BTCC Provisional 2007 Calendar - Page 2

Hazard · 6 Dec 2006, 19:06 (Ref:1783509)

Weird not having a round at the Stone, but glad it's the Rock instead

chezza · 6 Dec 2006, 19:18 (Ref:1783517)

The full calendar can be seen below

http://www.parcferme.com/content/view/1991/2/

rdjones · 6 Dec 2006, 19:52 (Ref:1783540)

So we are going back to Rockingham - interesting very interesting. There was something in Motorsport News today saying that if (and this now confirmed) that Silverstone has missed out on BTCC round in the history of the championship.

**touringlegend** · 6 Dec 2006, 21:10 (Ref:1783603)

Must say I prefer the Rockingham layout that was used in 2003 to anything that Silverstone has to offer.

It is a bit odd to see a BTCC calendar with no Silverstone though.

Wilbo · 6 Dec 2006, 23:39 (Ref:1783706)

"because it's Silverstone" > O Yeah!

cos · 7 Dec 2006, 00:36 (Ref:1783728)

Good to see The Rock back on the calendar, just a shame that it obviously wasn't first choice and only got a place due to Silverstone having clashing events.

Presumably the International layout will be used as before?

Redlake27 · 7 Dec 2006, 12:46 (Ref:1784054)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cos

Good to see The Rock back on the calendar, just a shame that it obviously wasn't first choice and only got a place due to Silverstone having clashing events.

Presumably the International layout will be used as before?

Not exactly. Rockingham got its place on merit, probably because it make more effort than Silverstone to promote motorsport...............

BTCC title sponsor Dunlop have also chosen not to take their Great and British calendar to Silverstone either.

Alfa Fan · 7 Dec 2006, 13:27 (Ref:1784093)

Rockingham didnt get its place "on merit". Its on the calender because they couldn't agree a date with Silverstone.

redshoes · 7 Dec 2006, 14:00 (Ref:1784149)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redlake27

BTCC title sponsor Dunlop have also chosen not to take their Great and British calendar to Silverstone either.

They aren't going to Rockingham either. What was your point?

***MagnetON*** · 7 Dec 2006, 18:35 (Ref:1784327)

Looks like there's some fall-out over Silverstone:

http://www.parcferme.com/content/view/1996/2/

redshoes · 7 Dec 2006, 18:50 (Ref:1784343)

Silverstone's earlier statement that the TOCA statement refers to :
http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...?ID=239852&F=N

Gow's answer to one of the questions on his forum : "the Rockingham deal was never really 'on the cards' and the decision to do it was only made this week."

Odd that I seem to recall a similar "they said" / "no we didn't" exchange between Rockingham and TOCA a few years ago.

touring fan01 · 7 Dec 2006, 19:05 (Ref:1784353)

He is saying he wrote and told them 3 days ago giving the reasons why they aren't going to silverstone and that silverstone acknowledged they received his letter. Obviously he couldn't say that unless it was true and could be backed-up with facts.

So it makes silverstone look pretty silly when they say they dont know the reason why. Maybe they can't read english?

cos · 7 Dec 2006, 19:08 (Ref:1784355)

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshoes

Silverstone's earlier statement that the TOCA statement refers to :
http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...?ID=239852&F=N

Gow's answer to one of the questions on his forum : "the Rockingham deal was never really 'on the cards' and the decision to do it was only made this week."

Odd that I seem to recall a similar "they said" / "no we didn't" exchange between Rockingham and TOCA a few years ago.

Silverstone would surely bend over backwards to secure the profitable BTCC date. The link above suggests Silverstone agreed to the date, so why did TOCA suddenly arrange Rockingham within the last few days? It won't make much difference to teams/sponsors if the slot is taken by Silverstone or Rockingham, so why rush to confirm the Rock instead of waiting for Silverstone to re-arrange its club meetings?

edit: here's TOCA's response to Silverstone: http://www.btcc.net/html/generalnews_detail.php?id=378

touring fan01 · 7 Dec 2006, 19:09 (Ref:1784359)

probably more to it than just arranging dates.

redshoes · 7 Dec 2006, 19:25 (Ref:1784369)

I'm a little surprised Rockingham were able to agree to a date so quickly. My understanding was that the current planning restrictions mean they can only have 5 or 6 race weekends during the year. SCSA have 5 confirmed dates plus one TBA in May, F3/GT have one meeting. Didn't think there were any dates left to be had.

Alfa Fan · 7 Dec 2006, 19:28 (Ref:1784373)

Maybe the SCSA wont be around to take up its dates.....

rdjones · 7 Dec 2006, 19:48 (Ref:1784395)

I think that the F3/GT meeting will also have SCSA on the bill, that was the case this year when GT's went back.

touring fan01 · 7 Dec 2006, 19:49 (Ref:1784396)

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshoes

I'm a little surprised Rockingham were able to agree to a date so quickly. My understanding was that the current planning restrictions mean they can only have 5 or 6 race weekends during the year. SCSA have 5 confirmed dates plus one TBA in May, F3/GT have one meeting. Didn't think there were any dates left to be had.

I would reckon that when rock were offered the date, they would have jumped at it straight away and juggled anything and everything around to make sure they got it. they would have scrapped a SCSA date to get a BTCC one in the blink of an eye.

macsport · 7 Dec 2006, 21:49 (Ref:1784487)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdjones

I think that the F3/GT meeting will also have SCSA on the bill, that was the case this year when GT's went back.

No - F3/GT meeting is standalone with usual support package.

It's good to see BTCC back at Rockingham.

adstubbs · 7 Dec 2006, 22:31 (Ref:1784513)

Great news for Rockingham - I went to see the BTCC there way back in 2003, and it was a great days racing. Seeing tourers three abreast out round the oval before piling down into the hairpin to the infield was great, and the fact you can see the whole circuit from the grandstand adds to the experience (even if I find it strange to watch a race sitting down). Looks like I might be adding Rockingham onto my list of circuits to marshal at next year, having not made it there this year. I can understand why Silverstone management are getting more than a tad annoyed, as the crowds at this year's final rounds were huge.

Wilbo · 7 Dec 2006, 22:51 (Ref:1784530)

Quote:

Silverstone would surely bend over backwards to secure the profitable BTCC date.

Don't think this is entirly true. I know that the WTCC required £250,000 to bring it's show to Silverstone and they weren't prepared to pay (because they felt they wouldn't recoup the money going on the ETCC 2004 (Silverstone - it's called "making an effort"), so they lost out this year to Brands.

Their strapline has changed from "Home of British Motorsport" - (because it isn't anymore), to "because it's Silverstone". This is a very insular and bullish statement and sums up the attitude and approach which is more than evident when you visit the place.

If you are a well travelled race goer you will be fully aware of the shambolic state of our "F1 offering", I suppose you only have to watch on TV to see the offerings from around the world. To say that the UK is the pioneer and hub of motorsport our national circuit needs huge investment starting with a very big wake up call.

Whils't I understand raising investment to improve the circuit isn't easy, to take sponsors to the BTCC in the past or FIA GT and find the majority of stands shut and shambolic facilities is a huge embaresment when the sport isn't exactly "cheap".

mark_l · 8 Dec 2006, 17:16 (Ref:1785261)

I certainly don't think this calendar is set in stone yet. If Silverstone and TOCA come to an agreement (i.e. Silverstone pay the asking price) then one of the Thruxton rounds could be dropped to accommodate Silverstone.

R59 · 10 Dec 2006, 14:29 (Ref:1786849)

According to Autosport, it's "That's All Folks".

It is entirely possible that Rockingham put the BTCC on as an additional date as they have a one or a couple of "spares" up their sleeve based on their agreement with the council.

Sad news for Silverstone.

Good news for Rockingham.

And all because the dates of the BTCC are set in stone by the way the TV contract is done.

Rob.

James C. · 10 Dec 2006, 14:33 (Ref:1786851)

It's a pity for Silverstone, but I prefer Rockingham than Silverstone National (this track is boring IMO)

Chigley · 10 Dec 2006, 22:23 (Ref:1787172)

Quote:

Presumably the International layout will be used as before?

Rockingham uses a new circuit layout (called Super Sports?) to avoid using the controversial Turn 1 chicane that the F3 boys couldn't handle. The new layout now incorporates the slightly revised bike link at the end of the School Straight leading to the Oval immediately after Turn 4; this also is the access to the pits. The circuit then goes straight round Turn 1 on the Oval up to the Deene hairpin, the right hander at Brook and the Gretton hairpin are not used.

The BGT used this layout in August and loved it, they couldn't take Turn 1 flat some were lifting others dabbed the brakes, F3 have also tested on the layout and approved it, so the Rock will see the BGT/F3 package in Sept 07 as well.

Ian

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
British F3 / GT Provisional 2007 Calendar	macsport	National & International Single Seaters	23	1 Nov 2006 17:37
Provisional 2007 Calendar	jab	Formula One	57	23 Oct 2006 13:55
2007 Moto GP Provisional Calendar	jhansen	Bike Racing	6	20 Aug 2006 16:19
BTCC 2006 provisional calendar	cos	Touring Car Racing	50	11 Nov 2005 09:17
BTCC 2001 Provisional Calendar	Andy H	Trackside	6	24 Aug 2000 12:23