What Tracks Will Get the Boot?

the Masked Lapwing · Post by **the Masked Lapwing** » 23 Jan 2011, 04:35

Hmmm... The possibilty of no more race at Albert Park?

Bloody Victorians.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 23 Jan 2011, 04:51

the Masked Lapwing wrote:Hmmm... The possibilty of no more race at Albert Park?

Bloody Victorians.

Get ready for F1 to go to Surfers me thinks.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 23 Jan 2011, 12:34

It's on autosport now aswell.

Anybody want to hazard a guess at what the next venue of the Australian GP will be? My money's on Surfers.

Jeroen Krautmeir · Post by **Jeroen Krautmeir** » 23 Jan 2011, 12:37

Wizzie wrote:It's on autosport now aswell.

Anybody want to hazard a guess at what the next venue of the Australian GP will be? My money's on Surfers.

Surfers is actually more of a possibility than one might think, and I wouldn't mind to see the circus go there. I would prefer a return to Adelaide, though that's impossible...

the Masked Lapwing · Post by **the Masked Lapwing** » 23 Jan 2011, 12:49

I want to see F1 at Bathurst. Sure, there's nowhere to pass over the top of the Mountain, and then there's the big accidents that can happen at The Chase (or anywhere, really). And if Bernie gets his wish, a night race would be interesting.

Jeroen Krautmeir · Post by **Jeroen Krautmeir** » 23 Jan 2011, 12:57

the Masked Lapwing wrote:I want to see F1 at Bathurst. Sure, there's nowhere to pass over the top of the Mountain, and then there's the big accidents that can happen at The Chase (or anywhere, really). And if Bernie gets his wish, a night race would be interesting.

That reminds me when I raced the track in a Soopah Aguri in F1C. I rarely made it past the turn 4 to turn 9 section where I just lost all grip and spun into oblivion, and when I did make it past, the car just went flying into a tree at The Dipper. Plenty of accidents for sure!

Alianora La Canta · Post by **Alianora La Canta** » 23 Jan 2011, 14:47

I'd predict China and Turkey to go at the end of this year (to make way for Russia and whatever pet circuit idea happens to be next on Bernie's list - most likely Mexico).

Sad, because I want to see the Turkish GP and I can't afford to go this year.

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 23 Jan 2011, 15:15

Jeroen Krautmeir wrote:
the Masked Lapwing wrote:I want to see F1 at Bathurst. Sure, there's nowhere to pass over the top of the Mountain, and then there's the big accidents that can happen at The Chase (or anywhere, really). And if Bernie gets his wish, a night race would be interesting.

That reminds me when I raced the track in a Soopah Aguri in F1C. I rarely made it past the turn 4 to turn 9 section where I just lost all grip and spun into oblivion, and when I did make it past, the car just went flying into a tree at The Dipper. Plenty of accidents for sure!

Reminds me of my online league when we went to Bathurst. I wrecked on lap 2 in a 17 lap race in there and I totally blew the braking point in the Dipper and headbutted the wall. Kaplunk.

But from what I just read on Autosport, Melbourne is in trouble, and it's source is the city's mayor, who wants an end to the Australian GP because it's becoming unfeasible. Mmm...

Rocks with Salt · Post by **Rocks with Salt** » 23 Jan 2011, 17:46

Okay, I know it's been forever, but I think it's time to put out a new board; thoughts?

P_Friesacher · Post by **P_Friesacher** » 23 Jan 2011, 18:05

By the way, am I the first one to mention, that Watkins Glen already has "The Boot"?

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 23 Jan 2011, 19:30

I don't think Interlagos is that safe, and also Shanghai will be staying, it's in China, one of (if not the) largest market on the planet so they won't be leaving there soon.

Does Montreal have a long term deal in place now to secure it's future?

Otherwise I think you've pretty much got it nailed.

nome66 · Post by **nome66** » 23 Jan 2011, 20:54

It seems to me that the FIA chooses the locations in the USA that have the least possible interest in F1.
let's see...
Dallas, detroit, vegas, phoenix.
2 good ones, but something went wrong and they high-tailed it outta there. 2005 @ indy and Glen's cash problems.

Mister Fungus · Post by **Mister Fungus** » 23 Jan 2011, 22:44

Wizzie wrote:Get ready for F1 to go to Vanuatu me thinks.

Now that's more like it

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 24 Jan 2011, 01:47

If Melbourne loses the race, send it back to Adelaide. However, because Adelaide is only 3.75km long - shorter than Monaco - it might need a bit of an extension. Like this: http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=4250546

Hopwfully that will get rid of the fiddly ninety-degree bends, and create new apssing opportunities at the end of Wakefield Street and Botanic Road to go with the one down at the Dequetteville hairpin.

Post by **mario** » 24 Jan 2011, 11:32

Captain Hammer wrote:If Melbourne loses the race, send it back to Adelaide. However, because Adelaide is only 3.75km long - shorter than Monaco - it might need a bit of an extension. Like this: http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=4250546

Hopwfully that will get rid of the fiddly ninety-degree bends, and create new apssing opportunities at the end of Wakefield Street and Botanic Road to go with the one down at the Dequetteville hairpin.

It's plausible that Albert Park may be dropped from the calendar sooner rather than later. The Mayor of Melbourne, Robert Doyle, although conceding that the race was originally a major boost to the states revenues, has openly questioned in an article for the local papers whether the race still offers the city value for money.

"The big stumbling block ... is the cost to the Victorian taxpayer," Doyle wrote. "In 1996 when the race was a combination of a four-day event and corporate sponsorship was far more generous than it is today, the race still needed to be underwritten by about $1.7 million. Last year it was $50 million.
"Fast forward to 2015, the year the franchise ends. Though the documented benefits for the city may include hundreds of millions of dollars of advertising value, tens of millions of dollars of local revenue, an event that will draw between 250,000 and 300,000 people over three days will come at a cost that will approach 70 million taxpayer dollars.
"It is the old argument: pay up front but get many times the value of the upfront payment in downstream economic benefits. For most events that formula is persuasive. But $70 million?"

He concluded: "[...] I know of no city that has voluntarily walked away from a grand prix, but could Melbourne be the first? The final possibility is that we decide that it has been 20 fantastic years, the benefits to the city and the state have been enormous, but the cycle has run its course."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89051

It's unsurprising that with the fees for the races continually spiralling upwards that something will sooner or later give, and I would not be surprised if Albert Park was dropped from the calendar in 2015. Whether the Australian GP remains at all is another matter - somewhere like Adelaide might be willing to take on the race, but probably not for the sort of rates which FOM currently demand. And I doubt that they would offer better terms for the sake of heritage - the French GP, for example, is supposed to be retained as part of the heritage of the sport, but there isn't going to be a French GP for the foreseeable future.

Captain Hammer · Post by **Captain Hammer** » 24 Jan 2011, 22:41

mario wrote:It's plausible that Albert Park may be dropped from the calendar sooner rather than later. The Mayor of Melbourne, Robert Doyle, although conceding that the race was originally a major boost to the states revenues, has openly questioned in an article for the local papers whether the race still offers the city value for money.

Doyle's a hack. He's a failed politician who settled for the title of Lord Mayor when he realised it was the best he was ever going to do. Victoria is a Liberal-controlled state, and it's widely expected that New South Wales will become Liberal at the next state elections. NSW Liberal leader Barry O'Farrell has been very critical of Kristina Keneally and the Labor government, particularly with their spending. He'll seriously cut back on anything he doesn't think is necessary. I suspect that Doyle is suggesting cutting the Grand Prix to consolidate Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu's position in line with O'Farrell's. While $70 million sounds like a lot, the Victorian government collects more in stamp duty in a year. Doyle is just skewing the numbers for political points. Melbourne won't get out of their contract so easily.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 28 Jan 2011, 11:45

Bernie ready to cancel Aus GP deal.

Sadly I don't see the Albert Park race lasting beyond 2012 :cry:

the Masked Lapwing · Post by **the Masked Lapwing** » 28 Jan 2011, 12:47

Wizzie wrote:Bernie ready to cancel Aus GP deal.

Sadly I don't see the Albert Park race lasting beyond 2012

Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone has said he will not stand in Australia's way if the country wants to get rid of its grand prix.

I'm sorry, but since when did one Victorian represent the entire country?

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 28 Jan 2011, 17:43

If you read the article, Bernie says he doesn't break contracts, and they have a contract with Melbourne till 2015, so it won't be going till then at the earliest.

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 28 Jan 2011, 19:03

AndreaModa wrote:If you read the article, Bernie says he doesn't break contracts, and they have a contract with Melbourne till 2015, so it won't be going till then at the earliest.

But Bernie has said that he will let Australia break the contract if they want to, it just won't be him that'll be breaking it...

Post by **mario** » 28 Jan 2011, 19:50

dr-baker wrote:
AndreaModa wrote:If you read the article, Bernie says he doesn't break contracts, and they have a contract with Melbourne till 2015, so it won't be going till then at the earliest.

But Bernie has said that he will let Australia break the contract if they want to, it just won't be him that'll be breaking it...

True, it is a rather duplicitous denial - in effect, whether or not the race continues after 2015, he is the one in the win-win situation. Either the race is cancelled, in which case he can point out that he was not the one to break the contract, or the race continues and everybody forgets about this debate.

I think, though, that anything which increases the pressure on FOM to justify why the tracks have to pay so much to hold an F1 race in ultimately a good thing. Bernie's "escalator" for the fees is what is really crippling the tracks at the moment, but I can't see that being changed until a really high profile venue goes bankrupt.

Yannick · Post by **Yannick** » 29 Jan 2011, 13:17

mario wrote:I think, though, that anything which increases the pressure on FOM to justify why the tracks have to pay so much to hold an F1 race in ultimately a good thing. Bernie's "escalator" for the fees is what is really crippling the tracks at the moment, but I can't see that being changed until a really high profile venue goes bankrupt.

Which one would that be? Spa? Happened before. Hockenheim or Nürburgring? The state has stepped in to help both of them already. Monza? Highly unlikely. And Monaco has got a favourable fee. So which is the high-profile venue that cannot be replaced or saved by taxpayers' money? Valencia Marina, probably.

Melbourne most certainly isn't. It's a nice race but I can fully understand it that they don't want to renew their contract.

watka · Post by **watka** » 29 Jan 2011, 14:15

the Masked Lapwing wrote:
Wizzie wrote:Bernie ready to cancel Aus GP deal.

Sadly I don't see the Albert Park race lasting beyond 2012

Formula 1 supremo Bernie Ecclestone has said he will not stand in Australia's way if the country wants to get rid of its grand prix.

I'm sorry, but since when did one Victorian represent the entire country?

I can tell you when one Welsh ginger woman represented your entire country.

Post by **mario** » 29 Jan 2011, 17:57

Yannick wrote:
mario wrote:I think, though, that anything which increases the pressure on FOM to justify why the tracks have to pay so much to hold an F1 race in ultimately a good thing. Bernie's "escalator" for the fees is what is really crippling the tracks at the moment, but I can't see that being changed until a really high profile venue goes bankrupt.

Which one would that be? Spa? Happened before. Hockenheim or Nürburgring? The state has stepped in to help both of them already. Monza? Highly unlikely. And Monaco has got a favourable fee. So which is the high-profile venue that cannot be replaced or saved by taxpayers' money? Valencia Marina, probably.

Melbourne most certainly isn't. It's a nice race but I can fully understand it that they don't want to renew their contract.

It's true that the attendance figures were a bit lacklustre at Valencia (yes, they sold did much better this year, but only by reducing both the number of seats and the ticket prices, which is something that isn't sustainable in the long term). Valencia is kind of a funny circuit though, as it was effectively tacked onto existing plans for regeneration work, and it isn't that popular with either the drivers or teams (only Hamilton has ever said anything positive about the track - but considering that he has scored three 2nd places, and in contention for the win each time, it's not surprising that he enjoys that circuit). However, if that track went, it would probably be for a more commercially attractive deal elsewhere (i.e. another oil rich Middle Eastern state, or a fast growing Asian economic power), or too much negative publicity (persistent complaints about boring races etc.).

Spa, as you say, has gone broke before, and will probably go broke again soon enough - aside from the cost of the race, there was the partial collapse of an access tunnel this year which would have added to the financial problems of the track owners. Yes, the government has stepped in there, but are they likely to continue doing that forever?

The other one I thought might be vulnerable, although this would only be once the fees have increased, might be Silverstone. The annual fee increase is reported variously as being 5-7%, which could start to bite in the a few years time (say, about five years). And I'm not so sure that the BRDC would get government assistance - the previous government turned down requests from the BRDC for financial support, and I can't see the current one being willing to hand out subsidies either. Admittedly, this is less likely, but still theoretically possible when the BRDC is only making a slender profit at the moment, and there is some pressure on them to cap the rate at which they raise their ticket prices.

Collieafc · Post by **Collieafc** » 29 Jan 2011, 19:08

I just get the feeling that even if a good track goes due to lack of finance or the FOM fee, there will be a Middle Eastern Tilkedrome with a government waving a wad of cash to take its place. Until they start saying "we wont pay it" Its only going to go up in price. And even then, with 20 races, Bernie can afford to drop several venues without replacement.

Simple supply and demand, really (to a point)

nome66 · Post by **nome66** » 29 Jan 2011, 19:30

Return. To. Indianapolis.
they're making an a** load of money off of this "Centennial Era" stuff and will make even more from the 1911-2011 anniversary race in May.
The track HAS the chicane michelin whined about, it ISN'T a tilkedrome built in an area i've named "The Middle of Nowhere: Texas Edition", Prielli will like that they, at the expense of the fans of the track's history, removed the yard of bricks at the start/finish line, and lastly, the fans in the area actually like open wheel/gran prix racing.

It, in every single way, is the best place for the United State Gran Prix.

PS: i predict that the track in austin will have an EXTREME loss in interest after the first two races. anyone else?

dr-baker · Post by **dr-baker** » 29 Jan 2011, 21:54

When did Indy get rid of their yard of bricks? That's news to me! Thought it was still there...

Klon · Post by **Klon** » 29 Jan 2011, 22:02

And why do we have to drive the stupid MotoGP configuration, the old one was a lot better. :mrgreen:

nome66 · Post by **nome66** » 29 Jan 2011, 22:57

i didn't mean to sound like that was my decision, sorry.
ALSO:: i meant removed several layers to make the bricks smoother.

Post by **mario** » 29 Jan 2011, 23:33

nome66 wrote:i didn't mean to sound like that was my decision, sorry.
ALSO:: i meant removed several layers to make the bricks smoother.

Do you happen to have a source detailing when and why they changed the yard of bricks? Besides, the yard of bricks was ruled out as being a factor in the tyre failures that Michelin suffered from back in 2005 (which was rumoured to be due to resonant excitation of the sidewall of the tyre as the cars went through the final banked turn).

And to be honest, when you ask people to talk about memorable events from the races at the IMS, you don't tend to hear about great passing moves, but about controversy and accidents; the 2005 fiasco, Ralf Schumacher's huge crash and broken vertebrae during the 2004 race, the "formation finish" by Schumacher in the 2002 event, and Alonso's weaving on the main straight to demonstrate his frustration after being unable to pass Hamilton in 2007. The venue wasn't hugely popular with the drivers either, since there aren't any really challenging corners in the infield (they are mostly slow corners, with a few medium speed corners), and the multiple slow turns in the infield didn't really offer up any passing opportunities either (apart from possibly Turn 8).

nome66 · Post by **nome66** » 29 Jan 2011, 23:56

http://www.indianapolismotorspeedway.co ... e-History/

P_Friesacher · Post by **P_Friesacher** » 30 Jan 2011, 02:26

nome66 wrote:[...] it ISN'T a tilkedrome built in an area i've named "The Middle of Nowhere: Texas Edition" [...]

No, it's a Tilkedrome (although, to my knowledge, not actually by Tilke) in an area named Indianapolis. Doubtless there is a lot of history - but that doesn't really apply for the infield, which is not all that great of a racetrack. Although I have always enjoyed how much grass they could afford to use instead of gravel beacuse there is just so much space. And about Austin being "in the middle of nowhere" - I'm not sure, but if you were to ask a random sample of people in Europe about which of the two cities they know, I suspect Austin might be known by a few more people than Indianapolis. (Although I'm sure most regular Europeans wouldn't know either, as depite what we sometimes like to think about ourselves we aren't much more knowledgable about other places on earth than people from other places are about us. In fact, the opposite might well be true).
Still: I would like to see F1 return to Indy, too (for the "USA North Grand Prix", perhaps). Or at least for IndyCar to hold a race in the infield. (Just to be clear: In addition to the Indy 500, not instead of it.)

nome66 · Post by **nome66** » 30 Jan 2011, 03:14

or maybe the Gran prix f1 race and the 500 indycar race in the same weekend.
OOOOORRRrrrr an adaptation of an aero kit on the f1 cars so they can run along side the indycars in the 500 so it will no longer be a spec race.

The Mountain Man · Post by **The Mountain Man** » 30 Jan 2011, 22:07

Hi everybody. New here and first post! :mrgreen:

I'd like to post a few news about the cancellation of the Rome GP.
Plainly put the city had no money to run the show. The city council is currently so strapped for the cash they had to institute a new "tourist tax" (a few quids over each hotel room reservation) just to make ends. A vital step as resurfacing the roads to be used for the GP would have required more money they could ever afford, especially since the central government has proven unwilling to provide extra funding. People of the ward where the GP was to be held were so struck by the decision they took to the roads immediately after the announcement and... celebrated with champagne! They had opposed the GP from moment one on not unreasonable grounds.
Another bit of news about the the Nurburgring, which is sharing the honor of hosting the German GP with Hockhenheim.
The society running the track and the adjoining Nordschleife has run up huge debts to the tune of 350+ million euro. While the tracks are profitable enough, the huge amusement park as proven a colossal money pit. It was based on fake visitor numbers and is, allegedly, badly built. It's huge news in Germany since it was largely financed with public money and to make up for losses the society has increased prices for the 2011 season to keep the amusement park rolling and is "selling out" the Nurburgring name for totally motorsports-unrelated events.
How long they will be able to keep up the huge money request from the chaps running the F1 circus, I don't know.

Myrvold · Post by **Myrvold** » 21 Feb 2011, 18:55

Rocks with Salt wrote:

Okay, I know it's been forever, but I think it's time to put out a new board; thoughts?

Very late, but how do you make that? Or, rather, what font are you using?

Yannick · Post by **Yannick** » 21 Feb 2011, 19:38

Bahrain has now effectively moved into the "first against the wall" category - at least for this year.

Rocks with Salt · Post by **Rocks with Salt** » 22 Feb 2011, 02:14

Myrvold wrote:Very late, but how do you make that? Or, rather, what font are you using?

I found a chalk font on 1001fonts.com, I believe, and then I just found a chalkboard template. Pretty simple.

And I believe Bahrain deserves its own category after these recent events: "First Against the Wall When the Revolution Literally Came."

Jeroen Krautmeir · Post by **Jeroen Krautmeir** » 22 Feb 2011, 02:20

Rocks with Salt wrote:And I believe Bahrain deserves its own category after these recent events: "First Against the Wall When the Revolution Literally Came."

Agreed!

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 22 Feb 2011, 04:58

Rocks with Salt wrote:And I believe Bahrain deserves its own category after these recent events: "First Against the Wall When the Revolution Literally Came."

I approve of this notion. :lol:

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 22 Feb 2011, 06:59

Barcelona beyond 2012 in doubt

Discuss.