The Formula 1 calendar development threadFormula 1 

Ok that makes sense. I always wondered why F1 seemed to ignore the U.S market. Seems that will continue, as I see COTA being one of those replaceable tracks they have plugged in to the season. Will it last like Suzuka, Spa, Monaco, etc? Probably not. They should have 2 or 3 races in the states I say.
I still think F1 should stick with 1 race per country. I never liked the whole idea of a "European Grand Prix" and the "San Marino Grand Prix", either as it really was just German/Spanish GP II and Italian GP II respectively. I don't think something that is dubbed as the "greatest motorsport in the world" should go out and play favourites with Countries.
 
I still think F1 should stick with 1 race per country. I never liked the whole idea of a "European Grand Prix" and the "San Marino Grand Prix", either as it really was just German/Spanish GP II and Italian GP II respectively. I don't think something that is dubbed as the "greatest motorsport in the world" should go out and play favourites with Countries.

And British... don't forget Senna's epic performance at Donington. And, of course, San Marino is a country, admittedly Europe is not :D
 
I still think F1 should stick with 1 race per country. I never liked the whole idea of a "European Grand Prix" and the "San Marino Grand Prix", either as it really was just German/Spanish GP II and Italian GP II respectively. I don't think something that is dubbed as the "greatest motorsport in the world" should go out and play favourites with Countries.
So you think it's better to have 1 race per country, even if some countries have a minimal F1 fanbase; as opposed to having GPs at world renowned tracks with massive fan support.

I don't see the point on getting hung up on countries either, especially in Europe. They're imaginary lines drawn on a map, and with the direction Europe is heading, boarders mean less and less.

So with that in mind, you could have 5 or 6 races in Europe, in different countries, but geographically closer to each other than any other races on the calander. So, if they're going to be located that closely together anyways, why does it matter what country the race is in, as long as its at a good track with lots of fans.


And as far as playing favourites, why shouldn't F1 pick favorites. There are certain countries and regions which support F1 many times more than others. Why does a country that has done nothing to help perpetuate the sport over the years deserve a GP? Why shouldn't regions who have been with F1 from the beginning, who helped make it what it is today, and jn many cases, have literally bled for the sport...why shouldn't those people/countries/regions be given preferential treatment?
 
So you think it's better to have 1 race per country, even if some countries have a minimal F1 fanbase; as opposed to having GPs at world renowned tracks with massive fan support.

I don't see the point on getting hung up on countries either, especially in Europe. They're imaginary lines drawn on a map, and with the direction Europe is heading, boarders mean less and less.

So with that in mind, you could have 5 or 6 races in Europe, in different countries, but geographically closer to each other than any other races on the calander. So, if they're going to be located that closely together anyways, why does it matter what country the race is in, as long as its at a good track with lots of fans.


And as far as playing favourites, why shouldn't F1 pick favorites. There are certain countries and regions which support F1 many times more than others. Why does a country that has done nothing to help perpetuate the sport over the years deserve a GP? Why shouldn't regions who have been with F1 from the beginning, who helped make it what it is today, and jn many cases, have literally bled for the sport...why shouldn't those people/countries/regions be given preferential treatment?
I think it ruins what makes a GP on a country special. If there were 2 British Grand Prixs, I think it ruins the value of the original British GP and the new British GP.
 
I think it ruins what makes a GP on a country special. If there were 2 British Grand Prixs, I think it ruins the value of the original British GP and the new British GP.
When the Indycars started the Indianapolis GP, it didn't harm the Indianapolis 500 that ran later in the month, contrary to what the IRL fanatics feared would happen. I think more people would attend the original British GP (just as more people attend the Indy 500) because of its historic roots and meaning to people.
 
I'm perfectly fine with F1 staying a mainly European thing but zi think the exposure to Americans would help. We don't have as many new tracks but the tracks we have are legendary on this side of the ocean. The reason why I say the states should have more races is because unlike European countries we need passports to go to Mexico and Canada yet alone Brazil. I understand now that the tracks we have 'aren't good enough' so I guess it will never take hold in America. I guess Ill be limited to taking F1 cars to Watkins, RA, Road Atlanta, Laguna, Lime a rock in vidya games.
 
I'm perfectly fine with F1 staying a mainly European thing but zi think the exposure to Americans would help. We don't have as many new tracks but the tracks we have are legendary on this side of the ocean. The reason why I say the states should have more races is because unlike European countries we need passports to go to Mexico and Canada yet alone Brazil. I understand now that the tracks we have 'aren't good enough' so I guess it will never take hold in America. I guess Ill be limited to taking F1 cars to Watkins, RA, Road Atlanta, Laguna, Lime a rock in vidya games.
As an American I would love to see more races here but then I ask myself, what is the interest of a second or third GP here? Sadly, the audiance for F1 is tiny in the US. If you subtract the people who can't afford the tickets or don't what to go then you have a minuscule number. If going by population you could say that China and India deserve 2-3 GPs but yet the interest there is either also low or people can't afford the tickets (thus the poor attendance).
 
When the Indycars started the Indianapolis GP, it didn't harm the Indianapolis 500 that ran later in the month, contrary to what the IRL fanatics feared would happen. I think more people would attend the original British GP (just as more people attend the Indy 500) because of its historic roots and meaning to people.
That's comparing a sport targeted to one country to one that is targeted towards the World.

I also think more than 1 race per country will ruin the whole idea of it being a "world" championship. Makes it feel like more of a regional championship with lots of overseas races.

I don't see the point on getting hung up on countries either, especially in Europe. They're imaginary lines drawn on a map, and with the direction Europe is heading, boarders mean less and less.

Yeah, and past those lines has a different language, different types of people, different government, different laws etc,
 
That's comparing a sport targeted to one country to one that is targeted towards the World.

I also think more than 1 race per country will ruin the whole idea of it being a "world" championship. Makes it feel like more of a regional championship with lots of overseas races.



Yeah, and past those lines has a different language, different types of people, different government, different laws etc,
I would say to determine the amount of races in a country on the overall interest. European countries should be able to have more races due to F1 being so popular. Look at NASCAR in the US, they run most of their races in one section of the country and have 4 races in Virginia (the size of many European countries) due to the owners and the interest.


How would it no longer be a world championship if the races are still all over the world?
 
I would say to determine the amount of races in a country on the overall interest. European countries should be able to have more races due to F1 being so popular. Look at NASCAR in the US, they run most of their races in one section of the country and runs 4 races in Virginia (the size of many European countries).


How would it no longer be a world championship if the races are still all over the world?
I have no issues with continents. Your treating it as if European Countries are very samey like an American State from the way you sound in your post which isn't the case. If a country loves F1, they should get love with a GP but they shouldn't be spoiled woth more than 1, F1 tickets aren't very cheap, it can also harm attendance rates for both races in the same country, especially the newer Grand Prix, making a 2nd Grand Prix in a country feel redundant.

Once again, you are comparing a World Championship to a National Championship.
 
I'm perfectly fine with F1 staying a mainly European thing but zi think the exposure to Americans would help. We don't have as many new tracks but the tracks we have are legendary on this side of the ocean. The reason why I say the states should have more races is because unlike European countries we need passports to go to Mexico and Canada yet alone Brazil. I understand now that the tracks we have 'aren't good enough' so I guess it will never take hold in America. I guess Ill be limited to taking F1 cars to Watkins, RA, Road Atlanta, Laguna, Lime a rock in vidya games.
I think I understand where you're coming from, but that's too much Nationalism for me. To me, the British GP is special because of Silverstone itself. The track, the history, the fans - to me, that's what makes winning an event special. Personally, I would feel the same sense of accomplishment winning a GP at Silverstone as I would at Donnington or Brands Hatch. Hell, I could win at all three in the same year, and would be as excited about each. The fact that all three tracks happen to be located on the same chunk of rock wouldn't devalue the victories at all. Like I said though, that's just me.

As far as the tracks in the US goes, you're correct in saying that many are legendary. Their legendary and nearly broke. None of the top U.S. road courses have the kind of fan support necessary to generate the revenue required to keep a track up to modern F1 standards. The lack of fan support isn't solely because there is a lack of interest for F1, it's because in the U.S., there is a lack of interest in road racing in general (relative to other places in the world)

Edit
I quoted the wrong post to begin with, my bad


Edit 2
I still think F1 should stick with 1 race per country...... I don't think something that is dubbed as the "greatest motorsport in the world" should go out and play favourites with Countries.
Just to go back a few posts, if that's how you really feel, I think you're in for a rude awakening when you learn the real reasons countries like Russia, China, Azerbaijan, India, Korea, or any other traditionally non-motorsport oriented country is given the opportunity to host a GP. It has nothing to do with the fans, and everything to do with global politics. Why do you think South Africa originally had a GP, and then subsequently lost it? Had nothing to do with fans deserving or not supporting a GP. It was purely political.

If F1 was truely the "greatest motorsport in the world", it would race on the best tracks around the world, regardless of where they are located.
 
Last edited:
I know they are two completely different things but I thought in my mind that it was an okay argument to make. I guess I was wrong...
I see the parallels between a National series visiting the same track twice and an International series visiting the same country twice...

I really hope France gets a GP back, with Renault and Grosjean in the sport, and we know there's a huge F1 fanbase there. With the logic we're working with right now, we could finally get rid of Monaco :D !!!
 
I really hope France gets a GP back, with Renault and Grosjean in the sport, and we know there's a huge F1 fanbase there. With the logic we're working with right now, we could finally get rid of Monaco :D !!!
Are we going to have the debate again of whether Monaco should stay or go :P :lol:.

I agree though. I'm actually surprised it is taking this long fo a country like France to get a GP. I wouldn't mind it if they made a longer version of Le Mans Buggati Circuit for F1.
 
Daaaaang, already??? That didn't take long. I didn't know Perry was involved, figures it would blow up because he ran his stupid mouth. That's a real shame though.


I clicked a link on that page, the story about Tavo Hellmund and what he's doing next. Apparently, he wants to buy Manor and have Alex Rossi and Dale Jr. as his drivers (which he figures will net him 5th in the WCC, helping pay for about half of he team). He's also poking around with building a new F1 track in Northern Cali. Tilke has/will investigate the site.

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/spo...cess-in-austin-and-mexico-whats-next-f/npKsz/

Nooo idea how reliable any of this is. Makes for a good read though :)
 
I've suspected that this might be on the cards for a while now. He was the driving force behind COTA before her got muscled out. He immediately jumped on the Mexico project and it's been a roaring (literally) success. It should give him the momentum to hit back in the United States with an alternative to COTA.
 
A new F1 track in California is an exciting proposition.

If it's done correct, it could be awesome, and I think Hellmund is the best guy for the job right now.

I don't doubt that the site will yield a good track with nice elevation change (unless they found the only flat ground in NorCal). I think a stadium section would be ideal as well. Mexico was a huge success, but they were working with a prebuilt baseball stadium...hardly ideal. If they could build a Motorsports stadium from scratch, which incorporates an exciting section of track, I think it would be a huge success in the US. You could hold RallyX and drifting events in the stadium too.

Despite its shortcomings, Formula Drift is a rapidly growing motorsport in the US, and has a huge following in California. Currently, Irwindale Speedway, aka "The House of Drift", is sort of the godfather of the FD schedule. It hosted the first Pro drift events in the US, and always hosts the season finale. Sadly though, the track is now owned by developers who want to build a shopping mall. The track remains open while they clear paperwork (and seems like it will stick around for 2016, thus far), but it's future is far from certain. The track is really only special because of its (short) history; otherwise it's just another drifting fishbowl.

I've long held the belief that FD, and the U.S. drift scene, need a monster section at a venue which can act as the premier event. Sort of like what Ebisu is to Japan/D1, or Mondello Park is to Ireland/IDC, or Pukekohe is to New Zealand/D1NZ. Something that scares the crap out of the drivers.

So at a track in NorCal, I think it would be beyond perfect to have some sort of stadium section which features a little elevation change, and a few tight corners which are suitable for both racing and drifting. And then go nuts with Americanizing the whole thing. Fill the stadium with jumbo trons, shoot fireworks all over the place, etc. Have t provide shade as well 👍

That's my hair brained idea for the day. I think if the right heads got together though, some magic could happen :dopey:
 
Why is the Mexico race so close to the Austin race? I've been reading up and some theories state they think it's The guy who leads F1 is trying to sabotage the sport in the Us and in turn sabotage COTA.
 
Why is the Mexico race so close to the Austin race? I've been reading up and some theories state they think it's The guy who leads F1 is trying to sabotage the sport in the Us and in turn sabotage COTA.
Now that seems like a reach.

My first guess why they're so close together is for logistical reasons. Same reason Australia, China, and Malaysia are 1, 2, 3. Then they go back to Europe for the summer. Canada is the oddball, but the weather window in Canada is very narrow compared to most other places, so July and August are really the only option. After the summer in Europe, back east for Singapore and Japan, then it's the Americas leg of Austin, Mexico, and Brazil before the final round in Abu Dahbi to finish off the season.

How does having the Mexican GP "close" to the U.S. GP sabotage the American event? By "close", do you mean time wise, or geographically?

Geographically speaking, the distance between Austin and Mexico City is about 1200km. Now, compare that with Barcelona to Bhudapest, which is roughly 1500km as the crow flies. If you let that 1500km be the diameter of a circle centred half way between the two cities, you'll find that Monaco, the Redbull Ring, and Monza (and Hockenheim, and Nurburgring, and Imola) are all located within that circle as well. In theory, there's potential to have 8 GP within a 1500km radius...9 if France were to get a GP back.

During the US GP, the sky announcers talked about Mexican fans going to the U.S. GP in 2014 (before there was a Mexican GP). The announcers were surprised to learn that in 2014, only 8% of ticket buyers were from Mexico. The announcers couldn't seem to figure out why the number was so low, based on the popularity of F1 in Mexico, and that a year later, the Mexican GP sold out in less than 2 hours. They just couldn't quite connect the dots...or rather, they couldn't connect the fence posts :P

If you think the Mexican GP hurt attendance numbers at the US GP, then I think you might be slightly out of tune with the current boarder situation between Mexico and the U.S. Jokes aside, I just don't think the idea of going to the US on holiday, coming from Mexico, is a very popular idea these days. I live in Canada, and myself along with a lot of people I know can't be bothered to go to the U.S. because of the hassle at the boarder...I definitely wouldn't be wasting my time with that crap if I was Mexican.
 
Last edited:
I really hope COTA doesn't drop off the calendar. It's the greatest Tilke track since Istanbul and it provided the best race of this season. No doubt it could do that again, should there be rain. I'd be gutted if COTA pulled out of F1.
 
It not a Tilke designed track. It just looks like one. I hate COTA and I really don't understand the appeal of it.
 
Because it is very much like a Tilke track and I cannot stand hardly anything he's ever done. Even Istanbul was only ever about one corner and that was a copy of a corner from Spa. The only thing he's ever done that's good, in my view, is the run from the chicane to the final corner at Fuji.

Otherwise I would quite happily bulldoze the lot of them. I know he has to work within FIA Grade 1 rules and doesn't, generally, get to build where he wants, but that doesn't excuse the tracks he designs.

It looks to me as though he designs them to cause modern F1 cars setup problems. The trouble with that is that cars change pretty quickly and the track stays the same.
 
I still think F1 should stick with 1 race per country. I never liked the whole idea of a "European Grand Prix" and the "San Marino Grand Prix", either as it really was just German/Spanish GP II and Italian GP II respectively. I don't think something that is dubbed as the "greatest motorsport in the world" should go out and play favourites with Countries.

I'd rather play favourites with tried and tested circuits than build white elephants in the middle of nowhere in bent countries for promoters and politicians looking to steal a quick quid.
 
Because it is very much like a Tilke track and I cannot stand hardly anything he's ever done. Even Istanbul was only ever about one corner and that was a copy of a corner from Spa. The only thing he's ever done that's good, in my view, is the run from the chicane to the final corner at Fuji.

Otherwise I would quite happily bulldoze the lot of them. I know he has to work within FIA Grade 1 rules and doesn't, generally, get to build where he wants, but that doesn't excuse the tracks he designs.

It looks to me as though he designs them to cause modern F1 cars setup problems. The trouble with that is that cars change pretty quickly and the track stays the same.
People (not necessarily you) need to understand that tracks like Spa, the Nordscheife, Bathurst etc will never get built again, and have to let it go. The appeal in these tracks is in part the danger of them, and that the range of outcomes of getting a corner right or wrong goes from orgasmic to death. They have been made as safe as they can, given the legacy design, but would never get approved to be built from scratch today.
There is no point in throwing modern track designers (Tilke or otherwise) under the bus for the designs, because as has been said, they are working with strict guidelines on straight lengths, types of corners after straights, elevation changes, safety (runoff areas the size of Belgium) etc etc.

The best chance we have for a new, totally unique circuit is, in my opinion, a street circuit where the FIA have to compromise on their requirements thanks to existing roads and buildings. Sadly, the list of viable candidates is short.
 
It's not that Tilke (as a metonym for modern track design) can't make good tracks; the new Österreichring and Sepang are great tracks. But a lot of them are very samey-bamey, pretty much indifferent to each other. I consider it irrefutable that the decline in driving standards and increase in "exceeding track limits" is down to circuits with unbelievable tarmac run offs which do not punish drivers.

My axe regarding them being white elephants in the middle of nowhere in bent countries isn't anything to do with him or any track designers.
 
Back