planetf1.com

With a Dutch Grand Prix looking more and more likely for 2020 - https://www.motorsportweek.com/news/id/22297

What do forumites think of having F1 racing Zandvoort again? I think it's a track that flows beautifully but am worried they would need to ruin it for F1. There is also the issue of overtaking which doesn't bother me but I'm sure the lack of it would bother many. That being said we all thought that about Paul Ricard...

If you look at how small the track has become, I think it may suffer from the same problems the Hungaroring is known for. If there is no problem adding all the silly run-off areas, then perhaps they might even get permission to enlarge the track again. But I'm not hopeful, and even in 1985 Prost couldn't get past a perfectly defending Lauda. However, that problem might be solved by artificial DRS overtakes.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

I think the Hungaroring has produced a lot of good races in different times. My main concern is that I look at some corners and I just can't see them letting F1 cars race around it without increasing the run off and there is no space to increase the run off.

I wouldn't mind seeing Zandvoort back on the calendar. It's a good layout (although they might have to change it somewhat to bring it up to current regulations), it's got history, and it's in a location that makes good sense to have a race. I would, in fact, much prefer it to seeing a street race in Miami; if one of those two projects goes through, I hope it's Zandvoort.

_________________

Pick 10: 1 win, 8 podiums | 2016: 22nd | 2017: 21st | 2018: 3rd |
Top Three: 9 wins, 26 podiums | 2016: 9th [6th] | 2017: 16th [6th] | 2018: 4th [4th] |

Surely you mean Prost couldn't get past a poorly defending Lauda right? Because if he was perfectly defending then of course it shouldn't have been possible to be passed, whether it be around Zandvoort or even on a hypothetical track that is super conducive for overtakes.

My point is stemming mainly from the notion that if a driver can defend perfectly yet they still get passed, then this isn't real racing is it? For example many of the overly easy DRS overtakes that we see, where the defender is often a mere spectator in the passing maneuver; this is not real racing and is why purists don't like it.

It has just been announced officially. Zandvoort it is.

https://www.dutchgp.com/

Onboard of current configuration.

I'm not enthused by the potential of anything much different from Spain looking at this but i'll hold any final judgement until after the upgrades.

One thing that stood out was the proximity of the pit exit to the first turn. Could be interesting if they don't modify it.

_________________
Races since last non RB, Merc, Ferrari winner (After Italy- 19) - 132 & counting.( Last win, Lotus, 17/3/13)

Non RB, Merc, Ferrari podiums won in Hybrid era - 342 trophies available, 24 won

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)

Where on this track are they supposed to overtake?

I think the general idea is: Max starts at the front and stays there.

We said that about Paul Ricard...

Not that I think it matters too much tbh.

Yeah but the track characteristics are completely different.

This track is so tight and boring... totally not up to current standards. I'm afraid it's going to be horrible GP...

Some of that track looks super narrow!

Amazing within a few years we have went from 2 spanish GP to none.

This seems to have been done for commercial reasons rather than improving the racing, it was said that future tracks would be be designed to facilitate better over taking, from what I've read about Zandvoort it looks like they have turned a blind eye to that criteria?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

No, I didn't mean that Prost couldn't get past a poorly defending Lauda. The track allowed a slower driver to remain in front, as you can see if you watch that race again. And Prost didn't get past, so I don't understand your post.

Just in case some on the forum would like to attend the Dutch Grand Prix next year; the authorities hope that most visitors will come by bicycle! Something tells me the Tour de France will start at Zandvoort next year too...

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Wonder how many of those gravel traps disappear. Probably all of them.

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.

Looks an awful track with no overtaking opportunities.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018

And if Alonso comes back do they go "Ah wait, we need a Spanish GP again"

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God

I rely on Prost

Only if he causes a serious rise in attendance! Which, strangely enough, can only happen outside Spain. I hear the Vietnamese are among Fernando's most ardent supporters...

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

100%

Yeah, but what other track is there to accommodate a Dutch GP? The recent success of Max calls for one, but I can't think of another track that would make it

Yes but it shows we are awful at judging if a track will produce overtaking or not.

Personally I'm not fussed. If you design tracks for overtaking you end up with all tracks feeling alike. It's good to have variety. if Zandvoort produces very little overtaking but the cars look good on the track and it flows beautifully then I don't see it as a bad thing at all.

Assen isn't a bad circuit, more overtaking possibly, although not sure if up to F1 safety standards.

Can't see much action taking place at Zandvoort, for reasons others have said above. It's been done purely for commercial reasons with Max most likely to be in the sport for at least the next 13-14 years.

_________________
#KeepFightingMichael

None that wouldn't require a shed load of money spending but then again that's what new circuits to the calendar tend to do?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Remember when Grands Prix were even run in another country? The Swiss Grand Prix at Dijon, for example.
I understand the "need" for a Dutch Grand Prix, but Max already has a home event at Francorchamps. (He said, only half-joking... )

I think that Assen, as it is now, is at least as good a track as Zandvoort, as it is now. But I assume the powers that be wish to retain Assen's status as one of the prime motorcycle tracks in the world (they don't call it the "cathedral" for nothing), and F1 and MotoGP aren't exactly compatible in the modern world. Any changes to accommodate F1 might make it less safe to motorcycle racing, and prove to be self-defeating in the longer run. But none of this makes Zandvoort any better as a track, of course.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Probably more than half joking his Mother is Belgian and I believe he was born in Belgium?

My understanding is that Assen might have been a better choice but it's a top class MotoGP circuit and there was some qualms that it would have ruined the track for the riders?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

Hopefully then they will leave all of the gravel traps in place. Wasn't MotoGP one of the primary reasons why they started replacing gravel traps with tarmac run-offs? If Zandvoort punishes mistakes hard then that might make for good viewing

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God

I rely on Prost

Yeah it's funny that people said the first thing they would do is replace the gravel traps with tarmac run off areas but I seemed to notice a lot of gravel traps at Barcelona so what you're saying about the bikes might be true?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 26th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)

His mum indeed is Belgian, and Max lived in Belgium for most of his life. Incidently, his "real" home race, before moving to Monaco, would be a race at Zolder.

It's not very clear to me what exactly the problem was in choosing between the two tracks, but according to one article I found, preparing Assen for F1 would have cost less. My guess is that the historic link with the old Zandvoort track, and the fact it is very close to Schiphol airport and a number of major Dutch cities that clinched it for them. Considering the fantastic MotoGP racing we get every year from Assen, I'm glad their safety won't be compromised in any way.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

Actually its the opposite. MotoGP riders and safety is better with more gravel. Fundamentally different from F1. If there is a failure of some kind in F1, most of the time they retain usage of the brakes, and runoff allows them to toffee apple speed faster than gravel, which tends to tip the cars in to flipping easier. Motorcycles, on the other hand, if there is a crash of some kind and they are ejected, lose very little speed on tarmac run-off and they often take far longer to come to a stop, and in some cases, they don't, and hit the barriers at high speed.

Some tracks just don't work well for both. COTA, for example, as much is it pains me to say it. There is way too much tarmac run off there.

Gravel/tarmac is actually a subject which should have it's own stuck thread on this page, it's such an engrossing and interesting discussion.

Back to Zandvoort, i would imagine they will remove nearly all of them, going by current F1 safety standards.

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.

Ok maybe I got it backwards. I was certain MotoGP was always cited as a reason for tarmac. But it never made sense to me for the reasons that you've described

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God

I rely on Prost

Daniel Ricciardo asked if they could put gravel down at the esses in Mexico in the drivers briefing and Charlie Whiting replied that it had to be tarmac because of the MotoGP.

I believe you, but I find that hard to believe that Charlie would say that. The debate on MotoGP ever going to Mexico City is currently in a flux due to how unsafe the track would be in its current state for motorcycles. That straight they have---Jesus GP bikes might hit 230mph on it. To say nothing of the stadium section, how close the walls are....I sincerely doubt they ever race there.

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.

It depends on the corner; but in the last few years MotoGP has moved to tarmac running into gravel. Pre airbag the thinking was to roll through the gravel. Since the airbag its best to spread eagle across tarmac to lose speed before hitting the gravel.

I've listened to it again and I'm wrong. It was the Astro turf they couldn't have because of MotoGP.

I never understood the need for astroturf anywhere. Last year I found artificial grass in the playground of my old primary school. What is this world coming to when children are given the idea that real isn't good enough?

I always found it odd that MotoGP riders are allowed to run both wheels past the white line repeatedly. Of course I understand that if this happens inadvertently, their safety is priority number one. But allowing riders to go beyond the white line without penalty is inviting accidents.

Looking for some background concerning the preference for Zandvoort over Assen, I read in an article that Assen claimed "updating" Zandvoort would be a lot more expensive, so other factors would have been decisive.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi

I think the track is awesome, but over the last few years it's been almost impossible to overtake in Formula 3, though that doesn't always translate to how hard it is in F1. Think I might prefer it to tracks where there's a car park to turn around in if you go off either way, though.

Astro-turf is actually a really good deterrent for car racing. It has virtually no grip, so it's slippery and you don't gain by running over it, but it also can't make the car dig in and flip like real grass and dirt.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017

Here comes the runoff!

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/zand ... ZZEKaxPfbE

_________________
I'd rather die than be overtaken.