[buggy#0]

I don't like to see people dismissing the work of everyone involved. It's a world class venue with world class organisers, who've given us a world class track which has provided world class racing. The actual surface is largely irrelevant - what's important is it's a track with sufficient surface complexity. The way in which the astro has been laid means that even on the flat stuff, there are pronounced shifts in grip levels, much like you'd find on a typical dirt track that's been weather affected. Granted, the layout is much smoother than the astro track next door, but flowing high-grip blue groove circuits are also experiencing a boom in popularity. It's the natural progression of off road circuits internationally, and sooner rather than later, big events will have to start looking at alternatives.

I completely understand that those who've spent their lives racing around dirt tracks will likely find it artificial, and there's no denying it is - the majority of dirt tracks that aren't loose and dusty undergo a lot of sugar treatment to create an unnaturally high-grip surface. That's just how things are. What I really dislike is the "on road with jumps" adage - of course, grip levels are comparable to rubbered-in concrete or carpet. The carpet EOS tracks really are almost suitable for on road racing, minus the jumps. But that's where it all ends - it feels like people almost devalue the skill involved just because cars aren't sliding through every corner and getting covered in dirt after every run. Naturally occurring on the chosen surface or not, every crest, jump, bump or shift in the grip level takes an extreme amount of skill to negotiate with any kind of pace.

If any of you have flicked through the event programme too, they included a nice little section on why they switched to astro. They summarise it nicely.