F1 Q&A: Monaco sprint, VSc, Russell Spain strategy and having to let multiple drivers past

Formula 1 announced the 2027 calendar last week, with the number of sprint events increased from six to 10, and one of them Monaco.

This has proved controversial with some fans.

Why pick the worst track on the calendar for overtaking to have two races in one weekend, some have wondered. What’s the point of having two boring races; isn’t one enough?

The thinking behind it, though, is less about the races than about qualifying, and how making Monaco a sprint could mix up the weekend.

Monaco qualifying is renowned as one of the highlights of the season. In that case, surely two great qualifying sessions is better than one?

It was also pointed out by F1 that it gives the chance of two different grid orders and therefore more variability.

There is another factor to consider, too.

Monaco is one of the most demanding tracks on the calendar, and it is renowned as somewhere drivers have to build up to the limit progressively so they can become confident with knowing how the car will behave when they get there.

Get that wrong, push too hard too soon, and the chances of an accident are considerably higher.

So asking the drivers to go straight into a qualifying after a single practice session is a really difficult challenge.

It is likely to mean more mistakes, more action, more drama, and therefore more entertainment.

The same goes for grand prix qualifying.

Yes, by then the drivers will have done a sprint race. But there are always changes made to the cars for qualifying, so again the drivers will be going in blind to some degree.

Yes, the sprint is likely to be a procession. How could it be anything else? But it adds an extra degree of jeopardy to the whole weekend.

Do you think F1 might consider the F2 approach for the virtual safety car, where drivers cannot pit under a VSC but can pit under a full safety car? As a regular viewer of both series, I think this works well in F2 and is another way to solve the jeopardy a short VSC period brings to a race. – Caroline

The VSC was discussed at the so-called FIA sporting advisory committee last week, but sources say no consensus emerged there as to potential changes.

It was also on the agenda for the F1 Commission meeting on Monday but there were no significant developments.

Lando Norris, who lost victory in Madrid by the VSC timing, said after the race that the drivers had previously discussed with the FIA the idea that the VSC should be out for a minimum of a lap so this sort of thing could not happen.

But every potential ‘solution’ comes with consequences. In that case, F1 might end up with a full lap of VSC just to recover a bit of debris.

The VSC was introduced so that relatively small-scale incidents could be dealt with without the lengthy disruption of a full safety car.

It’s accepted that the safety car affords possibilities to gain and lose out, so why should the VSC not do the same? The argument is that, generally, these even out over the season, although the Norris case in Madrid had particularly dramatic consequences.

Antonelli benefited from this one, for example, but has lost out in other scenarios this year. For example, when the VSC gifted Lewis Hamilton the lead in Barcelona, even if that was rendered moot by Antonelli’s subsequent retirement.