2020 Formula 1 Calendar threadFormula 1 

  • Thread starter Dennisch
  • 525 comments
  • 31,289 views
zzz_pt
But I miss a GP in Portugal. Either Estoril or, preferably, Algarve. Dunno if they meet the current F1 regulation standards but I bet the races would be better than in a lot of current GP circuits.
Click to expand...
I know Algarve is Grade 2. But I'm not sure about Estoril. I don't think it is Grade 1.
 
jake2013guy
I know Algarve is Grade 2. But I'm not sure about Estoril. I don't think it is Grade 1.
Click to expand...

Apparently Estoril is Grade 1. But AIA is still my favorite.

Did AIA lost Grade 1? Because the lap record was set by Buemi back in 2009 with an F1 car and LMP1 cars race there. I don't know how grades work tbh and the official website doesn't mention the FIA grade.
 
zzz_pt
Did AIA lost Grade 1? Because the lap record was set by Buemi back in 2009 with an F1 car and LMP1 cars race there. I don't know how grades work tbh and the official website doesn't mention the FIA grade.
Click to expand...
You can have F1 cars going round the circuit and you can have official tests if you're Grade 2 but you can't hold GPs.
 
Melbourne confirmed until 2025.

Melbourne.jpg
 
Ugh. We had the chance to lose Mexico and Spain, two circuits which usually produce crap races, and keep Hockenheim which is always an awesome race. And now we get lumbered with the awful ones and lose Hockenheim.

The sooner that Russian GP contract ends the better.
 
That would be a hefty calendar. I wonder what the cost is for the teams for each extra race.

Will definitely miss Hockenheim.
 
Retaining Catalunya for a extra year so it can reach that 30 years of consecutive racing milestone?

Hopefully it'll be relegated to winter testing only thereafter.
 
Last edited:
Here is the 2020 calendar
image.jpg


Canada clashes with Le Mans, the Mexican Grand Prix has been renamed "Mexico City Grand Prix" and Italy's place relies on them signing a nearly-confirmed contract. We also get the new races over and done with quickly, with Vietnam and Netherlands 3rd and 5th on the calendar respectively.
 
Why has Mexico been changed to Mexico City? I hate non-country names as it is and can just about tolerate Abu Dhabi instead of United Emirates as it is one of the constituent Emirates.

Also agree that Malaysia should come back. It's a fantastic track.

France, Bahrain, Monaco, Abu Dhabi, Russia, Azerbaijan, United States and Spain can all be deleted. No, I don't like Azerbaijan and the United States. I'd rather a calendar of 8-10 great tracks than a bloated calender of 20+ tracks with average races in as filler.
 
Liquid
Why has Mexico been changed to Mexico City? I hate non-country names as it is and can just about tolerate Abu Dhabi instead of United Emirates as it is one of the constituent Emirates.
Click to expand...
I think it's because the race is now funded by the Mexico City government rather than Mexico itself, so it's been renamed to highlight this change to promote the city itself.
(This is all pure speculation on my part, just seems like the only logical explanation)

Liquid
France, Bahrain, Monaco, Abu Dhabi, Russia, Azerbaijan, United States and Spain can all be deleted.
Click to expand...
Austin as a circuit itself may suck, but the racing there in F1 has always been awesome. Bahrain has saved itself by becoming a night race and Monaco is Monaco. The others I can't really come up with a valid reason to keep them except money talks.

Paul Ricard would be fine if they adjusted the layout. The first chicane needs to go back to the original fast sweepers as the "slow" chicane we have actually isn't slow, Hamilton took it in 5th gear on his pole lap last year. The full Mistral should be used, as although the chicane on the backstraight has allowed all the overtaking to happen on it, the experiment hasn't worked as the races have been moaned about constantly.

Spain, Abu Dhabi, Russia and Mexico can go without a whimper. Also go back to Fuji instead of Suzuka.
 
Austin is alright to just keep a presence in the U.S. The racing on the circuit has been average. The S corners while nice to watch don't really make for much of a passing opportunity. With cars on equal tires, it could turn into a processional race.
 
ROAD_DOGG33J
Austin is alright to just keep a presence in the U.S. The racing on the circuit has been average. The S corners while nice to watch don't really make for much of a passing opportunity. With cars on equal tires, it could turn into a processional race.
Click to expand...
It's a shame so many other American circuits could be brought up to spec but it's mostly an issue with pit size and whatnot
 
I think that's more or less the main issue with F1 tracks for me (which mostly rate: meh). It's not about the quality or history of the track, but rather the baby-smooth tarmac so we don't rustle tender F1 jimmies, and a big fancy pit/entertainment venue, etc. The track's true qualities aren't of much consideration. If they were, F1 would be racing at Watkins Glen again, or Road America, Mosport, etc. What I'd give to see F1 cars on a track which hasn't been carefully manicured for them...
 
FutureF1
I, for one, don’t want to see any American road courses modified for F1. To get the FIA grade 1 standard, they’d have to strip most US road courses of any character that they have.
Click to expand...

That.

If F1 wants to get bigger in the USA, they need to drop the ridiculous over the top standards.
Nobody likes the glorified carparks and most of the Tilke crap. Bring back the old school tracks and combine it with the "let them race" mantra.
 
If they can race on street courses like Monaco and Baku, then they should be able to able to race on some of the American courses.

I kind of liked Indianapolis though. It was nice to see something a bit different.
 
Oh, I fully agree. I'd rather see F1 swallow their pride and just race at a track as it is. I fully agree though that I'd rather they never show up at a proper good road course in the US if it means investing billions and ruining the character they have, bulldozing all the bumps out of the track, adding miles of sticky paint run-off, and towering glass structures for media crews. I know the great tracks in the US are too low-brow for the likes of F1.
 
TheElbows
Oh, I fully agree. I'd rather see F1 swallow their pride and just race at a track as it is...I know the great tracks in the US are too low-brow for the likes of F1.
Click to expand...

That's got nothing to do with it, and it sounds more like a problem that you have with F1 than a problem that F1 has with the tracks.

The reason for a graded quality standard is simple: safety. The day your sport kills a driver and you didn't take demonstrably-reasonable, available precautions (see Halo for reference) then you're liable. No insurer will carry that liability and you stop being able to organise and promote races.
 
Oh that's only one of many problems I have with F1.

PS: If IndyCar can race at these tracks, F1 could. I don't agree with you on the safety aspect, personally.
 
It’s not just the track itself—when adding new dates, modern F1 also wants a big city right next door to keep everyone entertained. That eliminates most of the classic road courses in the US.
 
Indycar is slower than F1 though, so on Road courses they can get away with a bit less quality of runoff. Just look at Katherine Legge's crash at the kink at Road America and add about 30mph in an F1 car to that and then tell me Indycar can get away with it.
 
TenEightyOne
safety
Click to expand...

The call of FIA hypocrites.

If safety is the word*, there would not be a race at Baku. Canada. Australia. Up and coming Vietnam. Singapore. Sochi. All tracks with walls very near the racing, waiting for a freak accident to happen. And the F1 is looking at even more street circuits to fill the calendar with. If streets circuits can happen, so can old school tracks. The cars are safe enough.































*can't be the word, because the bird is the word.
 
I wouldn't go so far as to say that the cars are safe enough but I do agree that the governing bodies crying SAFETY in track design and grading criteria is an extremely hollow double standard.
 
Look at Alonso in Australia. Walked away. Kubica in Montreal. Light concussion and a sprained ankle. Both crashes at 300km/h.

I'd say that they're safe enough.
 
Safety is actually less of a factor than the general quality of other facilities. The huge amount of runoff you'll see on many modern purpose built tracks is more there to stop playboys from wrecking their Lamborghinis than it is for the safety of F1 drivers. A lot of tracks fail to meet Grade 1 standards because the pit, paddock, media, and spectator facilities are not sufficient for the needs of a grand prix.
 

Latest Posts

Back