Kimi Antonelli leads the Drivers’ Championship by 59 points with six victories, while George Russell has leapfrogged Lewis Hamilton for second place following a double podium for Mercedes at the Dutch Grand Prix.

Hamilton was Mercedes’ primary threat for most of the early season, winning convincingly in Barcelona and regularly adding silverware to his cabinet. Now, last weekend’s action at Zandvoort confirmed a new challenger: Lando Norris.

Knowing Zandvoort’s tight layout makes overtaking notoriously difficult, Norris executed a masterclass stint on the hard tyre to build a crucial strategy offset against Antonelli, whom he had lost position to on the second restart following a heavy crash for Max Verstappen. During his second stint, Norris pulled off an impressive move around the outside of Turn 1 and pulled away to secure an 11-second victory.

It marks a vital second consecutive win for the defending champion, fully vindicating McLaren’s recovery after a sluggish start under F1’s complex 2026 regulations.

Norris expected the early deficit, referencing his team’s development pivot during the previous regulation cycle: “We were always going to start behind this season because of how much we focused on last year. It was inevitable. But for us to catch up, we’ve had to out-develop them [Mercedes], and we have.”

Now 83 points behind Antonelli, Norris is in a stronger position to stage a title comeback than Verstappen was at this stage last season. Upgrades introduced at the Hungaroring and Zandvoort elevated McLaren’s overall package, though Norris admits his MCL40 remains “horrible to drive” through tight, low-speed corners.

“The slow speed is still our biggest weakness, especially just this tight, twisty stuff,” Norris explained. “As soon as it gets proper tight and twisty, that is when the car doesn’t like it.”

Instead, Norris attributes much of his recent turnaround to sharp execution from his team: “It’s not just that I’m driving better on track. I’m certainly eliminating my weaknesses on track, but it’s also how I work off the track. Yesterday to today is a perfect example of the work we put in overnight transforming our race and giving me the opportunity to win.”

Where Mercedes and Ferrari’s Race Unravelled

Norris’ victory was aided by strategic miscues behind him. Antonelli pitted under a late Virtual Safety Car after losing the lead, but the move dropped him behind Russell.

Mercedes instructed Russell to yield once Antonelli demonstrated superior pace, but the swap came too late to launch an attack on the lead. Instead, Russell spent the closing laps defending their double podium from a chasing Charles Leclerc and Hamilton.

Despite displaying top-three pace, both Ferrari drivers were repeatedly compromised by track position. The situation peaked on Lap 42, when a delay from the Ferrari pit wall in swapping the two cars cost Hamilton valuable time. Hamilton eventually finished fourth and voiced his frustration after the flag.

“I’m here to win, and it is difficult when you’re looking ahead, and you see the two Mercedes drivers - they get the call, it’s done, and they execute straight away,” Hamilton said.

“They let Kimi by and let him get on with the race. I was on a different strategy, and it was not the same here.”

It has set off alarm bells at Mercedes. Having won just two of the last six races, Antonelli admitted that they are “clearly not the fastest car anymore on the grid” following extensive upgrade packages for both McLaren and Ferrari in recent outings.

“We’re probably second or third [best], and McLaren has taken a huge step, especially since Hungary, since the big upgrade package they brought,” noted Antonelli.

“But I’m confident with the team. It has been working super hard on this next package that is coming up, and they just want to make sure it works well once we put it on.”

Unlike its rivals, Mercedes has opted to stagger its development curve across the full calendar. Their next major upgrade isn’t scheduled until the Bahrain Grand Prix in Malaysia, whereas Ferrari plans to introduce its largest package of the season for its home race at Monza.

F1 is on for an intense run of races between the end of September and the beginning of December. With the mix of time zones, upgrades, and performance fluctuations, it presents an opportunity.

Does Norris see it that way? “My pace advantage over Mercedes at high speed was crazy, but their advantage over us in slow speed is also crazy. Therefore, I don’t have the confidence to say ‘Yeah, I can easily fight for a championship for the rest of the season.’

“I know I’ve just won two races in a row and had two poles in a row, but at the minute I don’t have the car I need to fight for a championship. Of the tracks we have coming up, we’re certainly going to struggle more. So I’m just doing my part to make sure, as a team, we don’t relax, we don’t get complacent in any way, and we work more than we’ve ever done before.”

As one of the most vocal critics of the 2026 regulations, first branding them “Mario Kart” and later “anti-racing”, his demeanour in press conferences has been notoriously bleak.

From tossing a journalist out of his press conference in Japan to admitting he was “beyond” frustrated with battery harvesting tactics, Verstappen accelerated through denial, anger, and bargaining, arriving at depression early in the season.

That spiral raised two crucial questions: Would he actually stay in F1? And if so, would it be with Red Bull?

Red Bull’s current competitiveness hasn’t met expectations, and key figures have continued to depart—most notably his longtime race engineer Gianpiero Lambiase, who leaves at the end of 2027 to eventually join McLaren no later than 2028.

The question of whether “it’s all worth it” clearly crossed Verstappen’s mind, competing against 35 million other reasons to remain. Now, he has finally reached acceptance.

Verstappen has committed—through gritted teeth—to Red Bull while F1 untangles its Frankenstein engine rules, signing a two-year extension through 2030.

Putting faith in Red Bull

Red Bull’s official announcement heavily emphasised Verstappen’s faith in the team, banking on them rather than Mercedes, McLaren, or Ferrari to return him to the top.

When asked if deciding to stay was stressful, Verstappen’s response was typically nonchalant: “No, it wasn’t stressful. I think it was the right call. I feel really good about the team, and we strongly believe we can get back to the top in the coming years.”

It’s clear to see he’s settling in with team principal Lauren Mekies, who appeared in a lighthearted video on social media with Verstappen announcing the contract renewal.

It remains a massive gamble. Red Bull faces an uphill climb on the power unit side with ADOU, while its new wind tunnel won’t impact car development until 2027.

Yet Verstappen insisted he was won over by open discussions with senior management, now led by Oliver Mintzlaff and Mekies in the post-Christian Horner and Helmut Marko era.

“We had very open, transparent discussions,” Verstappen said.

“Over the last few months, talking about the team moving forward - plans, ideas - it’s always been communicated to me in an open way. I like what they are trying to achieve, and that’s why I want to be part of it.”

Verstappen ‘willing to live’ with 2026 rules

Securing Verstappen’s commitment was a big test for Mekies, especially with the Dutchman openly eyeing other motorsport disciplines. His outing at the Nürburgring 24 Hours earlier this year reminded him of what he truly craves: pure, on-the-limit racing.

Modern F1 struggles to provide that. High-degradation tyres paired with aggressive energy recovery systems have generated artificial racing and taken the challenge away from legendary corners like Suzuka’s 130R, Silverstone’s Maggots-Becketts, and Spa’s Eau Rouge.

F1 and the FIA launched a charm offensive, agreeing with the teams to gradually reduce the electrical proportion from 50/50 down to 60/40 by 2028.

“The rules are slowly getting a bit better, and let’s say I’m willing to live with it,” Verstappen admitted. “Hopefully by 2030 it opens up another opportunity, potentially with V8 engines coming in.”

It speaks volumes about the current engine regulations that the grid is already looking toward 2031. FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem’s proposal to return to V8s with a small hybrid element remains largely conceptual, but it offers a light at the end of the tunnel.

By then, Verstappen will be 33-years-old, still young enough to follow the long-career blueprints of Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso, provided the cars are fun to drive.

When asked if sticking with Red Bull through this era felt like a long marriage, Verstappen quipped: “Well, I’m practising for my own marriage! Just seeing how long I can eke that out in racing terms, and then try to triple that in marriage.

“I always said to Dietrich [Mateschitz] that my target was to race for Red Bull forever. We are getting close to that. There are still a lot of years ahead, but that’s still the target.”

Having come into the season as the favourite at Mercedes due to his experience over Andrea Kimi Antonelli, he now finds himself 50 points off his teammate and only two wins to Antonelli’s six at the halfway point.

The retirement five corners into the Belgian Grand Prix was another blow, which Russell blamed largely on his car rather than the collision with Lewis Hamilton.

In his eyes, he shouldn’t have been in a position where his Mercedes was losing performance all the way down the Kemmel Straight.

The team traced it back to a software glitch in the Power Unit, which caused his battery charge - which accounts for 50% of the total power - to drain too quickly.

“I got to the top of Eau Rouge with 0% on the battery. Quite frankly, it was dangerous. I got swamped by three cars,” said Russell.

“I shouldn’t have been in that position in the first place. That’s why I’m most angry.”

It was an out-of-character message that ended up not being broadcast over the F1 TV world feed, with Russell angrily quizzing the team over what happened in between various expletives.

Toto Wolff later confirmed it was an issue affecting all Mercedes-powered cars, although Antonelli escaped it impacting him in the same way as Russell because he lifted fighting Verstappen through Eau Rouge at the start.

This momentary lift effectively reset his system, enabling him to deploy on the Kemmel Straight to retake the lead.

With Russell’s car, it was the second problem Mercedes was chasing that weekend. An issue in Friday practice had left him a second behind Antonelli on lap time, which the team had initially blamed on Russell’s driving.

As Spa is such an energy-starved circuit, any small differences in how much energy you can recover are accentuated in how much energy you can deploy throughout the lap.

This puts a lot of emphasis on the braking zones, because that is primarily where you regenerate the energy to charge the batteries, and then use that power on the straights.

Mercedes said Russell had been making too many corrections through the corners compared to Antonelli, which in turn was costing him momentum and ultimately speed.

Looking at the data, Russell was primarily braking later than Antonelli through La Source, Les Combes, and Fagnes chicane. This is great for gaining lap time in those parts of the track, but ultimately leaves you short on the straights.

This was critical in the final part of Spa, where the flat-out Blancimont section drains the battery. With few opportunities to recharge the battery in the preceding corners, Russell’s later braking compared to Antonelli was effectively compounding the problem.

Mercedes now thinks they are on top of the issue, although it’s unlikely Russell will see the true impact of their changes until after the summer break at another energy-starved circuit such as Monza.

“We are still learning a lot together, ourselves and our colleagues at HPP. We found a bug in our software, and we had to react to it,” said Mercedes technical director, Simone Resta.

“There was already something there at Silverstone, but the issue was more evident at Spa, which is one of the tracks with the highest laptime for power delta. We think we’ve finally understood it and nailed it coming into Budapest.”

Is Antonelli simply more suited to the 2026 cars compared to Russell?

The question of whether Antonelli’s driving style is more suited to these complicated cars than Russell’s is a tricky one.

It’s true that Antonelli’s smoother corner exit with minimal tyre slip is better for the high-degradation Pirelli tyres.

This was on show at Silverstone, where Antonelli went 10 laps longer than everyone else in his stint and built enough of a tyre offset to challenge Charles Leclerc for the win before his car issue forced a retirement.

Russell’s later braking technique at Spa would’ve netted more lap time with the previous generation of cars, as it was all about carrying speed through the corners.

Now that has changed, but it also comes with a caveat. The current generation of power units utilises what has been referred to as “self-learning” elements.

It’s not quite the fancy AI systems being pushed by consumer technology companies, but rather a complex set of algorithms that adapt to a driver’s inputs lap after lap and predict the optimal battery deployment strategy.

There is the argument that this conflicts with Article 27.1 of the F1 sporting regulations: “The driver must drive the car alone and unaided.”

But as Oscar Piastri highlights, these types of systems have been present in F1, even under previous regulations.

“Even with the previous hybrid engines, there was a big element of learning, coding and AI, to some extent,” said Piastri.

“When I joined F1, those engines were incredibly mature, but also the penalty of things being slightly wrong or slightly out of place was significantly less, because it was such a small percentage of the overall power you got.

“Whereas this year, it’s basically half your power, so any small differences or anything that doesn’t quite go right has a massive impact, especially at a track like Spa.”

The drivers have no control over these systems, only access to the ‘Overtake Mode’ that gives extra boost during the race. But as the regulations mature, Piastri expects it will get easier for teams.

“I don’t expect it to ever fully go away,” said Piastri. “But as the manufacturers understand it more and work out the regulation restrictions more, in terms of what the code can and can’t do, hopefully things will become a bit better.”

Can Russell turn things around?

Defending World Champion Lando Norris pointed out that F1 drivers are “paid millions” to adapt to different cars, and that “If you’re not ready, then you’re not at a good enough level.”

But that’s exactly what Russell has been doing. The Briton himself admitted to making adjustments to suit the power unit’s self-learning attributes.

Speaking on Thursday at Hungary, Russell said: “Coming out of Monaco, going into Barcelona and Austria, I made some changes with my driving style, and I felt I made a good step forward.

“And obviously I was on pole in both those races, and won in Austria, and just wanted to continue that forward momentum.

“We recognised after Spa, it wasn’t in the driving style. So that is something, at least, that is a learning that has been validated that I didn’t know pre-Spa.”

We’re also talking about a driver who understands what it takes to become a world champion.

Having initially got his drive at Williams in 2019 by presenting a PowerPoint presentation that listed all the reasons why they should take him on, Russell has always known adaptability is key.

He beat Lewis Hamilton when he was his teammate with the previous generation of cars for three years, and out-raced Valtteri Bottas when he stood in for Hamilton for the Sakhir Grand Prix in 2020 - a driver who had spent 15 rounds in the W11.

Russell spoke a lot about his mental strength in his Thursday media rounds at Hungary, and how in this period, he has been “the most resilient I’ve ever been” in his career.

The belief that he can get it over the line is there, especially when Max Verstappen overcame a 100+ point deficit to finish just two points off Norris last season.

The European swing might be one long headache, but Russell’s experience will count for a lot during the flyaway races at the end of the season when points become critical and pressure increases.

Andrea Kimi Antonelli continues to deliver masterclass performances, while Ferrari is in genuine contention for victories.

At Spa-Francorchamps, it was looking like Charles Leclerc was about to steal two race wins on the bounce from Mercedes.

Leclerc moved to third after a collision between his teammate Lewis Hamilton and George Russell forced the latter to retire five corners into the race.

Following a brief Safety Car period, it was expected that Antonelli would build up a significant gap to Verstappen and Leclerc due to Mercedes’ superior deployment, but that wasn’t the case.

“Max in the first stint was keeping up, and then Charles had great pace as well on the Hards,” said Antonelli.

“It was not easy because there was also so much deployment difference between all the teams. We were strong in certain parts of the track but then weak in others. So it definitely wasn’t straightforward.”

Things became more complicated after Antonelli’s one and only pit stop, when a mid-race Virtual Safety Car was thrown by Race Control to clear up debris on the track - just as Leclerc rounded Stavelot. With Spa being one of the longest tracks on the calendar, any time you can save in the pit lane translates to big gains on track.

Ferrari called Leclerc in from the lead, enabling him to emerge ahead of Kimi Antonelli by 2.5s. Leclerc’s case for winning was increased when he overtook Lando Norris with ease, but Antonelli began to lose time, to the tune of nearly a second per lap, behind the McLaren.

It felt like a little justice for Norris, whose race weekend was compromised by Mercedes due to a reliability upgrade for his engine that meant taking on extra power unit components, triggering a 10-place grid drop despite qualifying in third.

Antonelli tried once around the outside of the braking zone of Les Combes, but Norris shut the door. A couple of laps later, Antonelli harvested enough energy to get the job done down the Kemmel Straight. The hunt for Leclerc was on.

The Ferrari driver had kept him at an arm’s length two seconds for most of the second stint, but Antonelli began to reel him in once they were released from traffic. Engineer Pete Bonnington told Antonelli to watch

With 10 laps to go, Antonelli made his move exiting Raidillon and down the Kemmel Straight, emerging ahead as they reached the braking zone of Les Combes.

Leclerc didn’t let him go easily and kept the pressure for the remaining nine laps until the chequered flag. It was clear that the Ferrari was unable to keep up on the straights, but it was now the second race in a row in which they had been unexpectedly competitive at a track that should have exposed their weaknesses.

“On Thursday, we expected to be very far back, maybe to the extent of four or five tenths. In qualifying, that was true. But in the race, we were a bit closer than we thought. So, it’s been positive,” said Leclerc.

“On two tracks which, on paper, were quite bad for us, we won, and we finished second - with a little bit of luck. But it was a good effort from the team. On two tracks that didn’t fit our car particularly well, we’ve scored good points.”

For Antonelli, it’s a fortuitous bit of luck that Russell did not finish. The Briton could be heard, furious, in a radio message in the aftermath of his first-lap collision with Hamilton.

”I’m out! What the fuck happened with the SOC (State of Charge) down the straight? I had no fucking battery down the straight. Guys, unacceptable. Unfucking acceptable for this whole weekend.”

Russell said that he had 30% to 40% less power than he had anticipated at the start, which caused him to get swamped down the Kemmel Straight from third.

Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff would later reveal that all Mercedes-powered cars were down on power, particularly out of Turn 1. Despite the widespread issue, Russell’s battery deployment was nowhere near the same as Antonelli’s, primarily losing out on the Kemmel Straight and exiting Stavelot.

Antonelli believes it is a byproduct of F1’s complicated 2026 regulations, having himself fallen victim to unexplained power losses earlier in the season.

“With George this weekend, there was a slight loss, and sometimes you just don’t understand. I had the same in Australia, for example. It can be a little bit down to driving, but sometimes the system just does something a little bit different,” said Antonelli.

“It’s very complicated, and for the team, you have to appreciate the work, because the system is very complicated. They’re trying to make things a bit easier, but sometimes it’s hard to get it perfect.”

Spa Francorchamps is also one of the most energy-demanding tracks on the calendar, which itself throws up some unintended consequences, says Antonelli: “If you start driving differently, then for the system it’s a bit crazy. So, it is tricky. But I have to agree that, for George, this weekend there was a slight issue. I’m sure it will be fixed for Budapest.”

Russell is now back to being 50 points behind his title rival, with Lewis Hamilton now reclaiming second in the title race and looking like a legitimate threat if Ferrari can bring more upgrades to its car.

Hamilton escapes sporting penalty for unsafe release

Hamilton came back from another five-second time penalty for the collision with Russell, after the stewards determined he was wholly at fault for the collision.

While serving the penalty during his pit stop under VSC, Hamilton asked for a front wing flap adjustment. This is done to offset any understeer that usually develops over the course of a race, either due to damage or tyre fatigue.

Mechanics can adjust the flap by reaching over with a mechanical tool, although the call to do so for Hamilton was late. As he pulled away from his pit box, the front right tyre struck the mechanic, and Hamilton was forced to stop.

Luckily, no harm was caused, so Hamilton was sent on his way. An unsafe release investigation post-race followed, potentially putting Hamilton’s late surge to fourth at risk.

Usually, the tariff for an unsafe release in a race is a five-second, 10-second, or drive-thru penalty. But the stewards later determined that Hamilton had gained no sporting advantage because he stopped, so it was one of the rare circumstances in which they did not issue a sporting penalty.

Instead, Ferrari was disciplined by the headmaster. They received a €30,000 fine (€10,000 of which is suspended for 12 months), and they must submit a report to the FIA within the next 14 days that shows measures have been put in place to prevent it from happening again.

It sums up the luck Ferrari has experienced recently. Timings of the safety car, wins at circuits which should be weaknesses, and now a legitimate escape from a sporting penalty.

The racing gods are making it easy for Ferrari to mount a challenge to Mercedes, which is why this second half of the season is going to be fascinating to watch unfold.

Antonelli was building up to the perfect pole lap all day. Fastest in FP3, fastest in Q1 and Q2, provisional pole in Q3.

Improvements from Ferrari piled the pressure on during the final Q3 run, but what he perhaps didn’t anticipate was Max Verstappen crashing at Turn 9 on a fresh set of soft tyres, seemingly overdriving his RB22.

Yellow flags first appeared, but Antonelli had interpreted them as double yellows on his dashboard:

Antonelli: “Yeah, Bono, but I don’t understand. You told me yellow, yellow.”

Bono: “Affirm, yes.”

Antonelli: “I had a double yellow on my dash...”

Bono: “So we’ll have to have a look through that, see what your dash was trying to tell you.”

As he backed off, Russell powered through and snatched pole from Leclerc with a 1:06.113s, one of the quickest times all weekend and two tenths clear of the Ferrari.

But was it done under double waved yellows?

An initial investigation cleared Russell, but there was some confusion after Race Control declared that one of his times was deleted due to a double-waved yellow-flag infringement.

This was later clarified by the FIA to be just his in-lap to the pits, with eight other drivers also having laps deleted for passing the double-yellow zone after the chequered flag.

Amid the confusion, Toto Wolff was also adamant that Russell was on pole, telling Sky Sports: “It’s a 100m lift, a single yellow for George, loses a tenth and a half. It’s completely on.”

Data from his lap shows that his speed dropped by 25kph (215kph versus 240kph on the previous lap), costing him roughly the same amount of time Wolff had claimed.

This was enough to fulfil the regulations, with Article B1.8.4 (a)/(b) of the F1 Sporting Regulations stating for a single-waved yellow: “Drivers must reduce their speed and be prepared to change direction […] expected to have braked earlier and/or discernibly reduced speed in the relevant marshalling sector.”

In the event of a double yellow, drivers must slow down and not attempt a meaningful lap time; otherwise, the lap will be automatically deleted and may result in a 10-place grid penalty.

Antonelli felt that the incident, which happened at the fastest part of the track, warranted a double yellow: “I think double yellows would have been enough, because you just need to abort the lap, but for sure it is something that needs to be reviewed.

“Especially when it happens in a high-speed corner. If it’s a slow speed, still single yellow can be okay, but for a fast corner, it should be double yellow straightaway.”

So why wasn’t it a double yellow straight away?

Marshals trackside have access to a marshalling system that looks a bit like a Playstation controller. Each button denotes a flag that transmits the signal to the light panels and timing screen.

These are mainly supplied by EM Motorsport, whose panels must be ultra-bright (64,000 candelas per square meter) to be visible in direct sunlight.

The sequence for a single yellow flag is a solid yellow flash. For a double yellow, it’s a diagonal yellow split across the panel. In the replays, Russell’s car is seen passing a solid colour rather than a diagonal split.

According to the FIA, the marshal operating at the post was very quick to press the single yellow button, and it took 15 seconds for the Race Director to override it and make it a double yellow flag.

It’s impressive that Russell spotted and distinguished the two while going 200kph+, but this is also muscle memory ingrained in every driver since karting.

When asked about the incident, Russell said: “I didn’t even see the car because the run-off is so far. I think in that instance, a single yellow was correct because a double yellow is immediate danger. Lifting a hundred metres before a corner or lifting off with a single yellow, you’re never going to lose control of the car.

“The only reason Verstappen was in the wall that far away is because he was attacking and lost control of the car. So I think the single yellow was correct. I did everything right to be very much under control, and it’s a very different story to a double yellow.”

Russell benefited from this timing, enabling him to take an unlikely pole after tinkering with his car’s setup in the buildup to qualifying during FP3.

Although he still suffered from four-wheel drift that many others reported at the hot 50°C track temperatures, Russell felt he made the right adjustments and managed the tyres.

“It was just a little bit of how I brought the tyres in, changed a little bit of the front wing,” said Russell.

“It’s one of those, when you nail Turn 1, and you go through fast, but the car doesn’t slide, it keeps the temperatures a little bit down, so the tyres are cooler approaching the next turn. Then you have more grip, you go through there faster, and the tyres are cooler once again.”

It’s a crucial pole for the Briton and a dose of good fortune after a rotten run of races: a DNF in Canada, a penalty fiasco in Monaco, and an unlucky Virtual Safety Car in Spain.

With the two Ferraris separating him and Antonelli, it is a great opportunity for Russell to cut the gap to Antonelli in the Drivers’ Championship by a couple of points.

Although he is wary of discounting them, considering both Hamilton and Leclerc are running upgrades to their engine and fuel this weekend, plus there is the added jeopardy of Pirelli predicting a three-stop as a possible strategy option.

“These guys are super-fast, and it’s going to be a challenge having the two of them nearby. We saw Lewis in Barcelona, and how great his pace was. It will be challenging for them to overtake us in the straights because we’ve got the straight-line advantage, but they’ve got the advantage in the corners,” said Russell.

“If they’re splitting the strategy or putting us under pressure, it may be difficult to hold onto. And of course, Kimi is going to be super-fast. The McLarens have looked really fast. Max, I don’t know how his last lap looked, but he was right up there as well with those new Red Bull upgrades. So, there’s a huge fight on our hands from all angles.”

Michael Schumacher, Fernando Alonso, Nigel Mansell, Alain Prost, Niki Lauda, and Sebastian Vettel (to name a few!) have all achieved the feat. Now Lewis Hamilton adds his name to the list of winners in the scarlet red car.

It was a bold strategy from Ferrari that won them the Barcelona-Catalunya Grand Prix. In a race that demanded tyre conservation, owing to Pirelli’s tyres being a step softer this year, Hamilton opted for an aggressive three-stop strategy.

Although it’s slower on paper, Hamilton applied pressure on Mercedes to make it work. The key moment came when George Russell, searching for a win after an unlucky spate of race weekends, was unable to match the race pace of teammate Kimi Antonelli.

While the Mercedes pair clashed, Hamilton slashed their advantage in half and set himself up for a charge in the final stint. As luck would have it, Fernando Alonso’s Aston Martin stopped with a battery problem after 40 laps, bringing out the VSC.

It lasted just long enough for Ferrari to pit Hamilton earlier than they planned, getting him out just in front of Russell. While everyone else was trying to make the conventional two-stop work, Hamilton powered through.

There was a bit of luck when a fast-charging Antonelli was forced to retire with a power unit problem, a shock upset in that perhaps shows Mercedes’ reliability might still be a deciding factor on how the title race will pan out.

It gave Hamilton some breathing space on the run to the chequered flag, with him finishing 19 seconds ahead of Russell.

The key changes by Ferrari that made Hamilton’s win possible

It seemed implausible 12 months ago that this partnership was ever on this trajectory.

Even with the change in car regulations, any chance of winning was going to be tricky, raising questions about whether Hamilton had jumped ship at Mercedes at the wrong time.

“I truly believed in my decision to join Ferrari. I truly believed in what this team could achieve, what we could achieve together,” said Hamilton.

“I know it started out with lots of excitement and then lots of doubt and lots of negativity that followed through a whole year. And I really feel like my fans really rescued me last year, my family also, and friends who stuck with me through it all.”

Hamilton signalled the need for several changes at the end of last season if he and Ferrari were ever going to get back to winning.

Many of those were made for 2026. A new race engineer in Carlo Santi, a proper start for Loic Serra, the return of Ferrari’s innovations in the aero department, and a switch of brake material for Hamilton from the Japanese GP onwards to exploit his late braking technique.

Spain and the previous two Grand Prix in Canada and Monaco have been Hamilton’s most convincing run of races since he joined Ferrari.

The team introduced eight upgrades to the SF-26 in Barcelona, focusing on the front wing and floor. It’s clear they are working well, as Hamilton and Charles Leclerc were consistently ahead of McLaren in qualifying and in the race.

“These guys have really listened and really worked hard to add performance and be innovative. This year is all about innovation,” said Hamilton.

“We came out with the bit on the rear exhaust, the Macarena rear wing, and this is what I was asking for last year. It was like, this team has to be the leaders in that, and they’ve shown that they can and they will.”

Hamilton soaked up the British national anthem on the podium before celebrating with his Ferrari teammates during the Italian national anthem, mimicking the enthusiasm once shown by Vettel, Alonso and Schumacher for the prancing horse.

Carlo Santi, affectionately known as Hamilton’s ‘Italian Bono’, joined him on the podium to pick up the Constructors’ trophy. He took over race engineering duties for Hamilton from Ricardo Adam, having previously worked with Kimi Raikkonen in 2017/2018.

Hamilton said the engineering setup is “a million times better than it was last year,” and it was clear that communication in the race was one of the key strengths Santi has brought to the fold.

“It’s really great to be able to share that experience with him on that stage. Also, he’s very, very quiet. You could tell it’s hard for him to express his emotions,” said Hamilton.

“I’m giving him these big hugs and pulling him in, saying thank you. I like to think this has probably reignited his love for being an engineer, as it has for me as a driver.”

Why Hamilton can’t be ruled out in the title race

Hamilton is quick not to get ahead of himself, knowing that Ferrari is still a far way behind its potential if the figures from the power unit ADUO are to be believed.

“By no means is this something that’s just going to happen all the time.

“We’ve got a heavy, heavy, steep mountain to climb up ahead of us to try to do this, as Mercedes has all year so far.”

While the win has been coming for Ferrari, for Hamilton, it is all part of his post-Abu Dhabi 2021 journey.

This was his 106th victory in F1, a remarkable achievement in itself, but the seven-time world champion referenced the self-doubt that often plagues greats of sport when things aren’t clicking.

“Every win is special in its own way, but there are different journeys to each. Like the one at Silverstone in 2024. That was, in its own way, a monumental moment for me,” said Hamilton.

“It’s a moment where I never thought maybe that I’d ever get to win again. Then after a year like last year, there were definitely moments that I was like, ‘Sheesh, maybe it is true that when you get to a certain point, you lose it.’

“But I’ve proven that you don’t. You always have it, and it just takes work. It takes perseverance, that constant believing in yourself, to tap into your inner self and keep yourself alive, keep yourself fit.”

Hamilton jumped Russell for second in the championship standings after Monaco, and now he’s just cut the deficit to Antonelli to 41 points.

By being there whenever something has gone wrong for Mercedes, Hamilton has positioned himself as a contender who cannot be ruled out in what is shaping up to be a fascinating European swing of the season.

I use the term ‘briefly’ because of the complicated set of events that took up most of Friday’s action at the Circuit de Barcelona Catalunya.

Alpine had successfully argued the case for Gasly’s third place to be reinstated after it convinced F1’s official timekeeper, FOM, to double-check its timing loop systems in Monaco.

The seven-page result of its right of review detailed how FOM had admitted that there was a fault with how it measured the distance between one of its timing loops and the start of the pit lane.

The timekeepers use loop ‘zones’ that act as mini-sectors, triggering when a car passes over each point, and calculate the average speed for that specific segment.

It works using the following methodology:

This is then used to determine if a driver is over the 60kph speed limit. Article B1.6.3(a) in the Sporting Regulations states: “During the race, any driver who exceeds the limit will receive a penalty in accordance with Article 54.3.”

The regulations don’t explicitly state how they calculate speed, but it isn’t determined from wheel speeds alone for accuracy reasons, according to the ruling.

It reads: “It is acknowledged that some elements of this calculation are FIA-defined parameters, but, as any tyre needs to be slipping to generate force, wheel speed is inherently not equal to car speed, certainly not to the level of accuracy needed for Pit Lane Speed Measurement. This is why it is widely understood that an off-car system for measurement of pit lane speed is required.”

Monaco is a tricky pit lane in this case because of its geography. Rather than being a straight line, it’s curved, so the timekeepers use nine of these loop ‘zones’.

Gasly was judged to have gone over the 60kph limit by 0.1kph on two separate occasions, the second being during the Safety Car laps when the cars went through the pit lane after the red flag.

According to managing director Steve Nielsen, Alpine had adjusted Gasly’s pit speed limiter by 0.1kph under the red flag, as was allowed by the scrutineers, to ensure they would not be caught out again.

After the race, FOM used a LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) scanner - which uses lasers to measure distances to an accuracy of 3mm - to measure the distance between the pit entry and the first loop ‘zone’.

It proved to be the key piece of evidence in the whole saga, as it revealed that the initial setup calculation used to determine the penalties was off by 77cm, meaning the minimum distance element of the equation was inaccurate.

Alpine had presented its own telemetry data, including wheel-speed and team sensors, showing Gasly was consistently below the 60kph limit, but the stewards dismissed it because neither is deemed sufficiently accurate to measure pit-lane speed.

The FOM data was enough, with the FIA stewards deeming that Gasly (and potentially others) were victims of an error that likely arose due to the addition of Cadillac’s garage and the repositioning of the barriers at the pit entry.

Why wasn’t this rectified earlier in the weekend?

Speeding penalties in the pit lane tend to be one of F1’s most clear-cut rules.

It’s why people often refer to it as a ‘slam dunk’ penalty, because the system has generally been right in the past.

After several drivers were fined for exceeding the speed limit by similar margins in practice, both the FIA and the teams discussed possible reasons as early as Friday night.

Nielsen also confirmed that it was raised as an issue, but didn’t think the official timekeepers were at fault. This is why no LIDAR scans were made on Saturday or early on Sunday.

It turned out to be the case, with each driver choosing to take a shortcut into the pit entry falling foul of a rather unique set of circumstances.

McLaren and Red Bull intend to appeal, Mercedes seek legal options

Gasly’s third place was rescinded via the publication of an adjusted final result (FIA Document 100 from the Monaco GP), but this was later recalled when it emerged that both McLaren and Red Bull lodged intentions to appeal the decision.

Both teams now have 96 hours to gather relevant evidence to submit a formal appeal to the International Court of Appeal (ICA).

One Mercedes insider is also said to be ‘livid’ with the decision to overturn the result in favour of Gasly, with team principal Toto Wolff confirming they are looking at legal options.

“We were just on the phone with our lawyers to look at what we can do for George,” said Wolff.

“A drive-thru penalty is equivalent to 20 seconds of race time. What would 20 seconds of race time have meant for his result?

“Do we think that we realistically have a chance of reversing the result? I don’t think so. But we definitely have to give it a go if we see there is a millimetre of chance.”

This boils down to how Gasly inherited the podium in the first place, as both Oscar Piastri and George Russell were also issued the same five-second time penalties for speeding in the pit lane.

By the same admission, their penalties should be rescinded and positions adjusted accordingly. But as noted in the ruling: “There is no regulation that gives the stewards the power to ‘undo’ a served penalty.”

Williams successfully overturned a penalty for Carlos Sainz after a collision with Liam Lawson at last year’s Dutch Grand Prix, but as he’d already served a time penalty in the race, the stewards could not give the time back. Instead, they only wiped the penalty points he received.

Based on this precedent, it’s unlikely that Mercedes, McLaren, or Ferrari would be able to overturn the in-race penalties for their drivers with any appeal.

Where Red Bull and McLaren’s arguments might lie is in sporting merit.

Sporting fairness dictates that Gasly should lose the place because he was only there due to penalties for Russell and Piastri.

But as Alpine didn’t serve the time penalty, it’s easy to rescind and amend the result, given they were the only team to successfully review the penalty and found inaccuracies in the system.

F1 teams will always act in their own interests, but the outcome sets an unwanted precedent for how future penalties are handled. They could choose not to serve them in a race, potentially accrue more penalties, and appeal later.

Either way, it is certainly one for the ICA to ponder.

F1 and the FIA should make every possible effort to ensure results are determined on track at the chequered flag.

Deciding them days later in a courtroom isn’t in anyone’s interest and puts the integrity of the rest of the regulatory operation into disrepute.

For Russell and Mercedes, the whole saga snowballed into a nightmare scenario that now sees him 68 points behind Kimi Antonelli in a two-horse race for the title.

“Clearly, we can all learn from that because that wasn’t something that just came up on Sunday, that suddenly 10 cars were in breach of pit lane speeding. It was flagged before,” said Wolff.

“For us as a team, and especially for George, it has massive implications. He had a difficult qualifying session, but he moved all the way back up there, and clearly, without the penalty, without us not serving it correctly, it would have been a totally different outcome for his race.

“Whether he would have made the podium or just not is a different question, but a different outcome would have had an impact on his championship situation. And that’s why it’s unfortunate.”

There is virtually no run-off, and even in the corners that have an escape road, you need to decide fairly early that you’re going to bail; otherwise, you’ll end up in the barrier.

Andrea Kimi Antonelli had to deal with all of that for 78 laps, plus the possibility of speeding in the pit lane, a red flag for a track breakup with 11 laps to go, and another standing start with three-time Monaco GP winner Lewis Hamilton alongside him.

That second restart was tense. Not least because starts have been the only weakness of Antonelli’s so far in this miraculous campaign.

Hamilton and Ferrari were known for gaining significant ground at the start, and with the pressure of winning Monaco less than 10 laps away, it was beginning to weigh on Antonelli.

“I was frustrated, because Lewis was starting next to me this time and knowing how good they start, I was like - well, I cannot say, I’m going to say a bad word - but I was like ‘Oh man’

As the five lights extinguished, Antonelli emerged a car-length ahead of Hamilton once they reached Sainte Devote for a second time: “He had a lot of wheel spin, which made my life a little bit easier heading into Turn 1. But yeah, it was not easy to refocus after the red flag.”

Antonelli had lapped everyone leading to the red flag, including his teammate George Russell, up to third place.

He was so fast that engineer Peter Bonnington told him to slow down when his times began to light up purple on the timing screen, denoting the fastest lap of the race.

Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff remarked that Antonelli was producing lap times “like clockwork,” emulating the consistency all great drivers like Ayrton Senna, Graham Hill, and Michael Schumacher once displayed when they conquered Monaco’s famous streets.

It was the kind of performance that befits a champion-in-waiting.

“I just felt really one with the car, and I was just able to set a good rhythm with high intensity, and the car was responding really well,” said Antonelli.

“I was surprised, but it was just one of those days where everything clicks.”

It must be worrying for Russell that everything isn’t clicking for him in the same way. His Monaco GP was a nightmare fuelled by penalties and strategy mishaps, leaving him empty-handed.

With Hamilton now second in the championship, he finds himself 68 points behind in a two-horse race.

“Across the last two races, I’ve effectively lost around 40 points. It’s incredibly frustrating, but the rest of the season can still look very different,” said Russell.

“We saw that last year and in many seasons previous. It’s unfortunate how things have played out so far, but I’m aiming to bounce back in Barcelona. I believe in myself, and I know what I’m capable of.”

Russell loses points and Gasly loses a podium for bizarre pit lane infraction

Part of Russell’s headaches came from an unusual scenario developing in the pit lane. He was among four drivers who were pinged for going over the 60kph speed limit by 0.1kph, all of whom were awarded five-second time penalties.

These penalties must either be added onto a driver’s elapsed time at the end of the race, or they are served at their next pit stop. Failing to do so results in another penalty because of the possibility of gaining a sporting advantage.

When Russell accidentally pitted under the Safety Car, he turned into his pit box just as the Mercedes mechanics had just served Antonelli and were beginning work on the car. He was banged to rights.

The stewards awarded him a rather harsh drive-through penalty for failing to serve his time penalty correctly, which effectively undid his race at the restart.

But why were Russell and the three other drivers, including Lewis Hamilton, all penalised for the same and small infraction?

The FIA measures pit speed using timing loops that activate when drivers enter the pit lane, which is tracked via their official transponders. Rather than measuring their speed with a sensor, it’s an average over the course of the distance of the pit lane.

Drivers often practice hitting their pit speed limiters as close as possible to the lines to minimise time spent in the pit lane. Some even look at where the loops are on Thursday to see what margins they can get away with.

On Friday, four drivers were fined for going between 0.3kph and 0.5kph over the speed limit and in the race, a similar scenario occurred.

The FIA confirmed after the race that their equipment wasn’t faulty, and while Russell believes it might have been related to a software issue, others put it down to cutting the line at pit entry.

“I wasn’t speeding. It’s just the way the pit lane is. I’ve done this pit lane for years. It’s not like I came in and didn’t press the button or something like that. Pitlane limiter is on immediately,” said Hamilton.

“It’s just the line that you take, which is the same line we’ve all taken for years. Where you come in, you kind of cut part of the white line. I was shocked to hear that I was speeding because I wasn’t actually over the speed limit.

“I think it’s the distance and something that we really need to look into because I heard lots of people got that today, and they probably weren’t really speeding.”

Alpine would later file a right to review after Pierre Gasly was hit with two separate pit speeding infractions, costing him a shot at a podium at the Monaco GP following retirements from Lando Norris, Max Verstappen and issues for eventual third-placed man Isack Hadjar.

“I am absolutely heartbroken by the outcome of today’s race. I have so many emotions right now, not only after such a challenging weekend but also after having a lifelong dream of a Monaco podium taken away from me for reasons I just cannot comprehend,” said Gasly.

“I know I was under the pit lane speed limit and activated it much before the line. We also have a margin for these occurrences not to exceed, so I just hope they can review it properly and give us the result that all of us on the team deserve.”

Team representative Flavio Briatore says Alpine has a “strong case” for a review of the situation. The team will have to present the FIA with new evidence relevant to the sanction that was unavailable at the time of the stewards’ decision if they want a further hearing.

Alpine staff were seen using a measuring wheel to measure the pit lane during the packdown, although given that pit lane speeding penalties tend to be among F1’s most clear-cut penalties, any review of the infractions seems implausible.

Leclerc points finger at Ferrari supplier for Monaco crash

Hamilton escaped any penalty impacting his race by serving it under the Safety Car that was brought out for Lance Stroll’s crash, which was the result of a track break-up between Turns 18 and 19 that would later claim teammate Charles Leclerc at the restart.

According to the Race Director’s event notes, the track had been resurfaced between Turns 19 and Turn 1.

As it happened, a small section began to break up over the course of 60 laps, with shards of asphalt being picked up by both Stroll and Leclerc, sending them both into the TecPro barrier.

Neither Stroll nor Leclerc initially blamed the track, instead pointing the finger at issues with their brakes. While the Aston Martin is known to have an issue with its brake-by-wire regen system, Leclerc’s problems were unusual.

When he got back to the pits, he was animated as he spoke to the engineers and Ferrari’s deputy team principal, Jerome D’Ambrosio.

“Finishing my home race like this is disappointing. I had an issue with my rear brakes in the last corner and hit the wall. The positive to take from this weekend is that we have a solution in place and will adjust the configuration of my brakes,” said Leclerc.

A couple of hours after the race, supplier Brembo issued a response: “The company does not know the cause of the problems encountered by Leclerc and considers it premature to make definitive technical assessments before analysing the available data.”

You could argue that Leclerc didn’t name Brembo explicitly in his statement, so it could be seen as an admission of guilt from the supplier. Hamilton is known to be using brake materials from Carbon Industrie, the same supplier he had at Mercedes, since the Japanese GP.

A switch for Leclerc could be on the horizon, especially since Brembo’s partnership with Ferrari extends to its subsidiaries AP Racing, which supplies clutches, and Öhlin dampers.

It is a strange development in what is fast becoming a season where Leclerc is struggling to match Hamilton in performance alone, just as the seven-time world champion gets to grips.

Hamilton praised Fred Vasseur, who had to briefly step away from his duties in Monaco on Saturday after spending Friday night in the hospital for a medical issue, for implementing the changes he wanted to get himself back into contention.

“I can’t believe that I’m second in the championship, and I’m really happy and thankful for that. I couldn’t have done that without this team, without the reliability we have, and without Fred,” said Hamilton.

“Fred has been awesome in supporting me. I think last year was really tough for both of us, and I’ve been begging him for certain changes. He pulled through and did those, and now I’m seeing the fruits of that.”

Although it’s beginning to click for Hamilton, it’s his Mercedes protege who has been taking the honours on the top step. And we all leave Monaco asking the same question: Can anyone stop Kimi Antonelli?

Ferrari looked like the team to beat on Friday as Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton traded fastest laps, but in the end, it was a surprise run from Max Verstappen and some hidden pace finally being shown by Mercedes.

Monaco is one of the more unique tracks this year because the cars are not starved of energy, so there is the possibility of doing two consecutive runs in qualifying without needing a ‘cool down’ lap in between.

Leclerc had ruined his first attempt by running wide at Massonet, then after pitting for new tyres and fuel, he topped the timesheets by 0.024s with a lap that included a spectacular run through the swimming pool chicane.

Verstappen left it until the dying moments of Q3 to produce a lap that was two tenths faster than Leclerc’s effort, but Antonelli came through to produce a “magic lap” and snatched pole by 0.043s - without fully realising he was on course to do so.

“I didn’t know how much I was improving. I just saw it before the delta, and then I saw it at the finish line,” said Antonelli.

“Sector two felt great, but then I got the confirmation on the radio. It’s so intense here that you just think about trying to drive as fast as you can without making mistakes. Then you see where you end up once you cross the finish line.”

None of Antonelli’s sectors went purple on the timing screen, but a quicker second sector and consistent pace throughout Q3 won him the pole.

Ferrari drop the ball

Leclerc was the last man on track who could provide an upset, but he lost the rear of his edgy Ferrari going through Tabac. Limping back with damage, he parked up at Rascasse, put his hands into his visor, and rued another lost pole at Monaco.

The Ferrari driver had noted a problem with the brakes over team radio and later told media that he was experiencing a similar issue with his car in Canada, but didn’t elaborate.

Hamilton said the team didn’t change anything on their cars overnight, but by sitting still, they left themselves vulnerable to those who had a lot to gain.

Red Bull was the biggest example of how things can change quickly, especially when you least expect it. Verstappen was nine-tenths off in FP3, but come qualifying, his RB22 came alive.

“I was confident we would make some improvements heading into qualifying, but not to fight for pole,” said Verstappen.

“When I jumped into the car, I was like: ‘OK, let’s try and recover a bit. Maybe top five, that was the target.’ I’d say from quite early on in qualifying, the car felt a bit better.

“We still have our little problems, especially in the middle sector, that’s where we lose the most, where you have a few kerbs that you have to take, and there are a few bumps in the track. It’s just a little bit more complicated at the moment for our car.”

Those bumps are specifically at the second Mirabeau, where an awkward kerb exiting the corner can easily throw the front axle into the barriers if taken too aggressively, and then at the Nouvelle chicane.

Antonelli and Leclerc were both noticeably using the kerbing in the middle of the corner to rotate their cars aggressively, so they could open up the steering lock more quickly for the second part.

It’s a trick that requires precise timing and can result in a crash, as Audi’s Gabriel Bortoleto found out when he clipped the barrier, causing the one and only red flag.

The ability to ride the kerbs more aggressively gave Antonelli free lap time, a result of Mercedes working hard overnight on the simulators and through the data to find the extra tenths.

“I’m not going to lie, we were struggling,” said Antonelli.

“The team did an incredible, big turnaround compared to yesterday with the setup and overnight correlation. The car just felt much more alive this morning.

“It was also more forgiving, much more to kerb cutting and bumps.”

It produced one of the closest qualifying battles of the season, with Antonelli in prime position to extend his unprecedented run of wins since taking his first at China in March.

Russell left searching for answers

While it seems easy for Antonelli, teammate George Russell appears to have put the difficulty on hard mode since his victory in Melbourne.

He was lost for words when it came to explaining the deficit of eight-tenths of a second to Antonelli.

“At the start of the year, it was just easy. Every lap I did in practice, qualifying, it was first place, worst case second, every single session: Q1, Q2, Q3,” said Russell when speaking to Sky Sports.

“In the last three races, it’s just been nowhere. Even in Canada, it was a real fight to get a decent lap, and then I just nailed it at the end of both of those sessions.

“But that was sort of like pulling something special out of the hat and a little bit lucky to do it at the right time. But that’s just where I am right now.”

Having fallen 43 points behind his teammate after Canada, Russell highlighted how the long seasons give him the chance to catch up.

But sport is all about momentum. Right now, that’s with Kimi Antonelli, and he has the chance to add a win at one of F1’s most prestigious races to his roster.

When asked if they had any advice for Antonelli, Verstappen smirked: “When the lights go out, wait one second. That’s my advice!”

Hamilton retorted: “Yeah, I’m one step behind, so two seconds!”

It might be the only way they can stop the teenage prodigy from making it five in Monaco.

During the break before race weekend, the FIA announced an agreement “in principle” with all 11 teams and F1 stakeholders to increase the proportion of total power coming from the internal combustion engine (ICE) and reduce the electrical component (MGU-K).

Instead of the current 50/50 split, which is causing unwanted problems such as battery drain, super-clipping, and lift-and-coast, the split would be 60/40 in favour of bringing more power to the ICE and preventing energy starvation.

This would primarily be done by increasing the fuel flow rate, which would add an extra 50kW (67 bhp) of power, and by reducing the MGU-K system by a corresponding 50kW.

Fresh off his escapades driving in the Nurburgring 24 hours race, Max Verstappen was told about the changes and suggested they could convince him to stay in F1.

Once it became clear that the dark arts of F1 engine politics aren’t simply a case of doing what’s best for the show, Verstappen said changes proposed were the ‘minimum necessary’ to keep his interest when asked about the energy deployment.

He made it clear that it isn’t simply about what F1 is producing right now with the ‘Yo-Yo’ style of racing, remarking that they could put on the same kind of show as Canada and the previous four races in rental cars.

“It’s all a bit confusing. It’s just not what F1 should be about. It’s way too complex, all of this,” said Verstappen.

“The fans don’t even know what we are dealing with while driving; what is allowed when you’re behind or when you’re the car ahead, what we have to do on a formation lap or what we have to do in an out-lap, or how much battery we’re allowed to charge.

“F1 just needs to be more pure. I really hope that what they try to do next year will go through because I think that is necessary, the minimum necessary, to make it a bit more natural and a bit more back to normal, or at least a bit more pure racing.”

F1 drivers still uneasy about 2026 cars

A lot has been done to improve the cars’ predictability after Oliver Bearman’s frightening crash at Suzuka, with the FIA even trialling different LED rainlight colours in Canada to indicate different battery charge states.

Despite this, much of it remains a “weird feeling,” according to Lewis Hamilton, who noted that the cars are not doing what they expect when going full throttle.

“You go down the power, open up the Straight Mode, and then the power dies halfway down the straight, and the RPM starts dropping. It doesn’t feel what motorsport should be,” said Hamilton.

“The engine should be ringing its neck off right to the end of the straight and just pulling and pulling. That’s what they used to do in the V8 or V10 era. They would just pull and pull.”

Kimi Antonelli said that even with the recent changes, the system still “triggers you a little bit” when the energy deployment is introduced, but improvements have been made to make it more predictable.

“System-wise, it’s better than the start of the season, and definitely also for me, it’s becoming more natural compared to what it was in Melbourne,” said Antonelli.

F1 has dodged a wet race twice so far, even though the FIA declared a rain hazard, but only three drivers have actually driven in the wet. One of those is Pierre Gasly, who said his time in the wet at a test in Silverstone was memorable to say the least.

“You guys are going to be shocked,” he said when turning to George Russell and Arvid Lindblad in the Thursday press conference.

“I’m glad I’ve done these two days. It’s going to be interesting. I was at Silverstone on 20th of January, which was memorable and I think will stay with me forever.”

Will the drivers get what they want?

The FIA can push through rule changes on safety grounds, as it did with the start procedure at the beginning of the season. If the cars’ predictability isn’t deemed a direct safety issue, the FIA will require a supermajority vote by four of the six manufacturers (including General Motors) on the Power Unit Advisory Committee.

Red Bull team principal Laurent Mekies said he would support “any step” towards “closer flat-out qualifying and racing.”

Mercedes has also voiced support for any changes, though that goes without saying, given their current competitive advantage and their desire not to ruffle any more feathers after the engine compression ratio row earlier this season.

Alpine team principal Alan Permane also said that concerns about the need for larger fuel tanks and teams wanting to carry over chassis from this year to next as a cost-cutting measure have been addressed.

“On the chassis side, we have already spoken and come to an agreement, certainly at team principal level,” said Permane.

“If anyone wanted to carry their chassis over and that wasn’t quite big enough to do the 310km race, we would look at selective races and, only where absolutely necessary, shortening them by maybe one or two laps and limiting laps to the grid to one.”

The sticking point is mainly with Audi and Honda, who are both concerned about the additional investments that may be required for the 60/40 split.

The PU makers would need to bear the additional costs of improving reliability, and while this would be covered under the cost cap, for those two manufacturers its a question of asking their respective owners for the cash.

Audi’s F1 project has already been a political hot potato within the Volkswagen Group, with multiple leadership changes at both the team and PU level.

Honda’s engine project started too late, after the Japanese car maker initially wanted out due to the costs involved. The effects, in tandem with having to wait for Adrian Newey, have been one of the biggest stories of 2026 so far.

As car development for 2027 is now well underway, both feel the changes would be better suited for 2028.

Then there is Ferrari, which believes that any changes for 2027 at such a late stage could affect the human resources tasked with finding performance gains under the Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities to catch up to Mercedes.

All of these are instances of F1’s interests clashing with the manufacturers. Should Audi, Honda, and Ferrari’s concerns not be resolved before a vote between the PU makers next month, then Verstappen’s desire for a more ‘pure’ F1 might be delayed.

Whether his plans to leave F1 get put on hold are a different matter…

Much like the Sprint, it was another thrilling battle between the pair as Russell tested Antonelli’s ability to play on the limit and balance risk versus reward.

Antonelli had clearly learned his lesson, opting to go for the Turn 13 chicane instead of the pinchpoint at Turn 1 to overtake his teammate.

Apart from a close moment entering the chicane, which saw Antonelli lock both front wheels and narrowly avoid crashing into the back of his teammate like Lando Norris did with Oscar Piastri 12 months prior, it was a clean and hard-fought battle.

“It was a tough fight. I think a couple of times we were a little bit on the edge, but we were going at each other,” said Antonelli.

“We were both pushing, and we both wanted to win. For everyone watching, it was pretty entertaining.”

Despite a call to “clean up the racing” over team radio to both drivers when things got close to the limit, it was ultimately an issue with the battery pack in Russell’s car that ended the fun.

“Up until lap 30, I was thoroughly enjoying the race. I loved the battle with Kimi, and I am sure he did too,” said Russell.

“It was like going back to karting days, where you are racing wheel-to-wheel, swapping the lead multiple times. I just wish we could have continued it until the end of the Grand Prix.”

Third-placed Max Verstappen told Antonelli that he was watching the action unfold on the TV screens dotted around the track in the opening laps, in what appeared to be a seal of approval from the four-time world champion.

Second-placed Lewis Hamilton, who gave up his seat at Mercedes to join Ferrari and paved the way for Antonelli, hoisted him onto his shoulder on the podium in a moment akin to the scene from The Lion King when a newborn Simba is raised to the song ‘Circle of Life’ to symbolise a change of king.

What made it fascinating was the dynamics at play. Russell is now a seasoned driver in F1 with enough experience at the top to know the limits of the rulebook, while the fresh-faced Antonelli is applying all that with a quarter of the experience.

Toto Wolff watched on, knowing that Canada is a hot spot for teammates colliding, but seemed satisfied that Russell and Antonelli worked within the framework of what they agreed: race each other hard, but don’t jeopardise the result.

“It is not always easy to watch your cars battling as they were in the early stages, but it was great racing,” said Wolff.

“It was maybe a little too close for our comfort at times, but both George and Kimi raced hard but fair. I am sure we will see many more exciting races like this over the year ahead.”

There are a few opportunities for Russell to close that gap over the course of the long season: F1 has an intense period of six races in eight weekends coming up, starting with Monaco.

Wolff believes Russell must draw on his experience from karting and junior formulas to put the disappointing end to Canada behind him and get on with his title challenge.

“He’s had to overcome adversity previously, whether it’s from karting or junior formulas, and he’s not going to give up that fight,” said Wolff.

“There are 17 races to go. So many points to score. Wake up tomorrow, digest, forget, move on, move forward, and drive the best you can. And that’s exactly what he’s going to do.”

Lewis Hamilton rolls back the years with Max Verstappen fight

Hamilton started the weekend by addressing retirement rumours in the Thursday press conference, but his form on Sunday didn’t suggest he was a man with one foot out the door.

The Ferrari driver was quicker than Leclerc all weekend and closed down on Verstappen in the final parts of the race to take second place.

It was the most comfortable Hamilton has ever looked in the Ferrari since he joined, which he puts down to trying a different setup route with his interim engineer Carlo Santi, who replaced Ricardo Adami at the start of the season.

“There are so many elements that have to come together to get the car in the right place, and I think I finally have that with the engineers and the whole setup within the team,” Hamilton told Sky Sports.

“I really hope that I can continue on with this performance. I’m much, much happier and comfortable in the car. It feels more like it used to be.”

Remarkably, that third-place was Verstappen’s first podium of the season. Red Bull’s tyre troubles continued in Canada, and the Dutchman was quick to acknowledge that it was more due to the misfortune of others than any performance breakthrough.

“I’m a little bit surprised with being on the podium here. But you also have to look at it with George retiring, McLaren’s making a mess of the strategy,” said Verstappen.

“On the medium, I never really felt like I could switch on the tyre, so the tyre was just not in the right window for us, and that stint was then a little bit more difficult to feel any kind of grip. But we still did a good job. I think for us to have our first podium is just very positive.”

McLaren defends Canadian GP start tyre call

It looked like McLaren had a front row seat to take advantage of any Mercedes hiccups, but it would all unravel with one tyre call.

Starting from the second row on the grid, Norris and Piastri were two of seven drivers who opted not to start on dry tyres, instead going for Intermediates.

The decision was thrown up by the uncertain conditions, with spots of rain appearing to fall just minutes before teams must ‘lock-in’ their starting tyres for the race.

One of the many adages in F1 folklore is: “Be on the right tyre at the right time,” but it quickly became clear that this was the wrong choice.

Despite Norris taking the lead after a better getaway off the line, it took only four laps before the tyres overheated, forcing him to pit and lose vital time.

Teammate Piastri pitted on the opening lap, and in an instant, McLaren’s second-row advantage was wiped out with both cars dropping to 19th and 20th places.

McLaren says the decision to stay on the intermediate tyres was “driven by the grasy track and rain with five minutes to go” until the start.

“The potential upsides of this strategy were significant, as evidenced by the team’s superior grip at the start of the race, allowing Lando to take the lead. Ultimately, however, this potential advantage was negated by the two additional formation laps.”

You read that right. McLaren had multiple opportunities to rectify their tyre call and mitigate the time loss from a pit stop, and chose not to take them.

Arvid Lindblad had stalled on the grid and needed to be recovered, so the first attempt to start the race was aborted. It was aborted for a second time when the recovery took longer than expected, meaning McLaren had three formation laps to pit and change to dry tyres without losing 20 seconds.

Instead, they stuck to their guns and paid the price.

Norris was later confronted with the painful sight of both Mercedes drivers lapping him as they fought for the lead while he was in 12th place. Oh, what could’ve been.

He would later retire with a terminal gearbox problem, while Piastri had collided with Alex Albon early in the race, damaging his car and consigning him to P11.

“This is racing, and on difficult days you show character and learn the qualities that make you a champion,” said team principal Andrea Stella.

“We’re grateful for the support, we’ll regroup and go again in Monaco.”

George Russell entered the season as the favourite for Mercedes, but Andrea Kimi Antonelli’s mesmerising form in the last three race weekends is becoming impossible to ignore.

It has probably come a year early for Mercedes, but they are well-equipped to deal with two of their drivers fighting over the same piece of tarmac.

Team Principal Toto Wolff had to keep Antonelli in check during the Canadian Grand Prix Sprint race, after the 19-year-old ranted over team radio about his teammates’ defensive tactics at Turn 1.

“If we need to race like this, good to know,” he exclaimed, after needing to take to the grass. He would later lose position to Lando Norris at Turn 8, in what appeared to be a hot-headed moment on the brakes.

Despite efforts by experienced race engineer Peter Bonnington to calm him down, Antonelli continued ranting. At the chequered flag, Wolff went into full school headmaster mode: “Kimi, now it’s the fourth time. We talk about this internally and not on the radio, OK?”

Antonelli was more composed when he got out of the car during the post-race interviews, but did he have a point?

Neither Race Control nor the FIA stewards decided to investigate the Turn 1 incident, even though replays clearly showed Antonelli was ahead of Russell on the outside of the corner.

As per the driving guidelines, any driver who overtakes on the outside must have their front axle ahead of the other car’s front axle at the apex of the corner.

Russell also made contact with Antonelli just after the apex, which eventually led to the Italian going off the track. Turn 1 at the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve is also slightly odd, in that it blends into Turn 2, so the outside line becomes the inside line almost instantly after the apex.

The stewards always view overtaking on the outside as a more difficult manoeuvre to accomplish, but Russell is also slightly covered by a point that pre-faced the guidelines: “A car being overtaken, or performing an overtake, cannot simply “disappear.”

While it’s important to let drivers race, quite a lot of the points that define ‘racing’ in these guidelines overlapped in this incident. The fact that it didn’t warrant an investigation is a cause for concern, irrespective of the outcome.

Some might argue that because it was between two teammates, the stewards and Race Control took a lenient approach. Well, you can’t pick and choose when you want rules to be applied. Would the same have happened if it were Max Verstappen on Russell?

The Briton was almost dismissive of Antonelli when asked about the incident in the post-Sprint race press conference: “Respect to him for giving it a go. Emotions are always high for all of us in the cockpit, but I’m sure we’ll both talk about it after.

“I didn’t think I did anything wrong and I wasn’t investigated, so I guess the Race Director and Stewards thought the same.”

“There was nothing untoward with the driving and, as I said, I don’t think it was even investigated. I think that says enough.”

Antonelli believes there needs to be further “clarity” in their discussions before the race, but he also offered a measured response that shows part of the maturity that makes him a standout among teenage talent.

“We do meetings before races, and that’s what we say in the room,” he explained.

“Then, of course, we race to win, and we try to do our best to defend our position. So, probably I understood the significance of that meeting a bit differently.”

“The main thing for the team is that there’s no contact, that we don’t crash into each other - which today at the end was very close.”

Russell confirmed that he spoke to Antonelli in private after the incident. He didn’t elaborate on the contents of the discussion, but Wolff did say he expected both drivers to set out rules themselves.

“That was good, like sports should be – an inter-team battle or outside, and for us, it’s good learning,” Wolff told Sky Sports F1.

“We obviously went through these motions with Nico (Rosberg) and Lewis (Hamilton). Sprint races, there’s always a possibility to recalibrate or recondition, and it was very easy, because we sat them down and said: ‘How do we want to race?

“Are we racing the other car like any third car, which I’m fine with, and obviously, you don’t leave any space there. Or do you want to leave the space? Which I would not expect, because fundamentally, you are racing to win and win the championship. Or are we playing this super-smooth sailing, and you only overtake each other on the straight under braking?

“We agreed that we trust them; they know how to push. But in any case, no one is expecting the other one to leave space, because it’s too important.”

It shows a different approach compared to McLaren’s papaya rules, which often felt more like an equal-opportunities policy than any attempt to mitigate two teammates jeopardising a team result.

Mercedes has learned a lot since Rosberg and Hamilton clashed on track. The likelihood of a repeat isn’t impossible, but establishing clear ground rules is a step towards mitigating any clash that could jeopardise the team’s dynamics or affect the result on track.

George Russell snatches Canadian GP pole

A few hours later, Russell would lay down another marker in his Canadian GP comeback weekend by taking pole for the main race by 0.068s from Antonelli.

It was the same margin that he took pole in Sprint qualifying, although the laps were slightly different.

Antonelli was briefly ahead exiting the final chicane, but Russell’s Mercedes was on a slightly different energy deployment strategy, which enabled him to reduce the amount his car’s battery energy tapered off on the run to the line.

It was an impressive effort from Russell, who put himself under pressure by bailing on his first effort due to tyre temperatures, and instead opted to fuel for two more runs at the end.

Although the track temperatures were stable at 31°C, tyre temperatures are difficult to generate at Circuit Gilles Villeneuve due to the tarmac’s very smooth micro-surface.

There are also a few opportunities to generate temperature, as the track is largely made up of straights rather than long-radius corners, where friction can be used to heat the core.

It’s what caught out Charles Leclerc in the Ferrari all session, and Max Verstappen, both of whom start the race outside the top five.

Russell’s strategy of a push-cool-push proved to be the best, as he snatched what looked like an opportunistic pole away from Antonelli in the dying moments of qualifying with a 1:12.578s.

After seeing Antonelli’s purple sectors on the trackside TVs when preparing his lap, Russell knew he needed to bring “something big” to beat his teammate again.

Mercedes had made adjustments to his car, which put him “out of sync” and effectively meant he needed to build up his confidence - not easy when lap times were also yo-yoing throughout the session.

“Isack was really quick in Q2. His lap time was incredible in Q2,” said Russell.

“It just goes to show how challenging it was for all of us and especially on a circuit like this, where you’re dancing with the walls, it’s really difficult to get that flow. You need a huge amount of commitment to find that last couple of tenths.”

Both McLaren’s start from the second row, although they are still missing performance despite also bringing updates like Mercedes to this track.

Norris was quick to point out that this circuit has always played to Mercedes’ strengths, and to come there thinking they could beat them would be naive.

“Last year, we easily had the best car, and Mercedes were still on pole. So, they’ve always just done very well on this type of track. With them bringing upgrades, we thought it would be tough to beat them.

“In fact, we’re not using some of our upgrades. I think we’re very surprised to be even this close. There are a lot of positives, considering we haven’t been able to extract everything from our upgrades just yet.

“It shows that there are still good things to come once we figure them out. I think to beat the Mercedes around here, considering how strong they’ve been so far this season, is probably a little bit optimistic.”

Should either Mercedes driver trip up the other in what is predicted to be a wet race, Norris and Piastri will be there to pick up the scraps and potentially a first race win for McLaren in 2026.

F1 teams and the FIA discussed measures to address some of the safety concerns raised by drivers and to add some of the spectacle back to qualifying, after fans were left unimpressed by Suzuka.

Extra power unit limitations were tabled for use from the Miami Grand Prix onwards, but by Thursday, confusion had already arisen over what the FIA had announced and what was being enforced.

The regular power unit specification sheet stated that the maximum recharge limit would be capped at 8MJ during qualifying, despite the FIA claiming it would be reduced to 7MJ.

While the spec sheet was correct, the actual regulation change (C5.2.10) stated: “This limit may be reduced to 7MJ at Competitions where the FIA determines that the maximum possible energy harvested per lap attributable under braking and in partial load is no more than 7MJ.”

Miami is an energy-rich circuit, so it makes sense that it would not be lowered below 8MJ. The spec sheet also detailed the use of maximum power around the lap, available only through Turns 8-11 and 16-17, with a power cap of 250kW throughout the rest of the lap.

It all seems incredibly complicated, but figureheads in F1 have long been adamant that fans don’t need to be across every single technical detail that the championship has to offer.

It’s true that the encyclopaedia of knowledge you would need to fully understand everything F1 has to offer would be overwhelming. Having watched F1 for over 20 years, I learn new things every weekend. But in this instance, how the drivers use the power to create overtaking opportunities should be easy to understand.

In the days of KERS, a battery icon showing how much energy each driver had left was a simple way of conveying how it was being used. It was also accessible, as it mimicked what we see every day on our smartphones. Knowing when a driver has power available is key to understanding this way of racing, and so far, F1 is making a hash of it.

A shift in influence

Drivers were asked during the Thursday media rounds whether the changes to the 2026 regulations would make any difference.

Max Verstappen remarked that it was just a “tickle”, while Oscar Piastri believes it will take more to address some of the fundamental problems: “You’re never going to fix the problems without changing the hardware of the power units, but I think it’s a step in the right direction.”

Piastri had driven Lewis Hamilton’s 2008 title-winning McLaren MP4-23 during a team event on Wednesday, and it was clear he came away from the experience with V8 fever.

“In all seriousness, driving a car from 2008 yesterday and seeing some of the cool cars from the past, I think trying to recapture some of those things would be very cool for the future,” said Piastri.

James Vowles also said he would like to see a return to the V8s, with neither team principal making reference to “road relevance” when asked if F1 should listen to the calls to bring back the engines that were once thought of as a ‘dinosaur’ technology.

F1 uses 100% sustainable fuels now, so a switch to V8s shouldn’t necessarily bring any unwanted knock-on effects towards the championship’s net zero targets.

When conceptualising what would become the 2026 power units in 2017, the emphasis was on cutting costs while attracting new manufacturers, who were seen as key to F1’s global success.

Audi, Honda, and General Motors all committed as a result, but when you consider the outcome of those projects, was it really worth it? It will take several years before Cadillac can challenge for points, Honda’s project started too late, and Audi’s changed hands too many times.

It was a risk for F1, and to an extent it paid off, as it now has as many engine manufacturers as it did before the 2009 financial crisis. But amid the challenges posed by the 2026 PUs, there is now a shift, as evidenced by recent comments from FIA Single Seater Director, Nikolas Tombazis.

He made the point that automotive companies were adamant about not developing another internal combustion engine, instead emphasising the electric element to align with all-electric road cars. But that transition on the road is proving more challenging, mainly because battery technology is still in its infancy.

We’re seeing that play out in F1 right now; the 50/50 split has proven too technically challenging to deliver the kind of racing that should be at the top level of motorsport.

It has led to quite a seismic political shift behind the scenes, and one that should benefit F1 in the long run.

“It is true, the political landscape has changed,” said Tombazis, speaking to media this week.

“In terms of where we want to be in the future, we do need to protect the sport from the world macro-economic situation, meaning we cannot be hostage to automotive companies deciding to be part of our sport or not.

“We want them to be part of our sport, absolutely. That’s why we’ve worked so hard to secure new participants.

“But we can also not be in a position where, if they decide they don’t want to be, we’re suddenly left vulnerable. And we need to keep working for cost reduction.”

You could argue that F1 had a golden opportunity to avoid this by addressing the single biggest complaint of the V6 Turbo era: noise. Fans want to hear race tracks singing, and watching the Monaco Historic last weekend felt like F1 was missing that core component with the 2026 ruleset.

There were discussions about a ‘global engine’ under the FIA Presidency of Jean Todt, to be used across WEC, WRC and F1.

A legacy of that project is now being used in WEC with the Genesis Magma team (headed by former Renault F1 team principal Cyril Abitboul), which is using a V8 produced by Hyundai that draws on some of the design DNA of their inline-four-cylinder WRC engine.

With the shift in power dynamics between the FIA, teams, and manufacturers heading more towards what works for the ‘show’ instead of the economic demands, a similar scenario could play out with existing engine technologies in F1 to bring back V8s or even V10s.

Should F1 drivers have a say?

It’s fair to say the drivers have been the biggest critics of the 2026 cars, whether it’s comparing them to Mario Kart or Formula E. Lando Norris believes the current cars are no longer enjoyable to drive, owing to the heavy emphasis on battery management.

You might think this doesn’t matter if the racing on the track is fun and entertaining, but as former FIA Deputy President for Sport, Robert Reid (and a World Rally Champion co-driver in his own right) notes, it is ultimately the driver who carries the risk.

“A driver can learn to operate almost anything. That does not mean the task has been well designed. If more of the driver’s attention is taken up managing systems that sit between instinct and outcome, the car may still be clever, efficient and relevant. But the cost of producing performance goes up,” he wrote on LinkedIn.

“Every high-performance environment carries the same risk. In trying to optimise the system, it can make the human task less legible. The result may still be performance. It may still be speed. It may still be spectacle. But if the performer has to carry more hidden costs to produce it, something important has changed.”

Hamilton believes drivers should have a “seat at the table” in future discussions about rule changes, and highlighted how feedback is often dictated by those not driving the cars.

Considering the current PU working group, which is made up of all five manufacturers along with representatives from F1 and the FIA, adding 22 drivers would make it a pretty big table.

But does Hamilton have a point? F1 politics can be fickle at the best of times. Vowles believes there should be dialogue, but warned that extra seats might have unintended consequences.

“I know Carlos was, for example, consulted. Nikolas [Tombasis] did a good job by bringing him on board and asking the questions before we went through this regulation change, to make sure he and others were part of that process,” he explained.

“We’re already probably too many around the table to discuss because you just end up going in circles. Adding five more of us won’t help. But in the background, there’s a forum making sure drivers can share their views on certain aspects.

“I think having a representative, either pre-meeting with the FIA or in the meeting, is probably somewhat sensible. We just need to make sure that we’re not driving towards one PU manufacturer and using bias, and that we really do hear the opinion of what’s required from the drivers.”

Whatever you think of the new ruleset, it’s here to stay until at least 2030. What matters is how F1 reacts to what will effectively be a huge customer-clinching trial over the next few months.

Audi F1 CEO and team principal Mattia Binotto believes the recent changes are evidence of a productive dialogue among all stakeholders and the rulemakers.

“The FIA is doing the right job by listening, hearing, and bringing people around the table: technicians, engineers, team principals, and drivers,” explains Binotto.

“It’s already difficult to change our regulations during the season, and that has happened. And it has happened because we had a broad consensus around the changes, and the only way to achieve it is to make sure we have listened well to everyone and found common ground.”

Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities should help Honda, Red Bull, and potentially Ferrari close the gap to Mercedes on the PU front. The effects of this won’t be seen instantly, but it will contribute to the adjustments being made in the background.

With the next Concorde Agreement set to be negotiated in 2031, we could see a very different type of F1 than we have now. Time will tell if it’s a step in the right direction.

While he’s known for keeping Max Verstappen in check whenever they’ve had a feisty team radio exchange, Lambiase has been one of the main figureheads throughout his success at Red Bull.

Having been through the good, the bad, the intense, and emotional times together, the pair have forged one of the closest bonds on the grid.

We caught a glimpse of that dynamic at the final round of the season in Abu Dhabi last year, where an emotional Lambiase was seen on the pit wall after Verstappen had just lost the title to Lando Norris by two points.

When asked about it in the post-race press conference, Verstappen said: “I’m sure he was a bit emotional after the flag. So, I’m really looking forward to leaving here and catching up with him because it’s not been easy at times for him.

“I’m just very proud to be able to work with someone that good. A proper example of someone who never gave up this season, even through the difficult times.”

Their partnership has yielded 71 Grand Prix victories so far and four world championships, second only to Lewis Hamilton and Peter Bonnington’s partnership at the Mercedes winning juggernaut.

Lambiase will leave Red Bull to join rivals McLaren as early as 2028, taking up the role of chief racing officer and reporting to team principal Andrea Stella, in a reported multi-million-pound deal to secure his services.

It is the latest high-profile departure at Red Bull, with McLaren even referencing former strategy head Will Courtney and car designer Rob Marshall in its press release, noting the team’s “ability to attract and secure top talent” in F1.

While aimed at quieting suggestions that Stella might have signed a pre-contract to join Ferrari, which McLaren has refuted, it might also be a subtle dig aimed at Red Bull.

Their super team, which brought eight championships between Verstappen and Sebastian Vettel, is no longer. Only chief engineer Paul Monaghan remains among senior management, having signed a contract extension in 2024.

Many of the people in Verstappen’s close orbit have also left, most recently chief mechanic Matt Caller, who moved to Audi, and chief designer Craig Skinner, whom the Dutchman rated highly.

2026 F1 cars do not play to Verstappen’s strengths

These exits come at a pivotal time for Verstappen, who has made it clear that he does not intend to stick around for long if F1 continues on its current trajectory.

He has been the most vocal about the 2026 ruleset, branding it “Mario Kart” and claiming it is “not racing,” having previously warned about the problems it could pose in 2023.

F1 and the FIA are currently using the unusual mid-season break to hold crunch talks over how to make qualifying spectacular again, and to address driver complaints on closing speeds when harvesting energy after Oliver Bearman’s scary Japanese Grand Prix crash.

After an initial meeting this week, teams are committing to “making tweaks to some aspects of the regulations in the area of energy management”, with further proposals set to be voted on later in the month in time for the Miami GP.

Even with changes on the horizon, it sounded like Verstappen already had one foot out of the door when he spoke to BBC Radio 5 Live after the Japanese GP. He claimed that he is “not enjoying the whole formula” and, when referencing his future, said he was “thinking about everything inside this paddock.”

Verstappen also questioned if the 24-race calendar was too long, and whether it was worth spending all that time away from his family. Given that he is one of only three drivers on the grid who are fathers (Fernando Alonso recently added to that list), it makes sense that he would look at this aspect.

The 2026 season is his 12th in F1, and it is very different to when he started. 2015 only featured 19 races, most of which were based in Europe, and there were no tripleheaders.

Then there is the issue of driving the cars.

The 2026 cars do not play to Verstappen’s strengths. He likes a car that is very direct, so much so that Alex Albon once said Verstappen’s driving style was “eye-wateringly sharp”, which often caught out his teammates.

His ability to pivot the car and get on the power early out of a corner worked wonders with the ground-effect cars, but in a formula made of battery reserves and engine algorithms, it is incredibly energy-intensive.

Coupled with an overweight RB22 that generates excessive tyre wear, it all snowballs. Verstappen is effectively penalised for what has made him a world champion driver.

Although talks between FIA technical chiefs and F1 teams sound encouraging, they are unlikely to appease the Verstappen camp. Changing the engine format before 2030 is out of the question, and any drastic action, such as shifting the split from 50/50 to 70/30 in favour of the internal combustion engine, is unlikely to be implemented at short notice.

Surely the best drivers adapt to what they are given? Verstappen doesn’t look it that way. Being a purist, he points out that effectively having to drive how a computer tells him to in a turbocharged carbon fibre monocoque isn’t worth the risk.

“I try to adapt to it, but it’s not nice the way you have to race. It’s really anti-driving. Then at one point, yeah, it’s just not what I want to do,” said Verstappen.

“And of course you can look at it and make a lot of money. Great. But at the end of the day, it’s not about money any more because this has always been my passion.”

The wider implications for Red Bull

Although Laurent Mekies oversaw success at the end of 2025, the atmosphere within Red Bull is said to be souring after the team has only scored 16 points in the first three races of the season.

Lambiase’s exit does little to persuade Verstappen to keep faith that they can turn things around. Most have pointed to Verstappen’s comments in 2021, where he told Austrian broadcaster Viaplay on working with Lambiase: “I told him that I only work with him. As soon as he quits, I’ll quit too.”

Verstappen has already worked with Simon Rennie, ex-engineer to Daniel Ricciardo and Albon, at a couple of races where Lambiase was absent last season. Rennie shares some of Lambiase’s qualities, including delivering clear, concise information - his voice is also somewhat similar.

Seeing such a key member of Verstappen’s inner circle defect to McLaren, which has prided itself on an open, no-blame game-work culture, might sway others to consider more lucrative options elsewhere.

As for Verstappen, Red Bull has supported him since his days racing in Formula 3. They beat Toto Wolff to securing him after Helmut Marko offered him a fast-track seat to F1, and rewrote the record books. But there is no loyalty in F1.

Whatever he does next is tied to Red Bull’s performance on track. He is contracted until 2028, but can activate a performance clause if he is not at least second in the Drivers’ Championship or higher by August.

The loss of both close confidants in Marko and Lambiase will likely inform whether he decides to help Red Bull into this new era or close what has been an exceptional chapter in his motorsport career.

The NIBs

FIA report reveals scale of volunteers needed for a single F1 season

A staggering report by the FIA on volunteers claimed that at least 20,000 were needed to ensure the safe and efficient organisation of every race in 2025.

An average of 838 volunteers is needed per round, totalling a minimum of 20,112 trained volunteers throughout the 24-race season.

Applying an industry-standard replacement labour cost methodology, the FIA estimates that volunteers generate €13.2 million in work.

Its report also notes that, to ensure a "well-trained volunteer cohort" for F1, the FIA invests roughly €11.1 million in the system, with the High Performance Programme alone costing €350,000 annually.

The full report can be read here.

Now Andrea Kimi Antonelli adds himself to that list when a fortuitous safety car gifted him the lead of the Japanese Grand Prix, following a big crash for Haas driver Oliver Bearman.

George Russell had just pitted a lap before the safety car came out in an attempt to undercut leader Oscar Piastri, meaning he lost significant ground when the race restarted.

“Unbelievable!” - Russell exclaimed over the team radio, knowing his race was about to get harder. One man’s misfortune is another man’s fortune; in this case, it was his teammate Antonelli.

The safety car was a lifeline for Antonelli’s race after he botched his start off the line, owing to F1’s complicated procedures in 2026, losing six places and handing an early lead to Piastri. When asked how he felt going from pole to P6, Antonelli said: “I cannot say, but I was very mad.”

The Italian joked that he has a few weeks to “practice clutch drops” now that F1 has no races in April, due to the war in the Middle East.

“It’s an area where I need to work a lot, because it’s definitely not good enough and I’m just making my life a lot harder,” said Antonelli, who has been the biggest loser of positions at starts this year.

“I dropped the clutch a bit too deep, deeper than what I should have, and obviously the tyres were also a bit colder. That meant I went beyond the grip that was available and just lost a lot of places.”

Once Antonelli had settled into the race, there was no stopping him. He gained places on Hamilton, Lando Norris, and Leclerc before he was behind Russell when it was time to pit. As he led the pack away at the restart on Lap 28, that was the last we saw of him as he built up a 14-second lead on Piastri by the time he took the chequered flag.

Clean air is still king in F1, but Antonelli himself has stepped up since his rookie season and proved that he is the real deal, even if he and everyone else around him aren’t getting caught up in the hype around being a title contender.

“Experience helps a lot. Last year, I went through a lot, and it taught me far more than I anticipated. It’s definitely helping me this year. There’s still a lot of work to do, but I definitely feel much more in control of the situation,” said Antonelli.

“The car helps, and I’m going to try to be ready and everything because it’s one of those opportunities that don’t happen every day. So really grateful for the car that the team has provided us so far, and yeah, I just need to keep my head down.”

Although it was a quality effort from the 19-year-old, it was another race where teammate Russell was nursing problems with his Mercedes. The team went the wrong way with a rear-suspension setup change on Saturday, which cost him a shot at pole.

Along with the unfortunate safety car periods during the race, he lost further places to Hamilton and Leclerc due to various power unit glitches, according to Mercedes trackside engineering director Andrew Shovlin.

“George lost a further place to Lewis when he hit the harvesting limit too early in the lap and had insufficient battery for the restart,” explains Shovlin.

“He then had another frustrating issue where a bug in the software code, triggered by a button press and a gear shift at the same time, caused the power unit to go into superclip and charge the battery, which allowed Charles to pass.”

It was an unfortunate way for his race to pan out, but it could’ve been much worse for Mercedes if Antonelli hadn’t picked himself up after his bad start.

Piastri described Japan as one of his “best weekends in F1” after McLaren finally had both cars start the race without problems.

Like Russell, the Australian’s race was compromised by the safety car. Does he think a comeback win was on the cards for the defending champions? “I would have loved to have seen how it would have panned out.”

Although the field is more spread out in qualifying, Piastri highlighted that pace alone isn’t enough to win races among the big four in 2026.

“We knew from last year, or we know from last year, that even when you have the best car, you still need to operate it at an incredibly high level. On our side, we did a really good job of that,” said Piastri.

“The fact that I could keep George behind for so long was really encouraging. But we’re under no illusion. We did everything right this weekend, and we still got beaten by 15 seconds, so we’ve got a pretty big gap to fill.”

It becomes even more impressive when you consider that it was 19-year-old Antonelli operating at that high level. His win means that he now leads Russell by nine points, becoming the youngest driver in F1 history to lead the Drivers’ Championship.

I have a feeling we’ll be saying that more often this season.

Drivers urge F1 and FIA to make changes following scary Oliver Bearman crash

Bearman’s crash 22 laps into the Japanese GP illustrated a problem drivers had warned F1 chiefs about, ever since the start of this regulation cycle.

The Haas driver was racing Franco Colapinto when the pair exited the Spoon hairpin and accelerated up to the Turns 13 and 14 complex.

He was caught out when Colapinto’s Alpine entered battery-de-rating mode to harvest energy, resulting in a speed differential of 31mph.

Bearman took evasive action and ended up on the grass at 150mph, crossing the track, and slamming into the barriers with a 50G impact. He got out of the car but was limping, clutching his ankle. Thankfully, he suffered no fractures or broken bones, only a contusion on his right leg.

“It was a scary moment out there, but everything is okay, which is the main thing,” said Bearman.

“There was a massive overspeed – around 50kph – which is a part of these new regulations, and we have to get used to it, but also I felt like I wasn’t given much space, given the huge excess speed I was carrying.”

The stewards chose not to investigate Colapinto, suggesting they likely viewed it as a byproduct of a technical issue rather than driver error.

Drivers are usually warned that the car in front is harvesting energy with flashing lights on the rear wing pillars, but that happened only once with Colapinto in the buildup to the crash. In the moments before Bearman took avoiding action, there was no indication from the lights.

Carlos Sainz was the most vocal about the incident, having raised the issue with F1 and the FIA in his role as director of the Grand Prix Drivers Association.

“I heard it [impact] was 50G, higher than my crash in Russia in 2015, which was 46G,” Sainz told Sky Sports F1.

“I was so surprised when they [FIA] said, ‘No, we will sort out qualifying and leave the racing alone because it’s exciting.’ As drivers, we’ve been extremely vocal about the fact that the problem is not only in qualifying but also in the races.

“We’ve been warning that this kind of accident is going to happen. We were lucky here; there was an escape road. Imagine going to Baku, Singapore, or Vegas and having this kind of closing speed and crashes.”

It’s clear there is a divide, given the implications it could have for the racing and performance of others. Leclerc highlighted this in the drivers’ press conference.

“Whether we need to change absolutely everything for the race, I don’t think I’m the only one speaking with other drivers, but it might be half-half, but I actually enjoy these cars for the racing bit.”

In a statement issued by the FIA, they confirmed there will be a “number of meetings in April” where the issue is discussed and that “any potential adjustments, particularly those related to energy management, require careful simulation and detailed analysis.”

It is likely they will make changes to prevent the farce we’ve seen in qualifying this weekend, but whether that also translates into the race remains to be seen.

Suzuka’s 130R is one of F1’s most challenging corners.

Located in the final part of the lap, immediately after the cars cross over the figure eight section, they are presented with a ruthless left-hander that is approached at close to 200mph.

Fernando Alonso produced one of F1’s best overtakes on Michael Schumacher in 2005, while former drivers Allan McNish and Jaime Alguersuari have both shown how wrong it can go if you make a mistake.

After two hours of practice, it’s pretty clear we won’t be getting any similar ‘crazy’ moments in 2026.

This is largely due to an inherent problem with this year’s power unit regulations, which is mainly exposed at circuits where the battery, accounting for 50% of the total power output, is starved of energy.

Despite the FIA's attempts to mitigate it, the question arises: have classic corners that have defined the good and the great in F1 now been castrated?

FIA makes last-minute rule tweak at Suzuka

In the hours leading up to the first practice session for the Japanese Grand Prix, the FIA made a last-minute rule change to qualifying.

The tweak centres around Formula 1’s complex energy management rules. Although the standard recharge limit for the 4MJ (megajoules) battery is 8.5MJ, the FIA varies that allowance at each circuit on safety grounds.

This was introduced amid suggestions that drivers would employ erratic tactics, such as lifting and coasting on straights, to recover maximum energy.

As outlined in the technical regulations, the governing body can reduce the recharge from the standard 8.5MJ to as low as 5MJ when “harvesting strategies required to achieve the above limit are excessive.”

The regulations also give them the freedom to increase the limit to 9MJ at tracks where energy recovery is easy and extra power is beneficial.

Suzuka had been highlighted as one of the venues where a 9MJ allowance would be permitted because of the lack of heavy-braking zones where batteries can be easily recharged.

But in their Power Unit Information document issued on Thursday, the FIA stipulated that only 8MJ of harvesting would be permitted, down from the planned 9MJ.

A separate statement confirmed that the rule changes received “unanimous” support from power unit manufacturers and were done to “ensure that the intended balance between energy deployment and driver performance is maintained.”

That balance specifically refers to super clipping, where the power unit switches to a mode that enables the battery to draw power from the Internal Combustion Engine to charge. The effect was present in the previous set of regulations, although not as prominently, and was often referred to as battery de-rating.

Concerns have grown over the spectacle in qualifying ever since the scene of drivers losing as much as 50kph on entry to the high-speed Turns 9 and 10 at Melbourne exposed a weakness in the current regulations.

Normally, a corner where drivers change down two gears and flick the car left, then right, at around 180mph; instead, they were taking it 40mph slower, as the car had already begun to slow down due to the super clipping.

This was less of an issue at Shanghai because of the amount of heavy braking zones, but the problem has reared its head again at Suzuka.

Has Suzuka been spoiled?

This high-speed circuit is one of the scariest on the calendar, largely because of the proximity of the barriers to the tarmac.

Four-time world champion Sebastian Vettel once said it was the only circuit he would seriously consider making a comeback, explaining that it was the track where he felt most “alive” when racing.

Alex Albon pointed out three key areas that would be less exciting due to the need to lift and coast on entry in 2026: Degner 1, Spoon Hairpin, and 130R.

“There isn’t really any high-speed any more. Because you’re arriving so slowly, basically everything is a medium-speed corner now,” he added.

Watching laps from both practice sessions, it was clear these were pinch points for F1’s energy-starved power units.

It’s more subtle on the entry to Degner 1 and Spoon, but the drivers are losing speed before they apply the brakes at corners that often generate mistakes. This was the case in the quickest laps by Oscar Piastri, Andrea Kimi Antonelli, and Max Verstappen in FP2.

Speaking at the Thursday press conference, Lando Norris highlighted how Spoon used to demand full commitment from drivers on entry, as they hook the car into the sweeping left turn that mimics the household cutlery item.

“You’ll start [super] clipping into Spoon. That’s one of the quickest corners, where you turn in, and you are going incredibly quickly. Like last year, I didn’t even brake on entry to Spoon,” said Norris.

“It took a risk to get to that point, and it feels incredible in Quali when you’re pushing it to the limit like that.”

Esteban Ocon also pointed out that this year’s cars have much less downforce than in 2025, which contributes to slower speeds, but admitted it was a “shame” that the Degners had become “power-limited” rather than “grip-limited.”

Super clipping is mostly visible at 130R. Antonelli reaches a peak of 205mph midway down the straight between Turn 14 and 15, before gradually tapering down to 181mph as he reaches the apex of the left-hander.

Verstappen’s Red Bull starts super clipping much later, but then he loses a lot of speed exiting the final chicane. Piastri is much more gradual like Antonelli, with him only peaking at 195mph midway through the curved section before dropping to 180mph at the apex.

Compared to last year in the same session, Verstappen and Norris reach a peak of 196mph and drop to just 193mph at the apex of 130R.

When asked about whether F1’s battery deployment rules had ruined Suzuka, Norris answered: “It’s never ruined. I don’t think you can ever ruin this track. Will it be as spectacular? I don’t think so. It will not be.”

Spectacular has always been a non-negotiable for F1. It’s why the cars look like they do, spark as they do, and sound like they do.

Although the current regulations have delivered some exciting racing moments, the challenge of pushing to the limit on a qualifying lap should not be a compromise.

It’s a factor that Leclerc admitted has been lost in the quest to make F1 more accessible to manufacturers with simplified power units.

“What I love about this sport is when you get to Q3, and you have the maximum pressure on you to deliver at your best at that moment, and that you try and do a lap that you haven’t done before,” said Leclerc. “At the moment, this is not possible.”

F1 technical chiefs have been tasked to find a longer-term solution that can be implemented as early as the Miami Grand Prix to prevent energy management tactics from taking over the show.

What is clear is that there is a range of options available, whether it’s reducing the battery power output and compensating with more power from the internal combustion engine, or upping the fuel flow rate in qualifying only.

Whatever the solution, one of the core elements of F1’s DNA is being tested. Hopefully, something can be sorted out to bring back the thrills of qualifying.

Had he passed just a fraction sooner, Antonelli would’ve completed the ‘Grand Slam’ during his maiden Grand Prix victory, having achieved pole, victory, fastest lap, and led nearly every lap.

It highlights just how impressive this achievement was for the 19-year-old when faced with seven-time world champion Hamilton, experienced Charles Leclerc and title favourite George Russell.

Antonelli’s 2026 season got off to a rough start in Australia with a big crash that required a rushed rebuild from his team. Then, in the Chinese GP Sprint race, he collided with Red Bull’s Isack Hadjar and received a 10-second time penalty that cost him and Mercedes points.

When he surpassed Sebastian Vettel to become F1’s youngest polesitter on Saturday, he exclaimed to his engineer Peter Bonnington: “Finally, a clean session!” - It showed what was possible when he could put it all together.

There were a few heart-in-mouth moments, notably while leading the race with three laps to go, when he locked his front right tyre at T14 and ran wide off the track.

Dealing with the pressure of leading a race was one of the main takeaways for the young Italian, who, up until now, had only done it twice at last year’s Japanese and Canadian Grands Prix.

“It was a massive lesson,” said Antonelli.

“There’s so much that I’ve learned, but it’s to never relax. At the end, I left room for mistakes, and one happened. I just need to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Wolff: Antonelli’s win ‘came earlier than I thought’

The pressure on Antonelli to succeed has been there from the get-go. The teenage prodigy was chosen by Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff as Hamilton's successor when he left to join Ferrari at the end of 2024.

Antonelli endured a difficult mid-season in 2025 with DNFs in the Austrian, British, and Belgian Grands Prix. At Spa Francorchamps, his confidence visibly took a hit when he was knocked out in Q1 and ended up 18th on the grid.

Wolff was criticised for fast-tracking Antonelli and throwing him in the deep end in the works team, with many believing he either needed another year in Formula 2 or to follow the tried-and-tested route of starting in a backmarker team to gain experience.

The inevitable rookie struggles may have been seized on by the critics, but the signs were always there. Pole in the Miami Sprint was followed up with a first podium in Canada, then he resisted pressure from Max Verstappen at the height of his title battle with McLaren’s Lando Norris to finish P2 in Brazil.

Wolff has always been adamant about Antonelli’s potential. Having lost out on signing Verstappen to Red Bull before he made it to F1, this is his wonderkid.

A victory in F1 was a matter of when, not if, although even Wolff admitted that it had come “earlier than I thought” when speaking to Sky Sports F1 after the race.

“Last year, we said that it’s going to be a very difficult year with many ups and downs and mistakes.

“Then, bang, he wins the second race. He has controlled it in the front; he has driven very well today, so he’s probably a little bit better than the trajectory I thought.”

Hamilton was 22 years old when he won his first race and went on to challenge for a title. Having achieved a milestone in his new career at Ferrari with his first podium, he reflected on winning the 2007 Canadian Grand Prix: “It’s truly special getting your first Grand Prix win…”

Antonelli interjects: “I was one year old, by the way!”

“You were born in 2006, right? That’s ridiculous! After so many years, seeing him come through and talented young people who truly deserve it get to the top.”

Mercedes downplays Antonelli title talk

Antonelli’s sense of maturity and introspection are remarkable for a teenager. Being able to criticise your own performance in front of a group of engineers who are much older after every race, it’s a trait that not many athletes could do confidently at his age.

“One of the things that impresses us most compared to last year is that Kimi is acting with so much maturity and cold-bloodedness to issues,” said Wolff.

”He’s able to compartmentalise the debriefing, talk about what’s ahead and not what’s behind with a lot of confidence but no over-confidence.

“For a racing driver, beyond the skill of driving the car fast, that mental resilience is key and that’s what Kimi is showing at the moment.”

Seeing him on the top step in Shanghai alongside Bonnington and Hamilton was a proud moment for Wolff, having claimed in a social media video that he still sees his former world champion as a Mercedes driver.

“It was great to see Lewis up on the podium with Kimi, George, and Bono. All four of them are such a big part of this team’s history,” said Wolff.

Wolff was also quick to downplay any suggestions that this now puts Antonelli in the frame for the title hunt: “You can already see the hype that is going to start now, especially in Italy. I can already see the headlines, ‘World Champion, Grande Kimi!’ and whatever.

“That’s really not good, because mistakes are going to come. He’s just a kid, so it’s too early to even think about a championship.”

Modern F1 is incredibly complex these days, and with even more eyeballs watching it globally, pressure is high. Perhaps it’s right for Wolff to ensure Antonelli’s eyes aren’t bigger than his stomach.

For now, he joins Hamilton, Russell, Juan Manuel Fangio, Stirling Moss, Nico Rosberg, and Valtteri Bottas in the very exclusive club of drivers who have won races for Mercedes in F1.

The NIBs

Max Verstappen lists problems before Shanghai DNF

Max Verstappen endured a very tricky race for Red Bull in Shanghai, having retired with 10 laps left to run.

The Dutchman had a poor start and dropped to 12th, but recovered to sixth after an early pit stop and a Safety Car.

“We had problems with the ERS cooling,” said Verstappen.

“A lot of things went wrong. The car didn’t feel good, no balance, high tyre deg. There was also something wrong with the steering wheel, so there’s a whole list of things. I’m not even sure how I made it to sixth.”

Aston Martin’s fears for Fernando Alonso come true

Fernando Alonso had to retire 31 laps into the Chinese GP due to “discomfort from vibrations.”

It comes after team principal Adrian Newey warned that their race mileage would be limited, mostly due to a shortage of spare Power Unit components, but also to protect driver welfare.

“From about Lap 20, I was struggling with the vibration levels. We were already one lap down, so we decided to retire the car,” said Alonso.

“The vibrations seemed worse today than on any other day of the weekend, so we need to investigate why that was.”

McLaren explains double DNS

McLaren has blamed its double DNS for Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri on separate electrical problems.

“During routine race preparation, a problem was identified on the electrical side of the power unit for Lando’s car. Despite intense investigations and hard work in collaboration with our colleagues at Mercedes High Performance Powertrains (HPP) to fix the issue, there was no way to resolve the fault before the race start, resulting in the first time Lando has missed a Grand Prix start in his eight-year career.

“In a separate scenario, following Oscar lining up to the grid, a separate issue was discovered on the electrical side of the number 81 car’s power unit. Following significant work and effort by the entire team, alongside HPP, to find a resolution, we were unfortunately left with no option but to bring the car back to the garage prior to the race start.”

George Russell kicked things off by winning the first race in the new era, with teammate Andrea Kimi Antonelli completing a one-two victory for Mercedes.

They have firmly put their struggles from the ground-effect era behind them, although it was not without a challenge from Ferrari.

Both their drivers had rocketship starts off the line, as Charles Leclerc went from fourth to first at Turn 1, and Lewis Hamilton gained four places and jumped to third by the end of the opening lap.

Ferrari’s starts had been one of the headlines of pre-season testing, although they were partially helped by both Mercedes drivers starting the race with 0% energy, much to the surprise of polesitter Russell.

“I got on the grid, saw my battery level, and had nothing in the tank. Then made a bad start, but then had some really tight battles with Charles,” said Russell.

Russell piled the pressure on Leclerc in the opening laps, in what would become one of the early vindications of this current ruleset. It was a cat-and-mouse exchange between the leaders, with their pair dicing for the lead between Turns 4 and 10.

Hamilton also put himself in the mix, while Kimi Antonelli was carving his way through the field after also losing places at the start. The pivotal point in this lead battle came when Isack Hadjar’s Red Bull power unit expired 11 laps into the race, causing a Virtual Safety Car to emerge.

Different cars, same strategies - unless you’re Ferrari

While the cars and power units might have changed for 2026, the strategy under VSC remains the same. If you pit, you gain at least 10 seconds on everyone else because they have to drive to a delta time that is slower than race pace.

Given the placement of Hadjar’s Red Bull, it was clearly going to last a couple of laps, so any team that took advantage of this would be in a lucrative position later in the race.

Mercedes pitted both drivers and lost little ground while Ferrari stayed out, much to the dismay of Hamilton, who retorted over team radio: “At least one of us should’ve come in…”

His temporary engineer for the opening races, Carlo Santi, said they were on ‘Plan A’ with both cars, which was a one-stop. Ferrari would get another chance four laps later when Valtteri Bottas stopped at the pit entry and needed recovering, bringing out a second VSC.

Leclerc was at Turn 11 at this stage, giving Ferrari 19 seconds to react if they wanted to stop. Instead, they kept to ‘Plan A’ for both drivers, and on the following lap, the pit lane entry closed, squandering yet another opportunity to close the gap to Mercedes.

Does Leclerc regret not taking the initiative and pitting during one of the VSC periods?

“I don’t regret it. It was a conscious choice. We knew there were very high chances this would not be the only VSC of the race, so we thought it was better for us to wait for another one. That’s always a gamble, of course.”

Strategy has been a weak point at Ferrari over the years, and they still seem to be behind the curve when it comes to making decisions that could affect both drivers.

Ferrari team principal Frederic Vassuer said they were surprised by how long the tyres lasted for Mercedes in the final stint, with both Russell and Antonelli completing 46 laps to make the one-stop work.

This effectively informed Ferrari’s decision not to pit during the second VSC, and instead focus on making their planned one-stop work.

“With regards to our strategy, we decided not to pit under the VSC, as we were focused on our optimal strategy,” said Vasseur.

“Then, we and I think also Mercedes, were very surprised by the long life of the tyres and with the second VSC we were a bit unlucky as the pit lane entry was closed when we could have pitted.”

McLaren’s conservative title defence

The race felt like it was being played out in two phases at the front between the top four, with Mercedes and Ferrari running off into the Melbourne sunset while McLaren and Red Bull dealt with problems.

Max Verstappen, who recovered from starting 20th on the grid to finish sixth behind Lando Norris, blamed much of his lack of pace at the end on tyre management.

“We settled into our own race but unfortunately had a little too much degradation; the tyre behaviour was surprising as we had a lot of graining on the Hard compound, which of course compromised our stints and meant that we couldn’t really fight for more,” said Verstappen.

Norris kicked off his title defence with a conservative race, although McLaren knew it would be a tricky start to the season after seeing the pace deficit to Mercedes in pre-season testing.

“P5 is a good result, I think we maximised what we could achieve today. The gap to the guys ahead is pretty big, and we clearly have a lot of work to do, which we thought might be the case coming into this weekend,” said Norris.

“The fact that we could defend against Max and keep him behind, even though he had a lot more pace, was a positive.”

It was a bitter outcome for Oscar Piastri at his home race, who crashed on the reconnaissance laps to the grid at Turn 4.

Team principal Andrea Stella said it was “a combination of factors” that included “suboptimal tyre temperatures, unexpected torque deployment and being up on the kerb,” that caused the spin.

An identity crisis for F1?

F1 was criticised after qualifying for introducing a power unit specification that deliberately starved them of energy, with the 50/50 split between the combustion engine and electric motor proving to be a challenge around the mostly full-throttle Albert Park.

It’s true that F1 cars shouldn’t be losing a quarter of their power on straights, least of all through Melbourne’s sweeping Turns 9 and 10 complex. This is meant to be the pinnacle of motorsport, but it looked less challenging, with Norris and Verstappen openly voicing their concerns.

Norris believes there is too much emphasis on battery management, rather than actually driving the cars: “The problem is you have to look at the steering wheel every three seconds to see what’s going to happen, otherwise you’re going to end up off the track.”

The teams are operating at the limit of these regeneration systems, as evidenced by Verstappen’s crash in qualifying that put him at the back of the grid in the first place. Leclerc also highlighted the tricky line drivers were treading between harvesting energy and using the overtake modes.

“I don’t think any of us knew what to expect with the fights with the energy [management]. Then it’s even trickier for the overtakes to defend,” said Leclerc.

“You don’t really know when your battery is going to cut out on the straight. So while defending, there are massive speed differences. It’s been quite challenging, but I was happy to get out of this battle first.”

When asked if it was easier to race these cars compared to the previous generation, Russell said: “There’s definitely more opportunity, but you do have to be more strategic.

“On a circuit like this, where you have four straights, and you’ve got 100% of battery, you’ve got to split that between four straights. No team is splitting that 25% per straight.

“Some teams are doing it more on one straight, other teams are doing it more on the other. If you use your overtake mode, your boost button, you will pass the driver in one straight, and he will then pass back.

“We’re going to Shanghai next, where you’ve got one big, long straight. The majority of drivers will be using their energy there, so you don’t need to divide it up between four as you do here in Melbourne.”

Leclerc, now in his sixth season in F1 and having raced three generations of cars, outlined the main differences: “Before, it was more about who was the bravest on the brakes. Now there has to be a bit more of a strategy behind every move you make, because with every boost button activation, you’re going to pay the price big time after that.

“You always try to think multiple steps ahead to try to end up first, but it’s a different way to go about racing for sure.”

Whether you think this different way of racing is more artificial or not, Russell believes fans, F1 and the FIA should give things a chance to develop before making any hasty decisions.

“Everyone’s very quick to criticise things. You need to give it a shot. We’re 22 drivers. When we’ve had the best cars and the least tyre degradation and when we’ve been happiest, everyone moans the racing’s rubbish.

“Now, drivers aren’t perfectly happy, and everyone said it was an amazing race. So, you can’t have it all, and I think we should just give it a chance and see after a few more races.”

Oscar Piastri reported he had “no power” in the early minutes of FP1, and then Lando Norris was out after just half an hour due to downshift problems.

Things were trickier for Mercedes’ Kimi Antonelli, who also reported a loss of power during his initial runs, while George Russell had battery deployment problems that interrupted a lot of his runs.

“We had a few configuration issues on the power unit side that took a couple of runs to unpick,” said Mercedes trackside engineering director, Andrew Shovlin.

“On top of that, the balance of the car wasn’t great for either driver. That affects our cornering speeds, which in turn impacts the deployment.”

Ferrari and Red Bull led the way in this respect, with Charles Leclerc posting the fastest time of 1:20.267s, which was half a second faster than teammate Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen. It was by no means a yardstick, but their laps gave some indication of where their strengths lie.

Much of the performance from this year’s F1 cars comes from managing the deployment, regeneration and charge of the 350kw battery. Albert Park is one of the tracks where cars are largely energy-starved because they are at full throttle for most of the lap, so getting that balance right is key to lap time.

Drivers and teams spent the two hours they had on Friday optimising that, and it appeared as though Ferrari and Red Bull had the upper hand in the middle sector.

This was evidenced by the Ferrari-engined cars topping the speed traps, while the quickest lap by RB’s Arvid Lindblad (which was fourth fastest overall) featured a purple middle sector.

Ferrari branded Friday in Melbourne “a productive day in the park” in their press release, although Leclerc was quick to point out that it wasn’t all smooth for them after taking the wrong setup direction in FP2.

“The teams are showing little by little a bit more performance and, unfortunately, we seem to be on the back foot. Especially to Mercedes, who seem to be very strong,” Leclerc told F1 TV.

“I don’t think they showed everything in low fuel, but in high fuel, it was very impressive.”

Indeed. The technical issues for Mercedes and McLaren - possibly brought on by the upgraded specification yet to run - appeared to be remedied for FP2, enabling them to focus on those crucial deployment areas.

Piastri was quickest in front of the home fans with a 1:19.729s, ahead of Antonelli and Russell, while Norris was still a few seconds off, having missed a chunk of time in FP1.

Russell’s long runs appeared to be the most representative, with him averaging lap times in the mid-1:23s. Piastri was in the high-1:24s, Hadjar on the medium tyre was in the high-1:24s, while the Ferrari drivers did not get a proper representative run in.

“We made a positive step for FP2 and had a much better session. The car felt more put together, and we completed a good amount of single lap and long run work,” said Russell.

“The front of the field looks very competitive, and we will have to take another step overnight if we are to be in the fight for pole position.”

The work done overnight might be a key factor in determining this weekend’s competitive outcome. The kings of turning things around in this way in recent years has been Red Bull, and they may need to pull the same magic after a messy FP2.

Verstappen stopped in the pits due to a problem with the electronic control box, then spent a few minutes in the garage because the mechanics couldn’t get his car out of gear.

When Verstappen did get out on track, he went off and damaged his floor at T10. Teammate Isack Hadjar also had a few adventures at T1 while putting laps together, ending the day ninth fastest in FP2.

It was clear they were a few seconds off Mercedes’ and Ferrari’s ultimate pace, both in the race pace and over a lap. Verstappen offered his thoughts after FP2: “Pace-wise, we are where I expected us to be. There is still a lot of work to do, and we will analyse what worked and what we can improve on overnight, and that is the reality at the moment.”

Aston Martin problems continue as Newey deflects blame to Honda

If the top four thought they were encountering teething problems, they could’ve been worse.

Down at Aston Martin, the most laps they completed in the morning were three with Lance Stroll before his battery pack gave up.

Fernando Alonso didn’t even turn a wheel until FP2 after his battery pack also gave up without even running. This was improved to 31 laps between them in FP2, but it came with a caveat.

Speaking in the team principal’s press conference, Adrian Newey said they were going through battery packs at a “scary” rate as the rest of their running in Australia will be determined by Honda’s spare parts inventory.

“The critical point is the number of batteries. We came here with four batteries. We’ve had conditioning problems or communication problems with two of those batteries, which means we’ve only got two operational batteries,” said Newey.

“That, given our kind of rate of battery damage, is quite a scary place to be in. Obviously, we’re hopeful that we can get through the weekend and start two cars, but it’s very difficult to be concrete at the moment about that.”

Honda did offer some encouragement, claiming that data from both practice sessions shows the countermeasures they implemented at Melbourne for their power unit are working: “There are less battery vibrations occurring, according to our analysis gathered during the session.”

Much of Aston Martin’s troubles stems from how late Newey ended up working on the car and the switch in concept from what they had before his arrival, but he was quick to also point out Honda’s role in how they ended up in such a mess.

“A bit of history is important there. Honda pulled out at the end of 2021. They then re-entered the sport at the end of 2022, so they had been out of competition for roughly a year,” said Newey.

“When they reformed, a lot of the original group had, it now transpires, disbanded and gone to work on solar panels or whatever, and so a lot of the group that reformed are actually fresh to F1.

“They didn’t bring the experience that they had had previously. Plus, when they came back in 2023, that was the first year of the budget cap introduction for engines. So all their rivals had been developing away through ’21, ’22 with continuity, their existing team, and free of the budget cap.”

Newey estimates that Honda re-entered with around 30% of their original team, but Aston Martin only knew about this quite late into the development process.

“We only really became aware of it in November of last year when Lawrence, Andy Cowell and myself went to Tokyo to discuss rumours starting to suggest that the original target power they wouldn’t achieve for race one,” explained Newey.

“Out of that came the fact that many of the original workforce had not returned when they restarted.”

When you consider that Aston Martin announced it was moving to Honda power as early as May 2023, it raises questions about how senior management has handled the situation and whether it was avoidable.

For now, Newey has a task to turn things around. The first signs are encouraging after Honda’s initial countermeasures appeared to work, but it is set to be a long season for Alonso and Stroll.

The NIBs

FIA reveal changes to Driving Standards guidelines

Changes to the F1 driving standards guidelines show harsher penalties, with stewards now able to disqualify or impose one-race bans for “apparent deliberate or reckless intent.”

Last year, the guidelines only specified a 10-second stop-and-go penalty and four penalty points for the same offence.

The offence for “forcing another driver off track” has also been updated. Previously, it only allowed the stewards to impose penalties for driving “recklessly”, but that definition has been expanded to include “reckless or dangerously or deliberately.”

Guidelines for incidents under Safety Car have been revised, with the 10-car length rule now simply stating “failing to keep within the maximum allowable gap to the car in front.”

The updated F1 Driving Standards guidelines (issued 26 February 2026) can be viewed here.

During his four-year stint with McLaren-Honda between 2015 and 2018, the sight of him retiring from a race or openly mocking the Japanese manufacturer in public was a regular fixture in Formula 1.

The myriad of grid penalties and DNFs eventually drove him out at the end of 2018, with Alonso opting to focus his energy on winning Le Mans for a second consecutive time with rival car brand Toyota. It was the ultimate two-fingers in the style of Steve McQueen.

Honda had the last laugh. After severing its engine contract with McLaren, it went to Red Bull, powering Max Verstappen to four consecutive Drivers’ titles. This success convinced them to stay in F1 after initially planning to step back once the new power units came into play this season.

As Red Bull went its own way by producing its own power unit in-house, Honda sought a partnership with Aston Martin. This, according to billionaire team owner Lawrence Stroll, would put them in the same league as Mercedes and Ferrari as a works team.

The addition of F1 design guru Adrian Newey solidified their place as a team to watch heading into the big regulation reset of 2026. This was the no-brainer. This was the banker. This was the one that couldn’t fail.

The first reveal of their challenger in Barcelona turned heads. What we could see from the all-black liveried AMR26 was a tightly packaged and aggressive take on the 2026 regulations, with Aston Martin’s social media admin quick to dub it the ‘Adrian Newey-designed AMR26’ in all of their posts.

No team was entering 2026 with greater expectations.

Fast forward to pre-season testing in Bahrain. Not only were they the slowest, but they were unpredictable. The time they spent on track was riddled with technical glitches, akin to the days Alonso had with McLaren under Honda power.

After just 334 laps completed across the six days, Aston Martin finds itself in big trouble at the start of F1 2026.

Starting four months too late

At Aston Martin’s launch event in February, there was little talk of breaking into the ‘big four’ teams. Instead, the attention turned to why they were late in Barcelona.

Everyone was permitted to commence aerodynamic work on their cars in January 2025. In an interview published by the team itself, Newey claimed that Aston Martin started four months later than everyone else, in part due to his contractual obligations stemming from his gardening leave from Red Bull.

“The reality is that we didn’t get a model of the ‘26 car into the AI.R Tunnel until mid-April, whereas most, if not all of our rivals would have had a model in the wind tunnel from the moment the 2026 aero testing ban ended at the beginning of January last year,” said Newey.

“That put us on the back foot by about four months, which has meant a very, very compressed research and design cycle. The car only came together at the last minute, which is why we were fighting to make it to the Barcelona Shakedown.”

At the car launch, Newey remarked that both he and Stroll had come “close to having a tear” in their eyes when they first saw the car roll out of the garage, knowing how difficult it was to get to this point.

He also let it slip that the first concepts of the AMR26 had come during his Red Bull gardening leave: “The philosophy really, I suppose, came in my garden leave time, where I joined the team on the second of March, but I was on gardening leave from late April, effectively.”

Teams had known the basics of the 2026 regulations as early as 2024, and while haggling over specifics, they would’ve been conceptualising their approach in the background.

When Newey finally arrived, he was named team principal within a couple of months, replacing Andy Cowell. The former Mercedes HPP boss was rumoured to be leaving the team after he was removed as a director of the F1 team holding company, AMR GP, in December, although the team has since claimed he plans to stay.

Having Cowell onboard will be valuable to Honda as they try to understand the problems they identified during pre-season testing.

The snowball effect

Speaking during their F1 pre-season briefing with Japanese media this week, Honda Racing Corporation leaders Koji Watanabe and Ikuo Takeishi attributed their testing problems to abnormal vibrations that damaged the power unit's battery system.

Although they have yet to identify the root cause, they believe the battery pack is being shaken because the structure it is attached to is vibrating more severely than expected.

With virtual track testing taking place at its Sakura base in Japan, they are effectively working against the clock to identify a fix before the season opener in Melbourne in March.

All of this takes on a snowball effect.

Honda’s early reliability problems have led to questions over whether it will need to make use of F1’s ‘Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities’ system that enables power unit manufacturers to catch up on performance if they are behind after the March 1st homologation date.

Although in-season reliability upgrades are permitted with FIA approval, performance upgrades are limited to three periods: from rounds 1-6, 7-12, and 13-18.

If Honda is more than 2% but less than 4% below the best engine, it will be allowed one performance upgrade. More than 4% below the best, and it will be permitted two upgrades, with the usage of test benches and cost cap spending adjusted.

Honda is also bound by the power unit budget cap, so any development money will now have to be spent earlier in the season to address any problems they find from testing.

Aston Martin heads to Melbourne without a clear picture of where their chassis sits among the competitive order. In the era of cost-cap F1, this plays havoc with your upgrade cycle.

Teams can no longer spend their way out of problems. Air-freighting new parts to the first races - Australia, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Japan, China - can be very costly under the budget cap, which means any meaningful performances might not come until later in the year when they have lost significant ground in the Constructors’ battle.

There is also the impact this poor on-track performance could have on the car brand. Aston Martin is struggling financially, posting pre-tax losses of £363.9 million in 2025 and expecting to cut 20% of its jobs. This has been compounded by the tariffs on automobiles imposed by the Trump Administration in the US.

They recently lost the contract to provide Safety Cars to F1, with the contract going back to their main rival, Mercedes-Benz, exclusively from 2026.

To alleviate the losses at the car company, they received a £50 million cash injection by selling the naming rights of the F1 team to AMR GP. This effectively means the Aston Martin brand can still be used, regardless of the car company's position.

Newey is confident Aston Martin has produced a car with upgrade potential, but how fast they come might determine the outcome of their star driver.

An unwanted sequel for Alonso?

The question remains as to whether this will take its toll on Alonso.

Now 44 years old and expecting his first child with partner Melissa Jimenez in March, he is effectively heading into the final years of his F1 career as a driver.

Will he want to stick around and endure any pain before on-track gains?

Alonso was named by Newey as one of the drivers he most wanted to work with, while the Spaniard had also come close earlier in his F1 career, nearly signing to race for Red Bull in 2009.

For his part, Alonso is staying hopeful: “I think everything can be fixed for sure, short-term and medium-term. I don’t think there is anything that is impossible to fix. We need to wait and see.

“We will try to fix everything that we can before Australia, and after that, try to fix as many things as possible in the first couple of races before it’s too late in the championship. But no, I’m optimistic. I think there is a solution in place.”