Future Grands Prix?

[chillibowl]

a bit out of left field, or a science fiction novel, and certainly going off topic but we might not be too many years away from not needing a live audience at all.

sit at home, put on your VR/AR headset and let your virtual holographic avatar take a seat in the stands along with the millions of other holograms.

5 years, 10 years, maybe sooner. some tech companies already tried it out at the last winter olympics and with a massive global 5G roll out on its way this is the future of sports entertainment and subscription based services.

for example out of the 900,000 Dutch fans who wont be able to buy a ticket, how many would pay for an option to virtually experience this race live and see their boy compete?

i mean you cant go so stuck at home and probably paying for the feed already right so why not buy the enhanced package?

personally i think the headsets are daft but the thought of attending any sporting event around the globe, any concert, to be able to stand witness to whatever the next watershed/fall of the Berlin Wall level historical moment...of course i will be investing in the hardware necessary to subscribe to whomever is offering me this services.

the revolution will be televised!

[rustyfan]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

a bit out of left field, or a science fiction novel, and certainly going off topic but we might not be too many years away from not needing a live audience at all.

sit at home, put on your VR/AR headset and let your virtual holographic avatar take a seat in the stands along with the millions of other holograms.

5 years, 10 years, maybe sooner. some tech companies already tried it out at the last winter olympics and with a massive global 5G roll out on its way this is the future of sports entertainment and subscription based services.

for example out of the 900,000 Dutch fans who wont be able to buy a ticket, how many would pay for an option to virtually experience this race live and see their boy compete?

i mean you cant go so stuck at home and probably paying for the feed already right so why not buy the enhanced package?

personally i think the headsets are daft but the thought of attending any sporting event around the globe, any concert, to be able to stand witness to whatever the next watershed/fall of the Berlin Wall level historical moment...of course i will be investing in the hardware necessary to subscribe to whomever is offering me this services.

the revolution will be televised!

Not sure about the hologram-on-site idea , but it'd be zero problems with the tech we have today to setup a bunch of 360-cameras around the circuit to offer a way of watching the race using your VR-headset. I have a feeling the immersion would be quite intense, especially since you'd be able to place said cameras very close to the action - even on the cars themselves. Sure, you wouldn't feel the G-forces but I'm pretty sure it'd be one helluva ride nonetheless

[chillibowl]

indeed holographic representation at a far away track is an out there idea

but yeah the VR/AR stuff is very doable with today's tech. providing an immersive stream in real time would costly so a replay experience would be a sensible first step (and i think there are already some F1 VR/360 videos of a lap or two are out there already). nothing during a race though as far as i know.

[Mike Harte]

The Grand Prix at Barcelona has been given a one year extension, meaning that next year's event will take place.

The number of spectators at this year's event was the lowest since 1999 despite Carlos Sainz driving (the loss of Alonso may also have been a factor) and the political unease due to separation issues with Madrid may have contributed.

The Catalonian regional government currently financially supports this race, but there is pressure for that subsidy to be stopped as there are far more pressing needs for the money.

[S griffin]

That’s good, be a travesty if it went. And Mexico is safe. However I wouldn’t be surprised if one or two drop out

[chillibowl]

no mention of terms but Monza resigned until 2024 and also the last asterisk on 2020 is gone giving us 22 races next year.

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/i...-2024/4530433/

[S griffin]

That’s good, it’s important we keep historic venues like Monza on the calendar

[NaBUru38]

No Nürburgring or Hockenheim in 2020, despite Mercedes and Vettel.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

That’s good, it’s important we keep historic venues like Monza on the calendar

I'm not saying I disagree with the sentiment - but I wonder why it is important?

What is important about keeping a venue?

[S griffin]

Do I really need too much explaining? We need to keep venues on the calendar that add something to F1, unlike some of the bland and empty new circuits

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I'm not saying I disagree with the sentiment - but I wonder why it is important?

What is important about keeping a venue?

In the case of Monza it's important, as this is one of the original F1 Grand Prix tracks and is therefore at the heart of the sport. To lose a venue like Monza I believe would diminish F1, because it attracts a huge fan base, the teams and drivers like it, as well as it being steeped in history.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Do I really need too much explaining? We need to keep venues on the calendar that add something to F1, unlike some of the bland and empty new circuits

Well yes, hence the reason I asked.
I always wonder the reason behind a statement being made, and this is one of those.
Just because a venue has been around for a while does not, in my opinion, automatically mean it should stay ad infinitum. If that were the case, then the current 22 race calendar would be:

Silverstone,
Monaco,
Indianapolis,
Bremgarten,
Spa-Francorchamps,
Reims-Gueux,
Monza,
Nurburgring,
Pedralbes,
Rouen-Les-Essarts,
Zandvoort,
Buenos Aires,
Aintree,
Pescara,
Boavista,
Ain-Diab,
AVUS,
Monsanto,
Sebring,
Riverside,
Watkins Glen
Prince George

Can we really say that a calendar featuring those tracks would be better than the current one?
No Sao Paulo, Suzuka, Red Bull Ring, Gilles Villeneuve or Melbourne because there is a more historic venue that must be kept?

What does Monza add, that these venues do not? - that is all I am asking.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

In the case of Monza it's important, as this is one of the original F1 Grand Prix tracks and is therefore at the heart of the sport. To lose a venue like Monza I believe would diminish F1, because it attracts a huge fan base, the teams and drivers like it, as well as it being steeped in history.

I appreciate you backing up the declaration with some reasoning.

Huge fan base and being liked by drivers are valid reasons for keeping it, and make much more sense to me that just 'because it's been around for a while'.

If we just keep a track because it has a historical place, then that gives circuit owners a free reign to not bother investing in track facilities because, guess what, they'll always have a place on the calendar anyway.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I'm not saying I disagree with the sentiment - but I wonder why it is important?

What is important about keeping a venue?

Putting history aside, this particular venue, i believe, is unique in its almost 'ovalish' and high speed nature.

Variety in track layouts speaks to the heart of the sporting challenge we would all like to see more of. Imo it speaks for itself.

[steve_r]

Ok - turn it around. Can you make a case for China (just for example) being included in the calendar instead of Monza?

One has a rich history of F1 in terms of drivers and teams with a huge and passionate fanbase, and a track that has created drama and is steeped with history.

The other has by comparison almost no history in the sport, no drivers, no teams, and embarrassingly whole grandstands of spectator seats that are covered by large taupaulins because they were empty throughout the entire weekend, including on race day. However the government is happy to stump up the exorbitant cash to the F1 powers that be.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

If we just keep a track because it has a historical place, then that gives circuit owners a free reign to not bother investing in track facilities because, guess what, they'll always have a place on the calendar anyway.

Track owners will have to invest in some up keep of the track facilities but that investment can be the bare minimum.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by steve_r

Ok - turn it around. Can you make a case for China (just for example) being included in the calendar instead of Monza?

One has a rich history of F1 in terms of drivers and teams with a huge and passionate fanbase, and a track that has created drama and is steeped with history.

The other has by comparison almost no history in the sport, no drivers, no teams, and embarrassingly whole grandstands of spectator seats that are covered by large taupaulins because they were empty throughout the entire weekend, including on race day. However the government is happy to stump up the exorbitant cash to the F1 powers that be.

The organisers of the Chinese GP nearly bailed back in 2010, after the initial 7 year contract was up, as the race was making a loss and the sanctioning fee was so high. However, after the 2010 race, Bernie negotiated a new deal, which ran up until 2017 and which I believe had a reduced sanctioning fee. In September 2017, a new three year deal was was announced, keeping the race on the calendar up until and including 2020.

In comparison to Monza, it's chalk and cheese. If the Chinese GP were to drop off the calendar in 2021, I don't think it would be a loss.

[crmalcolm]

I'm not saying I think it is wrong for Monza to be on the calendar - in fact I am all for it.
My issue is with keeping something just because of history. When the cars form up on the grid, it is 2019. Every other year in the past is irrelevant at that point.

But - if in 2019 the track has a high attendance, provides interesting racing and offers something in its own character then it is right to be racing there.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I'm not saying I think it is wrong for Monza to be on the calendar - in fact I am all for it.
My issue is with keeping something just because of history. When the cars form up on the grid, it is 2019. Every other year in the past is irrelevant at that point.

But - if in 2019 the track has a high attendance, provides interesting racing and offers something in its own character then it is right to be racing there.

Oh I disagree, every other year in the past isn't irrelevant. When the cars form up on the grid, yes it is 2019 but it's also the next chapter in the history of that track/race.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Oh I disagree, every other year in the past isn't irrelevant. When the cars form up on the grid, yes it is 2019 but it's also the next chapter in the history of that track/race.

This, I think, is the answer to the question 'what is wrong with F1?'.

Doing things for historical or nostalgic reasons keeps the mindset stuck in the past rather than looking to the future.

So what if a series has raced at circuit X for Y years?
If a track is relevant in 2020, then it deserves a place. But not because it was relevant in the past.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

This, I think, is the answer to the question 'what is wrong with F1?'.

Doing things for historical or nostalgic reasons keeps the mindset stuck in the past rather than looking to the future.

So what if a series has raced at circuit X for Y years?
If a track is relevant in 2020, then it deserves a place. But not because it was relevant in the past.

I don't think it is about being stuck in the past, or doing things just for historical or nostalgic reasons. It's about continuing with the next technological developments, looking to the future and writing the next chapter.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Well yes, hence the reason I asked.

I always wonder the reason behind a statement being made, and this is one of those.

Just because a venue has been around for a while does not, in my opinion, automatically mean it should stay ad infinitum. If that were the case, then the current 22 race calendar would be:



Silverstone,

Monaco,

Indianapolis,

Bremgarten,

Spa-Francorchamps,

Reims-Gueux,

Monza,

Nurburgring,

Pedralbes,

Rouen-Les-Essarts,

Zandvoort,

Buenos Aires,

Aintree,

Pescara,

Boavista,

Ain-Diab,

AVUS,

Monsanto,

Sebring,

Riverside,

Watkins Glen

Prince George



Can we really say that a calendar featuring those tracks would be better than the current one?

No Sao Paulo, Suzuka, Red Bull Ring, Gilles Villeneuve or Melbourne because there is a more historic venue that must be kept?



What does Monza add, that these venues do not? - that is all I am asking.

I think you missed my point entirely

Firstly I never said that we should keep all the old circuits and stop going to new venues as you seem to suggest. I said it’s more important we keep events like Monza rather than some of the newer circuits that don’t add much (I say some, not all)

Secondly, what does Monza add to the calendar? Well obviously it’s history, atmosphere and legendary race track. Surely any true F1 fan can see that. Need I say more?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Secondly, what does Monza add to the calendar? Well obviously it’s history, atmosphere and legendary race track. Surely any true F1 fan can see that. Need I say more?

The history and legendary status would still be there if they didn't race, so I don't see that as something being added.

I'll accept that it has good atmosphere though. But I don't get the link between being a 'true fan' and accepting that Monza must be on the calendar?

[S griffin]

Because true fans see the importance of Monza, it is circuits like that remind most true fans like me why we fell in love with the sport in the first place

Now if only more could find some more passion for tracks like this

[Alan52]

There must be a race in Italy the sama as Great Britain must have a race.Is there a venue in Italy that would be better than Monza?If so go there if not stay at Monza.
Mugello is a fantastic Moto GP circuit but not sure it would work for F1.