I couldn't give a damn about identity. I want the layout and surface to be challenging and for drivers to be punished if they go off. Personally, I couldn't give a damn about where in the world they are or how well they symbolise the local culture. To the arm-chair fan, little of that matters, only to those locals, and on the half of the calendar of which these new tracks feature, the locals don't care either. More turned out for the Valencia test than turned out for the Istanbul race last year, and it's closer to the western dominated sport than most countries. Malaysia are constantly complaining of not enough spectators coming through the gates. Melbourne, Silverstone, Spa, Monza and Suzuka (despite a lack of successful drivers) on the other hand have fanatical followers and have to limit spectators year after year. What do all of those tracks have in common? Challenges. No million mile wide straights. No tropical climates. Few tarmac run-offs without punishing the drivers for mistakes.
Singapore may not be carved in the style of the area (yet), but it's a unique circuit, and more importantly it's a challenge. In a sea of silky-smooth predictadromes, it stands out as one which the drivers both relish and approach with apprehension... it separates the top drivers from the also-rans. Massa's pole lap in 2008 was mesmerising. Alonso's driving the same (even if it was tarnished by circumstances). How many times can that be said of any of the other recent tracks?
Ironically, we're having this discussion during the Sepang weekend, which is probably one of the better recent tracks, at least in layout. It's relatively flowing, it's quite quick, there's the constant heat punishing both drivers and teams and especially since the later slot was introduced, the constant threat of a deluge. It's not a track I especially like, but it's far from the worst of the Tilke tracks around.