30 or 40 into 20

Skeeter

Skeeter

Skeeter

Caporegime
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
Bear with me...

As we all know there is a massive influx of new tracks coming into F1. Bernie seems to be adding at least 1 new venue a year, and we still have Mexico, Russia, Greece and Hong Kong on the cars at the moment. Obvisously these tracks are going to be added to the calendar at the expense of some of our old favourites.

However, why do we have to be limited to the number of tracks that match the number of races per season? What if we have a lot more sharing deals?

You wouldn't want a venue to be off the calendar for more than a year, but no reason they can't alternate. Imagine if tracks got together into groups of 3 and each one took 1 year off and then 2 years on. If every venue was in that kind of deal then it would mean we could have 30 venues used with 20 races a season with each track being used 2 our of every 3 years.

If you pushed it up to pairs, so each track alternates year on year with 1 other track (like the German races) then it could mean 40 venues used over 2 years.

Clearly you aren't going to get deals like this for every track, but if you get a few on this sort of arrangement there is no reason why F1 couldn't run a 20 race season, yet have 25 to 30 different venues that it goes too. Each year would also be slightly different to mix things up.

I know that given the choice between no British GP and a British GP 2 out of every 3 years alternating its year off with say Russia and Hong Kong, I'd rather have the setup that kept a British GP.

Sorry, long post, I did warn you :D

What do you think?

(I wonder how many people are going to click this thread thinking its about speed limits :))
 
Sharing isn't going to happen to often at a guess because of the money. If one track is struggling to keep up either in track quality, track changes over the years or things like facilities, having just one huge money race every three years is only going to dramatically reduce any possible profit. So if a track is struggling to keep itself in the F1 rotation, taking money away is highly unlikely to help them stay competitive.


Would happily see the end to all the "street" races to see new ones come in but, Monaco is the rich people's event. Sponsors get to bring people they are doing deals with along to a race with loads of celebrities and sports stars. Its the go to event of the year for that kind of thing, no overtaking, boring races but far too profitable, the rest.... hope they go.
 
As with everything else in F1 it will come down to money. Tracks have to pay a large amount to host a GP and try to get money from doing so. Can a track like Silverstone make enough money over a 2 or 3 year cycle to maintain the standard of track and pay F1 fees from only one GP?

I think it is inevitable that F1 will move to where the money is now, ie Middle East/Asia.
 
Its not 1 in 3, its 2 in 3 or 1 in 2. A venue would be off the calendar for 1 year at a time at most. The 3 track sharing would have 2 spots on the calendar, with 1 track sitting out each year.

It worked for Germany. Neither the Nurburgring or Hockenheim could afford a full time race, yet alternating has kept both of them on the calendar (for now).
 
It's certainly a nice idea, out of the new tracks some will surely be duds so would be nice to not be stuck with them every year and alos would be nice to know we will get to keep all of the decent circuits.

Not sure it will ever happen though, it'll probably just come down to the money available which will decide most of the tracks, which is a real shame.
 
F1 always plays this game, its Bernie's way of keeping the established tracks on their toes.

You are right in that 30 doesn't go into 20 but what will happen is most of the dross tracks from the last 10 years will quietly be dropped, Turkey is an obvious one. By dross I mean ones where no one turns up, not just rubbish layouts as I quite like the Turkish layout, just should be in France instead.

F1 will always try to expand and go where the money is, but it will always encounter the same problem that without sell out crowds and popular tracks there is no reason for companies to invest in the sport (sort of like sponsoring a league 2 football team with a 30k stadium that only gets 5k of fans, just isn't worth the money).

So I see the traditional tracks, like Silverstone, Monza and so on are sort of safe, provided everyone keeps going. Sell outs at the British GP will keep it going because the sport needs that sort of fan base every year to make sure investment for the teams continues.

Bernie will die soon enough anyway so the safety of the classic tracks is some what protected when he goes.
 
If the money works out, then it would be good to have a bit more variety in the circuits and make the teams work a bit harder to get the right set ups on tracks they aren't recently familiar with.
 
Duke said:
If the money works out, then it would be good to have a bit more variety in the circuits and make the teams work a bit harder to get the right set ups on tracks they aren't recently familiar with.
Click to expand...

I think all testing should be done on tracks that they don't race on.

At the very least it takes F1 to places it wouldn't usually go to.
 
Skeeter said:
I think all testing should be done on tracks that they don't race on.
Click to expand...

Yeah in theory you would want that, but it depends how many F1 spec tracks that aren't on the calendar are up to scratch still. But this could be sorted if they alternative and could give the circuits off that calendar that year a little income.
 
ThestigGT999 said:
I wanna see the Slovakiaring used in F1

I'd say have 25 races per season
Click to expand...

It's not just the drivers, it's all the support staff too. Mechanics, technicians, drivers, they all deserve a break. At the moment 20 races is the limit. Any more and they'll need duplicate crews like they have in NASCAR and they're trying to avoid that.
 
Duke said:
Yeah in theory you would want that, but it depends how many F1 spec tracks that aren't on the calendar are up to scratch still. But this could be sorted if they alternative and could give the circuits off that calendar that year a little income.
Click to expand...

Classification for F1 testing is less strict than for F1 races. There's a lot of tracks that are classified for testing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom