ok, according to this blogger
http://boscotheblog.blogspot.com/200...s-it-take.html
Had it not been for a mechanical issue another female may have beat Arlene Hiss to the gun by like 14 years...who is he talking about?
Women were running the USAC road racing series nearly two decades earlier, and if not for mechanical trouble a woman would have made the first qualifying attempt for the Indy 500 in 1962.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security
A shot in the dark-Denise McCluggage?Originally Posted by BSJracing
"Only a fool fights in a burning house."-Kang
"If you listen to fools....The Maaahhhhb Ruuuules....."-Ronnie James Dio
They would have allowed a women in the pits in the dark, dark ages?!
I'm really curious as to the answer on this one- would have probably changed the history of the 500 significantly if that barrier had been broken that much earlier.
So did this driver even run a practice lap? DD should know.
"Charging a man with murder here was like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500."- Capt. Willard, Apocolypse Now
"Ain't nuthin' like a piece of p***y, 'cept maybe the Indy 500."- Bunny, Platoon
"To alcohol! The cause of- and solution to- all of life's problems."- Homer J. Simpson
Strangely enough, NASCAR had several women who raced in the equivalent of what is now the Cup series back in the '50s. One of them, Sara Christian, was said to be quite good. It wasn't until 1960 or so that they banned women from the pits.
Again, you're taking this too literally. Just because someone wrote it, be it in a book, newspaper or on the internet, doesn't mean it's accurate. There are some serious shortcomings with this blog post.
While there are signs of some good research in the post, in other places...not so much.
Many of the questions posited are speculative without any checking for information that could answer the questions quite easily. It also is rather deeply couched in politics.
He is right that Arlene Hiss never technically "qualified", but that's more semantics than anything else. While I've seen her incorrectly listed that way, far more often I've seen Arlene Hiss listed as the first woman to race/compete in an "Indycar". Which is completely accurate. He seems upset over the inaccuracy, but that isn't Arlene Hiss' fault. That's down to the mainstream media still being completely and utterly ignorant of the most basic racing terminology.
In short, there are some glaring errors in that blog post. For one, she couldn't have gone to Saugus to get in a sprint car, as it was almost exclusively a stock car track. Sprint cars hadn't raced there for at least five years at the time.
I do like The Firesign Theater quote, and I've used it here, but in this case, using "Everything You Know Is Wrong" is wrong
As I believe most bloggers are blowhards trying not to work but stir the pot to up their blog count, thereby bloating an advertising number I'm not going to bother, but in light of the Firesign Theatre quote (as I am a fan of Regnad Kcin) I will add that 93.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot.I do like The Firesign Theater quote, and I've used it here, but in this case, using "Everything You Know Is Wrong" is wrong
Now the big question, one of the riding mechanics in the 1909 era was the wife of a husband/wife driving team......she was not allowed in the Founder Cup Race however she worked every practice session as a mechanician.......now did she ever get to ride in the 500? I would have to look up his name to try and figure it out, but if so a woman in competition would have a far different story.
EDIT--The Driver's name was Bert Dingleyand her name is only listed as Mrs. Dingley in the book "The Fairmount Park Motor Races, 1908-1911" and she was the mechanician of note for her husband in the Portland race of '09 or '08......"On Thursday, all eyes were focused on th Chalmers-Detroit Bluebirds. First, Bert Dingley attracted some attention, when he took his wife around the course as his mechanician for four laps, the fastest which was an 8:35." his qualifying speed was eventually lowered to 7:58 later in the week---now to look to see if Bert ever drove in the 500......which would have been her only chance in the 500.
DOUBLE EDIT--Bert is listed http://www.champcarstats.com/drivers/DingleyBert.htm his wife is not http://www.champcarstats.com/rm/rm1.htm in spite of the claim in the book that she was his mechanician in Portland and Portland shows in Bert's list.
An answer may lie in the article "Racing Motorists Wife not Alarmed" Philadelphia Evening Bulletin 8 october 1909
Last edited by Neshaminy; 06-15-2012 at 03:13 PM.
Katharine's Legge is in the gravel!--Jenks
__________________________________________________ ____________________
12-7-1941 Never, Never Forget 9-11-2001
While it can be accurately stated that Hiss raced/competed in a Champ car or a National Championship car, "Indycar" is "completely" inaccurate without much further explanation and with even greater, casual liberty allowed for such debatable spelling of the word.
Umm, that's why I used the quotes. It was meant tongue firmly in cheek since so few use the term "Champ Cars" let alone "National Championship" any longer. I realize the difference. Unfortunately, all one sees now is "Indy Car, or worse "Indycar"
I understand now and fully concur.Umm, that's why I used the quotes. It was meant tongue firmly in cheek since so few use the term "Champ Cars" let alone "National Championship" any longer. I realize the difference. Unfortunately, all one sees now is "Indy Car, or worse "Indycar"
Just made this post in another thread:
Actually, I won't be that harsh. There are some outstanding bloggers on a wide range of topics. Some do far better than those in traditional media. For example, if they are so inclined, they have more time to research something without facing a hard deadline. That allows for some remarkably well researched pieces. And what you describe afflicts most organized media, newspapers and TV included, it's all about readers, viewers, traffic. I know first hand about "generating traffic"
The blogger seems to have some familiarity with racing, though some of the errors make it seem not extremely deep (like mystifyingly citing the woman attempting to qualify in 1962). Part of it is better researched than many articles I've read. Some of the rest of it, he might not have had access to materials that would help. While I used to cringe about someone unfamiliar about racing writing such articles, now it seems as if those from outside racing come in with a more open mindset and do some research. Sadly, so many racing writers - veteran and novice alike - seem to fall back on re-telling the old folk tales and do little to no real research.
Last edited by JThur1; 06-16-2012 at 02:40 AM.
I did remember having stumbled across Paula Murphy references in the past...here she is driving a Novi, not sure of the date
http://www.americanjetcars.com/pmurphy/paula56.htm
Paula Murphy is exactly who I think the blogger might be mistakenly referring to, though that's off in several ways (like "qualifying attempt").
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks