The Observer

In the past couple of weeks I've surprised myself. You see, I consider myself to be a bit of a traditionalist, particularly when it comes to motor racing. But all this talk about the changing face of the Formula One calendar hasn't worried me one bit.

One of the few stories doing the rounds at the moment is of an exodus away from the European heartland to 'new markets', with particular focus on the loss of Imola. It's off the calendar for 2007 and it might never come back.

The calendar subject is one that has often raised its head over the past 10 years - particularly during fallow news weeks such as now!

FIA president Max Mosley repeated the lines he has always taken on this subject when quizzed about it in Munich last week.

When asked how important the European Formula One races are, he said: "They are important, but there are still a disproportionate number of races in Europe.

"If you look at the Olympic Games, over the last 100 years around 50 per cent of them have been in Europe and that is a little bit out of balance, and we are even worse.

"But we will get to the right balance between European and non-European races as markets development. Places like India, China, Russia, South America, Central America, they are all very important markets."

Now, don't get me wrong. I haven't completely lost sight of the value of tradition. But there's nothing here I'd argue with. He's right. Why should a world championship be dominated by Europe?

The Imola pitlane © LAT

Yes, there is a concentration of strong economies in the Northern Hemisphere, and yes, motor racing was born in Europe and has thrived here. But the world moves on.

I no longer see why the European bias should continue. What are we hanging on to here? Few of the old circuits have maintained what made them special, anyway.

Imola is an interesting case in point. Now, I love going to the circuit. The beautiful setting, the undulations, the atmosphere - it is such a special place. Even the high pollen count doesn't bother me because I don't get hay fever!

But a big ingredient of Imola, the circuit, died with Ayrton Senna. The chicanes at Tamburello and Villeneuve ruined the place as a racing track. It's safer, but it's also neutered. Overtaking is very difficult and the place is only good for tactical strategy battles, such as those witnessed between Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso in the past two years.

So would we miss it? Yes, the place, but the track... sadly, even though there are still some great sections to watch F1 cars, not as much as we would have done if it had been chopped from the calendar before 1994.

I haven't lost all sentiment for tradition, however. Monaco, Monza and Silverstone are three circuits that should be untouchable - purely for the emotional attachments. Silverstone is nothing like it was, of course, but F1 and Britain are too intertwined to be without each other - and that's not simple national bias talking. Honest!

Spa is another that should be protected - just because it's Spa. But I'm worried. They're mucking about with the lay-out at the end of the lap. Yes, it'll be safer, but I bet the changes won't make it a better race circuit.

Mosley admitted last week that a clause is in place to stop 'traditional' races just being slashed from the calendar.

"In the existing arrangements with FOM we have a clause that FOM cannot propose a calendar which involves the cancellation of a traditional event without the consent of the FIA," he said. "So we have a safety net there."

That's good to know. Some link with the past has to be maintained even if new countries should be embraced. But that protection might not always be there.

"I don't doubt that when the manufacturers come to do their [new] agreement they will ensure that part of their commercial interests in terms of the location of the races are taken into account," said Mosley. "That will get resolved and America and Europe are the two biggest markets for them."

So in the future, it will be the manufacturers who largely dictate where F1 goes. And if the venues are up to the standards set by Sepang, Istanbul and Shanghai that's not so bad. I'm no fan of the latter track, but it has produced good races. And that's the main thing.

The Shanghai media center © LAT

What I find more worrying is Mosley's belief that F1 can happily expand to a standard 20-race season. The calendar has swung between 17 and 19 races in recent years, but I will always favour the lower number to the higher count.

Why? Because too many races dilutes the importance of each Grand Prix. For example, as a typical European race fan, the NASCAR season blends into one for me, apart from the Daytona 500, the Brickyard 400 and ovals such as Talladega and Bristol. It's such a long season that winning a race takes on less significance. More is less when it comes to race calendars for me.

It is also the case that some human consideration for the teams putting in all the hard work should come into play on this subject. Families and marriages are already stretched to breaking point by the punishing schedule. But I guess that's not the sort of thing that giant motor corporations and organising bodies worry about.

But when markets open up, F1 feels compelled to dive in. For once, a new European race appears to be on the cards. That's because of the boom in interest currently being enjoyed in Spain, thanks to Alonso. A second race at Valencia looks likely.

But without dropping the 'weaker' races, which are rightly or wrongly considered to be traditional European rounds, the only way is up in terms of numbers.

"We would like to see another race in North America and probably not lose that many in Europe," said Mosley. "The ultimate sacrifice may have to be made by the teams having 20 races. That is to be discussed."

Like all capitalist industries, F1 will react to demand and there's nothing to be done to stop it. To a degree, I have no problem with that. If F1 does leave its European roots behind, then so be it. But more races?

There was a time when they said there'd never be more than 16...