125 replies to this topic

[Beri]

The title is a bit cryptic. So please moderators, feel free to better the title any way you please. I couldnt find a better suiting one.

Following a discussion going on in the F1 crazy statistics topic, it is worth having an own topic regarding the following discussion:

During the course of history, F1 has remained (or came back) to certain venues. For example Monza, Red Bull Ring, Hockenheim, Spa, Silverstone, Hermanos Rodriguez and Monaco. Due to safety regulations, budget cuts, politics or simply modernizing the track facilities, all those tracks have had some sort of an overhaul.
But at what extend would one call a race at Spa nowadays as the same track as it was when Clark won? The main difference is the length was shortened by half. But the track is still located at the same place.
Same goes for Silverstone. After the 2010/2011 overhaul, is it the same track where Schumacher won at the same day Trulli had his major shunt at Bridge in 2004? A corner that doesnt exist anymore.
What about the two Kyalami victories by Mansell in 1985 and 1992? In between those victories the layout of the track was altered so much, that about 90% of the layout was changed.

So, in short: What classifies as "the same racing track" in cases like the above mentioned ones? What other examples do you know of? Circuits mentioned dont have to be limited to F1 only.



Kyalami as it was used from 1968 to 1988.


Kyalami as it was used from 1991 onwards.


The Silverstone track changes over the years.


The differences between Zandvoort over the course of two decades.


Edit: Some typo's.

Edited by Beri, 24 December 2018 - 10:39.

[PayasYouRace]

As far as I’m concerned when the history of the circuit is concerned, as long as there’s any common bit of track or even infrastructure then it’s the same track.

It’s different if you’re looking at lap times of course. Then you have to consider the differences.

[Beri]

I, for myself, can not say that Mansell won at the same track in Kyalami. He won at Kyalami. But it are two different tracks. The same goes for the one example mentioned by me on Spa. Also I reckon Hamilton won at a different Silverstone in 2008 as he did the past seasons.

[noriaki]

As far as I’m concerned when the history of the circuit is concerned, as long as there’s any common bit of track or even infrastructure then it’s the same track.

It’s different if you’re looking at lap times of course. Then you have to consider the differences.

 

I would generally lean to agree, and also consider the post-changes Kyalami or Hockenheim the same circuits as they were before for example - but then again, it's not all completely straightforward.

 

Circuit de la Sarthe vs Bugatti circuit is a good example of a track I would consider difficult to justify being the "same", even if they may share the pitlane. Same goes for the various oval tracks that have an alternative GP track version. So it's difficult to make a completely straightforward definition. 

 

Edit - Modern Nurburgring GP, Sudschleife, Nordschleife, the old full circuit. How do you separate between them? 

Edited by noriaki, 24 December 2018 - 11:11.

[absinthedude]

With the "new" Spa, most of the current track is the same corners and straights as in the 50s, for example...of course they removed another 4 miles of track but what we have is still historic. With Donington, the current track very closely follows the pre-war route. Monaco has been tweaked but much remains the same. 

 

Silverstone is geographically in the same place but has been butchered so much....is there a single corner that is the same as 1990? On the other hand the recent revisions bring back into use a piece of track not used for grand prix racing since 1949, so that is a piece of history even if it's not one we were familiar with. 

Zandvoort is a bit like Spa, a shortened version of the old track. Similarly the Red Bull Ring and Osterreichring. Kyalami was totally changed, didn't they even change the direction? Interlagos is another which takes in about half or 60% of the old circuit but they kept the character of the old track. Mexico City's Autodromo Hermanos Rodrigues has been butchered beyond recognition. The character is different, as is Silverstone compared to the 70s and 80s. Hockenheim similarly has been butchered. Whereas Monza, despite the changes, remains an alter to the gods of speed. 

 

The "new" Nurburgring ("Neu-burgring as we called it when it opened) doesn't share a single corner with the Nordscheife. It's not the same track. But it's the Nurburgring. I guess. Kinda. sorta. In name. Not in spirit. Not in character. 

Edited by absinthedude, 24 December 2018 - 11:10.

[PayasYouRace]

Kyalami wasn’t totally new. The section from Jukskei Sweep to Leeukop was the same on both versions.

The Nurburgring is the most drastic. Only the start finish straight of the current GP track is the same as the old version.

[Garndell]

The way I look at it is thus:-

 

1. Track - This can go by many names but exists in the same location eg. Red Bull Ring, A1 Ring, Osterreichring & Spielberg... all the same track.

2. Layout - Taking Le Mans as an example, it's still Le Mans even if you add a corner/chicane/straight or take away a corner/chicane/straight it's just a different layout.  Le Mans like Silverstone has different layouts within the same track.

 

 

In the case of 2 (which is where some get tripped up) it's still the same track but has a different layout.  Would you classify changing a kerb so you can no longer ride it or moving the start/finish line a different track or layout?  I think people need to look past character and spirit and try to focus on the facts and reality of it.  People like to say part of F1's spirit and history is "open wheels and open cockpits" yet F1 has had covered wheels before (Mercedes W196 streamlined body-kit), they are still recognised as F1 cars so we should look at tracks the same way.

[Beri]

Kyalami wasn’t totally new. The section from Jukskei Sweep to Leeukop was the same on both versions.

The Nurburgring is the most drastic. Only the start finish straight of the current GP track is the same as the old version.

Well, the distinction these days on the Nurburgring case is the "Green Hell" of yesteryear is called the Nordschleife these days. The Nurburgring circuit qualifies itself as the current Grand Prix track.

The way I look at it is thus:-
 
1. Track - This can go by many names but exists in the same location eg. Red Bull Ring, A1 Ring, Osterreichring & Spielberg... all the same track.
2. Layout - Taking Le Mans as an example, it's still Le Mans even if you add a corner/chicane/straight or take away a corner/chicane/straight it's just a different layout.  Le Mans like Silverstone has different layouts within the same track.
 
 
In the case of 2 (which is where some get tripped up) it's still the same track but has a different layout.  Would you classify changing a kerb so you can no longer ride it or moving the start/finish line a different track or layout?  I think people need to look past character and spirit and try to focus on the facts and reality of it.  People like to say part of F1's spirit and history is "open wheels and open cockpits" yet F1 has had covered wheels before (Mercedes W196 streamlined body-kit), they are still recognised as F1 cars so we should look at tracks the same way.

Well that is a way to put it. A layout can be different, but still allows you to win a "insert-a-country-name-here" Grand Prix at the "name-the-circuit-here". But, to me, winning at the "name-the-circuit-here" isnt the same as winning at the old "name-the-circuit-here". You can talk up the current layout of Spa any way you want. But it isnt as nearly terrifying and demanding as it was in the days where Jacky Stewart almost lost his life in '66 at Masta. To me, those two tracks are completely different. Even if two layouts share an certain amount of corners together.

[Collombin]

This involves stepping outside the realms of F1, but the track surface should also be considered. Chuck Stevenson won successive Milwaukee champcar races in 1953-4. Same location? Yep. Same configuration? Yep. Same surface? Not even close - it went from a dirt track to a paved one, an entirely different kettle of fish.

[Anja]

I get what you're saying and you're right of course, it's not the same. But I don't see what's the big issue, I think it's fairly obvious to pretty much everyone involved. Are you pointing out the unfairness in oversimplification of all the stats and historical records? Those will never paint the whole picture, track changes are just one little aspect of it all.

 

Besides, the "it's not the same" argument can be made for many other aspects of racing. Is driving on Nordschleife in a 1930 car the same level of challenge as driving in a 1965 car? 

Edited by Anja, 24 December 2018 - 12:32.

[Beri]

In short, the reason this whole topic came up, was a fine piece of trivia brought up by PYR; McLaren won the Austrian Grand Prix a staggering number of 6 times. Of which 3 at the Osterreich Ring and 3 at the A1 Ring/Red Bull ring. Then the discussion came due to the saying that these tracks are different. So has McLaren won 3 times at the Red Bull Ring or 6 times at the Red Bull Ring?

[pdac]

As far as I'm concerned, no track is the same as it was in the past - even from year to year - if it's been changed. The cars change and the track changes - why do people feel the need to try pretend they are the same. I guess it could be about comparing the new with the old but, really, that's comparing apples and oranges.

Edited by pdac, 24 December 2018 - 12:49.

[chrisbell]

With the "new" Spa, most of the current track is the same corners and straights as in the 50s, for example...of course they removed another 4 miles of track but what we have is still historic. With Donington, the current track very closely follows the pre-war route. Monaco has been tweaked but much remains the same. 

 

Silverstone is geographically in the same place but has been butchered so much....is there a single corner that is the same as 1990? On the other hand the recent revisions bring back into use a piece of track not used for grand prix racing since 1949, so that is a piece of history even if it's not one we were familiar with. 

Zandvoort is a bit like Spa, a shortened version of the old track. Similarly the Red Bull Ring and Osterreichring. Kyalami was totally changed, didn't they even change the direction? Interlagos is another which takes in about half or 60% of the old circuit but they kept the character of the old track. Mexico City's Autodromo Hermanos Rodrigues has been butchered beyond recognition. The character is different, as is Silverstone compared to the 70s and 80s. Hockenheim similarly has been butchered. Whereas Monza, despite the changes, remains an alter to the gods of speed. 

 

The "new" Nurburgring ("Neu-burgring as we called it when it opened) doesn't share a single corner with the Nordscheife. It's not the same track. But it's the Nurburgring. I guess. Kinda. sorta. In name. Not in spirit. Not in character. 

Agreed, except I think the only sections from Silverstone in the early days that have been reused are the small sections where the modern infield bisects the old runway sections a nearly 90 degrees.

[PlatenGlass]

What if a big old track is turned into two smaller ones? Do they both retain the same identity as the old track? Are they the same as each other?

[ANF]

Silverstone is the same circuit as in 194...8 was it? but not the same track. Right?

[PayasYouRace]

What if a big old track is turned into two smaller ones? Do they both retain the same identity as the old track? Are they the same as each other?

 

Has that ever happened?

[azza200]

Mexico City to me is a new track because it barley resembles the old layout. Spa with its various changes over the years for me the only major change is Blanchimont which is understandable after the Irvine, Burti crash in 2001 & Coma's in 1992 & the Bus Stop down to La Source. Rest of the circuit is the same upgraded but still the same. 

 

Though the endless car park tarmac run off's have killed the character of the track it just looks like any other track nowadays. 

Edited by azza200, 24 December 2018 - 17:22.

[PlatenGlass]

Has that ever happened?

Dunno. But it could!

[PlatenGlass]

Mexico City to me is a new track because it barley resembles the old layout.

Other than the bit at the end I'd say it was very similar to what it was in the 80s/90s.

[realracer200]

The answer is easy, it all depens on who do you define "the same track".

[FLB]

If you count 30 years as 'some decades', the Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve hasn't changed much, except for a shortening of the rundown to the hairpin.

[pdac]

The answer is easy, it all depens on who do you define "the same track".

 

No, I think that's the question.

[azza200]

Other than the bit at the end I'd say it was very similar to what it was in the 80s/90s.

 

similar but not the same, its more similar now to other  Tilke-alcatraz circuits. 

[realracer200]

No, I think that's the question.

 

What I meant is that both points of view makes sense and it's not that one or the other is correct.

[Hati]

The Nurburgring is the most drastic. Only the start finish straight of the current GP track is the same as the old version.

 

Well, Hockenheim competes quite well too, current finish straight wasn't even part of original track.

 

(And I do count 30s version to same track although I'm not a fan of current layout. (As I've said, if it needed cutting a shortcut from first chicane to third would have been enough without completely destroying the spirit of the track.))

[Imateria]

Well, the distinction these days on the Nurburgring case is the "Green Hell" of yesteryear is called the Nordschleife these days. The Nurburgring circuit qualifies itself as the current Grand Prix track.



Well that is a way to put it. A layout can be different, but still allows you to win a "insert-a-country-name-here" Grand Prix at the "name-the-circuit-here". But, to me, winning at the "name-the-circuit-here" isnt the same as winning at the old "name-the-circuit-here". You can talk up the current layout of Spa any way you want. But it isnt as nearly terrifying and demanding as it was in the days where Jacky Stewart almost lost his life in '66 at Masta. To me, those two tracks are completely different. Even if two layouts share an certain amount of corners together.

And you've run into a problem there, you talk about how demanding the old Spa layout was and this seems to be at the heart of your question, the spirit of a track, but if modern F1 cars were to race on that layout it would be virtually flat the entire time except for La Source, absolutely zero challenge. Sometimes tracks have to change because the cars outgrow them as they did Spa.

[Dolph]

Mexico City to me is a new track because it barley resembles the old layout. Spa with its various changes over the years for me the only major change is Blanchimont which is understandable after the Irvine, Burti crash in 2001 & Coma's in 1992 & the Bus Stop down to La Source. Rest of the circuit is the same upgraded but still the same. 

 

Though the endless car park tarmac run off's have killed the character of the track it just looks like any other track nowadays. 

 

 

Spa old and new track. Pretty major changes:

[Vitesse2]

The Pau street circuit hasn't changed - apart from safety upgrades - since it was extended in 1935. There was a 2003 plan to extend it again, but that never happened.

 

Bathurst is essentially the circuit as built in 1938 - when it had a graded gravel surface. It was tarmaced the next year and the only subsequent alteration to its configuration is the deviation which was inserted into Conrod Straight in 1986.

[wj_gibson]

I suppose you have to differentiate between the venue and the circuit. The Nurburgring being an obvious case in point.

[Collombin]

At a recent-ish motorsport show I overheard two people talking about how one of them had seen Indycar racing in the UK when they went to Rockingham. His expert mate then revealed that Jim Clark had once raced there...

[Hati]

Spa old and new track. Pretty major changes:

 

Oh, you mean the new short version with your 'old'.

 

 

(Yeah, I know. Not as descriptive as the one above and above was in use when F1 visited Spa first time.)

[Tsarwash]

At a recent-ish motorsport show I overheard two people talking about how one of them had seen Indycar racing in the UK when they went to Rockingham. His expert mate then revealed that Jim Clark had once raced there...

I just found out from Wikipedia that Rockingham has been sold and most of it shall be demolished. Well, that must have been an expensive white elephant. I wonder how much money that lost in it's eighteen year lifetime ?

[PayasYouRace]

I wonder how things would have been different if CART hadn’t collapsed. It was unfortunate that Rockinghan and Lausitz were built just as the balance of power shifted from CART to the IRL.

[azza200]

Spa old and new track. Pretty major changes:

I'm on about the short version  

[noikeee]

The answer is it depends on context interpretation and semantics doesn't it. After all Spa is Spa but Spa old is a fair bit different than Spa new with very different characteristics, but it's still Spa; and then pre redesign Bus Stop is slightly different from post redesign Bus Stop but it's still Spa but it's not the exact same but...

[Sterzo]

The answer is it depends on context interpretation and semantics doesn't it. After all Spa is Spa but Spa old is a fair bit different than Spa new with very different characteristics, but it's still Spa; and then pre redesign Bus Stop is slightly different from post redesign Bus Stop but it's still Spa but it's not the exact same but...

 ...and I'm not the same me as I was when I went to (one of) the old Spas, and where am I now? It's different from the place it was when I came back from watching at Burnenville... and I can watch film of the 1955 Belgian GP sitting in my house which wasn't here on this farmland until 1956...

[boillot]

With cars, we usually stick with the chassis as the core that defines a car. Everything else can change and the car designation can get the letter suffixes but the 1975 Lotus 72 is still a 72. With tracks it’s not as easily definable.

Monza in 1972 was changed only marginally, perhaps a few % of the track, yet these chicanes changed the character of the track much more than all the changes made to Monza since 1973 together. But - Monza has been changed very much in 1955 as well (creation of Parabolica and new banking) and even earlier various layouts (some with bus stop chicanes) have been used.

What about Buenos Aires, that at the same time offered various possible configurations for F1 (no. 2, 6 and 9, IIRC) and different ones were used in different seasons?

Actually, I have absolutely no answer!

[absinthedude]

With the chopped Hockenheim, wasn't the original plan for shortening it to make a right hand turn at the first chicane, cutting across and leading to the third chicane....basically cutting out the Ostkurve? That would have retained much of the character of the track. What we have now, frankly, is pathetic. 

[absinthedude]

Different configurations of Bueons Aires were used for F1....for example the last one used in the 90s was the same as that used in the mid 50s. But the one used throughout the 70s and to 1981 was much longer. 

[Ali_G]

With the chopped Hockenheim, wasn't the original plan for shortening it to make a right hand turn at the first chicane, cutting across and leading to the third chicane....basically cutting out the Ostkurve? That would have retained much of the character of the track. What we have now, frankly, is pathetic.

Hockenheim has to be the worst butchering of a track in the last 30 years. It’s horiffic. The blast out into the forest was a great juxtapose to the stadium section. Now it’s just a bland Tilkedrome without any character or unique selling point.

Would Jim Clark have been happy that cars aren’t driving past his memorial anymore? I doubt it.

Edited by Ali_G, 26 December 2018 - 23:00.

[OvDrone]

I wonder how things would have been different if CART hadn’t collapsed. It was unfortunate that Rockinghan and Lausitz were built just as the balance of power shifted from CART to the IRL.

 

I adore Rockingham and am very upset at it'll probably get the Istanbul Park treatment. What a waste.

[Dan333SP]

Has that ever happened?

There are definitely some tracks that were designed to be split into smaller circuits and run simultaneously, but unless I’m mistaken they were mostly all primarily for testing. Good example is the Nord/sudschleife-

https://www.circuits...ng-sudschleife/

[Bleu]

There are definitely some tracks that were designed to be split into smaller circuits and run simultaneously, but unless I’m mistaken they were mostly all primarily for testing. Good example is the Nord/sudschleife-

https://www.circuits...ng-sudschleife/

 

Bahrain and Abu Dhabi have this chance nowadays, with both also having a decent pit for secondary track as well.

 

Bahrain = Internal and external circuit

Abu Dhabi = Cut left from turn 9 and enter to the final corner, other circuit going from penultimate corner to the early part of the second long straight.

[baddog]

Track is named by its location. you build another track at the same location it usually gets the same name, even if it is entirely different.

[JacnGille]

What if a big old track is turned into two smaller ones? Do they both retain the same identity as the old track? Are they the same as each other?

Road Atlanta installed a "cut through" between T5 and the Back Straight. There is a conflict in memories as to how much it was actually used.

[Dan333SP]

Road Atlanta installed a "cut through" between T5 and the Back Straight. There is a conflict in memories as to how much it was actually used.

 

Sebring also has the ability to be split into 2 simultaneous tracks. Today I learned they're called "Johnson Club Circuit" (this is what IndyCar uses when testing there) and "School Circuit" (southern part of track)-

 

http://www.racingcir...g/#.XCURg2hKiUk

Edited by Dan333SP, 27 December 2018 - 17:54.

[wj_gibson]

With the chopped Hockenheim, wasn't the original plan for shortening it to make a right hand turn at the first chicane, cutting across and leading to the third chicane....basically cutting out the Ostkurve? That would have retained much of the character of the track. What we have now, frankly, is pathetic.

I think that was just initially mooted as a rough approximation of the idea of shortening the circuit, I don’t think it was ever a plan as such.

[MattK9]

Hockenheim has to be the worst butchering of a track in the last 30 years. It’s horiffic. The blast out into the forest was a great juxtapose to the stadium section. Now it’s just a bland Tilkedrome without any character or unique selling point.

Would Jim Clark have been happy that cars aren’t driving past his memorial anymore? I doubt it.

The Jim Clark memorial was moved so that drivers still go past it. I believe it is at turn 2.

Hockenheim is one of the better Tilkedromes. It still has character. Just not as much as it used to. Besides I think you are using rose tinted glasses. Long straights and chicanes normally make a dull track.

[Rupert]

Even Monaco is not the same anymore. T1 and the swimming pool esses doesn't have the guardrails anymore. These corners were tighter before and are faster now. It's even different from, say, 2012.

[Hati]

I've never been in Silverstone (or England for that matter) but I've driven around it in many games during the years. I've probably driven every (or at least most) F1 track variant since the one that was in Geoff Crammonds F1GP. There have been big changes but much of the track have been familiar. Now I tested the 1967 version in Assetto Corsa (probably drove it in Grand Prix Legends but that game was so hard that I didn't play it much so no memories from there) and without knowing I probably wouldn't recognize it as same track. But yet, it is. And pit entry/exit is something else, boy would it be fun if that were still in use...

 

For those who don't own the game, here is a lap with age appropriate car by someone from youtube.

(Try to look at pit entry.)

 

In comparison, here is same game and same car but modern version of track.