Three races, one increasingly obvious problem
Three clues, as the saying goes, are enough to establish a pattern. Formula 1 and the FIA can probably stop pretending this one is going away on its own.
The debate is still about the same thing: the kind of racing created by the current technical cycle, and how much the drivers are forced to manage the energy of the power unit instead of chasing outright performance on the edge of grip, braking, and common sense. Mostly common sense.
Suzuka, just like Melbourne before it, made the limits of the current 50:50 split between electric power and the internal combustion engine painfully clear. For most drivers, this is no longer a battle taken in the corners in the old-fashioned sense. It is a battle against the energy budget.
Max Verstappen, Carlos Sainz, Fernando Alonso, Sergio Perez, Oliver Bearman and, in a more specific way tied to qualifying laps, Charles Leclerc have all voiced criticism in different forms. Fast corners, once a defining part of Formula 1, are increasingly replaced by stretches of coasting used to recover energy. Very thrilling, if your idea of motorsport is doing math while turning left and right.
The FIA has set April as the review window
The discussion about change should begin from the reality that the cars are now showing on track, not from nostalgia or any single driver’s irritation with the state of the sport. Verstappen’s frustration is not the point in itself, even if it is a loud enough signal to ignore at your peril.
A few hours after the Bearman-Colapinto accident at Suzuka, the FIA issued a statement laying out its position. The governing body said the regulations include “a series of variable parameters, especially in relation to energy management, that allow optimization based on real data.”
It also said that all stakeholders have consistently agreed that the rules should be reviewed after the opening phase of the season, once enough data has been gathered and analyzed. The FIA added that a series of meetings is scheduled in April to evaluate how the new regulations have worked and whether adjustments are needed.
That was not the first time the subject had come up. During the Bahrain tests, the F1 Commission had already discussed whether action was needed before the Australian Grand Prix. In the end, the decision was to wait for actual race weekends instead of making a knee-jerk move. Now that three full examples on very different circuits are available, revisiting what can be adapted is simply the sensible thing to do.
There is now roughly a month to study, debate and intervene on the balance between electric and thermal power. The goal is to avoid running out of energy on the more demanding circuits. That matters, because Formula 1 cannot quietly shrink itself into a contest of who can manage horsepower most efficiently while pretending this is the same thing as racing.
The FIA’s note also stressed that any possible regulation change, especially one related to energy management, will require careful simulation and detailed analysis. The federation said it will continue working closely and constructively with all stakeholders to secure the best possible outcome for the sport.
Safety, it added, will remain a core part of the FIA’s mission. At this stage, it said, speculation about the nature of any possible changes is premature. Further updates will come in due course. Sensible, cautious, slightly bureaucratic. In other words, very Formula 1.
Qualifying needs help, racing needs smaller fixes
After Suzuka, Leclerc, along with Oscar Piastri and Andrea Kimi Antonelli, discussed whether the power unit rules should be adjusted in light of the Bearman-Colapinto crash, which was triggered by the speed difference between the Haas and the Alpine.
Leclerc’s assessment was blunt, if carefully framed:
“With these cars, you need to race differently, there is no doubt about that. One of the topics discussed was the movement or change of direction every time you go into super clipping, and that is what creates rather dangerous situations. Whether everything absolutely needs to change for the race, I do not know. I do not think I am the only one talking about this with the other drivers. In truth, I like these cars for the racing possibilities they offer.
For qualifying, I think there are changes we need to make so we can push the cars to the limit without having to think too much about energy consumption. In the race, I think it also depends on simple adjustments from us when defending, keeping in mind that speed differences can be more significant. In that sense, I am referring more to the cars that have to defend than to those attacking. I also had some quite difficult moments with George in Australia. I think things will improve with time, but it is certainly complicated.”
That is where the current conversation sits: qualifying may need help so drivers can push flat-out without watching the energy meter like it is a fuel gauge in a budget rental car, while racing may only require smaller adjustments to defensive driving and the way the cars handle larger speed differentials.
The problem is no longer theoretical. The FIA has a month, more or less, to decide whether the balance of the new rules needs a correction before the sport spends the rest of the season explaining why the fastest cars keep being asked to behave like spreadsheet operators.
