Monza keeps Italian Grand Prix until 2016
18th March 2010, 21:01 by Keith Collantine 47 Comments »
The Italian Grand Prix will remain at Monza at least until 2016, the BBC has reported.
Last week Bernie Ecclestone claimed Rome would hold a Grand Prix in 2013. If it does, it would mean Italy having two rounds of the world championship for the first time since 2006.
The Italian round is one of only two races on the calendar which has appeared in every championship since it began in 1950 – the other being the British Grand Prix.
Monza has held every running of the Italian Grand Prix except for the 1980 race, which was held at Imola.
Rome Grand Prix
Scribe said on 18th March 2010, 21:16
Good, theres very little to say really isn’t there. This is one of the few that simply must be on the calender or somones doing it wrong. Bet they got better terms than silverstone.
Whish we had a few more truly low downforce circuits though. Taking out the chicanes would be great.
Spud said on 18th March 2010, 21:34
Maybe if they just took out the first chicane.
It would be class to see the cars blasting through Curva Biassono at 200ish MPH up to the next chicane before Lesmo One & Two.
I know it’ll never happen though.
samakafuzzy said on 18th March 2010, 21:41
If I were Bernie Ecclestone, I would have 8 priority races, Grand Prix that need to exist. They are:
Monza
Silverstone
Monaco
Montreal
Spa
Suzuka
US Grand Prix
Largely untapped, hugely messed up in f1 past, but needs to exist.
German Grand Prix
Without Germany, we would have no Mercedes GP, no Merc power in McLaren, no Force India getting podiums, no Schumacher, Hulkenbrug, Rosberg, Vettel, Sutil, Glock or Heidfeld (am I missing anyone)
Ijust hope this spells the beginning of the end for Valencia, Singapore and other snoozefests (though Roman streets in that area are awfully thin)
Bring on the London Grand Prix!!!!!!!!!
Scribe said on 18th March 2010, 22:11
I’m fairly happy for Singapore to have a Grand Prix because they seem to be Motorsports fans down there, I just whish they’d build themselves a track. The Stands are always full, so it be a shame to deprive a public that actually wants a grandprix.
I know, if we are to loose Turkey, life turn 8 an put it on a high speed Singapore circuit.
iceshiel said on 19th March 2010, 12:31
Singapore is building a permanent race track. I’m not sure if it meets F1 standards though.
beanzoo said on 18th March 2010, 22:13
how many years is the contract for the valencia gp the sooner is gone the better not a good track, i agree with the 8 gp’s u list here the future of the spa gp is not certain though which is a bit worring.
James said on 19th March 2010, 8:37
Disagree about US GP. They cannot organise themselves properly and there isnt as much demand for F1 over there.
Somewhat sceptical over the Canadian GP. It cant really afford to hold a GP. It is a fan favourite coated in history, but it isnt a classic compared to other races on the calander in my opinion.
You can probably trade Suzuka for a Japanese GP of sorts. I prefer Fuji myself, but there does need to be a Japanese race.
MajorMilou said on 19th March 2010, 9:03
And a French GP. It’s disgraceful to think there isn’t a French GP when you think of Franceùs history in motorsports. The political atmosphere is the main cause, with ecology and green being the new trendy topic and color, and nobody wants to finance a GP.
But I think France has something like 15 different GP winners throughout history, still has a team and engine supplier, is definitely one of the big 6 automotive countries with Germany, Italy, UK, USA, and Japan. Those 6 should be an automatic entry in the calendar, along with Monaco (although US doesn’t have much interest for F1).
To those 7, Spa, Montreal, Brazil, Australia, and Spain should be added, based on track quality and fan-base.
In theroy, I think it would be fair to consider a race in Finland (3 different world champions). Austria, Switzerland, New Zealand, South Africa, and even Argentina might even be justified, still based on history.
But places like Hungary, Turkey, Korea, China, Barhain and the UAE have never produced either a driver, or a car, and I see no justification other than politics to have them included in the Zorld Championship!
steph said on 19th March 2010, 9:20
Disagree. I don’t think F1 *needs* or has to have any venue. Maybe Monaco slightly but the rest we can liven without although ti would be a crying shame if we lost them. The French GP for instance, it’s been shown right now F1 can survive without it and therefore doesn’t need it.
We also should have places that haven’t hadn that much of an F1 history. At one time no country had a racing history but the sport still pushed on. If we don’t go anywhere new we don’t tap into any oteher potential markets, we don’t get new fans or even new drivers in the future. We can’t just look at history, we have to look to the future.
“You can probably trade Suzuka for a Japanese GP of sorts. I prefer Fuji myself, but there does need to be a Japanese race.”
Agree with you here about Fuji. I think it can produce better racing and I do miss it (05 was different at Suzuka as all the top guys started at the back and they were never going to stay there) but Suzuka is a better track I think.
Red Andy said on 19th March 2010, 10:10
It is a “world” championship after all. At the time Hungary was a giant step into the unknown as it was on the other side of the Iron Curtain, and it’s still the only Grand Prix in the former Warsaw Pact states.
No matter how much Eurocentric fans may hate it, Asia and the Gulf are the emerging regions where F1 needs to be. In general the circuits in those countries aren’t wonderful, because they’re all modern and all designed by one bloke and his set of crayons, but that shouldn’t be an argument against keeping F1 out of new and emerging economies. The one that sticks out is Turkey – really there is little reason for a GP there.
I can see the argument for retaining a few GPs for historical reasons, but it should only be a few – Monaco, Italy, France, the UK and Germany. Every other race should have to earn its place on the calendar, based on whether it makes good economic sense for F1 to be there and with the aim of creating a truly representative “world” championship.
MajorMilou said on 19th March 2010, 11:46
You have valid points, I agree with most of what you say except for the “good economic sense” piece. I’m fine with races in Asia and middle east or eastern europe based on a truly representative World Championship. But this constant “economic” or “political” sense is what bothers me the most. Not only are the tracks not great, but when you look at the race in Bahrein for example, there are no fans, people don’t seem to care, and it only makes sense for FOM and Mr. Ecclestone because I believe these races are mostly funded by government.
For the naive people like me who still want to see some sports in F1 and not purely an entertainement (right now, F1 is argualbly failing to be either one…), I think the races in Brazil or Canada are more exciting based on having fans close to the track and actually enjoy the sport, not just hang around Paddock Club to be seen like they would go to Cannes during the film festival.
So I guess my critique is both on the design and purpose of the new tracks (more money was put in the hotels and VIP lounges at Abu Dhabi than anything else, the track itself seemed secondary in their minds) and on the fact that countries with little fan base are priviledged compared to others for reasons that have nothing to do with sports.
I’m going off topic so to come back to Monza, why does everyone love it? The track has history, the fans are crawy and invade the track after the race, it has become a totally atypical track with huge straights despite the chicanes, and there is always excitement about the event. All these things that are absent from the new races. So perhaps it’s not directly the new countries’ fault if they generally spark less interest than the historical venues like Silverstone or Monza, but I still believe it’s related.
newnhamlea1 said on 18th March 2010, 21:53
i realy wish that imola would get its race back, it deserves it much more than Valencia or Rome
Scribe said on 18th March 2010, 22:12
Imola needs fixing before they give it back it’s race. I miss cars in the parkland but it’s not really F1 quality at the moment.
newnhamlea1 said on 18th March 2010, 22:17
they have already re-built the pits and paddock and have also removed the chicane before the start/finnish straight.
Scribe said on 18th March 2010, 22:29
It’s still not the track it was. I just don’t think Imola will put on good racing at the moment.
newnhamlea1 said on 18th March 2010, 22:40
until the stream that runs parralel to the straight after tamburello is diverted we will never be able to go back to the old days, however i still would much rather have imola than another boring street circuit.
Phillip Daniels said on 19th March 2010, 13:51
I like custard pies! and f1
Zazeems said on 18th March 2010, 22:50
@spud, so true, that would be absoloutley immense. However there isn’t enough room for extra run-off on the outside of Curva Grande.
Also, I have a really revolutionary monet and resource saving scheme. Instead of spending millions building a new street circuit for a second race in Italy, how about using the completley F1 ready circuit that already exists. Does that not make even the slightest sense?
(in case you’re not up on F1 affairs, i’m talking about the Rome street circuit and Imola)
Icthyes said on 19th March 2010, 13:45
We could make Curva Grande banked
Personally I’m fine with the first chicane, it provides an overtaking opportunity, which is more than can be said for the second one.
Zazeems said on 18th March 2010, 22:54
I mean, Imola was good enough for F1 racing in the 04-06 years when the cars were actually slightly faster, and now it’s had a complete facility upgrade and is F1 testing standard, I really don’t see why not.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 18th March 2010, 22:56
Come on, there was never going to be a genuine threat to Monza.
steph said on 19th March 2010, 9:22
Agree and certainly not from Rome
roberttty said on 18th March 2010, 23:40
As a Singaporean, I will be terribly disappointed if we lose the GP. There’s a permanent track being designed and built near the Changi Airport and I heard that the consortium using Tilke’s design didnt get the contract!
http://www.singaporesports.sg/PlayNews/tabid/60/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/506/get-set-for-the-next-big-thing-in-motor.aspx
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1003416/1/.html
Prisoner Monkeys said on 19th March 2010, 1:28
Bernie Ecclestone has said that the 2010 calendar will feature twenty races, because it’s a “nice, round number”. The addition of the Indian Grand Prix takes the calendar to the twenty rounds, so none will be departing. Mr. E has also hinted that there may be a United States Grand Prix from 2011, and that if there is, then there will be twenty-one races. He was responding to speculation that the Turkish Grand Prix might be dropped. So I have no idea where you’re getting the notion that the Singaporean Grand Prix might be abandoned.
Also, I believe the Changi circuit is being developed with the V8 Supercars in mind. It will only be an FIA Grade-2 circuit, and thus unable to host Formula 1 races.
Roberttty said on 19th March 2010, 3:41
@PrisonerMonkey I didn’t say I think the Singapore GP is in danger of being removed – I said I will be disappointed, that’s all.
In fact, I recall Bernie assuring the organisers that the contract is highly likely to be extended beyond the current 5 years.
As for the Changi track, I believe there’s the option of adding the nearby public roads so as to meet the minimum track length stated by F1 regulations.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 19th March 2010, 6:55
I doubt the addition of public roads will increase the Changi circuit’s grading. From the looks of the image in that Channel News Asia article, it’s pretty compact. There’s not going to be much space for run-off, and hence will not qualify for Grade-1 status. Sure, we have street circuits, but from the looks of things, there are a few places where debris from an accident could be thrown onto other parts of the circuit, which is a big no-no.
wasiF1 said on 19th March 2010, 2:18
Great news, Monza is the temple of speed & it shouldn’t be removed from the calender just like Monaco.If Rome will have a GP then it may be named as the European GP as now that GP in Valencia is having tough time attracting spectator.
GeeMac said on 19th March 2010, 5:38
It would have been a crime if Monza had lost the Italian Grand Prix in favour of Rome. Really glad and releived to see Monza will continue to feature on the F1 calendar.
David B said on 19th March 2010, 8:43
Monza is fantastic, but I don’t think there has ever been a chance to be replaced by Rome.
In Italy there has been a political issue raised by “Lega Nord” party (Northern independant party, part of the government and keen to racism and xenophoby). They feared “their” Monza GP would have been replaced by the hated Rome business.
They made it bigger than how it really was.
My opinion is that the italian GP must be held at Monza, and I also would like the first chicane to be cut out (but you would need to build a very large run off area at Curvone, with large number of trees abated).
Rome GP to me is quite a stupid thing.
I would also like the San Marino GP back at Imola.
PJA said on 19th March 2010, 9:55
I am glad that Monza will keep the Italian Grand Prix, it would defiantly be on my list of safe guarded races, not just because of the history but because there are not that many low down force high speed circuits on the calendar.
Personally I don’t really want a Rome GP, not just because I don’t think any country should regularly host two Grand Prix, but the main motivating factor seems to be that Ecclestone wants a race in a major city for the spectacle regardless of what sort of circuit it can come up with. This seems to be why we often hear rumours of a GP in New York, London or Paris.
geo132 said on 19th March 2010, 11:06
Oh good! now that gives me more 5 years to watch/attend the race there!
Insert_Name said on 19th March 2010, 11:15
-Monaco and Monza will both have the GP forever
-Spa and Suzuka are must but not critical
-It would be good to see the US Grand Prix come back
-The Arabian Peninsular only needs 1 GP not two.
-Australia needs a GP because they actually appreciate it. Track needs to change to Phillip Island though.
-Silverstone is by far the best F1 ready tracks in England, hence should retain the British GP
- Germany needs a GP. Bring back Nordschleife (bring it up to standards but don’t mess with the track layout.) Imagine the drafting opportunities!!!
- Singapore – if it weren’t for it being night it would be dull
Prisoner Monkeys said on 19th March 2010, 12:26
Germany already has a race: it’s at Hockenheim. And it would be abolutely impossible to bring the Nurburgring forward to herequired standards.
As for Philip Island, it’s too short, seriously lacking in the most basic facilities and would be a weak alternative to Albert Park.
And Silverstone has the British Grand Prix for the next seventeen years.
Insert_Name said on 19th March 2010, 13:06
I’m sorry, but new Hockenheim is an a classic track destroyed. It lacks anything unique.
Philip Island is 4.445km long, which makes slightly below average length but far from short. Facilities could be improved quite easily, but the fast open corners of the track mixed with it being on the side of a hill would make an interesting race for an F1 GP
Silverstone should have the GP for the next seventeen years. At least the track isn’t dull.
Joey-Poey said on 19th March 2010, 16:08
I love Silverstone and I think it’s a great track, but I would like to see them go back to like they used to do and switch between it and Brands-Hatch every other year.
Also, in regards to the US GP, there IS interest here. We’re a little spread out, but I can attest that there are F1 fans in the states. If the FIA would stop making giant cock-ups then it’d probably be easier to build the following and put on good races.
Case in point: Indy’s infield course is a pitiful choice for a track over here. Elkhart Lake, Laguna Seca, Barber Motorsports in Alabama, Sears Point (or Infineon or whatever they call it now), Watkins Glen and Road Atlanta are all GREAT courses that I would love to see F1 race on. Laguna Seca espcially is already known for the corkscrew and puts on a great show. All those places either have a lot of character to them and many are full of history. Hell, if you brought it back to Watkins Glen, I can only imagine how many people would flock to see the return of F1 after so many years away.
If a proper venue was picked for once instead of places like Pheonix or Indy, you could see some fantastic results.
Prisoner Monkeys said on 19th March 2010, 23:28
Hey, at least Germany has a Grand Prix!
As for Phillip Island, it’s too narrow and too dangerous – Cameron McConville’s accident at the first corner last year proves as much. Pillip Island has nothing that Albert Park doesn’t. And besides, the drivers like Albert Park.
verstappen said on 19th March 2010, 13:27
I’m more afraid for Spa and Suzuka then I was for Monza.
And I like new countries to be added, but on existing circuits, because I just don’t like all those Tilke-things.
Maybe it is what you get when you apply the current rules / standards to the design of a new circuit, but I honestly don’t know, because this man(studio) does all of them!
Chris coumbe said on 19th March 2010, 13:52
snooker is crap, F1 is far more exciting!
newnhamlea1 said on 22nd March 2010, 11:09
yes i agree, snooker is the worlds MOST boring sport and you are correct F1 is far more exciting.
retah rekoons said on 19th November 2010, 13:43
snooker is pointless. All they do is walk around a table and pot balls in to the respective holes. But on the other hand F1 is one of the best things you can see on television today. It is filled with action and always has a different result each time. this is because the drivers don’t bribe the officials.