Stewart slams Tilke-designed tracks

[vcs316]

Most Formula One fans have been complaining about Hermann Tilke-designed tracks for years and it looks like people are finally starting to take note.

Sir Jackie Stewart has come out and slammed the German architect, saying 'he has not done much for the spectators'.

Tilke's association with Formula One started way back in 1999 when he designed the Sepang International Circuit in Malaysia and since then he has been involved in the design of Bahrain International Circuit, China's Shanghai International Circuit, Istanbul Park Racing Circuit in Turkey, Valencia Street Circuit in Spain and Abu Dhabi's Yas Marina Circuit, to name just a few.

Overtaking is notoriously difficult in Bahrain and Valencia and, instead of looking at the design of the circuits, F1's powers that be have opted to alter the cars. In recent years they've introduced KERS and adjustable rear wings in an attempt to boost passing.

However, overtaking remains very difficult at most tracks and Stewart is convinced Tilke's designs are the big problem.

'My belief is that the major reason for the lack of overtaking in modern grand prix racing is down to the modern tracks, nearly all of which have been designed by the same man, the German architect Hermann Tilke,' he wrote in his The Telegraph.

'Yes, braking zones are now much shorter due to highly efficient brakes and aerodynamic downforce, meaning there is a much smaller overtaking zone (in my day it may have been as much as 200m; now it is more like 50m).

'But the new circuits themselves must take their share of the blame. Put simply, they are largely carbon copies of each other and they tend not to penalise mistakes.

'Take the last race of 2010 for example. There were four drivers who could have clinched the championship in Abu Dhabi but Ferrari's Fernando Alonso was the overwhelming favourite.

'He had only to finish fourth to secure his third world crown. It didn't happen because he could not find a way past Vitaly Petrov, a rookie in his first season in F1 and with little or no experience of being under such pressure.'

He added: 'Tilke has been behind almost every new circuit in F1 since the early 1990s. In some respects, he has done a great job, bringing fantastic amenities and luxuries to the sport. But I fear he has not done much for the spectators.

'Unless circuits are modified, spectators and television viewers might have to live with a lack of overtaking for some time.'

Although thankful that racetracks are no longer as dangerous as they used to be, Stewart believes maybe it's 'we have now gone too far the other way'.

'Racetracks have changed since my day and thank God for that. Back then a driver who raced for five years had a two in three chance of being killed.

'Four to six drivers a year lost their lives. It was totally unacceptable and I campaigned hard for improved safety in the sport, which happily came to pass.

'It is nearly 17 years since a life was lost in an F1 car. I can't think of an industry, a sport or a business where that standard of risk management has been achieved.

'But we have now gone too far the other way. Circuits should not permit liberties to be abused without a penalty that can be instantly recognised by spectators or TV viewers. Safety is one thing; abuse of privilege is another.'

http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/6...t-Tilke-Tracks

[Hornet]

I don't always agree with Sir Stewart but I have to say a big thank you to him for this. Thank you Sir Jackie Stewart! We could complain all we want and no one would hear us. Its good to have some well known figure to voice out the same opinion, and maybe then Bernie and Co will start taking notes of it.

Enough of Tilke, get a new designer. Is Tilke the only living person on this planet who knows how to design F1 track? I don't think so. I really can't see the rational why we keep bringing back the same person track after track.

Imagine if we have to build 19 new tracks for a full championship. What they are doing is having Tilke design them all and we ended up with 19 clones which are build around the same idea. Why not get 19 different designers and we'll have 19 truly different track with its own characteristic, wouldn't that be more fun?

[Tifosi]

As soon as I saw the word "slam" in the title I knew it was a Planet F1 rehash.

The whole reason Bahrain is boring is that it doesn't punish drivers for any mistakes. Safety in F1 doesn't mean endless run-off areas. Tilke has over-sanitised some of his tracks and his monopoly on creating new ones is just ridiculous.

[Greig]

I don't think Tilke is to blame for the run off area's. We often hear the drivers complain about walls etc being too close to the track and ask for changes

[Tifosi]

more gravel required then

[Greig]

And is that good for fans to see say 10 cars out of the race stuck in gravel?

[Tifosi]

And is that good for fans to see say 10 cars out of the race stuck in gravel?

no, but they wouldn't do that would they - in the same way that they wouldn't all hit a wall if it was their either. However, knowing that if they go wide they might only lose a little bit of time then there's no challenge or the same reward for marginal driving. I'm thinking "Wall of Champions" here as an example.

[Greig]

Sure it would make it more challenging to drive, not more exciting though I think, use Monaco as an example, highly challenging to drive, terrible for racing

[NJB13]

Drivers are not punished for mistakes like before. There should be more gravel traps, or, there should be designated reentry points, go off-track and you have to go to designated re-entry point designed to give a significant delay.

[Greig]

Drivers are not punished for mistakes like before. There should be more gravel traps, or, there should be designated reentry points, go off-track and you have to go to designated re-entry point designed to give a significant delay.

A driver who uses the run-off is normally punished, losing at least a place then having dirty tyres. They most certainly do not want to use the run-off area. How would it benefit the sport to punish small mistakes with a DNF stuck in gravel?

[Tifosi]

Sure it would make it more challenging to drive, not more exciting though I think, use Monaco as an example, highly challenging to drive, terrible for racing

That did cross my mind actually, but Monaco is boring because it's processional due to lack of overtaking opportunities (imo). The accuracy of the drive and the proximity of the cars to the barriers is the only exciting bit.

[Ste]

no, but they wouldn't do that would they - in the same way that they wouldn't all hit a wall if it was their either. However, knowing that if they go wide they might only lose a little bit of time then there's no challenge or the same reward for marginal driving. I'm thinking "Wall of Champions" here as an example.

Agree.

F1 has become too sanitised in my opinion. It isn't really to do with safety in my opinion. Look at Kubica hitting a concrete wall head on at 180mph in Canada. He had a very slight injury, but that was an extreme crash and an extremely small distance to the wall. These huge run offs aren't needed. As Stu said above there is little reward for 'marginal' driving. If a driver outbrakes himself, he should end up going through a gravel trap and re-joining, not simply cutting the corner and re-joining. Not only would this make races more interesting because the chance of a costly mistake his higher but it would probably improve the drivers because they won't push over the limit knowing they can get away with it.

Monaco is different to anywhere. It's challenging to drive, but of course it's terrible for racing, there isn't anywhere to overtake. It's not the fact that there are walls either side waiting to punish. Look at T1 at Fuji or T1 at Spa, the number of times drivers have out-braked themselves and used those run-offs to escape when really they should have been scampering through a gravel trap. Running wide at the Curva du Sol shouldn't mean just driving back on and the same goes for the huge slice of astro turf at Stowe or the 50m wide run-off at Copse at Silverstone. I'm not suggesting that for every mistake the driver should be in a wall but all these sorts of mistakes nowadays goes completely un-punished.

I don't think we saw many, if any fewer finishers in a race just because there were less opportunities to escape. Let's imagine a boring race at Hungary where the guy in third has a chance to win, but is stuck behind P2 who's slow with no way to pass. P2 is pressured into a mistake at the chicane but just uses the run-off and keeps the position. Now put the gravel trap back and let him be pressured into that same mistake, he goes over the gravel, P3 passes him and the race becomes far more interesting with his pursuit of P1.

Gravel traps and less run off definitely need to re-appear in F1 in my opinion. Look at Spa 2010 for example. This year Alonso stupidly drove on a soaking wet curb and ended up in the wall. He should have been punished for that mistake...and was. But if that had been at a wet Abu Dhabi or Korea, he would have simply spun across the track into a huge piece of tarmac and re-joined. Hardly a penalty for such a mistake.

[Greig]

I don't think we saw many, if any fewer finishers in a race just because there were less opportunities to escape. Let's imagine a boring race at Hungary where the guy in third has a chance to win, but is stuck behind P2 who's slow with no way to pass. P2 is pressured into a mistake at the chicane but just uses the run-off and keeps the position. Now put the gravel trap back and let him be pressured into that same mistake, he goes over the gravel, P3 passes him and the race becomes far more interesting with his pursuit of P1.

Erm you are not allowed to cut the track to gain an advantage though, gravel trap or no gravel trap

I would be interested to know how many times run off area's have prevented punishing a driver, do you have any stats?

Your Alonso example, hmmm well how about Webber doing the same thing at a Tilke track, its not just Spa that punishes, there is walls and barriers at many of these tracks, where Alonso went off has no run off because its not a place drivers tend to hit the wall. And you can't say F1 is too safe just because Kubica survived, he was very very lucky.

The drivers do not want walls so they can test the safety at 180MPH, long has the GPDA spoken for the drivers about not wanting to eat a wall, but I guess they know nothing really and some fans want to see crashing to make the sport more interesting.....

You suggest drivers escape by using run off area's but normally they lose plenty of places and rejoin the race, that to me is much better for the show then watching a car that can entertain being beached in the gravel for a small mistake. Run off area's do punish.

[Ste]

Erm you are not allowed to cut the track to gain an advantage though, gravel trap or no gravel trap

I would be interested to know how many times run off area's have prevented punishing a driver, do you have any stats?

Your Alonso example, hmmm well how about Webber doing the same thing at a Tilke track, its not just Spa that punishes, there is walls and barriers at many of these tracks, where Alonso went off has no run off because its not a place drivers tend to hit the wall. And you can't say F1 is too safe just because Kubica survived, he was very very lucky.

The drivers do not want walls so they can test the safety at 180MPH, long has the GPDA spoken for the drivers about not wanting to eat a wall, but I guess they know nothing really and some fans want to see crashing to make the sport more interesting.....

You suggest drivers escape by using run off area's but normally they lose plenty of places and rejoin the race, that to me is much better for the show then watching a car that can entertain being beached in the gravel for a small mistake. Run off area's do punish.

No, you're not allowed to gain an advantage but the point is that most of the time they don't lose anything either. Using my T1 spa example again, Kimi took a massive advantage by going onto the run-off there in 2009 and it's been done numerous times there at Spa. Bring the wall back and people braking too late will lose places backing off to avoid it.

The point I was making about Alonso is that if it had happened at most of the Tilke tracks then he would have escaped. Korea maybe not since it's a semi-street circuit layout, but Bahrain for example or Abu Dhabi there aren't really walls there to punish (apart from one at Abu Dhabi after going under the hotel).

I didn't say F1 was too safe ("It isn't really to do with safety in my opinion") I said it was too sanitised. Yes, Kubica was lucky, but time and again we've seen horrible accidents and drivers have simply walked away, so again, run-offs can't be all to do with stopping them hitting walls at high speeds.

Again, I never said I want crashing ("I'm not suggesting that for every mistake the driver should be in a wall") I just feel drivers should be punished more for their mistakes, rather than just driving over an additional piece of tarmac and re-joining. Degna at Suzuka is a good example. That's an incredibly challenging corner, a real driving corner. Drivers that make a mistake there and they either get away with it (JB) or end up in the wall if their mistake is worse. Hamilton got it completely wrong at Degna 1 and 2 and was punished. That's how it should be, not just letting him escape on a 100m run-off.

Run off areas do occasionally punish but usually only by allowing the following car to get closer, or losing a bit of their lead or by losing a little time to the car infront.

Turn 10 at Bahrain, the number of times in a race that drivers just outbrake themselves and just get out of it, turn right around and re-join is insane.

[Greig]

Kimi did do it, then then said if anyone does it again then it's a penalty, so they never done it Webber also hit a wall at Abu Dhabi so yes the track can punish mistakes also. Lewis used the run off area's in Brazil and Korea, both times losing a place to Alonso, seems they punish but do not take away from the overall entertainment. Maybe you should ask Burti, Panis or Ralf for example if they would have liked a nice run off area

The run off area's are not exclusive to Tilke tracks in any case.

[Ste]

Well Kimi took an advantage by doing it in Spa 2008 and then actually overtook using it in 2009. Yes, to be fair, that one place in the 21 turn circuit can potentially punish a mistake.

2007 Alonso was already ahead of Hamilton before the Curva du sol but yes Hamilton lost a few places there. However, that is the start of the race. If he'd done that at any other point in the race there wouldn't have been that penalty.

So yes, Run-offs do punish, but usually only at the start of the race when the cars are bunched up together.

[Greig]

Did Hamilton not lose a place in 2010 in Brazil to Alonso, pretty sure he did

So how did Abu Dhabi's run off area's prevent overtaking, Stewart uses Petrov v Alonso how did the run offs affect that? They never did they...overtaking was the problem and he mentions it himself, the braking distances are the problem.

[Tifosi]

No true F1 fan wants to see crashing and that wasn't suggested :-|, but then no true F1 fan wants to watch drivers constantly use non designated parts of the circuit to test out their overambitious manoeuvres that really weren't worth making in the first place either.

Obviously, getting a balance is the key thing and I still maintain that (although run-off areas are not exclusive to his tracks) Tilke has designed some of his tracks with far too many of them. Take Turn 8 at Turkey for example. a superbly designed set of turns that never cease to sort the men out from the boys. However, Turn 8 has very little by way of a punishment and therefore little of a reward comparatively if someone gets it 100% right comparing those who ride the curbs to those that get the first bit wrong yet just fly wide and come out the other side a bit further behind. That completely sanitises turn 8 for me and spoils what could be a - not dangerous - but more "important" part of the circuit to get right.

Safety is not the issue, it's making sure that the drivers who are actually worth their salt are the ones competing. 22 cars finishing has never been the key ingredient to exciting races anyway and allowing a driver who tests his luck more times than commits to a marginal move that is ultimately rewarded isn't going to make the race any more exciting just because he's "allowed" to be in it for the duration.

[Greig]

When has there been a driver constantly using run-offs?

Turn 8 in Turkey will still heavily punish someone not getting it right over someone who nails it, if there was no run-off there then would the corner be so good? I doubt it the drivers would no longer attack it as they do, instead playing it safe.

So you would be more than happy to see Massa DNF (beached in gravel) 5 races last season instead of using the run-off areas for instance, how does that appeal to you as a fan?

[Ste]

No true F1 fan wants to see crashing and that wasn't suggested :-|, but then no true F1 fan wants to watch drivers constantly use non designated parts of the circuit to test out their overambitious manoeuvres that really weren't worth making in the first place either.

Obviously, getting a balance is the key thing and I still maintain that (although run-off areas are not exclusive to his tracks) Tilke has designed some of his tracks with far too many of them. Take Turn 8 at Turkey for example. a superbly designed set of turns that never cease to sort the men out from the boys. However, Turn 8 has very little by way of a punishment and therefore little of a reward comparatively if someone gets it 100% right comparing those who ride the curbs to those that get the first bit wrong yet just fly wide and come out the other side a bit further behind. That completely sanitises turn 8 for me and spoils what could be a - not dangerous - but more "important" part of the circuit to get right.

Safety is not the issue, it's making sure that the drivers who are actually worth their salt are the ones competing. 22 cars finishing has never been the key ingredient to exciting races anyway and allowing a driver who tests his luck more times than commits to a marginal move that is ultimately rewarded isn't going to make the race any more exciting just because he's "allowed" to be in it for the duration.

+1.

[Greig]

Ok Ste tell me how many times the run-off was used at turn 8 in Turkey last season for example, I am assuming you know

[Tifosi]

Do you have the stats for all of the drivers that would have been beached in areas that we haven't even agreed should all contain gravel? More importantly, do you know that they would all have driven the same way knowing that that gravel is there?

I appreciate that you are using the fact that I like Massa to lend weight to your point but the principle remains the same and the penalties would be the same for everyone too. I want to see the best drivers be tested and compete to win. I can't say that it means much to me to see ANY drivers finish 4th or 5th or 6th or whatever in a race or indeed championship if they drove well but not really good enough compared to the others.

Anything outside of the driver's control however is another matter

[Greig]

Do you have the stats for all of the drivers that would have been beached in areas that we haven't even agreed should all contain gravel? More importantly, do you know that they would all have driven the same way knowing that that gravel is there?

I appreciate that you are using the fact that I like Massa to lend weight to your point but the principle remains the same and the penalties would be the same for everyone too. I want to see the best drivers be tested and compete to win. I can't say that it means much to me to see ANY drivers finish 4th or 5th or 6th or whatever in a race or indeed championship if they drove well but not really good enough compared to the others.

Anything outside of the driver's control however is another matter

No but I am not the one complaining about over use of run-off area's without some facts about how often they are used You and Ste are arguing the case against them, with what evidence?

Do you think the title last season was at all affected by run-off area's? Has a run-off area stopped the best drivers still being the best? I think not

[Ste]

Do you think the title last season was at all affected by run-off area's? Has a run-off area stopped the best drivers still being the best? I think not

That's exactly the point we're making.

No, it hasn't because it doesn't punish anyone aside from at the start of races.

And no, I don't have statistics for everyone who used the run off last year, but do you have statistics for everyone who has and who has been punished? No. We can all give the odd example but this is an opinion based discussion rather than a fully facts based one.

[Greig]

No, it hasn't because it doesn't punish anyone aside from at the start of races.

But that is simply not true.

So what do you base your opinion on then?

[Ste]

But that is simply not true.

Let's have some evidence then and not just the occasional time one has actually punished someone

Lewis' mistake in Korea that let Alonso back through would have been a lot more costly if it had been gravel - he only lost one position...even though the field was tightly bunched after a safety car. It would have been better to watch Lewis fighting back through the pack than just a drive to the finish wouldn't it?

[Greig]

Let's have some evidence then and not just the occasional time one has actually punished someone

Lewis' mistake in Korea that let Alonso back through would have been a lot more costly if it had been gravel - he only lost one position...even though the field was tightly bunched after a safety car.

I already gave you some, Lewis twice punished by losing places, neither at the start of the race, so your comment is simply untrue

[RedRebel40]

When has there been a driver constantly using run-offs?

Turn 8 in Turkey will still heavily punish someone not getting it right over someone who nails it, if there was no run-off there then would the corner be so good? I doubt it the drivers would no longer attack it as they do, instead playing it safe.

that corner would be a carnage if the runoff was replaced by a gravel trap or even better a fence.

[Tifosi]

No but I am not the one complaining about over use of run-off area's without some facts about how often they are used You and Ste are arguing the case against them, with what evidence?

Do you think the title last season was at all affected by run-off area's? Has a run-off area stopped the best drivers still being the best? I think not

I have no stats on the use of run-off areas either. Who would keep 'em for a start? It's not really the point we are making here I think. Our point (well certainly mine) is that the more challenging the circuit the more exciting it is for all. The higher the stakes for getting it right or wrong - the more of a challenge it is and everyone appreciates that fact.

Our "evidence" is that was have watched races when run-offs are used by drivers only because they know they can survive pretty well if they get it wrong during a race, especially when gaps between cars are greater. It's about the "cost/reward of marginal driving" to me. I remember MS spinning out when he was way in the lead once cos he stopped concentrating. He wasn't punished ultimately cos his lead had been so great so he kind of earned being let off for that mistake. Another time he wouldn't have been.

Also, I agree that run-offs don't make a difference to who is best in F1 but again that's not the point. The lack of risk (not related to safety) is the issue that detracts from the spectacle and the challenge.

[brembo man]

Solution, bring Lewis' crane back, but let everyone have use of it.