FIA scrapping historic races in favour of new circuits

[AR3-GP]

The concern to me is that in 5 years or so once the 'boom' has worn off, the older tracks will not be able to manage the upkeep as they have been operating with very narrow margins, and of course the 'boom tracks' will have become estates or repurposed and unsuitable for F1.

All of the traditional GP circuits are at risk of being replaced by street circuits in trendy cities. Liberty/FOM doesn't care as long as they can collect a higher fee from a street circuit.

[Arcanum]

As I see it there are three schools of track builders and they have alway been there. .

1) Those who believe tracks should consist of a natural progression of challenging curves inspired by the landscape. where the driver can make a difference and where an overtake takes several corners to set up. Suzuki and Spa are classical examples, but also Austin.
2) those who believe a track should be predominantly fast an feature a runway for overtakes like Monza and abu dabi.
3) Those who don’t care tor the track at all as long as it has a nice backdrop and enough seats for paying spectators Ceasars palace, Monaco as well as Miami.

In the end F1 always has been a mix of the three. The balance has shifted back and forth a bit over the years but there seems to be a natural straightening mechanism, which prevents them from going too extreme In one direction.

Thanks, that's a really logical and rational way to think about this.

[PlatinumZealot]

Yup. Modern convenience is important to attract and keep fans.

[Big Tea]

The concern to me is that in 5 years or so once the 'boom' has worn off, the older tracks will not be able to manage the upkeep as they have been operating with very narrow margins, and of course the 'boom tracks' will have become estates or repurposed and unsuitable for F1.

All of the traditional GP circuits are at risk of being replaced by street circuits in trendy cities. Liberty/FOM doesn't care as long as they can collect a higher fee from a street circuit.

From what I see this last couple of years, and I have to admit I have not been in person for 5 years, it seems the race is something incidental to a show going on where people just have to be because ' everyone is' .

The music, those attending and 'occasion' is far more important than any content on the track.
Its not just F1 either. Go to a top rugby game and half the crowd don't even know who is involved other than the team is called XXX and everyone will be talking about it on social media, and they simply must have photographs to put on their feed.

[JordanMugen]

Out of current races, I would like to see the following ones scrapped of the calendar: Melbourne, Qatar, Imola, Zandvoort, Abu Dhabi, Austin, Miami, Vegas.

Imola and Zandvort are fantastic circuits IMO!

Tracks such as Spa have to charge high prices for tickets as that is their main source of revenue to pay the hosting fee. A lot of the new races have the fee paid by their government in order to bring a race to their country.

The Victorian state government subsidises the Australian Grand Prix by around $15m AUD p/a too, i.e., they cover the loss the Grand Prix Corporation makes on the event which is usually about that much.

Although with the increase in Formula One's popularity, AGP ticket prices have soared recently on a demand-based pricing model so maybe it is a loss-making event no more?!

1) Those who believe tracks should consist of a natural progression of challenging curves inspired by the landscape. where the driver can make a difference and where an overtake takes several corners to set up. Suzuki and Spa are classical examples, but also Austin.

What if the only land available is a flat field in the middle of nowhere, a la Paul Ricard circuit?

Such middle of nowhere circuits are particularly useful to avoid noise complaints or restrictions from neighbouring properties or residential areas.

While it would be nice to build all racing circuits in mountainous regions, it doesn't always work out that way.

[AR3-GP]

The concern to me is that in 5 years or so once the 'boom' has worn off, the older tracks will not be able to manage the upkeep as they have been operating with very narrow margins, and of course the 'boom tracks' will have become estates or repurposed and unsuitable for F1.

The hosting fees will go down if there is no demand to host GPs.

[AR3-GP]

Yup. Modern convenience is important to attract and keep fans.

Convenience is only important if the product isn't very good.

[harty71]

I hate the direction F1 is going, they might as well sack it off if they are going to kill the tradition. We already have too many street circuits that are poor for racing. I hope Max Verstappen keeps voicing his opinion.

[mzivtins]

If historic races are being dropped in favour of other factors then at least move the tracks on significantly.
The issue people have is that the old tracks just provide better racing (mots of the time)

I know most of you are going to disagree with this and think it goes too far but:
I want to see new tracks have an inverted section. If F1 cars make all this great downforce then use it as their party trick, no need for stupid DRS zones, drive upside down. You slow down, you crash. But at least new tracks would bring something new to the sport a new challenge and evolution. New tracks should help push the limits of what we consider normal, yes inverted track is an extreme example.