Sutil criticises bland modern circuits

With controversial comments that are likely to earn him a disapproving glare from the FIA, Force India F1 star Adrian Sutil has branded the modern genre of grand prix circuits ‘too safe’ and ‘boring’ – as he cited the speed, danger and thrill as the chief attractions of racing at the very highest level.

Earlier this year, respected leading designers Adrian Newey (Red Bull Racing) and Sam Michael (Williams) suggested the governing body might want to look more at the layout of the circuits when it comes to assessing how the show can be spiced up in F1, rather than almost routinely pointing the finger of blame at car aerodynamics [see separate story – click here].

There has also been a significant degree of criticism of the so-called ‘Tilkedromes’ – tracks penned by German architect Hermann Tilke, including the current grand prix venues in Malaysia, Bahrain, China, Turkey, Singapore, Abu Dhabi and Valencia, with the latter having been widely panned for producing some of the most monotonous races in recent memory during its two seasons in use to-date.

Sutil’s contention is that drivers should be more readily consulted on proposed circuit layouts, and his somewhat maverick attitude in an age in which safety is perceived as king – with, thankfully, no fatalities in the top flight since Ayrton Senna and Roland Ratzenberger in 1994 – is likely to generate considerable cause for debate.

“Abu Dhabi was one of the most perfect circuits I have driven on, and the most boring as well,” the young German – noted for his fearless approach on-track – is quoted as having said by Sports Illustrated. “It was just straight and really, really boring – but I probably cannot say anything bad about it for it’s safe, like all modern circuits should be.

“I think it’s time to involve more drivers in this work, because we want fast corners as that’s where F1 cars are so good. The majority of the drivers feel this way. Of course there are a few who like it the way it is, safe. There will always be different opinions about it, but most of them would say there can be some changes in the circuits.

“Everyone loves driving because there is thrill in it. If it was not dangerous, maybe not so many drivers would be doing it. Maybe there are certain risks in it, but if you don’t take those risks, it would get boring. Circuits are getting too safe and driving is not so nice anymore. Personally speaking, I’m just not getting that thrill.

“There is a wall in the corner and you have got to take it easy or you would ram into it. Formula 1 is dangerously fast and is all about speed; that’s why it’s interesting, and we should keep it like that. Of course it is good to be safe and you need to look for improvement in drivers’ safety, but F1 did so much for safety that these cars are highly-developed and I feel really safe.”

Sutil added that he hopes designers of the track that is due to host the inaugural Indian Grand Prix in 2011 will take into account his concerns and make it a stern challenge for all competitors – and therefore, by extension, an edge-of-the-seat spectacle for fans.

“We should concentrate on putting up a really good circuit in Delhi,” affirmed the 28-year-old. “Hopefully they will get the information from drivers that they want, and I hope they put in some really exciting corners.”

Yahoo Sport (http://uk.eurosport....cks-boring.html)

I must say I agree with him; I cannot think of a single race at a modern circuit where I've had that feeling as a spectactor that something dramatic can happen any minute; that's what's really lacking these days I think.

I don't think it's safety that's the problem, so much as the total divorce of modern circuits from existing roads. If you're given a rectangle of land and told to design a circuit, it would be a severe neglect of your duty not to make the circuit as safe as possible. Building circuits from scratch has almost usually been a recipe for disaster.

I agree with him. It's not just the circuits, but the cars as well. The continuous push to make them slower with less powerful engines and rev limits etc. just adds the blandness with corners that once needed a deft right foot, now being taken at full throttle.

good for him. Totally agree. Guess we can say Turkey is the best of the new bunch but still way too much run off

He's right, but the cars are the problem, not the circuits. As boring as Bahrain, Abu Dhabi and the like are, they tend to produce more overtaking than Suzuka, Silverstone, Hockenheim/Nurburgring, Hungaroring and Catalunya.

Well said Adrian Sutil. I want to watch racing with my heart in my mouth - Interlagos, Spa, Suzuka, Montreal and the old Hockenheim all provide(d) the thrill of racing on tracks which deserve and require respect. Tilke's tracks are less challenging in every respect.

He's right, but the cars are the problem, not the circuits. As boring as Bahrain, Abu Dhabi and the like are, they tend to produce more overtaking than Suzuka, Silverstone, Hockenheim/Nurburgring, Hungaroring and Catalunya.

Personally, I preferred Suzuka in 2009 to several of the Tilkedrome races. Not a great deal of overtaking, of course, but somehow it doens't quite seem to matter as much when they're on a classic circuit. There wasn't often a great deal of overtaking at the Nurburgring Nordschleife either.

Well well well Captain Tightpants what do you say about that? (again)

Personally, I preferred Suzuka in 2009 to several of the Tilkedrome races. Not a great deal of overtaking, of course, but somehow it doens't quite seem to matter as much when they're on a classic circuit. There wasn't often a great deal of overtaking at the Nurburgring Nordschleife either.

Suzuka is a beautiful layout and one of my favourite circuits, but it simply doesn't lend itself well to overtaking with the sensitive cars we have today. Ironically, everybody hated Fuji and yet that produced two excellent races. Admittedly both were in strange circumstances (2007 had torrential rain, 2008 had Hamilton and Massa's Kamikaze drives), but even so it was a pretty good layout.

Suzuka is a beautiful layout and one of my favourite circuits, but it simply doesn't lend itself well to overtaking with the sensitive cars we have today. Ironically, everybody hated Fuji and yet that produced two excellent races. Admittedly both were in strange circumstances (2007 had torrential rain, 2008 had Hamilton and Massa's Kamikaze drives), but even so it was a pretty good layout.

Fuji's nearly as old as Suzuka though. The general layout was established at a different time to the laying-down of most modern circuits, and a lot of the old track's features remain.

Abu Dhabi is the most ridiculous circuit money can buy. All the money and land in the world and they came up with a dozen of featureless corners separated by two km long straights and chincanes. But then, it really wasn't about the circuit, but the damn hotel.

Well well well Captain Tightpants what do you say about that? (again)

I don't think you should be saying anything

Abu Dhabi is the most ridiculous circuit money can buy. All the money and land in the world and they came up with a dozen of featureless corners separated by two km long straights and chincanes. But then, it really wasn't about the circuit, but the damn hotel.

Ah, but it was lovely twinkling away in the dark. And those special camera angles they had to show it off to it's best, that's what racings all about.

Finally! Someone in the public eye says what we're all thinking.

Kimi did say it already a couple of times

Sounds like Adrian and Kimi have something positive in common - dislike towards the modern F1 tracks.

He's right

As Kimi said, "The first sector is okay. The rest is a bit ****."

He's right

As Kimi said, "The first sector is okay. The rest is a bit ****."

And not only that, it was apparently whilst being interviewed in front of some of the Abu Dhabi dignitaries who had invested heavily in the circuit!

Finally! Someone in the public eye says what we're all thinking.

Not me, quite. I like the new circuits, looks are important IMO as well as the actual track racing. I blame the cars more than the circuits.

Suzuka is a beautiful layout and one of my favourite circuits, but it simply doesn't lend itself well to overtaking with the sensitive cars we have today. Ironically, everybody hated Fuji and yet that produced two excellent races. Admittedly both were in strange circumstances

Suzuka 2005 - one of the best races of the decade, plenty of overtaking...worth more than a thousand modern Fujis...

Besides being too flat, having too much run-off, no scenenic elements and and no atmophere, all these newer tracks are too Wide - there is rediculous notion that wideness provides 'alternate lines' and better racing, when in fact makes the cars look like toys and kills the sensation of speed...


Anyway, thumbs up Sutil

Lets return to the airfields. Non-specific design. Someone should draw up an alternative list of international pre-post WW2 airfields. Maltese GP anyone?

With all the money that is flying around for the construction of new circuits around the world, I don't understand why they are unable to simply create an identical copy of say Brands Hatch, gradient included with extra run off where required.

Fully agreed on the new circuits being crap, the only one I would not put in that list is Sepang. I don't understand why people hate that circuit, I think it's fantastic. I think it's hated just because Tilke designed it, but it's actually his only good design. I love it, the rest he has penned suck though.

Edited by FNG, 12 January 2010 - 18:13.

Sounds like Adrian and Kimi have something positive in common

Besides the nose of a Ferrari and rear wishbone of a FIF1?

[...] the old Hockenheim all provide(d) the thrill of racing on tracks which deserve and require respect. Tilke's tracks are less challenging in every respect.

Controversially, I really like the new Hockenheim - its only downside for me being that it replaced the old one. I wish we could have both on the calender.

While some modern circuits are good for overtaking, their ability to create good races is few and far between. Plus, since all new tracks are technical circuits, there is just no variety.

Controversially, I really like the new Hockenheim - its only downside for me being that it replaced the old one. I wish we could have both on the calender.

I like that one too, it's actually pretty fast and daunting in places. Watching the cars in the stadium section with high downforce just defies belief, how they just downshift, lift and then go through the right-hander entrance. I really love the track. But, of course it was always going to be a shadow of its former self, simply because that track was just unique, only Monza even came close.

Lets return to the airfields. Non-specific design. Someone should draw up an alternative list of international pre-post WW2 airfields. Maltese GP anyone?

In the words of Ian Hunter, 'Cleveland rocks.'

I'd say the Motegi road course is the worst of all the circuits built in the last 15 years, closely followed by Valencia (docks) and Abu Dhabi. Qatar, Oschersleben and Shanghai are pretty awful too.

Potrero de los Funes, Barber Motorsports Park and Edmonton are classic examples of Doing It Right. I would say Hockenheim should go in this list, but it proves that although you can design a perfectly good, challenging, open layout, if you tamper with the 'character' of the old track, you'll have hell to pay. Maybe you could call it the Kyalami Syndrome. Still, at least we've been spared the rash of 1.5 mile Charlotte-alike speedways that've been inflicted on American racing fans in the last decade or so.

Agree with Sutil. The drivers should definitely be consulted on proposed circuit layouts.

Controversially, I really like the new Hockenheim - its only downside for me being that it replaced the old one. I wish we could have both on the calender.

Same here. The new Hockenheim has provided some great racing. Also, loved the A1 ring. Scenery, fast track with the hairpin at the top of the hill providing some good moments. Of course, both circuits pale in comparsion to their older versions.

Sepang, Bahrain and Turkey are pretty good too.

He's right, but the cars are the problem, not the circuits. As boring as Bahrain, Abu Dhabi and the like are, they tend to produce more overtaking than Suzuka, Silverstone, Hockenheim/Nurburgring, Hungaroring and Catalunya.

Sutil didn't even mention overtaking. Theres more to good circuit design than that. Monaco is a great track even if they can't pass, because its spectacular and challenging. Has LH ever hit the wall anywhere else?

My respect for Sutil has...well, I have some now.

It also doesn't help that two of the newer circuits - Sakhir and Abu Dhabi - have absolutely 0% chance of being affected by rain. Many of the great circuits can be argued as being great not only because of track design but by their location. Think of Spa, Nurburgring, Silverstone, Suzuka, Interlagos, even Monaco, All have had great wet races.

Out of the current crop China seems the most prone to rain but it's boring layout and surroundings makes it less appealing than it really should be.

Another consideration is what typing of racing do people actually want?

Engineers have said recently changes should be made to tracks to promote overtaking, but do you want big overtaking statistics where cars just pass each other into hairpin followed by straight followed by hairpin? Sure you'd get overtaking but you might not get great racing, many of the great battles such as the one in Dijon or 07 in Fuji are great because they're not specifically designed to offer easy places to pass, but because of the cars and drivers performance. Which leads me to thinking that most of it is the cars themselves. Sure the tracks don't help.

Engineers have said recently changes should be made to tracks to promote overtaking, but do you want big overtaking statistics where cars just pass each other into hairpin followed by straight followed by hairpin? Sure you'd get overtaking but you might not get great racing, many of the great battles such as the one in Dijon or 07 in Fuji are great because they're not specifically designed to offer easy places to pass, but because of the cars and drivers performance.

I think most fans would prefer 50 artificial passes per race to a single superb pass every 20 years.

Controversially, I really like the new Hockenheim - its only downside for me being that it replaced the old one. I wish we could have both on the calender.

Cheers mate im also fond of the new Hockenheim but yeah as you said it's sad we cant both

Sutil is completley right though

i quite liked the fuji circuit, maybe people disliked it alot as it replaced suzuka ?

portimo the new circuit in portugal is pretty badass

I loved the A1 ring too, produced really good racing, the back section is pretty forgettable, i forget it exists, but the first 3 turns and the last turn are just great

also new tracks dont have corner names, robs them of soul

Engineers have said recently changes should be made to tracks to promote overtaking, but do you want big overtaking statistics where cars just pass each other into hairpin followed by straight followed by hairpin? Sure you'd get overtaking but you might not get great racing, many of the great battles such as the one in Dijon or 07 in Fuji are great because they're not specifically designed to offer easy places to pass, but because of the cars and drivers performance. Which leads me to thinking that most of it is the cars themselves. Sure the tracks don't help.

It feels like you've been watching other F1 than I have. Even the track design you're talking about - long ass straight with tight slow corners at both ends only gives a few overtaking moves during the race, as we saw in Abu-Dhabi. And what's wrong with actually having tons of overtaking with one driver outbreaking the other one into a corner? That's proper racing, the guy in front can defend himself if he wants to. Abu Dhabi 2009 race report, note that almost all of non-opening actions happens at the one corner which fits you description like no other on the calendar. Would I want to see more of action like this during an F1 race? **** yes and I don't get why anyone wouldn't, that is proper racing.

People complain (and rightfully so) about dulness of Tillke tracks, but that comes from the insane width of track and football pitch sized tarmac run off located nearly everywhere which totally kills any sense of excitement, speed or event. It also reduces chances of SC, which is a big part of what makes races in Montreal that exciting. But of course when SC comes out and mixes up the field (which means actual fighting on track) people go on how the results are artificial. But, actually Tillke circuits do provide some overtaking even during weekends when nothing unexpected happens. Valencia, Hungaroring and Barcelona are always under fire for not proving overtaking but people seem to miss the fact races are exactly as dull there as on about every other track, unless it rains or tires are out of their operating range for some reason.

Edited by wingwalker, 12 January 2010 - 21:08.

Its impossible to ask for 'dangerous' tracks again in F1. No in their right mind can justify putting lives at risk just for a bit more entertainment.

What I think a good compromise would be is to have some more 'daring' corners on tracks, but make good run-off areas for the drivers. Does that take some of the thrill away? Sure, but it still makes for an enjoyable driving experience. Has anybody ever actually *crashed* at Turn 8 in Istanbul? Nope(or not that I can think of). Plenty of run-off, yet still one of the best corners in F1 and the drivers still love it.

I think if one day, the cars are *so damn* safe that there's almost no way to get injured in a crash, then sure, lets create some death-defying tracks again, but until then.....we cant justify even a single life lost.

Its impossible to ask for 'dangerous' tracks again in F1. No in their right mind can justify putting lives at risk just for a bit more entertainment.

What I think a good compromise would be is to have some more 'daring' corners on tracks, but make good run-off areas for the drivers. Does that take some of the thrill away? Sure, but it still makes for an enjoyable driving experience. Has anybody ever actually *crashed* at Turn 8 in Istanbul? Nope(or not that I can think of). Plenty of run-off, yet still one of the best corners in F1 and the drivers still love it.

I think if one day, the cars are *so damn* safe that there's almost no way to get injured in a crash, then sure, lets create some death-defying tracks again, but until then.....we cant justify even a single life lost.

Yeah good on Sutil for speaking out but it's a mistake to mix up safety and excitement as alternatives. They can't trade off safety against anything.

But you can have fast corners that are safe, and they should make sure they have some in India.

But they totally can built narrower tracks (just make them wide in the one or two corners where it might make a difference) and without miles of tarmac around every god-damned corner. Also, make the astro turf between track and tarmac a lot wider and dunno rougher or whatever so drivers actually would be penalized for going off. This totally can be done.

Sutil just wants to look hard after his campness came out here

Grrr, those people who want F1 to be safe are poofs. Please don't judge me by my camp run.

Gravel traps replacing asphalt would make a lot of bland corners on Tilke's tracks exciting again - conversely look what asphalting Eau Rouge, Pouhon and Blanchimont did to Spa, no incidents happen at these corners anymore.

Having gravel outside turn 8 at Istanbul would make it a truly memorable corner. And also naming it after something would help too. It would make any mistakes a bit more spectacular, at no risk to drivers safety.

Gravel traps replacing asphalt would make a lot of bland corners on Tilke's tracks exciting again - conversely look what asphalting Eau Rouge, Pouhon and Blanchimont did to Spa, no incidents happen at these corners anymore.

Having gravel outside turn 8 at Istanbul would make it a truly memorable corner. And also naming it after something would help too. It would make any mistakes a bit more spectacular, at no risk to drivers safety.

Gravel traps are cheap, there's nothing else to recommend them. They take cars out of the race, launch cars into the air, flip them, cause flags, and have to be a lot bigger for any given degree of safety pushing fans further away. Their ability to slow a car is extremely variable.

What neuters the great corners is excessive downforce, making them easy flat instead of the challenge they used to be.

Sutil is going a dangerous path by claiming the circuits need to be more... "dangerous". What they need to be is more exciting, which is a slightly different thing. I'm sure this is just a semantics thing and I pretty much agree with him on the actual issue, but it's worth noting.

Turn 8 and similar corners can be "fixed" by putting a car-width slippery surface trap on the outside of the corner, before the tarmac run-off. I have no idea why they don't do this already. It's not like that is going to make any difference in terms of the hitting speed on the barrier, in case a car goes straight on. Also, paint the runoffs or place them with even more adverts or WHATEVER, just disguise it so that it doesn't look like a massive car park.

The bland circuits issue comes from the overtaking issue with the cars, really. If the cars could pass anywhere, they could build Brands Hatches instead of engineering them for overtaking (which I again stress that it has hardly ever worked), and for "alternative ways to spice up the show", ie lots of shiny lights.

Edited by paranoik0, 12 January 2010 - 23:34.

Road America would be great for F1, if they dont Tilkeize the track

im wondering if f1 should go way back to its routes, and have a road race, probably need some nice bits of dual carriageway and motorway.... use public roads, but not in a city environment...

also the new circuits dont have any heritage or much passion and you can get away with that for abit but....

the dakar made a big change, and because theres crazy amounts of passion in the people. it seems like its a change for the better

You should be able to have fast flowing safe circuits. With adequate safe run offs etc. Get rid of chicanes, busstops and the like. They are ugly rinky dink things which may suit bikes but not cars. Proper grass on track edges [with maybe bitumen back up]
The tracks are then faster, will give better racing and spectacle.
So many tracks world wide have been nuetred. The Indy cars still race on SOME decent road courses, though the prospensity everywhere for rinky dink street courses is getting worse.

One thing that bores me about all those new circuits is that they're all flat or at least look like totally flat on TV. Compare Bahrain, China, Valencia, Malaysia, Abu Dhabi or Turkey to Spa, A1-Ring, Nürburgring, Suzuka and Interlagos.

And I just noticed, that the "classic" circuits got real names, unlike Justanotherstate's International Circuit

Do we still need safe circuits? The cars have improved so much since the old days... I sometimes agree with JV, motorsport should be dangerous! If it is not, what is it? In the old days motorsport got really popular partly because the audience perceived most drivers as daredevils, back then it ranked as the worlds first extreme sport basicly.

I mean safety is great and I hope more than anyone nothing seriously happens each race I watch, but the balance is very very far to safety these days. Entire tracks are designed or mangled cause of it. Some say it can't be safe enough, I dunno

blaming the tracks for the lack of overtaking is just taking the easy way out.
Fact even when tracks have changed very little the number of overtaking manoeuvres have still reduced over the years.
Now as clearly some tracks have changed very little if at all it cannot be down to the tracks but the cars themselves, to claim otherwise is at best short sighted at worst deliberately misleading.

It feels like you've been watching other F1 than I have. Even the track design you're talking about - long ass straight with tight slow corners at both ends only gives a few overtaking moves during the race, as we saw in Abu-Dhabi. And what's wrong with actually having tons of overtaking with one driver outbreaking the other one into a corner? That's proper racing, the guy in front can defend himself if he wants to. Abu Dhabi 2009 race report, note that almost all of non-opening actions happens at the one corner which fits you description like no other on the calendar. Would I want to see more of action like this during an F1 race? **** yes and I don't get why anyone wouldn't, that is proper racing.

People complain (and rightfully so) about dulness of Tillke tracks, but that comes from the insane width of track and football pitch sized tarmac run off located nearly everywhere which totally kills any sense of excitement, speed or event. It also reduces chances of SC, which is a big part of what makes races in Montreal that exciting. But of course when SC comes out and mixes up the field (which means actual fighting on track) people go on how the results are artificial. But, actually Tillke circuits do provide some overtaking even during weekends when nothing unexpected happens. Valencia, Hungaroring and Barcelona are always under fire for not proving overtaking but people seem to miss the fact races are exactly as dull there as on about every other track, unless it rains or tires are out of their operating range for some reason.

Chill out. I was raising the issue, not identifying with it myself. It's called playing devil's advocate.

Gravel traps are cheap, there's nothing else to recommend them. They take cars out of the race, launch cars into the air, flip them, cause flags, and have to be a lot bigger for any given degree of safety pushing fans further away. Their ability to slow a car is extremely variable.

A lot of professional national circuits are little more than strips of tarmac and grass with still little more than random barriers around some parts. Where suitable the remaining trees have circular barriers around their base.

Recall some of the touring cars going off and into a pond or around some shurbs to an access road (no barrier) etc!

Would such circuits be unsuitable for F1?

I think the problem with Tilke circuits is that they are all too similar. They all pretend being the perfect circuit, having a bit of everything, and this way we end up having 15 similar circuits in the calender. I'd like to see circuits which have different character. There could be slow circuits, fast circuits, short circuits, long circuits, flat circutis, hilly circuits, narrow circuits, wide circuits. Many of these new circuits are too much replicas of the others. A thing which I hate a lot is corners specifically designed for overtaking. Who cares about overtaking if the track is exciting in unique way? And usually it ends up being the unique tracks where the most exciting overtaking takes place.

Edited by Bianchimont, 13 January 2010 - 11:35.