OPINION: The Las Vegas Grand Prix’s 10-year extension says everything about F1’s priorities
- Kavi Khandelwal
- Jun 5
- 4 min read
On 4th June 2026, Formula One announced a 10-year extension to the Las Vegas Grand Prix, locking it into the calendar until 2037.
The ink was barely dry before the press release was already calling it “a premier destination for great racing” — which depending on one’s relationship with irony, is either inspiring or deeply funny.
Meanwhile, the sport’s European backbone is quietly dismantling. Imola is gone from the 2026 calendar entirely. Zandvoort will host its final race this August before disappearing. Spa-Francorchamps will share its calendar slot with Barcelona from 2027, appearing every other year.
Domenicali himself said: “We are no longer as dependent on our core markets as we used to be… if there is a downturn somewhere for understandable reasons, we have to live with it and invest where we see growth.”
The sport’s CEO described the European heartland as a “downturn” to be “lived with”. These countries built F1, sustained it through its unpopular decades and gave it character.
Five European circuits saw their contracts expire at the end of 2025, all simultaneously scrambling for relevance in a sport that has decided their histories are not of value.
Las Vegas, apparently, is a different matter.
Credit where it’s due
In terms of numbers, this track has delivered. Las Vegas alone has produced $3.2 billion in cumulative economic impact for Southern Nevada, with all three editions selling out.
American television viewership hit a record 1.5 million last year — a 68% increase over 2024. F1’s North American experiment is a genuine commercial juggernaut, and Las Vegas opened the door wider than anything else.
Grand Prix Plaza — a 39-acre, multi-use facility — represents lasting infrastructure investment rather than a tent-and-barriers pop-up. F1 now has three American races, a presence that would have seemed delusional a decade ago.
Commercially, it is very hard to argue with.
Where it falls apart
Las Vegas is essentially two long straights connected by a handful of corners that exist. The 1.9km stretch down The Strip is a signature feature — and it is spectacular to look at, no question — but spectacular to look at and good racing are not the same thing.
Cars reach 322km/h on the straights, then scrub all that speed through tight, low-speed sections that reward underfloor grip and not much else. The result is a track that rewards a very specific, narrow setup window, punishes those who miss it and produces racing that — once the first lap shuffle is done — often settles into the DRS (Drag Reduction System) trains of the previous regulatory era with limited genuine overtaking variety.
More critically: it is a street circuit. Street circuits carry inherent risk at these speeds. Public road infrastructure was never designed to withstand the aerodynamic loading and mechanical forces of an F1 car at full throttle.
The 2023 race weekend saw a drain cover destroy Carlos Sainz’s car in practice, forcing the session to be abandoned. The 2025 edition saw the same issue resurface — manhole covers requiring emergency welding mid-session.
Drivers raised concerns about the low-grip surface after the inaugural race, particularly at night when temperatures drop and tyre warm-up becomes a genuine safety variable.
When the fastest street circuit on the calendar is also built on public road infrastructure that has repeatedly failed under race conditions, a 10-year commitment should warrant more scrutiny than it is currently getting.
The backlash from Las Vegas itself has been persistent. Max Verstappen said out loud the thing everyone’s thinking: that the Las Vegas Grand Prix is “99% show and 1% sporting event”.
Local businesses filed multiple lawsuits against F1 for revenue losses caused by road closures and disruptions. Properties along the circuit benefited; many businesses further from the route reported losses without receiving compensatory visitor flow.
Choosing to not resolve the community resentment before locking in 10 more years is certainly bold.
A sport, or a show?
F1 can be a global sport without abandoning the races that made it one. Growth and heritage are not inherently in conflict — unless you run the sport in a way that makes them so.
Las Vegas is not an isolated decision. It’s proof that F1 is quietly becoming a premium touring entertainment product that happens to involve racing cars.
New venues are evaluated on hosting fees and television markets. Historic circuits are evaluated on whether they can compete financially with sovereign wealth-backed street races.
Grandstand tickets at Vegas start at $850. The audience being courted is not the fan who has followed the sport for decades. That is a deliberate choice.
Vegas can stay. The American market is real and three US races is not inherently wrong. However, a 10-year guarantee for a three-year old race while Imola gets cut and Zandvoort can’t afford the fees is not balanced. It is a hierarchy, and that hierarchy is about money.
A 10-year deal for a three-year-old race built on a public road, with recurring safety incidents and an unresolved community backlash, while Imola and Zandvoort shut its doors, is not growth. It is a value statement.
And it is not a value statement about the sport.
Edited by Meghana Sree
Comments