Behind F1's Velvet Curtain
web.archive.orgIf your interested maybe bookmark this one for the weekend since i'm thirteen paragraphs in and Kate hasn't meandered remotely close to the point of the article yet.
Here's a archive.is mirror in case Hearst (Road & Track's parent) demand archive.org to kill it: https://archive.is/u3csL
This has got to be one of the most biased, uninformed, bullshit, articles I've ever read. The author has no connections to motorsports at all, where everything and everyone is connected.
I've had Indy hard cards, lunch with Charlie Whiting, been in race control and timing towers of too many race tracks to count, and had people ask to take pictures with me because of what I created (still feels weird, but whatever).
This is a fluff piece of nonsensical ranting and raving about a sport that the author knows nothing about. It is a very expensive sport and also attracts a lot of money because everyone wants to find any possible advantage they can within the rules. I started my business to help fund my racing habit, and found that we can make more money selling useful tools to the racers and fans.
Someone told the author to go on a trip and write an article that's X,000 words long... sadly, that person didn't care if the article was actually good or not.
Uh? I've worked for an Ad company with the Mercedes AMG Hospitality & Comms Team in the past (>7 yrs ago, way before Ineos got in)and what she wrote absolutely matches my experience regarding the disconnect between the actual sport and the whole "circus" and old money circling around it.
It also matches the extremely short time I've spent around Lewis Hamilton, which was incredibly gracious with everything and everyone the whole time, especially with fans.
Well I love this type of articles, written by outsiders that don't particularly care about their sponsors. Like a Hunter S. Thompson article about a culinary festival that devolves into the morality of cooking seafood alive.
It's a very naive article certainly, her amusement at how cavalier drivers can be when discussing their team and sponsors or exhibiting individuality tickles me given there has been an all but complete moratorium on personality in the sport for the past ten years.
Her comments on the history of cycling are either idealistic or plain ignorant, it was certainly a sport for peasants, but also the idle rich - bicycles became popular toys for the wealthy well before they were remotely available to the poor (to whom they would become almost indispensable).
She identifies herself a socialist right off the bat which I suspect is why the article is so contemptuous, having walked the paddock numerous times I can tell you it is enjoyable as hell if you're open to it, doubly so if it's a free ride as the author had!