The chase is on
Shanghai 2018
Chinese Grand Prix
How big can the F1 calendar get?
How big can the F1 calendar get?
Posted By: James Allen  |  15 Oct 2010   |  10:20 am GMT  |  231 comments

There has been an interesting response to yesterday’s news of a Russian Grand Prix joining the calendar in 2014.

The response from the teams is positive; Russia is an important new economy and has plenty of people with spending power, who fit the profile of F1, so it’s a good place to go as a car manufacturer or a major sponsor to promote your involvement in the sport and sell some product.

The response from many fans is positive too. The proposed track layout, around the Olympic village, looks fast and interesting. I think people are open to the idea of this race.

F1 is growing at a time when many sports are struggling (Darren Heath)

But the question I’ve been asked a lot in the last 24 hours is how big can the F1 calendar get and if it isn’t open ended – and Bernie Ecclestone’s stated aim of 20 races a year is adhered to – some races will have to make way. So which will they be?

The first thing to say is that in a time when many sports are contracting, F1 is expanding and doing so globally, so that is something very positive to remind ourselves of.

Ecclestone has been very productive recently, expanding the broadcast reach of the sport and adding in important new venues like India, USA and now Russia. These are all venues which will be paying in the order of $40 million a year for the rights to host a race and under the current arrangements half of that goes to the teams. So the revenues are welcome to them.

The concern of the teams and others in F1 is to get the balance right so that the championship doesn’t become too long and fans find it hard to follow. At 16 races, one every two weeks, as it used to be, the F1 championship was easy to follow, fans made an “appointment to view” for two hours every other Sunday from March to October.

Now it’s more strung out, more irregular and harder to follow for fans, who need to commit 19 weekends a year. If the calendar were to go to 22 races, would fans’ interest start to wane? I think there is a risk that it might. What you might see is fans picking and choosing the races they watch, missing ones they consider dull, like Valencia, for example, or not bothering to set the alarm for a race in the Far East. Some TV companies might find it hard to schedule that many races, although in the countries with strong audience figures, it will tend to out-rate most other Sunday programming.

Anecdotally, without any scientific research at all, I’ve noticed that quite a few fans, who would have expected to watch most, if not all, races find it hard to keep up with 19.

Of course NASCAR has a huge calendar, with 36 events from February to November, clearly they have accepted that only the most fanatical fans will follow every one and have gone for maximum reach in the various states across the USA. The TV contract is split between broadcasters, as it is too much for one network to handle.

Ecclestone has to listen to input from various quarters, from the TV companies, the teams, who push for races in certain territories along with their sponsors, to CVC his commercial partners, who are keen to sign up as many long term contracts as possible with circuits, global partners and TV companies. They want to guarantee the long term cash flows and keep them growing, to make the business robust, giving them the option to sell or float in the future. A friend of mine who is a financier and does business with CVC says that they are very pleased with their F1 investment and are not planning an exit any time soon.

But if the decision is that 20 races are the maximum then clearly some will have to make way. Turkey is clearly a candidate, with very poor attendances and no grass roots programmes to grow interest in the sport. The German and Belgian GPs are always a concern as the venues struggle to balance affordability.

Spa should be preserved (Darren Heath)

The possibility has been mooted in some quarters about running them on alternate years, but I think most fans would want to preserve Spa at all costs. Like Monaco, which doesn’t have to pay a huge sanctioning fee because of its importance to the sport, Spa has a claim to be considered a special case. In the FOTA fan survey this year 81% of fans said that the sport must continue to visit the “classic” venues, like Monaco, Spa, Monza and Silverstone.

The rest of the European venues either have long term deals or are keen to continue, I’m told. Again affordability is the key.

There have been some suggestions that in an expanded calendar, race weekends could be compressed. Certainly Friday is a bit of a wasted day, but it would be a mistake to standardise running qualifying and the race on Sunday, as happened in Suzuka. The TV companies wouldn’t like it and it reduces qualifying as a story.

What do you think? Should there be a limit of 20 races? Could you handle more? Let me know your thoughts.

Featured News
Editor's Picks
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!


by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

Thanks for the info



This reminds me of a topic I have been thinking about for awhile now, jobs within Formula 1 outside of the engineering. I have tried digging through the internet to find out the various jobs that lay within F1, but have had not much luck. Have or could you write a post on it or point me in a specific direction please.


What exactly do you have in mind?


James, I am just now seeing your reply. I am curious about the more marketing, finance, business operations, etc aspects of F1. I understand the prospects of getting into F1 as a driver/engineer, but what kind of opportunities exist for the above mentioned areas? Additionally, what would it take to try and get oneself into said areas?


I’ve made it a point to go to as many of the classic circuits as possible before they’re taken off the calender. Spa & Monza were incredible, Germany & Silverstone are next.


The only concern I have about an extended calendar is that there may be a bit of a early-season slump. With Basketball and Baseball in the US, the matches don’t really heat up until after the middle of the season. I think a balance needs to be met where the teams are still able to push 100% for each race. Too many races and maybe the teams will mail it in for a race or two which would be disastrous as far as I am concerned.


I would certainly qualify myself as a die hard fan, but the past couple of seasons as I get older and have increasing demands on my time, I find I am either having to not watch qualifying and / or watch race replays/highlights for certain events. The blue ribband events I make a special effort to watch live. I find the ‘new market’ events are the ones I’m watching replays or highlights.

The Bahrains / Valencias / Singapores, really aren’t must see events for me.


Ah the good old track argument rears its head again… lets hope some of the powers that be read these forums as there are some very good points made.

As a general rule there should be more rotation. look back to the 70s & 80s the tracks changed quite often (even within the same country). The problem is that now a days the facilities have to be so good and the tracks to a certain (way over the top, but thats a different argument…) safety standard. This costs huge amounts of money, something that track owners will not want to spend unless they have a long term contract in place.

Basically all the new super tracks in the middle / far east have ruined the chance of f1 ever returning to some of our old favorites with their cramped pits (good god all you need room for is the car a few mechanics and a tool box surely… those hideous triple decker caravans can stay in the carpark).

Say that a return to some old greats is possible:

Firstly a few that stay:

The big ones obviously; Spa, Monza, Silverstone, Monaco, Suzuka, Interlagos & Montreal.

Hungary – as others here have pointed out that although potentially processional races it is different from all the other mid speed type tracks, it has thrown up a few classics over the years

Australia – Melbournes great, how about a return to Adelaide though, a bit of rotation?

Germany – You can’t not have a German grandprix, the rotaion system between Hokkenheim and Nurburgring is good.

Spain – One only, lets throw Jerez back in, again mix them up.

Ones that go: I wouldnt get rid of all of these of course but some of them should go or possibly have a limit of 3 of them per year and rotate them.

Malaysia – its been on the calander for 11 years now, the track although not bad is getting a bit shoddy, time for a break.

Turkey – Great track but no one goes, it surely looses money hand over fist? i wouldnt go to it, you would need binoculars to see the track from some of the stands (comes back to the ott track safety)

Singapore – Now that the gimmick of night racing has passed I fail to see what it offers, another Monaco wannabe on a boring flat track.

Abu Dhabi – Same as Singapore, with the added Gimmicky hotel, il give it a chance for another year or two.

Bahrain – This ones hard, boring track but the people love it, it is well supported.

Like I said I wouldnt get rid of all of the above but would limit them to one every few years. My other suggestion would be to have a middle east and a far east grand prix every year.


France – the lack of a French grand prix is a disgrace, Magny Cours, Paul Ricard, Dijon (now theres a blast from the past)

Imola – Although im not a Ferrari fan the atmosphere seems fantastic, although not all good it has quite a history.

USA – Stop bulding this new track right now, whats the point it will be rubbish (im thinking valencia the 2nd). There must be hundereds of tracks in the US. Pick a good one.

Austria – although a mere shadow of the old Osterich ring A1 is not bad, it has these peculiar things called hills that seem to have vanished from tracks.

Kylami – Since Bernie preaches about it having to be a world championship its criminal that there is no race in Africa

Basically add a bit of variety, mix it up

Sigh, one can only wish

p.s. oops this got a bit longer than intended


Regarding Australia, and more specifically, Adelaide:

We have the Clipsal 500 (V8s) here every March which uses most of the old F1 circuit. It seems logical to have the Clipsal one weekend, and following that, the F1 – although that would create a lot of disruption for the ‘city’.

I’m sad to say that a lot of the people here in Adelaide (especially those in power) lack a lot of common sense and planning skills.

I for one would love to see Adelaide and Melbourne alternate the grand prix, but unfortunately I doubt the state government would let it happen 🙁


Keep Fridays, for fans able to attend circuits, a three day event makes the travelling more worthwhile.

Testing, practice for rookies, etc all good track action, possibly more entertaining than watching the top drivers even.

I wouldn’t feel so inclined to attend a two day event in a foreign country unless it could be fitted into a holiday.

Even our home grand prix would be much the poorer without the Glastonbury like feel of three or four days at Silverstone.

So far as extending the number of races, twenty is enough, I’ve been in front of the telly for F1 since before I was born, and have never missed a race since, but you CAN have too much of a good thing.

To watch all the F1 broadcast / online sessions, and other cars and bikes stuff, plus keeping up with forums and blogs etc leaves hardly enough time to drive my PS3 games.

…and it helps a lot if you make sure to marry a wife equally into motorsport !


Probably the real issue here is how many weeks can the season truly be run over per year?

40 weeks would definitely be the maximum you could generally ask from most professional sports and the people who bring it to us.

The nature of Formula 1 with the truly global venues makes this pretty demanding on those involved with a lot of travel and extremely daunting logistics involved.

There is also the downtime required from competition to enable practice, training, development and recovery. Basketballers play several times per week, soccer players twice a week and rugby players only once per week.

Formula 1 teams can handle two races per week in bursts, but can’t sustain that week in, week out. So 40 races is out of the question. 26 would be the maximum if you ran two on, one off for 39 weeks, but again you are likely to find too much fatigue throughout a season.

A 2 on, 1 off, 2 on, 2 off system through the season would suggest a 24 race season would be feasible without an official mid-season break. To have a 3 week break mid-season then 1 or 2 races would have to be dropped leaving us with probably 22 races as the maximum saturation for Formula 1 per year.

This would allow a 12 week break between seasons and a three week break mid-season for teams and drivers to reset themselves for the second half of the season.

The first four races should be Asian based, with Europe then taking over till just before the mid-season break, which would be Canada and the US. The remaining European races should then be run with Asia and Brazil finishing up the season.

The travel and schedule needs to move logically, to ensure the minimum backtracking – ie, we don’t go from Japan to Korea, Brazil and back to Abu Dhabi. Instead it would be Brazil, Japan, Korea, Abu Dhabi…

Should there be 22 races? Only if the new races are going to add positively to the sport. The tracks should be chosen for the likely quality of the races as well as the money being brought into the sport.

Make the new tracks be designed and built with genuine overtaking opportunities and exciting corners that require something special from the cars and the drivers. Processional races don’t do much for anyone, drivers or fans and need to be reduced if not eliminated.


I believe that 20 races are pushing F1 into the area of sport for the masses and not the pinnacle of thechnology where it should be. Teams need to have time to get back to office, research and develop and 20 races with 4 back to back pairs may be not a very good idea for this purpose.

On the other hand, and switching now to the viewer’s perspective, I agree that Valencia was a flop in terms of ambience, what is a shame since I imagined the race developing around those fantastic Calatrava buildings (I know Valencia quite well and the streets in this area are more than adequate accomodate a F1 city track). I wonder what was on the mind of the promoters to draw a circuit around old fishmongers’ wharehouses…

Also I would like that Bernie would favour broadcasting through open channels, even if at a discounted price. In Portugal, the interest in F1 has dropped to an all-time low since the races began to be transmitted only by a subscription sports channel which devotes 80% of its time to soccer…

Mohammed Al-Momen

I don’t mind a lot of races, it just this year I couldn’t watch any because of the timing difference (I live in the Saudi Arabia and our weekends are on Thursday and friday) as I’m usually at work when the races are on. I wish F1 is able to broadcast the races over the internet and just allow us to view them at a later time or something… somebody needs to pass one this to the Makers of the sport. It really hards to follow races when all they account for is European audience.


I understood James’s doubt. With several more races each year will we keep seeing them all ?

Personally I will not, but I don´t have any problem with the number of races.

In the past there were much fewer races and I was used to watch them all “direct”. With more races I became selective. For example, I don´t watch Japan anymore at 7AM Lisbon time (even if I like Suzuka very much). I won´t see Korea and I won´t see any race which will take place early in the morning (Lisbon/London time). With such a large calendar, from the eastern races I’ll just watch the ones which have artificial lighting, like Singapore.

China at 8AM on a Sunday ? No thanks.

Malaysia, at 9Am (Lisbom time, the same as London) is +- ok, even if I don´t like at all to seat in front of a Tv screen in the morning.

Austin will be good (more or less at same hour as Brasil).


Some of the above comments are so poorly written, it’s quite hard to understand what is actually being suggested/endorsed/criticised.

I don’t see a problem with the calendar having more than 20 races, provided the facilities and tracks are all world class. The off-season is currently so long, the solution must be to shorten that and keep the frequency of races the same at an average of once every two weeks. Although I love back to back race weekends when they happen at the moment, I think for that to become the norm would be a mistake. Teams and drivers would get fatigued, as would fans from the media saturation.

If it did come down to a choice of which current events to drop, I’ve always thought that Hungary is an odd place to have had such a permanent fixture on the calendar for so long, with such a mediocre track. I also wouldn’t miss Bahrain at all as it has had the dullest races by far for the last couple of years. However, I think that Bahrain is a case of money talking very loudly, so I can’t see it being dropped yet. It’s a shame the Turkish GP is so poorly attended, as it is a great track as a lot of people have said.


I have read 1/3 of the comments and found the debate of which circuits are best etc lacking in vision of opportunity. As much as fans wish it to be their fiefdom, the reality is the direct funding comes from circuits, sponsors and TV revenues. It seems that fans hope their customs will dictate the potential of the sport.

Recently the cash flow of Formula 1 saw such a hit that teams and management of the sport were forced to dictate huge change to re-structure or just leave. Fans were not making the boardroom decisions then.

When running a commercially successful business you cut costs and increase revenue. CVC are providing the opportunity to increase revenue, yet fans (and the media ask the fans to) question the strategy.

Most large successful commercial sports are able to produce a successful product on every day of the week, F1 can’t due to logistical reasons.

Drivers, teams and management are comfortable at the moment as they are able to cope effectively with the program, if they weren’t would we see more mechanical failure (NEVER SAFETY!!!).

We all choose a team, driver, car to win and failing that a spirited performance that meets our expectations of racing.

What if the spirited performance meant more and in team colours? Why are races only on a Sunday? Club racing on a Sunday I understand, but F1 is still conforming to this? The F1 community is anti-change and conformist.

I perceive convention and conformity are not Bernie Ecclestone traits, so it must be the teams. I think CVC and Bernie have moved things forward, but we have so much more to look forward too, why restrict our competitive racing pleasure to a few chosen circuits.

The more races and per se circuits we have, the more chance we’ll find the next Monza, Monaco or Melbourne.

I look forward to this century of racing and hope more people can tune in. 200 million 20 times a year or 150 million viewers 30 times a year + back up TV/ Internet TV on other days of the week.


From Bernie’s point of view – and to large degree of F1 fans – 20 races (or even more) is great. But not for this one. I agree with your point James, that too many races can be hard to follow even for the most die hard fanatics – like me. I personally think the 16 – 17 races per year like in the ’90s and early ’00s were enough. Things that go on for way too long just get boring.

Also, I can’t quite understand how increasing the no. of races can help teams cut costs. Clearly, to balance things out, the FOM will need to cough out more dough to the teams, which is highly unlikely!

Personally, I admire Bernie for what he’s done for F1: turning it into a global Billion dollar sport. But I sometimes get the feeling that he’s forcing the issue by carrying on with places/venues that have clearly shown increasing disinterest with the sport (i.e. Turkey, Bahrain, Malaysia, China). Although perhaps I can fully understand where’s he’s (Bernie) coming from: there’s a monumental amount of wealth to be found in these newly developed/developing markets.


The more the better. I miss F1 so much during the winter. I don’t really understand why should 20 race be the limit. If you don’t like some of the races simply don’t tune in. There are people who like it.


Valencia, Turkey, China, Bahrain all either poorly attended or boring races, which would allow more space in the calendar.

To be a WORLD championship Formula 1 must visit Africa as well, the Kyalami circuit in South Africa was great.


Firstly Friday…

Why not make the first session of friday a testing day for 3rd driver/s. 3rd driver being the driver not driving that weekend (unless a main driver is physically unable to race i.e. sick or injured from later crash).

The teams will have less setup time so it wont be as perfected, more will have to be done by simulator which isn’t perfect so teams ability to adapt will have to be stronger, 3rd drivers actually get the drive and we see new drivers moving through.

I have watched every race so far, and got bored in a few, bahrain and valencia ring bells for me.

The problem seems to be, and correctly me if I’m wrong James, that Bernie chooses the curciuts that come and go, not the fans (who watch it) or drivers (who drive it).

YES, a russian GP sounsd good and with a car market its good for manafactures aswell, BUT the curcuit looks absolutely horrible. It’s flat if you look at pictures of the area and will just be another, straight followed by slow turn etc for a bit then squiggly bit. i.e. same as korea or china.

WHY CAN”T BE USE SEVERAL CURCUIT DESIGNERS, just as each driver hasa slightly different driving style, designers design tracks slightly differently. We have seen what Tilke does, so why can’t we have a track with a bit of banking slightly, or a figure 8 track or some tricky corners.

The drivers all seemed to find the Degners rather hard going, so why can’t designers work in a few corners that are designed to be challenging for the drivers? I like those corners as they are much more interesting to watch than teh generic ones.

Gumps, undulations, banking, different types of kerbing etc.. all make a track interesting and different as the corner isn’t approached the same way as if it was flat. Tilke’s tracks are flat and predictable.

THe problem with these new tracks is that they are horribly boring BUT they are in the good markets for expansion.(china, abu dhabi etc..). So why not, if were going to expand there, make the curcuit properly.

What if the new South Korea track (good because of korean manafactures and asian market) looked like suzuka (presuming suzuak didn’t exist). We’d all be looking foward to it each year more than we are now! It would be a great track.

Unfortunately, these new tracks are dull, and that is due to each of the new tracks being designed by the same guy and each are designed with his methodology and his ideas. Just as watching 24 barrichello’s would be boring as they would all do the exact same thing, running 10 tilke tracks is boring as they all look the same and feature similiar corners which are taken similiarly.

Seeing a different designer with a different style is the first thing we need before we branch out anymore.

Oh, and since we have some relly honestly bad tracks, lets get rid of them..





to name a few.. Abu Dhabi the organisers have done a great job and made it look amazing, and its in a great market, UNFORTUNATELY let down by the bad bad bad track.

Apart from taht, the biggest problem is that we all know, and dread the fact that the tracks will be lost aren’t going to be the ones that are boring, they are going to be the ones that aren’t marketable or don’t bring in enough money or etc..

Australia, Spa, Silverstone, Monaco, Monza all test drivers in different ways and are hence interesting to watch.

So why can’t we just make new tracks like this?


I do think Bernie is running dangerously close to alienating the classic fanbase of F1, the Europeans. I don’t deny that there shouldn’t be races in every continent on the planet (it is, after all, a world championship) but this shouldn’t mean we have a season full of races where local audiences don’t care, and historical European tracks which fans both want to see and want to go to lying empty.

I do think 20 races is enough in one season, I love F1 as much as the next person but I have other stuff to do in my life – I can’t be as selfish to insist on watching 25 (say) races a year at the expense of anything else.

Anyway, I’d say the following must feature every year:

Monaco, Spa, Silverstone, Monza, Suzuka, Montreal and 1 each for Germany (not so bothered since they Hilked up Hockenheim) and France.

Australia and Brazil are, in my mind, 95% certains.

Of the newbies, definitely keep Singapore.

I don’t really care for a US F1 race, it’s always been a bit of a dud wherever it’s been run and since the Indianapolis 05 incident I don’t know whether people will appreciate a return.

Oh, and find someone else to design circuits other than Herman Tilke… I’m fed up of his name being all over new tracks, some of which are really not as good as classic tracks being left unused every year.


You raised an interesting point about alternate race weekends James, so I questioned my better half.

It appears that every other week is acceptable. But fitting in parents, in-laws, shopping, lawn mowing, etc. around grand prix only one week apart is pushing it apparently.

The number of races is less of a concern than the timing.

And to add to the debates higher up about Spa; I’ve missed three races this year but Spa is the only one I made a point of watching on iPlayer later. I suspect poor attendance and TV figures are due to it’s slot on the calendar more than anything else. James, how much say do they have on the slot? Surely it makes sense to preserve well loved venues by putting them in prime weekends? Valencia would be good on a Bank Holiday! ;o)


I don’t think there should be a limit, but I’m not the one travelling, working and driving. If the drivers and engineering can cope with a larger calendar then no there shouldn’t be a limit. If they do not want more races then they should be listened to.

Obviously I would want the best 20 tracks that we could have in the calendar, could some tracks go, or a least rotate with other tracks.

The tracks that I believe we must keep are Spa, Monza, Suzuka, Melbourne Park, Silverstone and Interlagos.

I also like Sepang, Imola, Old Hockenheim and weirdly, Magny-Cours.

Most of the tracks we can do without are the newer ones but Singapore and Abu Dhabi seem to be a success.


I could handle 22 races.

If I were to drop races, would be any track that doesn’t provide at least 2 real passing zones, sorry Monaco. Boring!


I have commented on this subject, but I would like to add an extra comment that seems to be missed by the majority of the people commenting.

A comment coming up time and time again is that more races means more costs. It is true but they seem to forget that more races means more revenue for all parties concerned. TV broadcasters will pay more as they will have more opportunity to get advertisement money. In addition more countries will become interested in broadcasting thus adding to the revenue streams towards CVC and the teams. More broadcasting means also more value to all the team sponsorships as the global players will have the opportunity to pass their marketing messages to a wider audience. More value = more money to the teams. Finally the investment that a team is making in building and running a team is not full flexible to the races it does. There are a lot of costs that are fixed in nature and the more you utilise them the better in increasing the profits of the team.

So… lets increase the races!


Snooker used to be very popular on UK television – then we had overkill, with almost weekly tournements and interest waned – rapidly.

Can we all take 4 or more hours out of every other summer Sunday to watch a GP? I don’t think so. The races are not exciting after the start. Add the lack of overtaking, very reliable cars, fiddled results, constant claims of ‘engineering’ cheating.

The bubble will burst, and quickly if the advertisers see a drop in tv viewing.


The problem with that analogy is that snooker is as exciting to watch as grass growing. F1 would only suffer from this overkill if the races become dull like what we have in Hungary and Valencia every year.


In case you hadn’t noticed, the majority of potential viewers already find F1 dull and boring. Even people who watch other forms of racing are not prepared to watch a 2 hour procession.

Bernie and the FIA know this, which is why they are forever looking at making changes to the format of GPs.

I don’t claim to know how to keep F1 popular on tv, but I do know what will happen if it turns into a twice monthly soap, using the same script each time it’s shown.


20 is the maximum I can take. Everytime a race weekend arrive Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays are kept for F1, be it live timing, updates and whatever F1 news I can get hold on.

Bernie wants Singapore to sign a 20 year contract, but the government says ‘hold on’. Reason is when Russia and New York gets going the appeal of the night race will fade, how true. Clever thinking.

Frankly there are too many fine racing circuits in the west with fans filling up the races. Bernie comes to the east simply because of economic growth, but the true racing fans are from the west. Concerns are the eastern circuits will dwindle as we don’t have enough passionate fans.



The first GP that should be wiped is the European GP. Not because it is Valencia, but simply because it is an extra race under no name.

There are tracks that should be on the calender, regardless of financial situations. Spa, Monaco, Silverstone & Monza.

Then there are tracks that have been around for a while &/or are important in terms of cash inflow for sponsors. These would be USA, Canada, Russia, Australia, Japan, Germany (alternate Hock and Nurb) & Brazil.

The rest, though, could simply be alternated year after year.

It is hard to say which should and shouldn’t be permanent but alternating seems the best way to go.

To me, my calender would look like:

1. Australia

2. Malaysia

3. Japan

4. China/Korea

5. Canada

6. USA

7. Brazil/Argentina

8. Monaco

9. Spain (Preferably Jerez)/Portugal

10. France (this needs to come back)

11. Great Britain

12. Germany (Hock/Nurb alternate)

13. Monza

14. Spa

15. Rome/Valencia/London

16. Russia/Hungary

17. Turkey/Bahrain

18. India

19. Abu Dhabi

20. Singapore

I think the calender can be expanded to 22 tracks if they stop the inefficient way of organising the calender.


Too slow in getting Europe involved for the season. A big part of the market, they need a race within the first 5 or 6, otherwise you run the risk of losing many of the fans for the majority of the season.

Brazil is getting too close to winter conditions at 7 and Canada may not be close enough to summer for ideal conditions either. I would move Japan back to the end of the season and bring Turkey/Bahrain up to 3 and have a few European events starting at 5 before heading to North America. Brazil needs to be later in the season as well.


Agree with you about Canada; however, there is not much difference in average temperature in Sao paulo throughout the year, and it actually rains less at the time of year that I placed it.

The other movements you have said though just bring us right back to an inefficient way of organising the calendar.

I guess it isn’t as easy to create a calendar as we might think. haha

Top Tags
JA ON F1 In association with...
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer

Sign up to receive the latest F1 News & Updates direct to your inbox

You have Successfully Subscribed!