The Global Gridlock: Why Formula 1’s Desire for Expansion Collides with the 24-Race Barrier

As Formula 1 approaches the sweeping regulatory changes scheduled for 2026, the focus is not solely on engine specifications or aerodynamic designs. Just as crucial is the escalating geopolitical and financial battle over who gets to host a Grand Prix. The sport’s global popularity surge has created an unprecedented demand for hosting slots, transforming the F1 calendar into a high-stakes, zero-sum game.

Every new territory eager to join the roster—from Bangkok to Kyalami—must displace an existing event. This situation has solidified a rigid commercial reality: F1 is not merely looking for exciting venues; it is selecting strategic, high-value economic partners.

The Iron Constraint: F1’s Self-Imposed 24-Race Ceiling

The Concorde Agreement, the complex tripartite document governing the relationship between the FIA, the teams, and Liberty Media, sets the boundaries for F1 operations. Although the current agreement allowed for an upper limit of 25 races per year, F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali has effectively enforced a cap of 24 Grands Prix. This decision is less about technical compliance and more about logistics and personnel sustainability.

The move to 24 races—driven primarily by the addition of major events like Las Vegas and Miami—has been met with vocal opposition from core figures, including multiple world champions like Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton, who cite the physical and emotional toll on paddock staff. Thus, the 24-race calendar is now a highly guarded piece of real estate. Any proposed addition, no matter how politically or historically appealing, must demonstrate overwhelming economic superiority or logistical ingenuity to secure a coveted spot.

The African Ambition: Kyalami, Rwanda, and Political Track Limits

Perhaps the most sentimental item on F1`s expansion checklist is the return to Africa. South Africa`s Kyalami circuit, last seen on the calendar in 1993, represents the most advanced opportunity. Representatives for the historic venue have secured FIA approval for the necessary upgrades to achieve Grade 1 status—the technical prerequisite for hosting F1.

However, F1’s pursuit of the African market has become geographically complex. While Kyalami works on investment, Rwanda unexpectedly emerged as a serious contender, presenting what Domenicali described as a “good plan.” This enthusiasm for diversification was immediately met with geopolitical friction. The Democratic Republic of Congo’s foreign minister publicly urged F1 to cease talks with Rwanda, warning that association with the country risked “blood-stained” brand damage due to ongoing regional conflict.

F1, a sport built on velocity and technical precision, must now carefully navigate international diplomacy. While the prospect of fulfilling Lewis Hamilton’s “huge dream” of racing on the continent remains, the Kyalami deal is a long way off, confirming that passion alone does not secure a multi-million-dollar hosting contract.

The Asian Financial Showdown: Thailand’s Street Race vs. Sepang’s Cost

Asia remains a critical growth area, yet the competition here is purely financial. The Southeast Asian calendar, already anchored by Singapore and China, is seeing fierce bids from two major players.

Thailand’s Bold Bid: The Thai government approved a substantial $1.23 billion package aimed at hosting five Grands Prix between 2028 and 2032. Their proposal bypasses the existing Buriram circuit (home to MotoGP) in favor of a glamorous, high-profile 3.54-mile street race in Bangkok’s capital heart. This commitment underscores a willingness to invest heavily in the street circuit model that has proven highly lucrative for Liberty Media.

Malaysia’s Financial Defeat: Conversely, the highly regarded Sepang International Circuit in Malaysia, which hosted F1 from 1999 to 2017, finds itself sidelined not by inadequacy but by economics. Despite corporate interest from partners like Petronas, the government deemed the reported hosting fee—estimated around $70 million—ultimately unaffordable. Sepang’s technical readiness is irrelevant; in the current climate, if the price tag is too high, F1 simply moves on. This is the stark reality of modern Formula 1: a ready, well-loved track is simply a non-starter if the bid lacks sufficient digits.

The European Rotation: F1’s Logistical Workaround

While global expansion generates headlines, F1 has found a clever way to appease heritage circuits within the constraints of the 24-race limit: the rotation plan.

The most immediate and significant change in Europe is the shift in Spain. From 2026, the Spanish Grand Prix will move from Barcelona to a new, state-of-the-art facility in Madrid, secured until 2035. Barcelona’s contract expires in 2026, signaling the end of an era for the historic venue.

A rotation policy is also confirmed for the highly popular Belgian Grand Prix at Spa-Francorchamps. While Spa holds a contract until 2031, it is scheduled to miss the 2028 and 2030 seasons. These open slots allow F1 to temporarily reintroduce circuits that have recently dropped off the calendar—potentially offering races to France or Germany—under a flexible `European Grand Prix` concept. This strategy maintains interest in traditional markets without permanently increasing the total race count, effectively maximizing revenue from limited slots.

Furthermore, Portugal’s Portimao circuit, which served admirably as a temporary host during the pandemic years, has secured a fixed two-year return in 2027 and 2028. This demonstrates F1’s willingness to reward capable venues when a temporary gap appears in the schedule.

Confirmed Venues: A Look at the Long-Term Grid

As the potential hosts line up, the foundation of the calendar remains robust, with several major events locked in for the foreseeable future, confirming F1’s strong commitments across the globe, particularly in the Middle East and North America, which host multiple races.

Ultimately, the future of the F1 calendar is a logistical and economic puzzle. With the 24-race limit strictly enforced, the governing bodies must weigh historical significance against fresh, aggressive multi-billion-dollar investments. Countries like Thailand and regions like Africa present compelling visions, but until they can meet the rigid technical and financial specifications—and navigate the inevitable political pitfalls—they will remain in the waiting room, hoping an existing host’s contract or financial stability falters.