F1 said it would be easy to replace the Russian Grand Prix, so why didn’t they?

News Focus

Posted on

| Written by

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had immediate repercussions for the Formula 1 calendar. The day after Vladimir Putin sent his tanks in, F1 announced its race at Sochi Autodrom was off.

Within a week, F1 had gone even further, terminating its contract to hold future races in Russia.

This was undoubtedly the correct course of action. But it came at a cost. Russia is believed to pay among one of the highest race hosting fees, which form one of the key pillars of F1’s income.

Nonetheless F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali was confident a replacement would be found with little difficulty. After all, F1 has just been through two years of the Covid-19 pandemic during which time many replacement events had to be put on at short notice.

“We have already proven in the last couple of years to be very flexible and not to have any problem in finding possible solutions to that,” said Domenicali. “So I can just confirm that could be an option for this year with no problem at all.”

On the face of it, that makes today’s announcement that the race will not be replaced something of a surprise. But the wider consequences of the war are partly why no replacement has been chosen.

F1 teams are no different to many businesses worldwide in that they are feeling the pressure of rising costs. This is partly rooted in the increased price of fuel, a consequence of the war, and has a particularly significant impact on freight costs.

Teams were, therefore, keen to ensure that any replacement for the Russian race did not detract from the sport’s income, as Guenther Steiner explained when asked by RaceFans last month.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

“It depends on how much the new race brings to the bottom line of the budget and that is in the hands of F1,” he said. “For sure they’ll make sure that we are not going to race just to go to a race.

“Especially with the higher costs of transport and things like this. F1 will make sure that we go to place and the fee is adequate so it costs the travel cost and then we are not losing money and we just go to one more place.”

The positioning of the race in F1’s congested calendar made it particularly hard to replace. Sochi’s round was to kick off a three-race run of events, followed by events in Japan and Singapore. It was preceded by one ‘off’ weekend, which followed another triple-header. With a succession of fly-away events at the end of the year, and F1 unwilling to race beyond the end of November when the FIFA Football World Cup will begin, its options to slot in a 23rd race were limited.

Adding an extra race in Europe on Sochi’s September 25th slot was considered impractical as teams would have to send their freight from that back to their bases and then on to Singapore within a matter of days.

F1 is understood to have had expressions of interest from potential replacement hosts. However rumours the Singapore round could become a double-header came to naught. Nor could nearby Sepang be enticed to return to the calendar after a five-year absence.

These were likely two of the most cost-effective possibilities for F1. Other, more far-flung options existed but would have incurred further freight costs, not to mention hotel and air fares, at a time when F1 and teams are already feeling the pinch. Alternatives existed, but with costs suddenly rising, the potential benefits did not outweigh them.

The upside for teams, and especially their staff, is the most demanding portion of this year’s calendar has been eased. What was originally six races in seven weeks is now five in seven, with two weekends’ break in the middle.

As for the quality of the competition, would anyone argue that racing nowhere is inferior to racing at Sochi?

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2022 F1 season

Browse all 2022 F1 season articles

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.

24 comments on “F1 said it would be easy to replace the Russian Grand Prix, so why didn’t they?”

  1. Nor could nearby Sepang be enticed to return to the calendar after a five-year absence.

    Good. They thoroughly messed up their track with the extremely unwelcome changes that killed the entire character of the track before their final F1 race.

    1. @proesterchen i seem to be a bit blurry on the details, what changes were made to Sepang before the final F1 race there?

      1. First, I should correct myself that the work was done in 2016, so we had two Grand Prix at the new track before Formula 1 left for good.

        Unfortunately, the Malaysians contracted a company that took the modern Masterpiece that was Sepang and changed basically everything that made it special:

        – T1-3 complex was completely reprofiled, removing the elevation change/drop in T2 entirely and opening up T3
        – T4 was flattened and no longer features the rise near the apex
        – same for T9
        – there were changes in T13’s profile
        – and most famously they ruined the complete track for F1 by introducing significant negative camber in T15, which connects the back and start/finish straights and previously allowed cars to take different lines that set up a passing opportunity down the start/finish straight

        With the negative camber in T15, it is reduced to a slower, single-line corner that unfortunately prevented drivers from rather than encouraging them to challenge the car ahead into T1.

        @keithcollantine published an article on the original remodel back in the day, though it’s somewhat incomplete as apparently the company that shall not be named wasn’t too keen on sharing the entirety of their exploits:

        https://www.racefans.net/2016/09/27/in-detail-how-sepang-has-changed-for-2016/

        1. @proesterchen yeah i remember those changes, your comment made me think there were even more changes made prior to the last race there. Don’t remember it making the racing so much worse though, both the 2016 and 2017 editions of the race were relatively entertaining, especially considering they were both bone dry in an area that has very wildly varying weather.

          Also very important: a lot of the changes were needed to make it safer for bike racing, which is significantly more popular in Malaysia than car racing. Sepang, even with the changes, remains a fantastic circuit, and i really miss waking up early to enjoy me some car racing in Malaysia.

          With the negative camber in T15, it is reduced to a slower, single-line corner that unfortunately prevented drivers from rather than encouraging them to challenge the car ahead into T1.

          Funny this, i remember when they made the changes they said that they were doing this ‘to encourage and allow drivers to take different lines around the corner, thus opening up overtaking opportunities both in T15 and T1’

          1. Funny this, i remember when they made the changes they said that they were doing this ‘to encourage and allow drivers to take different lines around the corner, thus opening up overtaking opportunities both in T15 and T1’

            Yes, they did claim that. And it was nonsense then, too. This company is a bunch of no-good expletive . You don’t believe me? Look at their proposals to “fix” Monza.

            Let them have a neutered track for their bike exploits, I don’t mind that if that’s what they consider important. There’s just no need to return to the track from an F1 perspective, cause what we may remember the track fondly for from most of its run is no longer there.

          2. There’s just no need to return to the track from an F1 perspective, cause what we may remember the track fondly for from most of its run is no longer there.

            The same can be said of many other circuits used for F1, too.

            Sepang may not be as ‘good’ as it once was, but it’s still subjectively better than a lot of places F1 actually does go to – ‘traditional’ European circuits included.

  2. As for the quality of the competition, would anyone argue that racing nowhere is inferior to racing at Sochi?

    F1 is like that almost everywhere, not just at Sochi.
    And there was a pretty good race there last time, by F1 standards. Or at least some of it was good – when the weather changed and upset every team’s plans and strategy simulations so they had to actually be spontaneous and reactive for once.

    1. would anyone argue that racing nowhere is inferior to racing at Sochi?

      The 2021 race ended up as the the top race of 2021 and in the top 10 of the all time Rate-the-Race stats.
      But maybe the readers of this site were wrong :P

    2. would anyone argue that racing nowhere is inferior to racing at Sochi?

      1. The 2021 race ended up as the the top race of 2021

        1. and in the top 10 of the all time Rate-the-Race stats.

        2. and in the top 10 of the all time Rate the Race stats.

          1. But maybe the readers of this site were wrong :P

  3. Mugello Mugello Mugello!!!

    Or how about a Japanese Sat/Sun Double header!!!

    1. @biskitboy
      Mugello is a European location, while two full races on the same weekend might be easier said than done.

  4. How about a street race in Sochi’s twin town – Cheltenham?

    Why are FIA scared of football? A Grand Prix would provide some relief from all the hype, especially in the never-ending group stages of the World Cup.

  5. Or adding one at Fuji

    1. @ricod This would only work between Singapore & Suzuka.

  6. Why not replace it with a virtual race for charity?

    1. @nullapax

      Why not replace it with a virtual race for charity?

      Now that idea I like.

      1. @nullapax @keithcollantine A great idea for sure. I suggest the proceeds going towards Ukrainian refugees (not that life is easy for those who haven’t fled the country).

  7. Indy Road Course

  8. Rising fuel costs are not a consequence of war but of the sanctions created by a minority of western countries. Oil costs do increase when there is a war anywhere particularly when near oilfields then settle back but last time I checked the Ukraine wasn’t pumping oil from it’s territory.
    Meanwhile the Russian ruble reaches record highs and they switch supplies to other countries.

  9. It would be easy to replace the race if F1 wasn’t so insanely greedy with its hosting fees

Comments are closed.