the cash for living expenses (and hopefully leftovers for racing).

No amount of scholarships would ever swing the pendulum the other way. If you intend to change its trajectory towards 50-50, you need to apply a push in the opposite direction. To put it another way, a scholarship for young women is most valuable when there aren’t many women in the sport to begin with. The idea is…

And because they’re relatively poor, since all their money goes towards racing.

I’d say this advice applies regardless of gender. If you’re putting in the level of effort needed to break through as a professional race car driver, you don’t have time for the other sex.

Like I said to start, good luck :)

Good luck on that price. By comparison, VASC costs about double that, while MotoGP costs 100 EUR for a season. I’d expect F1 to charge closer to MotoGP prices.

And more importantly, compare his defense against the indictment. Most notably, he’s defending himself against things other than what he’s going to jail for.

Technically his brother is the source, having claimed to be selling Scott’s debts but actually selling random names.

And, if you want to hear both how much of a charmer he is (probably how he got away with these schemes for so long) and how hard he tries to weasel his way out of it, listen to their direct talk with Scott and compare it to the indictment...

Perhaps it’s semantics, but I don’t think the concept was garbage. It was risky, both from the technical side of making it work and from the political side of getting banned as soon as they made it work. Nissan went with it because they didn’t have the money to compete against Audi, Porsche, and Toyota by building…

In the case of an open, equal rulebook, you’re right that the front-bias is deficient. With the Nissan, the difference is that there were restrictions with the LMP1 rules that limited rear downforce but not front downforce, which theoretically would be exploited by FWD in a way that gave a net benefit (less mechanical…

It was for aerodynamic reasons, to exploit the existing rulebook. There was a lot of restriction on the rear aero (particularly fixed wing and diffuser size, and no blowing of the diffuser or shaping of the rear deck), which meant basically everyone had the same rear downforce and drag. The idea was that by moving the…

That’s interesting, because the experience was centered around the GT-R LM Nismo, a radical front-wheel-drive prototype that never raced with a functional hybrid system. You know, the electrical part.

And shareholder benefit (which, to be fair, is somewhat synonymous with profit) would hold in this case as well. Ford was seeking to benefit himself, at the expense of investors who intended to pull funding to start a rival business.

As should the comparison be total compensation, rather than wage. Take home pay is just one part of compensation, benefits are a significant driver for selecting a job and the resulting standard of living.

Remember, WTCC is dead after this year. Instead, TCR International is becoming the FIA “World Cup” for touring cars, with no factory teams allowed. Pretty much what touring cars needed, just like when GT1 died and Blancpain GT replaced it.

Hot take, y’all.