I've had a few discussions elsewhere regarding this topic.
I'm sure all of us would agree that the Tilke designed tracks leave a bit to be desired...and that's putting it mildly.
Most fans favor the classic F1 tracks by and large whether they are still visited by F1, or not. Even those currently used have seen overhauls of various sections of the track whether it is the addition of chicanes, larger runoff areas, or completely redoing the runoff with tarmac instead of gravel. I know much of it was done under the guise of safety for drivers to avoid having problematic corners or areas of the track that were at risk for serious and/or fatal crashes.
What my question is, did things go too far in that direction so as to kill off certain characteristics of tracks? Keep in mind, I'm not advocating tracks be designed so that if one were to crash in certain areas, they could be crippled or killed.
There was a story related to me, I forget the specific names (someone here might know) regarding Monza as it existed prior to the early 1970s. One of the teams was working on slipstreaming, but one of the drivers knew that his car was capable of taking Curva Grande flat-out without lifting off the pedal. Every time he went to try to take it flat-out, he would back off the throttle. He finally took the curve flat-out, and wound up putting 200 yards between him and his teammate whereas before Grande they were bumper to bumper. I always thought it was an interesting risk/reward situation. The reward was pretty significant, but obviously there is a risk involved with taking the old Curva Grande flat-out.
Did we lose something with the way circuits are nowadays? It feels like drivers aren't penalized anywhere near the way they were many years ago for leaving the track. Spa comes to mind with the latest tarmac runoff areas.
Imola is another track I felt that got neutered because of Senna's death. I personally loved the old Imola with the Tamburello and Villeneuve into Tossa sections. I always felt as if the soul of Imola got stamped out with the redesigns. The old Silverstone was spectacular. Hockenheim was another.
Racing by definition is dangerous, and likely always will be...and circuits will always have some sort of danger involved. But I wonder with how good the car safety is nowadays relative to the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, would it be the worst thing if the cars ran on the old circuit layouts? Albeit with the modern safety features in place like the soft walls NASCAR circuits have and so forth. I feel like today's drivers are missing out on the thrill that many of the circuits in the past had to a degree and I feel like when there is a little more risk involved with a circuit, it makes for more interesting racing because of the psychological aspect that can be involved with certain areas.
Anyway, not that there is a right or a wrong on this...just interested in opinions.
