Should F1 have more than one race per weekend?

Debates and Polls

Posted on

| Written by

The Formula One Strategy Group recently suggested making a break with F1 tradition by holding more than one race during a grand prix weekend.

Various proposals have been put forward including a ‘qualifying race’ for drivers on Saturday, a race for third drivers which would give them a place on the grid or a women-only race.

Some of these would present logistical problems: for example some teams may be unable to field an additional car alongside their existing two, and the shortage of women racing in the upper levels of single-seater competition would make it difficult for them to fill a grid.

But the biggest obstacle might be opposition to breaking with tradition. Having two races per weekend is almost unheard of in the history of the world championship.

Is it time to make a change which could liven up the championship – or is this part of F1’s heritage which should be preserved?


One race good, two races better. As a way of increasing the action at a race weekend, putting on an extra race is about as simple as it gets. For a sport which is having difficulty attracting new fans, tweaking the format could be just the change it needs.

An extra race would give spectators at the track better value for money and increase the potential for on-track action. What’s not to like?


For those who feel the current races lack action, adding an extra one won’t solve anything. Nor will the impression F1 is being dominated by a single team be alleviated by giving them yet more races to win. And the special achievement of winning a grand prix would be diluted if it was just one of two races held each weekend.

None of F1’s most pressing problems at the moment are to do with the race weekend format. This is a case of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

I say

There is a historical precedent for running more than one F1 world championship race during a weekend. When Germany’s AVUS circuit held its only points-scoring round in 1959 the event was run over two one-hour heats due to concerns their tyres could not withstand a continuous two hours on the high-speed banked track.

However the other 924 world championship events held over the last 65 years were all individual races. What’s to be gained by making such an obvious break with tradition? Little, if anything, it seems to me.

Having more races is not the same thing as having better racing, and the latter is surely what we want to see. Extra races won’t address the shortage of teams and the financial jeopardy faced by potentially more than half the current grid. As a solution to F1’s most serious problems, adding an extra race is a complete non-sequitur.

IndyCar’s recent experience with adding double-header rounds gives further cause to believe this could be a change for the worse. The scheme failed to find favour and only one of its rounds is now a double-header.

You say

Do you agree Formula One should run more than one race per weekend? Cast your vote below and have your say in the comments.

Should there be more than one race for F1 cars and drivers per grand prix weekend?

  • No opinion (1%)
  • Strongly disagree (77%)
  • Slightly disagree (9%)
  • Neither agree nor disagree (2%)
  • Slightly agree (6%)
  • Strongly agree (6%)

Total Voters: 471

 Loading ...

An F1 Fanatic account is required in order to vote. If you do not have one, register an account here or read more about registering here. When this poll is closed the result will be displayed in stead of the voting form.

Debates and polls

Browse all debates and polls

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

115 comments on “Should F1 have more than one race per weekend?”

  1. I don’t see the point in adding one. It should be GP racing, one proper long distance race at top speed known to man. Not two lousy sprint races where drivers don’t dare anything in the first in fear of the second.

    1. I would support small tweaks, like making the race 350-360 km long, while increasing the fuel allowance by 20%, effectively giving little bit more energy to use. Or more logical change: the race length should be adjusted to suit the fuel use and avg speed. Like Singapore, Hungary and Monaco could be good as is, where as faster and less thirsty tracks could host longer races in terms of distance in action, but the same length in time – closer to 2h.

      It is so disappointing to me that the end of the race comes so quickly on some of the better, faster tracks, like Monza.

      Apart from such small tweaks, the whole weekend format is quite good and should not be meddled with in my opinion.

      1. Oh yes. Time minimum 2 hours, the fuel usage up 200%, only 2 cars per squad, only 2 pilots per squad; so many twos…So, more Benzin and and more kms, to mention two. Geschwindigkeit und Kraft, zwei zusammen. Quite modest opinions anyway I guess, too. ‘Monza forever’

        1. 200 kg of fuel would be too much without refueling. And we don’t want refueling or 1 ton cars.

      2. i like the variable race lengths – singapore is a gruelling 2 hours (nearly), while monza is more of a sprint. variety throughout the season is what’s needed here, not just adding random races to the weekend.

  2. Why completely ruin more than 65 years of tradition for absolutely no logical reason whatsoever? That’s all I have to ask myself before making a decision on this.

    1. Exactly.

      Logic just seems to have left the building at the moment which is bizarre when this is supposed to be the pinnacle where the brightest minds are.

      Even my gran will tell you that all any sport needs to be popular and watchable is for competition to be close and unpredictable, but somehow this glaringly obvious point has been completely lost and all other wild ideas are currently entertained instead.

      I wish somebody could explain to me how this happened..

  3. Remember when qualifying was 2 part? Ridiculous!

    1. ColdFly F1 (@)
      2nd August 2015, 17:48

      That’s why it’s 3 parts now :p

      1. I think you know that’s not the same thing… :)

  4. It’s a Grand Prix. The big prize.
    It’s meant to be an epic challenge of man and machine.

    I’d actually like to run the races longer, say to approx 300miles instead of approx 200, instead of further taking away the entire point of GP racing.

    The whole point is a test of man and machine, not pandering to TV executives who have no idea what its all about.

    1. As far as I am aware the distances have remained relatively the same. If they were pandering to executives then the Monaco Grand Prix would be EVEN shorter and the singapore GP would be the same length as the Monaco GP. Grand Prix Racing is about man and machine but it’s not a test of endurance, that’s what endurance racing is all about.

  5. It’s worked fine for several decades, so can’t think of a good reason for changing it. Additionally, doubling the number of races each year makes a Grand Prix less special. With 40 races a year, it’ll be hard to think of them as must-watch events.

    1. Didn’t Indycar cut down on the 2 race weekend? I guess that shows its not doing too much to make for a better weekend @jackysteeg.

      Yeah, having 2 races will feel like winning one is just winning half a weekend. Instead of nicely building up tension to that one race, you lose that from the first race / second race mechanic

      1. Only Belle Isle which have two races..

  6. I find one race more exciting than 2 races. Throw it away, whole weekend for nothing.
    As always, making things more complicated doesn’t necessarily make things better. A lesson F1 should have learned by now…
    They should keep their format as simple as possible. One qualy, one race. I haven’t missed a single race live since Monaco 1994, but sometimes it is simply hard to make room for those ~2 hours. Especially in the future with 20+ weekends… I guess a 2 race sunday would take up way more time. Don’t oversaturate people with F1.

    As for more on track action, I think the rule makers shot themselves in the foot several times over the course of the last 20 years. I miss the sunday morning warm-up. Also, the fear of ruining tyres and engines/Drivetrains limits the driving.

    The whole system might have been better if the limit of drivetrain parts and tyres would only count for the races, not for the practice and qualy sessions. Difficult to do, I guess.

  7. Adding a 2nd race puts more strain on engines, gearboxes, Would require more tyres & risk further damage to cars which could affect the main GP.

    Additionally with multiple races you tend to find that 1 gets significantly less TV viewers & there’s some data that suggest’s fans are overall usually not as engaged with 1 of them, Its a part of why Indycar is moving away from them.

    1. Exactly, there’s a reason why Indycar is cutting down on double race weekends

  8. Strongly Disagree. Mercedes dominating two races a weekend instead of one isn’t going to fix anything.

  9. No, they should instead work on strengthening the support race program; bring the GP2 and GP3 cars to every Grand Prix weekend!

    1. @adamgoh GP2/GP3 teams couldn’t afford that, The extra cost’s of doing flyaway races were a big part of why the GP2 asia series was canned.

      Additionally some of the circuits (Montreal, Interlagos, Melbourne & Suzuka to name a few) don’t have the pit/paddock space for additional categories.

      1. @gt-racer There are usually local support series, but is there space at a few of those flyaways for an extra ‘test’ session that could use reserve/development drivers already in attendance?

      2. @gt-racer I’m not an expert but with so many racing both bikes and super GT as Super Formula, does Suzuka really not have room?

        1. @xtwl None of those categories race at Suzuka together at the same weekend though.

          The problem isn’t so much space in the pits its about the paddock as the support categories need somewhere to put & work on the cars before/after there track time. They usually have a paddock setup somewhere around the track where they setup there trucks & setup tents to use as makeshift garages… At Suzuka there isn’t the space to do this.

          There’s some space between spoon & 130R where there are some small garages but its not big enough for the number of teams or equipment you get with GP2 or GP3.

          1. @gt-racer I knew they did not race there together but expected with so many racing throughout the year Suzuka would have the room, but guessed wrong. Thanks.

    2. @adamgoh Cost, as always, would prevent that being the case, but I do agree that GP2 and GP3 are very important to a fan’s experience of a Grand Prix weekend. Perhaps the richer circuits (such as COTA, Singapore, Shanghai) should be encouraged to subsidize the teams’ costs, becuase they are a proven mechanism in improving fan experience and ensuring the fans remain at the circuit longer.

      I also think the Porsche Supercup is a bit of a wasted opportunity. Lamborghini Super Trofeo instead? I would guess the Hurcan’s V10 soundtrack would encourage even the most casual fans to stick around a bit longer! It’s a shame Lamborghini could never afford Bernie’s fees – Audi R8 LMS Cup instead?

      1. Hm, I doubt Singapore has space to put them in. And Austin is bleeding money by the bucketloads already, doubt they can afford to subsidize the cost.

        But I agree that FOM should work on getting more of a support race program on for these races. Surely something could be found, put in sportscars, or F3 racers or whatever local series.

        1. @bascb, but support races cost money the promoter can’t afford after Bernie has taken all the revenue and more.

          1. very much so, yes. Again getting back to the real issue that DOES need to be solved @hohum.

  10. Instinctively I’d like more racing. Friday could be a LOT more interesting.

    I’d like to see more girls racing and it being less of a male activity, though I can see testosterone is kinda intrinsic to it. I don’t think girls should have to be as good as the boys to have a sport they can participate in.

    I’d like to see F1 drivers compete in something else as well as their own F1 cars, like GP2 cars maybe.

    Certainly Race 2 should NOT depend on Race 1, I think that’s a really destructive format.

    For me the value of ‘tradition’, on a scale of 1 – 10, is 0.

    1. Friday could be a LOT more interesting.

      @lockup Don’t really see why, Its the practice day & practice is never going to be that interesting unless your really into watching that sort of thing.

      Also remember that the support categories have there limited practice & GP2 also has its qualifying on Friday so changing things too much is going to take time away from them & they already don’t really have as much as they could sometimes do with.

      1. I see your point about GP2 / 3 needing time on Friday @gt-racer but practice as you say isn’t that interesting. Is it really needed? I feel F1 has become more variable and interesting as the amount of testing has been reduced over the years.

        After all practice/testing tends to mean each car is raced at its full design potential, which as the season develops becomes more and more predictable.

        Why shouldn’t teams race after a few installation laps? It’d be the same for all of them and any kind of race is more interesting than practice. They could ask for ideas on exactly what kind of race.

        1. @lockup The problem with less practice is how do teams test new bits, Not just for performance but also safety.

          Putting drivers in a situation where there going down to turn 1 at the start running new brakes or whatever that they haven’t tested that weekend is asking for trouble. And if they fail because of something that could have been found in practice your risking driver, track worker & spectator safety.

          Also your then putting rookie drivers in a race situation having give them no time to learn car or track & many of them won’t ever have raced on some of the F1 circuits before.

          You could argue that ditching practice & going straght into races would make the ‘show’ more interesting but you would be doing that at the expense of safety & also the sport which is what F1 should be before a ‘show’.

          1. Safety is a must of course @gt-racer so they must do enough install laps. But other series don’t spend a day testing before each race.

            I agree rookie drivers are an issue but most don’t get to run on Fridays. They have winter testing and FP3, and now they have to have had quite a substantial career in junior series.

            I reckon it’s a situation where each team thinks “I MUST test my car it’ll be so much better”, but over the sport as a whole the variability we get from less testing makes it more interesting.

            Not to mention the three hours on Fridays.

    2. @lockup On the note of tradition, many non-championship races also ran with two heats. Considering some of this year’s races are aping the old ‘non-championship’ half-grid GPs (e.g. Australia), having races in this format would just be continuing the revival of F1’s lost traditions, but now in championship rounds!

      1. Lol @fastiesty, tho I’m not sure what format would be the best one – two heats or whatever. I’m not suggesting it’s a solution to the problems in F1 atm either.

        I just sit on my sofa watching FP1 and FP2 and the teams all know what all the cars are running but we don’t, so I watch because, you know, “my name is Lockup and I’m an addict”.

        And I just think given all the ingredients – time, TV, internet, teams, track, drivers… it could be more fun.

        1. Indycar spends at least two practice sessions, four on three day weekends (which I prefer) They have friday exclusively for practice. Practice is practice and it’s never going to change. But teams need practice, to test new bits (which makes the season more interesting) and to get mileage on the car

          1. Teams don’t need practice to test new bits. They could put them on, do a few installation laps to check they’re safe, and race them. That would be more interesting.

  11. Yes. A race on Saturday or Friday for one car from each team. Drivers are development drivers or rookie, top 5 in race join back of grid on Sunday main race.

    1. ColdFly F1 (@)
      2nd August 2015, 17:50

      and replacing the #2 drivers in those teams – that would be fun!

  12. BTCC throws 3 very short races when they race, and I’m sure they’d do much better if they did 2 or even a single race.

    Also, I don’t like the idea of seeing a driver crash in race 1 and go “ah, well, we can try again tomorrow”. That’s not right. It should be a whole weekend preparation that if you mess up, you’re left with nothing and you’ve got to wait a fortnight to try again. It should be unique, your ONLY chance per weekend.

    1. Duncan Snowden
      2nd August 2015, 17:31

      “BTCC throws 3 very short races when they race, and I’m sure they’d do much better if they did 2 or even a single race.”

      You’re right. They did. It’s been about fifteen years since they switched to multiple races, and I still can’t get used to it. Totally screws up the TV coverage, for a start; they need to be live for basically the whole day on Sunday. Who can be bothered with that?

      I could just about accept a short sprint race instead of qualifying (the grid for that decided on the previous race’s results, or championship order for the first of the season) – which is how it crept into the BTCC, as I recall – but I don’t really see the point. The current quali system works well. One reason being that it isn’t a race: people recognise that, while it doesn’t always work out, it should be clean laps showing the cars’ ideal performance. Why change that?

      1. Not only that. The race is too short for anything to happen. Sometimes the race builds up until a point in which it’d become a lot more interesting, but then the flag is out and that’s it. Over to the next race. And not to even mention the ridiculous way in which they determine the grids for all the races…

  13. Nick (@theawesomefish)
    2nd August 2015, 16:20

    No. No, no, no and no again. All of the no.

    As far as I’m aware, this proposal seems to be with the intention of getting the fans of Formula 1 more interested with the series again, after the declining TV viewers and race weekend attendees which have been going on for some time now. If that’s what they’re aiming to do, then this is an utterly backward way of doing it.

    Leaving to one side the fact that the vast majority of those who responded to the recent fan survey felt that the current race weekend format was absolutely fine, at a time when at least five of the eleven teams in the Formula One World Championship are struggling financially, do we really want to be burdening them with the extra cost of running both cars in twice as many races per weekend? Or the engines, gearboxes and other components that would inevitably needed? Or freighting a third car to each race to accommodate another driver?

    Or in the current climate, with Mercedes dominating the standings and the racing being somewhat dull and lifeless throughout the field, as the drivers have to juggle outright speed with things like tyre temperature and fuel consumption and brake balance rather than going racing, do we want to ask viewers to make time for more of that over a weekend than we already do?

    To me, this seems like Formula One is trying to solve a drought by building a ferris wheel. The “you’ve got mail” rear wing, the Pirelli tyres which might as well be made of cheese, banning drivers from changing their helmets, even adding a recital of the host country’s national anthem before the race. All of this is simply the Strategy Group, Bernie and the FIA saying “Look at us, we’re actually useful!” while being nothing of the sort. Anything to avoid actually addressing and resolving the real problems that the sport has – inequitable prize money distribution, a number of teams struggling to stay afloat on a dwindling grid, contrived and artificial ‘racing’, the sport now being used as a political tool by certain countries, and the inmates running the asylum on the Strategy Group.

    But as long as they get their money, why would they ever stop?

  14. On a ‘full’ race weekend, absolutely not. F1 and GP2 (and occasionally GP3) are more than enough to keep me occupied. If they want people paying more attention to what’s going on at the track from Friday to Sunday, they need to work on promoting and increasing interest in those two key support series.

    Only downside is, then everyone would probably complain there’s more action in GP2…

    On the flyaways with no GP2/3, I tend to feel a little like something’s missing. I don’t think an extra F1 race with the current drivers is the answer (it’s the very, very last thing I’d want to see), but throwing something in there wouldn’t hurt.

    1. @neilosjames Just because there’s no GP2/GP3 for the flyaway’s doesn’t mean there no support categories.

      There’s usually some regional categories that race alongside F1 on the flyaways…. We tend not to hear much about them because there regional series that don’t get attention outside of that region. The one exception been the V8 Supercars that race alongside F1 for the Australian Gp.

      1. Oh they’re there, but only for people at the circuit. For TV viewers they might as well not be because none of the broadcasters (at least that I’m aware of) show them… eg Sky F1 shows GP2/3 and the Supercup but nothing else, so flyaway weekends are relatively empty for viewers of that channel.

        Would be good to be able to put *something* of sufficient quality and which interests people around the world enough that the broadcasters would show it. Or could be ‘persuaded’ to show it…

        1. Well, you are even lucky to see GP2/3! we in South Africa get it some time later…at, well, maybe, 9am Wednesday 3 weeks later or something like that! Maybe if I get the satellite TV I might be able to record it but right now I watch if I can find it on Youtube.

  15. If they do it, it must be done very well. And you can’t forget about history.
    What would Senna, Prost and Schumacher’s tally mean if anyone can easily break them by winning 15+ races per year..

    I did get excited by the 3th car race. A race on saturday (or sunday morning) with young drivers and the winner (or top2/3) get to enter the main event! That would be amazing if done correctly!
    They should be allowed to drive in any livery they want, not the same as the main team cars.

  16. This would only serve to devalue the Grand Prix experience for all involved while adding additional costs at the same time. Quality is more important than quantity.

  17. I favour two shorter races with the second race having a reverse grid. The artificially engineered need for pit-stops is an attempt to make the racing more exciting by shaking up the race order. Unfortunately the middle portion of the race following the first pit-stop tends to be dull as drivers settle for their position and are disincentivised to attempt risky over-takes.

    1. Calling pit stops “artificially engineered” and then calling for a “reverse grid” sounds -to say the least- weird.

    2. No no no no no! Shorter races are not what we need, we need more exciting races. This way monza will last 30-45 minutes per race. We need more exciting action within the single race, not two dull races.

  18. Want more than 1 race? Bring back f2. The real f2.

  19. No in the strongest possible terms.
    Another example of the powers that be wanting to solve something that doesn’t need fixing, by doing so trying to deflect attention away from the real problems affecting the sport.

    1. +10000000!

  20. My weekends are tight enough schedule-wise already. No thanks!

  21. Calling for another race to support the GP, with maybe even young talents, goes to show that they not only do a hash job with F1, but also with GP2.

  22. If we still had non-championship races we could try different formats without the fear of spoiling the main series, but we don’t.

    Anyway I take the tradition argument but one of the few constants of F1 is that it’s always changing. You can’t really compare points scoring records any more since they changed the system so massively. Qualifying has had more formats than you can count over the years. New features come and go, like DRS etc., circuits change. The tradition is more that we’ve been going racing for a long time than it is that the rules are constant.

    I don’t believe the sport NEEDS two races per weekend – it always smacked of an idea born from the desperate need to tell people that something was being done to try and improve things, even if it wasn’t remotely the right area to look at – but I wouldn’t automatically rail against the idea, if it was done well.

    I don’t like the third driver race idea, and the women’s race idea seems like a box-ticking exercise. I don’t see the point of a “qualifying” race either – Mercedes qualifies on pole to win from pole in the quali race in order to win from pole in the main race, don’t see what it would add.

    If they did do it for my money there wouldn’t be any point unless it did contain some reverse grid element. I know the purists would howl (and not without some justification) but the sport isn’t exactly “pure” as it is these days anyway. Qualifying as per current format on Friday afternoon or Saturday morning (FP3 time), use the results of that for some reversed grid half-distance race for half points on Saturday (top 8 or top 10 reversed, not sure), the normal distance race on Sunday for normal points based on the Friday session (not like GP2 where one race result feeds into the next race, which can be overly penal). Maybe something like that, with the rules relaxed to give them the tyres and engines etc. needed to do it, with the financial situation bettered to give the teams the incentive to race more. Maybe it would erode the sport too far.

    But I do agree that it’s not the area that needs fixing as a matter of priority, and that we should be trying to fix the real problems that exist.

  23. ColdFly F1 (@)
    2nd August 2015, 17:54

    I would run 2 races simultaneously with the same cars/drivers in Abu Dhabi (final race).
    This will keep the championship fight interesting until the end.

    1. @coldfly, Ideally with half the cars racing clockwise and the other half racing anticlockwise, definitely not predictable or boring.

      1. NO BERNIE, I wasn’t being serious.

      2. You’d be surprised – on that Abu Dhabi track it would still find a way to be boring.

  24. Why not ad max 5 cars from 2013 but they will be driven by girls/women, remove KERS to make them little slower, this will increase the field, there will be V8 engines on the grid and the women can show what they are capable of. No development to remove cost problem ?

  25. I did alightly agree. But only if it was to enable separate races for development drivers

    1. *Slightly

  26. I fail to see how one race on a weekend counts as a “tradition”. I brush my teeth every morning but I wouldn’t call that a tradition. Tradition is stuff like having a parade before the race, or playing the national anthems of the winners.

    Personally, I love when I get an Indycar double header weekend. No gimmicks, just 2 races like any other race.

    1. @pastaman

      Personally, I love when I get an Indycar double header weekend. No gimmicks, just 2 races like any other race.

      Which is something there moving away from because the Saturday race always gets less tv viewers & less overall fan engagement than the Sunday race.

      Additionally it increased cost’s so the teams didn’t like them either.

  27. Simon (@weeniebeenie)
    2nd August 2015, 18:19

    No. You don’t solve an issue by splitting it in two. Then you just have two things with an issue rather than one.

  28. I “slightly disagree” with the question as I don’t think an extra race really solves anything; however, when we had double points I would have been okay with two races at a weekend (2*single points). So I felt I couldn’t strongly disagree – two races at a venue isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
    What I think might work for modern, busy audiences with no background in motorsports (i.e. the majority of TV viewers) is a free-to-air sprint race on a few Saturdays throughout the year. It’s bite-sized F1, more of a showcase event. I’m not sure how it could be made attractive to the teams though.
    In any case, there are lots of things we can do to improve F1 without 2 races per weekend.

  29. What we really need is races with variety. We need races at longer tracks such as Le Mans thrown in between during the season… Practical or not, that’s what F1 needs, rather than having the same kind of track (in terms of distance) every time. Only then will Formula 1 be truly Formula 1…

    If F1 must break tradition, it should be in introducing oval or super-speedway tracks. But I know that ain’t gonna happen…

  30. As with much of FIA policy nowadays, it is a solution to a problem that simply doesn’t exist.

    If the cars are fundamentally unable to overtake each other, how is that problem resolved by increasing the amount of races? Does that, in fact, not make F1 more monotonous and lethargic? When the sport is in a desperate fight to retain the viewership of the causal fans, why give them more dates in their diary?

    The debates that surround reform in F1 are, for me, one of the most enjoyable aspects of being a fan of the sport. Wider tyres? Refueling? Less tyre degradation? Ground effect? However, it becomes less enjoyable when the proposals have no logical basis whatsoever, especially when those same ideas have come from the sport’s policymaker.

    F1 needs to change the medicine, not just up the dosage.

  31. Black 'n' Blue15
    2nd August 2015, 19:07

    Something tells me this is more of an exposure scheme abetted by FOM and a select number of GP hosting countries. In the case of Azerbaijan, they’ve spent millions in recent years on Eurovision and The European Athletic games, in return getting their Country significant air-time on TV. With F1 that same money will be shelled out for just a couple of hours on a Sunday, hence perhaps some kind of push for more Racing throughout the weekend.

    Personally, I can’t see what the benefit of a second race would be, especially if the Pre-Race were to herald more excitement than the Grand Prix itself. Teams would need more Race Fuel, tyres , engines, and spare parts augmenting costs in the process, which is exactly the opposite of what they should be doing. Perhaps the only positive to spring from a multi-Race template would be to show up the blatantly obvious homogeny of certain Tilke tracks.

  32. Those men go through an incredibly hard physical two hours, being thrown around at Xg, hanging on to the wheel, in high temperatures wearing multiple layers. It’s a gruelling ordeal for them. To have to do it again so soon is too much.

    No to two races. They are humans, not robots.

    1. But the “real” men of the past had to manually change gear and drive in F2 as well as “saloon car” races, and they didn’t have an entourage of trainers, physios and dieticians.

  33. Maybe for certain races, I’d probably enjoy a pair of half points awarded sprint races at a circuit such as Monaco or Abu Dhabi. On the flip side, maybe endurance type races should also be introduced, a 400km of Spa, for example.

    1. thats thinking outside the box :)
      i ld give that a thought !

  34. I seriously don’t understand such strongly negative opinions about that.
    I could agree, because more races, more fun. I can’t see how it would be so bad.
    Moreover, it would help teams with testing at a low cost, but would imply doubling the engine budget.

    Anyway, I’d be glad to trade FP3 for the qualifications and the actual qualis for a race (without inverted grids, please). Sunday’s race qualifications could be done just before the race, in the morning.

  35. the Grand Prix should be unique… and should be won by just 1 driver (and his car)… if they really want to change the race-weekend format they may try to introduce something different for the show (like a race between the reserve drivers, or a soap box race between all drivers haha) but seriously, the race should be just 1 per weekend.

  36. Just give a chance to other engine manufacturers to catch Merc’s like MotoGP does it and you won’t need any weekend tweaks. Stop messing with unknown race tracks brought to F1 with suspicious reasons where the “fans” are waiting for something to happen. Get back to Kyalami, Donington and Imola… For instance I welcome the 2017 rule changes regarding faster cars as I can hear the drivers, the ones who really should be asked, all routing for faster and harder to drive cars. Open the race track for fans to see the cars and drivers from a closer. Get the Facebook, Tweeter, Instagram e c.t. in to the mix. Simplify and show the fans before every race in a episodes if you like all the technology that is going on under that kevlar, but do a dummies edition not a NASA crazy engineers edition. Get back the tire war and you’ll have 3-5 seconds faster cars for crying loud. Put old Bernie to sleep and wake him after I die and let him run F1 again, I won’t care than….

  37. ColdFly F1 (@)
    2nd August 2015, 21:58

    There are so many reasons to be against 2 races, but there might be a creative solution to keep the best of both worlds.

    We oftentimes have 2 races already (before and after the safety car!).
    Imagine that there will always be a break in the middle (lead driver decides exactly when). Restart in same order (maybe unlap). Refuel. New tyres that last and can take some pounding. Grid Repairs to cars.
    Still only one GP winner, and no funny stuff like.

    Or change qualifying in 15minutes prequalifying, and then a 30min race to determine Sunday grid spots.

  38. LIke so many ideas in the F1 world, it is an idea that works well in theory but isnt practical in the real world. You would attract new fans to the sport who enjoy racing, but you would risk losing fans as well who dont like the idea.

    One major problem though of an extra race or races per weekend is cost, with half of the teams experiencing money issues of some sort. The extra cost involved i.e more tyres, engines/ gearboxes etc could well be the straw that broke the camels back and mean more teams choose too or are forced to pull out of F1

  39. the only main tradition f1 should consider itself with is to be the best motorsport championship it can be. the point should be to do better for now and the future.
    if the format is feasible and eventually pays off, its worth the try. too much whining and what was is going on currently.

  40. If this is going to be done, it should be two heats that are half the length a GP would be. Otherwise, no.

  41. No. Why?
    detracts from importance of main race
    there are better ways of attracting new fans, and its only a matter of time before F1 has to adopt these or become irrelevant

  42. I would change the qualifying format to a race against the clock. Instead of having low fuel runs there could be 2 groups on Saturday that drive around for 25mins+1 lap each and the total time determines the grid position for Sunday. The cars would start with a 5s gap between them and most likely based on the championship standings.
    It would not generate a lot of overtakes, but qualifying shouldn’t be too much of a wheel to wheel race anyway. However it would offer more action on track – since the 3 part qualifying has become quite stale.

  43. It depends heavily on the format of the second race.

    There’s been many different forms of qualifying over the years, and replacing it with a qualifying race of sorts would not be the end of F1.

    But splitting the actual grand prix into a saturday sprint and sunday main (possibly with reverse grids in the process) wouldn’t be a step forward.

  44. The 1959 German round was the right solution for the problem of inadequate tyres, but it would have been better to have had proper tyres for the job. We currently have the same problem with inadequate tyres and perhaps we would be better off with 2 races of 35 laps, 1 race on softs. 1 race on hards, at least the overtaking would have to be done on track. But naturally I would rather change the tyres than change the race format, let’s return to the original successful format and do away with gimmicks and manipulation.
    If we must have gimmicks like bubble-gum tyres, re-fueling etc. then allow the teams to choose their own strategy but make all pitstops a minimum time equal to the 107% lap time.

    1. ColdFly F1 (@)
      3rd August 2015, 7:58

      @hohum, as always I agree with most you say.
      But taking the time challenge out of pit stops would be wrong IMO.
      I love it seeing the well oiled machines changing 4 tyres in just over 2 seconds. (PS I’m down to 2hrs myself!)

      1. @coldfly, I agree with you about the well oiled machine factor, it’s like watching the crew of a maxi-yacht rounding a mark and seamlessly changing sails for the next leg, about the same size team as well, but I just prefer to make pit stops an undesirable option, in fact I want pit stops to be the result of bad fortune, bad planning or bad driving, but this being F1 I have to pretend I have another agenda.

  45. I like this idea.

  46. For a sport which is having difficulty attracting new fans, tweaking the format could be just the change it needs.

    There is a simple way to attract new fans: broadcast F1 races on Free to Air TV, and advertise the fact that you are doing it.

  47. Having a two race wknd hmmmm not too sure this will work but I wouldlike two things first a cap on how much they can spend say 100.000000 per year and can do whatever they like to the car and two the winning places of the last race be the same place that they start the next race or to reverse the place so that whomever came first starts at the back of the grid not sure if it would work but it’s just a thought

  48. NO!!! F1 does not need more than one race per weekend. It cheapens the show, one good race on Sunday is much better. Leave it alone and go tweak the new rules to improve like what happened in Hungary with the poor starts from Merc which will eat into them and the championship. If Ferrari wins at SPA, hopefully Kimi does, it will be a much better season for the rest of the races.

  49. 2 races is wrong wrong wrong. What F1 needs is three races.
    1 dry race. 1 wet race, with sprinklers. 1 monkey race, with monkeys driving.
    No Strategy Group.

    1. this comment made my day.

  50. So, I said ‘Slightly disagree’ – I agree with most people that it’s not a real solution.

    I probably should have gone for ‘strongly disagree’ because after voting, I realised fully how much less surprises a 2nd race will mean a – they all did a race distance on the track, so more data, less unknowns, with only the weather being a possible factor. Except that mid/low-grid level team might have trouble with spares and new parts, so we’d see even less competition there. No, not a good idea.

  51. I don’t like it. As others have said, the smaller teams are already low on funds. Can you imagine how many MORE noses Lotus will have to build for Maldonado? They can’t afford that. ;D

    Also, 2 races a weekend will not attract new fans and will make it very hard for the current ones to follow – especially live. If we can’t get new fans with 1 race how will 2 help???

    It still boils down to:
    1. Prize money distribution.
    2. Tokens not helping other teams to catch up.
    3. Tyres that delaminate drastically (last year), they grain very easily, etc.
    4. Tilkedroms… drones… need I say more?

    I’m sure there’s more to add but I’ll stop there. 2 races? No.

    1. petebaldwin (@)
      3rd August 2015, 10:19

      @friedatwo – It’s Bernie’s usual tactic – throw some ridiculous ideas about (sprinklers, 2 races, women’s only races, medals) so that they get talked about rather than the real problems.

  52. The pro’s and con’s focus mainly on sportive grounds. I am against more races per weekend based merely on private matters. I have a wife and kids. Spending the sunday afternoon in front of the TV every fortnight means no time to play with my kids outside, or going away with the family. It’s a big deal. If there is a race on Saturday too, it means that I want to see it but it’s a big sacrifice.

  53. petebaldwin (@)
    3rd August 2015, 10:16

    Can we PLEASE stop patronising women by going on about this stupid Women’s Only idea that Bernie trotted out! I watch F1. Not men’s f1. Not women’s F1.

    In regards to having 2 races…. why? I can’t see why it’d be beneficial! I guess it’s better for Bernie as he can sell it as 2 races instead of 1?

  54. More Back-to-Back F1 weekends would be better.

  55. I voted ‘strongly disagree’. I feel that having too many F1 races would devalue the championship, especially if there is more than one race on a given circuit. I found myself thinking about whether the Spanish GP weekend be improved if there were two F1 races on the Circuit de Cataluyna (I chose Cataluyna deliberately as it has a reputation for producing processional races). It is open to debate, but I don’t think it would, in my view it would be more likely to produce two dull races (which are less tense as they count for less in the overall scheme of the championship) instead of one.

  56. Thanks Keith finally a topic we can pretty much all agree on. :)

  57. A grandprix weekend is pretty big and lot of work goes behind the scene, putting another race in there would be very hectic for the organizers and expensive.

  58. I wouldn’t mind seeing a reversed grid race on Saturday afternoon in place of qualifying and see qualifying on the Friday afternoon. It would be quite radical to do it like this but I think it could work very well, it would bring back an element of competition on Friday and it would most likely see a very entertaining race on Saturday whilst keeping the main race on Sunday completely unaltered. The fans would get to see more action and excitement, the drivers would get to compete in more races and there will be much greater TV time for teams and sponsors, especially for the teams that qualify lower down the order. Everybody wins.

  59. I fear it that it may disturb tradition. Formula 1 is a sport off tradition and those.traditions should not be disturbed.

  60. Just seems like a nice solution to a problem that does not exist…

  61. No, a thousand times no. There’s nothing needed to be changed about the race format.

    The Support races – sure if the organisers can’t arrange a decent support card – should they be given the race? Bet there’s plenty of circuits that can.

  62. hauspanzer (@)
    23rd January 2016, 18:47

    It’s time to recognize that the Strategy Group should be disbanded. Their contributions so far have varied from ineffective to idiotic – not surprising given their vague charter and their inbuilt conflicts of interests. No real business would pay for this degree of uselessness.

  63. No real point in having two races if both of them are rubbish.

    Fix F1’s real issues first, then maybe I’d throw my support behind something like this.

  64. I would go for a 30-45m qualy (pole position history and stats deserves to keep a proper qualy).
    Qualy race with an attractive points table – old points system an idea 10-6-4-3-2-1.
    Sunday main race with the qualy race results grid order (with the pole position driver keeping the first row, a debatable idea) .

Comments are closed.