Grand Prix Rejects

The track lay-out for the Thailand Grand Prix that should take place in 2015 has been confirmed.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2013/04/26/t ... 2015-race/
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/sports/ ... race-route

To my personal opinion it fits in the Detroit, Phoenix category, pretty rejectful.
A lot of straights followed by slow corners, most of them 90-ish degrees.

Having been in Bangkok four months ago, it seems they just wanted to squeeze as much tourist attractions in as possible.
The streets are all pretty wide IIRC, the hotel I stayed in is actually along the track, the northern run along the Chao Phraya River.

PS: I'm not sure this is the right forum for this topic, it's fine with me if it has be relocated.

Wait, since when was there going to be a Thai Grand Prix in 2015?

It'd still make a change from the Tilke-dromes so it gets my vote.

Wizzie wrote:Wait, since when was there going to be a Thai Grand Prix in 2015?

There were reports at the tail end of 2012 in the Wall Street Journal that Bernie was in talks with the authorities to hammer out a deal for a race in either 2014 or 2015 (with Bernie pushing for the latter date). As far as I am aware the deal is not yet done, but Bernie does seem to be keen on pushing through with the deal.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 98210.html

CoopsII wrote:It'd still make a change from the Tilke-dromes so it gets my vote.

Dare I say it, though, that you should be careful what you wish for, because my first impression is that this looks worse than your average circuit by Tilke? The Dutch Bear, your comment probably explains the layout of this venue - as you say, it was probably planned by those hoping for the most photogenic shots of the city's tourist attractions rather than any interest in actual racing...

Wizzie wrote:Wait, since when was there going to be a Thai Grand Prix in 2015?

The Thai Government and Bernie have been negotiating about a possible Thai Grand Prix. If it goes forward, which I think is quite likely, the first time will probably be in 2015.
The only thing about this track is that still has to be formally presented to the Government, which will happen in three months time. Only they can give a green light, although that seems just a formality.
Mark Webber gave a demo run on part of the track in 2010. No coincidence Red Bull doing that, considering the beverage Red Bull is a international watered-down version of the Thai beverage Krating Daeng (Red Bull in Thai).

I don't agree with the sceptical comments. This track looks like it it made for giant rejectful messes. Especially since Thailand, AFAIK, is in a tropical zone which would lead to a high chance of rain. I smell reject goodness.

That track layout is no better than an educated guess, F1Fanatic just put it together based on the street names in the press release so there's a decent chance it will change before any race happened.

Ed24 wrote:That track layout is no better than an educated guess, F1Fanatic just put it together based on the street names in the press release so there's a decent chance it will change before any race happened.

I sure hope so, because that draft makes many Tilkedromes look like Spa-Francorchamps.

Am I the only one that thinks this track has potential if they go with it? I like the basic layout. I think passing should be easy and may see an exciting race.

go_Rubens wrote:Am I the only one that thinks this track has potential if they go with it? I like the basic layout. I think passing should be easy and may see an exciting race.

I completely agree. I mean, we need to remember that we're looking at a street circuit here, so fancy complexes, loop-the-loops (joke), etc are out of the question. And I can totally understand the Thai authorities wanting to put it in a place where there are lots of recognisable monuments, because no-one wants to watch a race around some back alleys in a suburb no-one's ever heard of. As has already been pointed out, F1Fanatic have just made a guess on the layout, but if it ends up being a close resemblance to the real thing, then I think it has some potential, and certainly offers us some variety from the constant barrage of mid-speed corners that the calender is currently clogged with, Tilkedrome or not.

AndreaModa wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:Am I the only one that thinks this track has potential if they go with it? I like the basic layout. I think passing should be easy and may see an exciting race.

I completely agree. I mean, we need to remember that we're looking at a street circuit here, so fancy complexes, loop-the-loops (joke), etc are out of the question. And I can totally understand the Thai authorities wanting to put it in a place where there are lots of recognisable monuments, because no-one wants to watch a race around some back alleys in a suburb no-one's ever heard of. As has already been pointed out, F1Fanatic have just made a guess on the layout, but if it ends up being a close resemblance to the real thing, then I think it has some potential, and certainly offers us some variety from the constant barrage of mid-speed corners that the calender is currently clogged with, Tilkedrome or not.

Indeed. According to the F1fanatic track map, it's almost a 1.4km run from turn 5 all the way down to the hairpin at turn 7. That's virtually unheard of on a street circuit.

Everyone missed the obvious flaw. We can't be sure if the grid girls are "genuine"

andrew2209 wrote:Everyone missed the obvious flaw. We can't be sure if the grid girls are "genuine"

Oh dear. Please let's not stoop to those levels...

dr-baker wrote:

andrew2209 wrote:Everyone missed the obvious flaw. We can't be sure if the grid girls are "genuine"

Oh dear. Please let's not stoop to those levels...

Exactly - I remember having to clear up the last discussion that went along those lines and it is something I'd rather avoid having to do again.

Why is it another street race? Do people in Thailand even know F1 well enough to be interested in coughing up the $s to buy a ticket to a race or is this just a case of Red Bull's local co-owners promoting their country?

Yannick wrote:Why is it another street race? Do people in Thailand even know F1 well enough to be interested in coughing up the $s to buy a ticket to a race or is this just a case of Red Bull's local co-owners promoting their country?

Maybe they thought it is cheaper and quicker to set up a street circuit instead of building a dedicated course?

Hey at least it can't be as bad as Valencia.

Basetornado wrote:Hey at least it can't be as bad as Valencia.

I bet the entire reason they put Valencia on the calendar is because they knew it sucked, so any time they proposed a track for the rest of history people would say "well, it's better than Valencia".

But seriously, I'm going to wait until the actual track layout comes out, not some early speculation. And then I'm going to wait until there's a race on it. And then I'll criticise it.

AndreaModa wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:Am I the only one that thinks this track has potential if they go with it? I like the basic layout. I think passing should be easy and may see an exciting race.

I completely agree. I mean, we need to remember that we're looking at a street circuit here, so fancy complexes, loop-the-loops (joke), etc are out of the question. And I can totally understand the Thai authorities wanting to put it in a place where there are lots of recognisable monuments, because no-one wants to watch a race around some back alleys in a suburb no-one's ever heard of. As has already been pointed out, F1Fanatic have just made a guess on the layout, but if it ends up being a close resemblance to the real thing, then I think it has some potential, and certainly offers us some variety from the constant barrage of mid-speed corners that the calender is currently clogged with, Tilkedrome or not.

I also agree with this. If there is indeed a Thai GP and the circuit is anything like this, I'm all for it. I'm for the calendar having variety in terms of track layouts. And that means having a street track with 90-degree corners and a boring layout. (Singapore has lots of 90-degree turns too I'll admit, but it's quite a convoluted circuit overall.) Am I the only one here who didn't actually mind the Phoenix layouts?

I personally thinks its kinda meh because of the lack of corner variety and that 1.4KM straight does seem a bit long IMO

roblomas52 wrote:I personally thinks its kinda meh because of the lack of corner variety and that 1.4KM straight does seem a bit long IMO

I will say one thing to you though, the 1.4 km straight is kind of unique because it would become F1's longest straight on the calendar (according to the speculations of the track layout). Plus, when does a street circuit have a straight longer than 1 km? I can't think of any. There are a few fast corners and a lot of 90 degree corners. But, as Enoch stated, he is all for variety in the calendar, which includes 90 degree corners and a boring layout. I'm in agreement with Enoch. Plus, I think the track isn't as convoluted as Singapore, which I think Enoch is trying to say.

eytl wrote:Am I the only one here who didn't actually mind the Phoenix layouts?

For me, I liked the first layout of the track, but the second one was downright rejectful for me.

Since this is F1 Rejects, shouldn't there be a section for reject tracks along with the teams and drivers? Just a possible suggestion and a thought.

I think, that it looks awesome (although I doubt that will be any sort of a final version)

Super fast street track would be quite unique, corner variety isn't necessary for a good racing track....only problem for me would be the location, a third race in Southeast Asia....meh.

giraurd wrote:a third race in Southeast Asia....meh.

I might like the days when there were a lot of European rounds and no Asian rounds, but why is having a third race in Southeast Asia such a meh? I don't get it.

go_Rubens wrote:Since this is F1 Rejects, shouldn't there be a section for reject tracks along with the teams and drivers? Just a possible suggestion and a thought.

How would one determine the reject status of a track?

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:Since this is F1 Rejects, shouldn't there be a section for reject tracks along with the teams and drivers? Just a possible suggestion and a thought.

How would one determine the reject status of a track?

One could determine the reject status of a track by looking at how many overtaking moves there were on average in a race on that particular track. Maybe Catalunya would be one and deserves to be one for the debacle that was the 1999 Spanish GP. Enoch and Jamie could also look at the quality of racing from their point of view and see if the racing was good or downright horrible.

go_Rubens wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:Since this is F1 Rejects, shouldn't there be a section for reject tracks along with the teams and drivers? Just a possible suggestion and a thought.

How would one determine the reject status of a track?

One could determine the reject status of a track by looking at how many overtaking moves there were on average in a race on that particular track. Maybe Catalunya would be one and deserves to be one for the debacle that was the 1999 Spanish GP. Enoch and Jamie could also look at the quality of racing from their point of view and see if the racing was good or downright horrible.

By that logic, though, Monaco would also be regarded as a reject track because it has always been so difficult to pass another driver, so there would need to be some careful calibration of your criteria.

mario wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:How would one determine the reject status of a track?

One could determine the reject status of a track by looking at how many overtaking moves there were on average in a race on that particular track. Maybe Catalunya would be one and deserves to be one for the debacle that was the 1999 Spanish GP. Enoch and Jamie could also look at the quality of racing from their point of view and see if the racing was good or downright horrible.

By that logic, though, Monaco would also be regarded as a reject track because it has always been so difficult to pass another driver, so there would need to be some careful calibration of your criteria.

Maybe one would have to consider the number of GPs that were held at the track as well (the older, classic tracks are generally considered less rejectful)...?

At least it's a vast improvement from the one proposed for 1939 GP (it never happened because the war broke out).



More on the 1939 GP

Speaking of 1930s Grand Prix and the start of F1 in the 50s, I am correct in saying that Prince Bira was the first Asian to race in F1?

So one could argue that Thailand has more heritage than some of the more recent Asian GP destinations

johnnyCarwash wrote:Speaking of 1930s Grand Prix and the start of F1 in the 50s, I am correct in saying that Prince Bira was the first Asian to race in F1?

So one could argue that Thailand has more heritage than some of the more recent Asian GP destinations

You're right indeed. Even more shocking is that the next Asian driver was Hiroshi Fushida, in 1975

Think of this: Enoch and Jamie can consider how many years F1 went to a track and if there were tracks that had underlying problems with them. They could also look up what the drivers thought of the track, so if the opinions of the drivers are bad, they could do research and then base everything else off the criteria I gave a while ago for reject tracks.

go_Rubens wrote:Think of this: Enoch and Jamie can consider how many years F1 went to a track and if there were tracks that had underlying problems with them. They could also look up what the drivers thought of the track, so if the opinions of the drivers are bad, they could do research and then base everything else off the criteria I gave a while ago for reject tracks.

That sounds like it would be a lot of effort, for something that very likely won't really be profiled on the site.

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:Since this is F1 Rejects, shouldn't there be a section for reject tracks along with the teams and drivers? Just a possible suggestion and a thought.

How would one determine the reject status of a track?

The Detroit GP and Caesar's Palace GP end up in there right away for disintegrating racing surface and parking lot location. Beyond those two, it's a lot harder to find reject tracks.

Onxy Wrecked wrote:The Detroit GP and Caesar's Palace GP end up in there right away for disintegrating racing surface and parking lot location. Beyond those two, it's a lot harder to find reject tracks.

Detroit I didn't think was THAT bad. It was a slow track, but nothing rejectful from my point of view. There are way, way worse tracks than Detroit. Like postwar AVUS, and Zeltweg Airfield.

Onxy Wrecked wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:Since this is F1 Rejects, shouldn't there be a section for reject tracks along with the teams and drivers? Just a possible suggestion and a thought.

How would one determine the reject status of a track?

The Detroit GP and Caesar's Palace GP end up in there right away for disintegrating racing surface and parking lot location. Beyond those two, it's a lot harder to find reject tracks.

Don't you mean Dallas GP? I can't remember the Detroit track ever breaking up myself.