Grand Prix Rejects

Here we go, 69 circuits analyzed from a reject point of view. For the most part, just expect a mention of the worst aspect of each track. These are 100 percent up for debate, and I'll take criticism and/or suggestions to make this better.

Adelaide: It's really hard to trash a track that consistently gave some of the most memorable moments in Formula One history, especially because so many people here are Aussies. But I'm probably going to say Mika Hakkinen having to receive an emergency tracheotomy on the side of the racetrack in 1995.

Aida: It's not racing if nobody can pass ... and does the race really happen if nobody is there to see it?

Ain-Diab: The track was way too long and the death of Stuart Lewis-Evans marred the only championship race to take place in Morocco.

Aintree: Liverpool is kind of a dump.

Albert Park: It took the race from Adelaide and it has incurred mounds of debt.

Anderstorp: Having the pits halfway through the lap is just plain strange.

AVUS: It lacks a certain je ne sais quoi, like, right turns, for instance.

Bahrain: One of many new tracks built for the money, not for the racing.

Boavista: Nice view, but racing on cobblestones is really unsafe.

Brands Hatch: Lots of good races, but there were a lot of deaths at the track as well.

Bremgarten: It's not your fault, Bremgarten, but the Swiss ban on motor racing takes the cake here. Losing your race because your country bans the sport is pretty strange (even though I understand the Swiss government's ideology).

Bugatti Circuit: It hosts a 24-hour rollerskating race.

Caesars Palace: It was in a parking lot, and proceeded to make for races exactly as boring as one would think races in a parking lot would be.

Catalunya: There's too much testing there. There's not enough passing there. The races are unfailingly boring there.

Charade: Loose gravel punctured 10 tires and one eye during the 1972 race, and Formula One never returned.

Dallas: The pavement was falling apart. Oppressively hot. The pavement was falling apart. Who schedules a grand prix in Texas in July? The pavement was falling apart.

Detroit street circuit: I'd say too much attrition resulted from the narrow track, but this is F1 Rejects and that is sacrilege. Instead, I'm going to complain that it wasn't Belle Isle.

Dijon-Prenois: The track was too damn short.

Donington Park: The biggest failure didn't actually have to do with the race it hosted; instead, it had to do with tearing up the track without the funding to put it back together in a failed attempt to get the British Grand Prix.

Estoril: Forgot to get its repairs done in time and was usurped by Jerez in 1997 for one of the more memorable incidents in Formula One history.

Fuji: Building NASCAR-style ovals in countries not named "The United States of America" is a bad idea from the outset. But specifically for Formula One, building the racetrack in an area prone to torrential downpours just wasn't smart. Regardless of its layout, Hermann Tilke.

Circuit Gilles Villeneuve: Lots of horrible crashes. Riccardo Paletti, Olivier Panis, Robert Kubica.

Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez: The elevation just screwed with so many things.

Hockenheimring: It never should have been touched by Hermann Tilke.

Hungaroring: Universally regarded as the most boring track on the circuit.

Imola: 1994.

Indianapolis: As the Indy 500: There was practically no crossover between actual Formula One races and these races considered as championship races. As a road course: The 2005 Michelin farce. (Honorable mention: It runs in the opposite direction of the outer circuit.)

Istanbul: It's not Constantinople. Also, there has been a startling lack of fans at recent races.

Jacarepagua: It got sacrificed for an Olympic training venue.

Jarama: Short, narrow, twisty, boring.

Jerez: In the middle of nowhere, relatively speaking; that sadly took a perfectly good racetrack off the schedule and gave us Catalunya (see above).

Interlagos: (The inspiration of this list.) That constant threat of being mugged.

Korean International Circuit: Lucky the race was so wet that nobody was able to focus on the sheer ridiculousness of the racetrack's construction.

Kyalami: A good racetrack in a country with bad politics. A bad racetrack in a country with better politics.

Long Beach: Hosted the last Champ Car race.

Magny-Cours: The Germans conquered France here, with 10 of 18 races on the track being won by them.

Marina Bay Circuit: Nelson Piquet Jr's little stunt here pollutes the history of this track.

Monsanto Park: The track crossed tram lines. There's a reason it only hosted one grand prix.

Monte Carlo: Nelson Piquet said it best: "It's like riding a bicycle round your living room."

Montjuic: The track was tragically unsafe during its final race, the 1975 Spanish Grand Prix, where four spectators were killed.

Mont-Tremblant: Kind of unsafe with all those bumps.

Monza: You know there's a problem with deaths at the track when there is a Wikipedia page entitled "List of Autodromo Nazionale Monza fatal accidents."

Mosport: It's not that notable.

Nivelles-Baulers: As a reaction to Spa-Francorchamps, it was wide, flat, safe and sterile. Ironically, it eventually lost its race because it was too unsafe to race upon the pavement.

Nurburgring: Nordschleife: Albeit legendary, it was far too unsafe for modern Formula One. Grand prix track: Too mathematical, too calculated, not natural and free-flowing.

Autodromo Oscar Alfredo Galvez: Flat, twisty and boring, in its modern iteration at least.

Osterreichring: One of Hermann Tilke's success stories turned sour when the stands were demolished for no good reason in 2004.

Circuit Paul Ricard: This track has the ignominy of being neutered into a test track with no stands.

Pedralbes: Another track taken off the calendar because of the safety backlash of the Le Mans disaster. Its straightaway was named after Franco.

Pescara: The longest track ever to host a grand prix, and that's not a compliment. The 1957 race there was the first time two races were held in one country in a season, starting an annoying trend that eventually led to the Valencia Street Circuit.

Phoenix street circuit: Three of Formula One's most terrible races happened here, including one that was out-drawn by an ostrich festival. This track scared Formula One out of the United States for more than a decade.

Prince George Circuit: South Africa's first Formula One circuit was too small for the sport.

Reims-Gueux: It was a giant triangle predicated entirely on drafting. It was Daytona, sans banking, in open-wheel cars.

Riverside: It's a shopping mall now. But the race's promoter bit the hand that fed him and pissed off the local media in Los Angeles, and in turn, nobody knew about the race that happened. Nobody came.

Rouen: It had plenty of opportunities, but couldn't ever secure the French Grand Prix over the long term.

Sebring: A giant expanse of super-flat concrete hosting a single race that nobody showed up to.

Sepang: Starting races in the late afternoon has been one of the dumbest logistical decisions of modern Formula One. Torrential downpours ensued.

Shanghai: A drain cover at the track once won Reject of the Race. Enough said.

Silverstone: Nothing says "we love tradition" quite like moving the pit lane after it had been in the same spot for nearly 50 years.

Spa-Francorchamps: If only the neighbors liked the racing as much as motorsports fans do...

Suzuka: It's not a rejectful track in its own right, but a NASCAR pace car driver died during an exhibition race at the track in 1996.

Valencia: It looks like it is in an industrial wasteland, and the races have been a waste of time.

Watkins Glen: America's most legendary road course lost its race because it forgot to pay the teams after the 1980 race.

Yas Marina: One race with both titles determined in 2009 isn't enough to judge this circuit. Let's see what it looks like with all the chips on the table this season.

Zandvoort: Another track killed by budget issues and hindered by bad neighbors.

Zeltweg Airfield: Like a boomerang, but with none of the fun. One farcical race, and that was the end of that. Jack Brabham was classified despite being 29 laps down.

Zolder: Took the life of Gilles Villeneuve and took the Belgian Grand Prix away from Spa-Francorchamps. Talk about unpopular.

This is one of the best damned topics I've seen on any forum, full stop. A lot of good points made, actually.

BEST TOPIC EVER!!!

But, let me insist: JEREZ IS NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE

For instance, Silverstone is just as "in the middle of nowhere" as Jerez, which has a 200,000 hab. city just 12 kms away (with high speed rail connection to the rest of the country), in an area where more than 600,000 ppl live and an airport 5 kms. away. I wouldn´t say it´s in the middle of nowhere. Is not bathplug Singapore or Montreal either.

Based on drawings of the Austin, Delhi and Sochi circuits, what are you thinking is Rejectful about them?

thehemogoblin wrote:Silverstone: Nothing says "we love tradition" quite like moving the pit lane after it had been in the same spot for nearly 50 years.

To be fair, I believe the pits are being moved to improve visibility for spectators along the current main straight. Also, the facilities for the teams are some of the worst on the calendar; rather than upgrade them constantly, the BRDC probably figured it was easier to just build a new pit building. The new pit lane is a bit odd; it dips right down, goes around the corner and then climbs steeply. It's almost as if the cars are driving in a ditch; in fact, half the lane may actually be under the existing circuit, though I can't say for sure.

thehemogoblin wrote:Valencia: It looks like it is in an industrial wasteland, and the races have been a waste of time.

I've read that the original plan for Valencia was to have something akin to the vision of Korea ... but the recession hit and Spain didn't weather it too well. I don't think it's beyond saving; it just needs a few tweaks: cut out the first chicane so that the drivers go flat out from the start line to the swing bridge, then tweak the bottom corner to be a single hairpin instead of three and it's 1000% better already.

thehemogoblin wrote:Indianapolis: As the Indy 500: There was practically no crossover between actual Formula One races and these races considered as championship races. As a road course: The 2005 Michelin farce. (Honorable mention: It runs in the opposite direction of the outer circuit.)

Add turns nine and ten - that stupid switchback - as being another Rejectful element of the track. And the wasted potential; after all, this is the Brickyard, one of the most famous circuits in the world. What Tilke came up with was just incredibly bland.

A very good read.

What's interesting to note is the quantity of rejectful recent tracks and the utter failure to learn from history.

thehemogoblin wrote:Pedralbes: Another track taken off the calendar because of the safety backlash of the Le Mans disaster. Its straightaway was named after Franco.

Haha, didn't know it, but makes sense. Every single city here had an important street renamed after Franco during the dictatorship years. A few other places were renamed after other people or institutions of the régime (like Falange, the single party), but the interesting thing is that no one bothered to call these places by their official names As soon as the dictatorship finished, they were changed back to their original names.

thehemogoblin wrote:Here we go, 69 circuits analyzed from a reject point of view. For the most part, just expect a mention of the worst aspect of each track. These are 100 percent up for debate, and I'll take criticism and/or suggestions to make this better.

Adelaide: It's really hard to trash a track that consistently gave some of the most memorable moments in Formula One history, especially because so many people here are Aussies. But I'm probably going to say Mika Hakkinen having to receive an emergency tracheotomy on the side of the racetrack in 1995.


Aida: It's not racing if nobody can pass ... and does the race really happen if nobody is there to see it?

Ain-Diab: The track was way too long and the death of Stuart Lewis-Evans marred the only championship race to take place in Morocco.


Aintree: Liverpool is kind of a dump.

Albert Park: It took the race from Adelaide and it has incurred mounds of debt.

Anderstorp: Having the pits halfway through the lap is just plain strange.

AVUS: It lacks a certain je ne sais quoi, like, right turns, for instance.

Bahrain: One of many new tracks built for the money, not for the racing.

Boavista: Nice view, but racing on cobblestones is really unsafe.

Brands Hatch: Lots of good races, but there were a lot of deaths at the track as well.

Bremgarten: It's not your fault, Bremgarten, but the Swiss ban on motor racing takes the cake here. Losing your race because your country bans the sport is pretty strange (even though I understand the Swiss government's ideology).

Bugatti Circuit: It hosts a 24-hour rollerskating race.

Caesars Palace: It was in a parking lot, and proceeded to make for races exactly as boring as one would think races in a parking lot would be.

Catalunya: There's too much testing there. There's not enough passing there. The races are unfailingly boring there.

Charade: Loose gravel punctured 10 tires and one eye during the 1972 race, and Formula One never returned.

Dallas: The pavement was falling apart. Oppressively hot. The pavement was falling apart. Who schedules a grand prix in Texas in July? The pavement was falling apart.

Detroit street circuit: I'd say too much attrition resulted from the narrow track, but this is F1 Rejects and that is sacrilege. Instead, I'm going to complain that it wasn't Belle Isle.

Dijon-Prenois: The track was too damn short.

Donington Park: The biggest failure didn't actually have to do with the race it hosted; instead, it had to do with tearing up the track without the funding to put it back together in a failed attempt to get the British Grand Prix.

Estoril: Forgot to get its repairs done in time and was usurped by Jerez in 1997 for one of the more memorable incidents in Formula One history.

Fuji: Building NASCAR-style ovals in countries not named "The United States of America" is a bad idea from the outset. But specifically for Formula One, building the racetrack in an area prone to torrential downpours just wasn't smart. Regardless of its layout, Hermann Tilke.

Circuit Gilles Villeneuve: Lots of horrible crashes. Riccardo Paletti, Olivier Panis, Robert Kubica.

Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez: The elevation just screwed with so many things.

Hockenheimring: It never should have been touched by Hermann Tilke.

Hungaroring: Universally regarded as the most boring track on the circuit.

Imola: 1994.

Indianapolis: As the Indy 500: There was practically no crossover between actual Formula One races and these races considered as championship races. As a road course: The 2005 Michelin farce. (Honorable mention: It runs in the opposite direction of the outer circuit.)

Istanbul: It's not Constantinople. Also, there has been a startling lack of fans at recent races.

Jacarepagua: It got sacrificed for an Olympic training venue.

Jarama: Short, narrow, twisty, boring.

Jerez: In the middle of nowhere, relatively speaking; that sadly took a perfectly good racetrack off the schedule and gave us Catalunya (see above).

Interlagos: (The inspiration of this list.) That constant threat of being mugged.

Korean International Circuit: Lucky the race was so wet that nobody was able to focus on the sheer ridiculousness of the racetrack's construction.

Kyalami: A good racetrack in a country with bad politics. A bad racetrack in a country with better politics.

Long Beach: Hosted the last Champ Car race.

Magny-Cours: The Germans conquered France here, with 10 of 18 races on the track being won by them.

Marina Bay Circuit: Nelson Piquet Jr's little stunt here pollutes the history of this track.

Monsanto Park: The track crossed tram lines. There's a reason it only hosted one grand prix.

Monte Carlo: Nelson Piquet said it best: "It's like riding a bicycle round your living room."

Montjuic: The track was tragically unsafe during its final race, the 1975 Spanish Grand Prix, where four spectators were killed.

Mont-Tremblant: Kind of unsafe with all those bumps.

Monza: You know there's a problem with deaths at the track when there is a Wikipedia page entitled "List of Autodromo Nazionale Monza fatal accidents."

Mosport: It's not that notable.

Nivelles-Baulers: As a reaction to Spa-Francorchamps, it was wide, flat, safe and sterile. Ironically, it eventually lost its race because it was too unsafe to race upon the pavement.

Nurburgring: Nordschleife: Albeit legendary, it was far too unsafe for modern Formula One. Grand prix track: Too mathematical, too calculated, not natural and free-flowing.

Autodromo Oscar Alfredo Galvez: Flat, twisty and boring, in its modern iteration at least.

Osterreichring: One of Hermann Tilke's success stories turned sour when the stands were demolished for no good reason in 2004.

Circuit Paul Ricard: This track has the ignominy of being neutered into a test track with no stands.

Pedralbes: Another track taken off the calendar because of the safety backlash of the Le Mans disaster. Its straightaway was named after Franco.

Pescara: The longest track ever to host a grand prix, and that's not a compliment. The 1957 race there was the first time two races were held in one country in a season, starting an annoying trend that eventually led to the Valencia Street Circuit.

Phoenix street circuit: Three of Formula One's most terrible races happened here, including one that was out-drawn by an ostrich festival. This track scared Formula One out of the United States for more than a decade.

Prince George Circuit: South Africa's first Formula One circuit was too small for the sport.

Reims-Gueux: It was a giant triangle predicated entirely on drafting. It was Daytona, sans banking, in open-wheel cars.

Riverside: It's a shopping mall now. But the race's promoter bit the hand that fed him and pissed off the local media in Los Angeles, and in turn, nobody knew about the race that happened. Nobody came.

Rouen: It had plenty of opportunities, but couldn't ever secure the French Grand Prix over the long term.

Sebring: A giant expanse of super-flat concrete hosting a single race that nobody showed up to.

Sepang: Starting races in the late afternoon has been one of the dumbest logistical decisions of modern Formula One. Torrential downpours ensued.

Shanghai: A drain cover at the track once won Reject of the Race. Enough said.

Silverstone: Nothing says "we love tradition" quite like moving the pit lane after it had been in the same spot for nearly 50 years.

Spa-Francorchamps: If only the neighbors liked the racing as much as motorsports fans do...

Suzuka: It's not a rejectful track in its own right, but a NASCAR pace car driver died during an exhibition race at the track in 1996.

Valencia: It looks like it is in an industrial wasteland, and the races have been a waste of time.

Watkins Glen: America's most legendary road course lost its race because it forgot to pay the teams after the 1980 race.

Yas Marina: One race with both titles determined in 2009 isn't enough to judge this circuit. Let's see what it looks like with all the chips on the table this season.

Zandvoort: Another track killed by budget issues and hindered by bad neighbors.

Zeltweg Airfield: Like a boomerang, but with none of the fun. One farcical race, and that was the end of that. Jack Brabham was classified despite being 29 laps down.

Zolder: Took the life of Gilles Villeneuve and took the Belgian Grand Prix away from Spa-Francorchamps. Talk about unpopular.

Adelaida: that accident happened because Häkkinen's McLaren suffered a tyre failure and a high kerb sent the spinning car flying into the tyre wall, which was what caused Häkkinen's injuries as the deceleration was very small, if I'm not mistaken. Too harsh to bash a circuit because of that.
Aida: 100% agree.
Ain-Diab: Lewis-Evans' death was because his Vanwall's engine seized and the whole car went down in flames, so hardly circuit's fault. And you call it too long when F1 had the Nordschleife and Pescara too the previous year?
Aintree: I don't think many people will be happy with your comment, though I may be wrong. Maybe I'd point out how exotic it was to celebrate an F1 race in an hippodrome.
Albert Park: true, but the circuit is great.
AVUS: agree.
Bahrain: agree.
Boavista: agree.
Brands Hatch: sadly, true.
Bremgarten: screw the Swiss government ideology. It was too harsh. Whoever wanted to risk his life racing in a closed track was in his right to do so. Why they didn't ban skiing, which is potentially equally as dangerous, or promulgate a law that bans suicide altogether? And that wasn't the circuit's fault.
Le Mans Bugatti: I've seen worse circuits.
Caesars Palace: if the track layout wouldn't have been that repetitive maybe we'd have even seen moderately exciting races.
Catalunya: agree. The chicane introduced before the start/finish straight only made matters worse, in my opinion.
Charade: agree, and it has a funny name.
Dallas: agree, but we saw Piercarlo Ghinzani and Osella score 2 points!
Detroit: it was challenging. Hence, I think it was great. And the pavement wasn't falling apart. It wasn't that unsafe either. Oh, yes, and it allowed for giant-killing performances (Martin Brundle's 2nd in 1984 with Tyrrell, Ligier's 2nd and nearly 3rd in 1986, Pierluigi Martini's 6th in 1988).
Dijon-Prenois: a track that had produced the best duel in F1's history can hardly be here.
Donington: agree.
Estoril: what a shame.
Fuji: boring track, both in GT4 and in F1.
Gilles Villeneuve: Paletti's crash happened because he crashed into Didier Pironi's stalled Ferrari at the start. That could've happened anywhere.
Hermanos Rodríguez: very good circuit, but it's placed in a bumpy place, which can be troublesome.
Hockenheimring: 200% agree. He butchered the circuit.
Hungaroring: we could live without this track.
Imola: the circuit was great, even taking into account the events of 1994.
Indianapolis: not that bad a circuit. 2005 Michelin farce hardly circuit's fault.
Istanbul: the circuit is very good. A frigging good Herman Tilke track and they want to get rid of it
Jacarepagua: very nice circuit.
Jerez: agree.
Interlagos: some overhauling really needs to be done, and it's shameful even F1 drivers can get mugged there.
Yeongam: I haven't seen the race, sadly, so I can't pass judgement of this one.
Kyalami: the mutilated 1992-1993 layout
Long Beach: an awesome venue that should have stayed longer.
Magny-Cours: nowhere near as good as Paul Ricard.
Monsanto: agree.
Montecarlo: great track.
Mont-Tremblant: but it was a great track.
Monza: agree, but nowadays the possibility of deaths is near zilch.
Mosport: maybe.
Nivelles-Baulers: agree.
Nürburgring: not that bad a circuit.
Óscar Gálvez: agree.
Österreichring: a track that'll be sorely missed in both its configurations.
Paul Ricard: agree.
Pedralbes: not that surprising considering it was the 50s.
Pescara: now that was an unsafe circuit...
Phoenix: good thing we had Jean Alesi's balls to the wall driving in 1990.
East London: agree.
Reims-Gueux: agree.
Riverside: agree.
Rouen: beautiful track.
Sebring: agree.
Sepang: not that bad a circuit.
Shanghai: get rid of it now, please.
Silverstone: agree.
Spa-Francorchamps: agree.
Suzuka: well, things like that can happen everywhere.
Valencia: agree. Get rid of it.
Watkins Glen: an utter shame.
Yas Marina: agree.
Zandvoort: agree.
Zeltweg: agree.
Zolder: agree.

Phoenix wrote:Bremgarten: screw the Swiss government ideology. It was too harsh. Whoever wanted to risk his life racing in a closed track was in his right to do so. Why they didn't ban skiing, which is potentially equally as dangerous, or promulgate a law that bans suicide altogether? And that wasn't the circuit's fault.

You've never heard of "being Switzerland"? It means being competely neutral and conservative about things. The Swiss hate cars in general; the Le Mans disaster was the excuse they were waiting for to ban motorsport.

Phoenix wrote:Hockenheimring: 200% agree. He butchered the circuit.

I find Martin Brundle's comments from this year's race interesting: from a driver's point of view, the revised layout is better because the old circuit was just a drag race to see how had the best engine. All the skill in the world wouldn't count for an engine that was down on power.

Phoenix, as you can tell, I struggled with a few of those tracks. Some of them were hard because of a lack of information, others were hard because the tracks themselves were so good. So I had to find the most rejectful ASPECT of the track, which was really hard for a place such as Adelaide, which nobody says anything bad about and produced some of the more notable races in Formula One history.

What a way of insulting people who live in aintree

I may sound dumb here, but cannot actually remember a tragic race at Brands-Hatch....... would someone mind informing me on what it is that has given Brands this rep?

Apart from that, fantastic post Best one I have seen on here for a while!

Henry Surtees in Formula 2 last year. Another competitior slid off, and his tyre was torn free of the bodywork. It struck Surtees as he went by, killing him instantly.

Also Chris Van der Drift's huge crash in Superleague Formula this season.

Brands Hatch is a very good circuit and not much of a reject track at all. But there are racing series, mostly open wheel like Superleague or F2 (which is going to be there next season anway) for which the track is simply not big enough anymore. I still think it is a VERY nice circuit for touring car races and the like!
Also, although I have never been there myself, I've heard numerous times that it is in a very nice part of England.

Captain Hammer wrote:

Phoenix wrote:Hockenheimring: 200% agree. He butchered the circuit.

I find Martin Brundle's comments from this year's race interesting: from a driver's point of view, the revised layout is better because the old circuit was just a drag race to see how had the best engine. All the skill in the world wouldn't count for an engine that was down on power.

I think I'm in the minority of people who prefer the current circuit. The old one just led to tedious races through the forest. The track as it is has a few overtaking spots and some sections that can test driver ability. Sure it would have been better for the re-design to keep some of the character of the old circuit but I think Hockenheim is worthy of it's race every 2nd year which it has at the moment. I personally think Spain should do the same with Catalunya and Valencia so we can get rid of a rubbish race every season.

Valencia - No explanation necessary.

Ahhhh right I see......

I thought you were regarding accidents during F1..... those accidents happened over 20 years after F1 left Brands.

Bit of an unfair judgement in my opinion as it isn't really judging the circuit in an F1 climate..... though not disagreeing that it's old-school factor has brought many serious injuries.... though in Brands defence... it cannot be blammed for Surtees's crash as that is more of a design fail for not having wheel tethers.... that could of happened at any circuit.

JJMonty wrote: it cannot be blammed for Surtees's crash as that is more of a design fail for not having wheel tethers.... that could of happened at any circuit.

It could have happened on many tracky, I agree - but the runoff there could have been a bit bigger, too. Van der Drift's crash, by the way, could also have happened in Monza or even the new Korean backstraight. But still - the combinations of all these factors and the rather narrow track is what, in my opinion, makes Brands a bit dangerous for some types of racing. Apart from that, as I've said, I really like the track. Great fun in rFactor, too.

Hockenheim (in its original guise) - the circuit that so tragically took Jim Clark from us.

P_Friesacher wrote:

JJMonty wrote: it cannot be blammed for Surtees's crash as that is more of a design fail for not having wheel tethers.... that could of happened at any circuit.

It could have happened on many tracky, I agree - but the runoff there could have been a bit bigger, too. Van der Drift's crash, by the way, could also have happened in Monza or even the new Korean backstraight. But still - the combinations of all these factors and the rather narrow track is what, in my opinion, makes Brands a bit dangerous for some types of racing. Apart from that, as I've said, I really like the track. Great fun in rFactor, too.

Agreed.... but some drivers prefer the old school circuits as it gives them the risk and in some ways.... risk = fun! Thats what Hamilton says, he gets more of a kick knowing he is inches away from the wall and knows he has no 2nd chances because of no tarmac run-offs.... it separates the men to the flukers.

I must admit as a karter/racer that I agree with him... sounds a bit dare-devilish I know... but thats the risk you take in racing... of course making it safe is a must and they have done a good job on that! You just cannot get rid of that risk all together as we have whitnessed.

Put it this way, if I had a choice of racing at Brands, or Go to Bahrain circuit to race, I would probably pick Brands because it gives you more of a challenge!

.... Perhaps i'm the only one that has this opinion or do others have a similar point of view?

thehemogoblin wrote:Magny-Cours: The Germans conquered France here, with 10 of 18 races on the track being won by them.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Also: Suzuka - Building in an unneccesary chicane, better known as Casio Triangle

JJMonty wrote:

P_Friesacher wrote:

Agreed.... but some drivers prefer the old school circuits as it gives them the risk and in some ways.... risk = fun! Thats what Hamilton says, he gets more of a kick knowing he is inches away from the wall and knows he has no 2nd chances because of no tarmac run-offs.... it separates the men to the flukers.

I must admit as a karter/racer that I agree with him... sounds a bit dare-devilish I know... but thats the risk you take in racing... of course making it safe is a must and they have done a good job on that! You just cannot get rid of that risk all together as we have whitnessed.

Put it this way, if I had a choice of racing at Brands, or Go to Bahrain circuit to race, I would probably pick Brands because it gives you more of a challenge!

.... Perhaps i'm the only one that has this opinion or do others have a similar point of view?

There, have a beer.

JJMonty wrote:Put it this way, if I had a choice of racing at Brands, or Go to Bahrain circuit to race, I would probably pick Brands because it gives you more of a challenge!

.... Perhaps i'm the only one that has this opinion or do others have a similar point of view?

I go to Brands to watch motorsport often enough for many people on here to know what I think. But the safety of the GP loop does need to be considered... And the local NIMBY-ism... And the environmentalists if they do decide to improve the loop - it is about as wooded as at Hockenheim...

Klon wrote:

thehemogoblin wrote:Magny-Cours: The Germans conquered France here, with 10 of 18 races on the track being won by them.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Also: Suzuka - Building in an unneccesary chicane, better known as Casio Triangle

Oh, not at all. Just wanted to remind the French people on here.

(Side note: Just found out last week that I'm a German citizen for life, because my mother was a citizen when I was born. So, yeah.)

Klon wrote:

thehemogoblin wrote:Magny-Cours: The Germans conquered France here, with 10 of 18 races on the track being won by them.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Also: Suzuka - Building in an unneccesary chicane, better known as Casio Triangle

I can´t agree with that. The Casio triangle provides almost the only chance to overtake for F1 cars

thehemogoblin wrote:Oh, not at all. Just wanted to remind the French people on here.

(Side note: Just found out last week that I'm a German citizen for life, because my mother was a citizen when I was born. So, yeah.)

So: time to join the Bundeswehr then! And quick too, before they finally abolish conscription. Or, if you really want to, migrate to Austria where probably we're all still going to have the distinct pleasure in the next few years...

P_Friesacher wrote:

thehemogoblin wrote:Oh, not at all. Just wanted to remind the French people on here.

(Side note: Just found out last week that I'm a German citizen for life, because my mother was a citizen when I was born. So, yeah.)

So: time to join the Bundeswehr then! And quick too, before they finally abolish conscription. Or, if you really want to, migrate to Austria where probably we're all still going to have the distinct pleasure in the next few years...

Oh hell no. I'm keeping my American citizenship. I'm not going into the military unless I absolutely have to. Not my forte.

Not mine either. Spent a year in civilian service (not sure if thats the correct translation, dict.cc says yes...) instead of 8 months in our military...

P_Friesacher wrote:Not mine either. Spent a year in civilian service (not sure if thats the correct translation, dict.cc says yes...) instead of 8 months in our military...

That's correct. And way to just relax in an armchair for a year.

I am T5 (not suitable for military or civilian service) and proud of it. But that's beside the point.

Also AVUS - Quite a load of very dangerous accidents

None of these tracks, these F1 tracks, will EVER trump the rejectful nature of the Beijing International Streetcircuit that A1GP visited where the hairpin was unable to be taken without using reverse gear, and even when they shortened the venue none of the crashed or spun cars could get removed properly.

P_Friesacher wrote:

JJMonty wrote: it cannot be blammed for Surtees's crash as that is more of a design fail for not having wheel tethers.... that could of happened at any circuit.

It could have happened on many tracky, I agree - but the runoff there could have been a bit bigger, too. Van der Drift's crash, by the way, could also have happened in Monza or even the new Korean backstraight. But still - the combinations of all these factors and the rather narrow track is what, in my opinion, makes Brands a bit dangerous for some types of racing. Apart from that, as I've said, I really like the track. Great fun in rFactor, too.

There was Lafitte's crash during the first start of the 1986 British Grand Prix, which shattered both his legs and forced him to retire from the sport - so there were serious accidents during the time that it was used as a Grand Prix circuit. It is a fun track with the elevation changes, but it has had its share of problems over the years.

Also, thehaemoglobin, I thought that the infield section of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway had nothing to do with Tilke - the contract for the infield section was drawn up in 1998, and at the time Tilke had been awarded the contract for Sepang. Do you have a source linking Tilke to the road course design?
In addition, surely you should add to Spa-Francorchamps's entry the perennial money problems that they've had? They've been running at a loss for the past few years, and the original owner went bankrupt in 2005 because of that. Then there was the 1985 Belgian Grand Prix, which had to be postponed by several months because the track surface broke up and made it impossible to drive a car there.

Speaking of which, you're not quite right that the road surface didn't break up in Detroit - in 1985, it did start to disintegrate at Turn 2, and caused several drivers to crash at that corner when they were caught out. However, it also lead to an ingenious bit of driving by Michele Alboreto - when Senna tried to pass him, Alboreto stayed away from the apex in Turn 2, where the surface had broken up, and Senna, in his trademark manner, threw his car down the inside of Alboreto. Of course, Senna hit the loose surface there, causing his car to slide wide and hit the wall, breaking his suspension, leaving Alboreto to drive on to the finish without any threat from Senna.

ADx_Wales wrote:None of these tracks, these F1 tracks, will EVER trump the rejectful nature of the Beijing International Streetcircuit that A1GP visited where the hairpin was unable to be taken without using reverse gear, and even when they shortened the venue none of the crashed or spun cars could get removed properly.

And then they were only able to negociate the hairpin by making use of the space created by the entrance of the pitlane, if I remember correctly....

Probably the most rejectful circuit ever has to be Puerto Iguazu. I could barely find information about it in Google, sadly. It held an Sudamerican F2 race back in 1986. When teams arrived, the track was still being constructed. The boxes area was within an abandoned sports centre, and the motorhomes were situated in a football field. As for the track itself, it was very narrow (only 7 metres in some zones). Only some single-blade guardrails and some tyres were placed as safety instruments. Th track was surrounded by poles and trees, and many of them were unprotected. Furthermore, the asphalt was breaking down, and fast-dry cement had to be used to keep the practice sessions going.
This is the only photo I could find of the circuit

ADx_Wales wrote:None of these tracks, these F1 tracks, will EVER trump the rejectful nature of the Beijing International Streetcircuit that A1GP visited where the hairpin was unable to be taken without using reverse gear, and even when they shortened the venue none of the crashed or spun cars could get removed properly.

How about the other Beijing International Street Circuit, which hosted a round of the Superleague Formula (also known as Stupid Football Thing)? It was classified as a non-championship event and had to be run as a Chinese national event because it failed to achieve FIA Grade-2 status - a section across the top of the circuit was deemed too narrow for racing, even with waved yellow flags in place.

dr-baker wrote:

JJMonty wrote:Put it this way, if I had a choice of racing at Brands, or Go to Bahrain circuit to race, I would probably pick Brands because it gives you more of a challenge!

.... Perhaps i'm the only one that has this opinion or do others have a similar point of view?

I go to Brands to watch motorsport often enough for many people on here to know what I think. But the safety of the GP loop does need to be considered... And the local NIMBY-ism... And the environmentalists if they do decide to improve the loop - it is about as wooded as at Hockenheim...

I live not too far (about 15 miles) from Brands and I go there a lot as well. My fiancee used to be an estate agent (but don't hold it against her) in West Kingsdown, which is basically Brands Hatch. The locals all get year-long free passes to Brands, valid for all races. But as you say, the incredible thing is people who move there, fully aware that there has been a racing circuit there for a long time (since 1927, in fact) and still complain about the noise. Like those idiots in that estate near Clearways. The track was there first, so don't move there! Unfortunately the UK is riddled with such idiotic complaints.

Klon wrote:I am T5 (not suitable for military or civilian service) and proud of it. But that's beside the point.

Also AVUS - Quite a load of very dangerous accidents

I too was deemed unfit for military service. It's in great big red letters on my military card. Surprisingly, I passed all of the tests to join the Air Force as an engineer 2 months before, so I expect the Portuguese Army already had their quota of conscripts for that year.

Speaking of AVUS, people who follow the Gran Turismo games might have seen some gameplay videos that have been put onto YouTube (and quickly taken down) in the past few days. They show an AVUS-inspired highway circuit called Special Stage Route 7. It's set on a highway in Japan (we think) and seems to consist of two seven-mile stretches linked by highway interchanges. One is quite fiddly and hairpin-y, the other is apparently one big loop in the AVUS tradition. It's not arrow-straight like AVUS, but the corners on the main stretch of highway are very long sweepers ... I just thought someone might be interested.

AVUS: Only track I know of that makes Talladega and Monza look like a go-kart rink. Would be interesting to see what NASCAR would do if the track was in its original configuration, with the larged degree banked turn.

mario wrote:

P_Friesacher wrote:

JJMonty wrote: it cannot be blammed for Surtees's crash as that is more of a design fail for not having wheel tethers.... that could of happened at any circuit.

It could have happened on many tracky, I agree - but the runoff there could have been a bit bigger, too. Van der Drift's crash, by the way, could also have happened in Monza or even the new Korean backstraight. But still - the combinations of all these factors and the rather narrow track is what, in my opinion, makes Brands a bit dangerous for some types of racing. Apart from that, as I've said, I really like the track. Great fun in rFactor, too.

There was Lafitte's crash during the first start of the 1986 British Grand Prix, which shattered both his legs and forced him to retire from the sport - so there were serious accidents during the time that it was used as a Grand Prix circuit. It is a fun track with the elevation changes, but it has had its share of problems over the years.

Also, thehaemoglobin, I thought that the infield section of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway had nothing to do with Tilke - the contract for the infield section was drawn up in 1998, and at the time Tilke had been awarded the contract for Sepang. Do you have a source linking Tilke to the road course design?
In addition, surely you should add to Spa-Francorchamps's entry the perennial money problems that they've had? They've been running at a loss for the past few years, and the original owner went bankrupt in 2005 because of that. Then there was the 1985 Belgian Grand Prix, which had to be postponed by several months because the track surface broke up and made it impossible to drive a car there.

Speaking of which, you're not quite right that the road surface didn't break up in Detroit - in 1985, it did start to disintegrate at Turn 2, and caused several drivers to crash at that corner when they were caught out. However, it also lead to an ingenious bit of driving by Michele Alboreto - when Senna tried to pass him, Alboreto stayed away from the apex in Turn 2, where the surface had broken up, and Senna, in his trademark manner, threw his car down the inside of Alboreto. Of course, Senna hit the loose surface there, causing his car to slide wide and hit the wall, breaking his suspension, leaving Alboreto to drive on to the finish without any threat from Senna.

It's thehemogoblin, sir.

And I thought Indy was Tilke. It's still terrible regardless. I never said my list was flawless. I just really wanted to start the discussion. You also have to keep in mind a lot of these things predate my life by years (for instance, Detroit 1985 is five years before I was born). The money problems at Spa are pretty bad too.

EPIC BUMP ahead! (considering Hemo is now AWOL)

Buddh: The track got some tax problems and received dismantling threats from farmers before the inaugral race was going to occur.

Albert Park: The first two corners are a recipe for failure.

AVUS: We have something like that in America, it's called Martinsville, except the designers of Martinsville actually had the right idea and didn't make the straights too bathplugging long.

Brands Hatch: Decent enough track for heavier cars, but not only are the locals annoying, but it would probably be boring with modern F1.

Old Hockenheim: Boring and not very challenging.

Indianapolis: More people have been killed at Indianapolis than at any other track in the world.

Long Beach: This Hairpin.

Mont-Tremblant: Without rain, it's a Canadian Hungaroring.

Mosport: Nobody but Ron Fellows cares about it. Not even NASCAR.

New Hockenheim: Every time this track comes up, all I hear is moaning about how bad the track supposedly is and forgets the old one was worse.

New Jersey: Chris Christie.

Watkins Glen: It's owned by NASCAR, not to mention that the track is not very interesting with everything besides NASCAR.

Not F1, but;

San Jose: BATHPLUGGING RAILROAD TRACKS.