Charles Leclerc had enough speed to win the 2026 United States Grand Prix, but his battles with Max Verstappen and Lando Norris ultimately cost him the opportunity to challenge Andrea Kimi Antonelli. That is the assessment of former Formula 1 driver Marc Surer, who believes the Ferrari driver lost too much time fighting his rivals despite demonstrating impressive pace during the closing stages of the race at the Circuit of the Americas.
Andrea Kimi Antonelli secured his ninth victory of the championship for Mercedes, finishing 13.078 seconds ahead of Charles Leclerc. The Italian controlled the race after successfully defending against Max Verstappen at Turn 1, while Ferrari’s hopes of challenging for victory became increasingly complicated by on-track battles and a different tyre strategy. Although Charles Leclerc eventually recovered to second place, his strongest pace arrived when the gap to the leader was already considerable.
Marc Surer believes Charles Leclerc lost his Austin victory chance in battles with rivals
Former Brabham Formula 1 driver Marc Surer believes Charles Leclerc possessed the speed required to challenge Andrea Kimi Antonelli for victory. Speaking to Motorsport-Total, the former driver argued that Ferrari’s chances had been compromised by the time the Monegasque lost fighting Max Verstappen and Lando Norris.
In Marc Surer’s assessment, Charles Leclerc was sufficiently quick to win the Grand Prix, but the prolonged wheel-to-wheel contests prevented him from making full use of that performance. The former F1 driver also praised Andrea Kimi Antonelli’s execution, highlighting the Mercedes driver’s pole position, victory and the fact that he committed only one track-limits offence.
A victory for Charles Leclerc would have been his second of the 2026 Formula 1 season, following his success at the British Grand Prix. It would also have ended Ferrari’s winless run since Silverstone, making the lost opportunity particularly significant for the Italian team.
However, Ferrari’s difficulty was not simply a matter of outright speed. The race developed in a way that repeatedly forced Charles Leclerc to focus on recovering positions rather than closing the gap to the leading Mercedes.
How Charles Leclerc’s first-lap fight with Max Verstappen affected Ferrari
The first major complication arrived almost immediately after the start. Charles Leclerc attacked Max Verstappen through the opening sector, using an ambitious move around Turn 4 to take second place from the four-time world champion.
The manoeuvre required an aggressive use of the Ferrari’s available battery energy. Charles Leclerc deployed considerable electrical power exiting Turn 1 to build momentum towards Turn 3, allowing him to challenge Max Verstappen on the inside at Turn 4.
Although the Ferrari driver completed the move, the energy expenditure left him vulnerable to a counterattack. Max Verstappen subsequently reclaimed second position after Charles Leclerc left an opportunity at Turn 16, undoing the advantage gained earlier in the lap.
That sequence proved important because it allowed Andrea Kimi Antonelli to establish an early advantage while his two closest pursuers were occupied with each other. Instead of remaining directly behind the Mercedes, Charles Leclerc had to continue battling the Red Bull driver.
The opening-lap duel between Charles Leclerc and Max Verstappen at Austin highlighted the intensity of their battle and the challenge of maintaining track position against a rival capable of responding immediately.
Had Charles Leclerc retained second place through the opening sectors, Ferrari would have possessed a wider range of strategic possibilities. Remaining ahead of Max Verstappen would have allowed the Scuderia to concentrate more directly on Andrea Kimi Antonelli rather than having its decisions influenced by Red Bull.
Ferrari’s two-stop strategy leaves Charles Leclerc chasing Mercedes
The strategic differences between Ferrari and Mercedes became increasingly important as the race progressed. Charles Leclerc completed two pit stops, coming in on laps 15 and 39, while Andrea Kimi Antonelli followed a one-stop strategy with his only visit to the pit lane on lap 24.
Mercedes began the Grand Prix on Medium tyres before switching to the Hard compound. Ferrari, meanwhile, started Charles Leclerc on Soft tyres, moved him onto Mediums at his first stop and fitted Hards for the final stint.
The choice of compounds had a major influence on the race. Andrea Kimi Antonelli was able to build his advantage using a strategy that required only one stop, whereas Charles Leclerc needed to recover positions after making his second visit to the pits.
Red Bull’s actions also affected Ferrari’s decisions. Max Verstappen stopped on lap 13, encouraging the Scuderia to follow a similar two-stop approach with Charles Leclerc brought in two laps later.
This left Ferrari responding to the immediate battle with Red Bull rather than pursuing an independent strategy specifically designed to challenge the leading Mercedes. An earlier move onto the Hard compound could potentially have created a different situation, particularly given the performance Charles Leclerc subsequently demonstrated on those tyres.
The various compound choices and stint lengths are central to understanding the outcome, with the F1 tyre and stint analysis providing a way to examine how different strategies influence race performance.
Charles Leclerc loses further time behind Lando Norris
Ferrari’s second pit stop created another complication by dropping Charles Leclerc behind McLaren driver Lando Norris. The reigning 2025 world champion was attempting to make a one-stop strategy work, although that approach ultimately failed to deliver the intended result.
Max Verstappen reached Lando Norris first and completed an overtake at Turn 1 on lap 47 of the 56-lap race. Charles Leclerc, however, had to wait longer to clear the McLaren, eventually passing at Turn 14.
That recovery allowed the Ferrari driver to resume his pursuit of the Red Bull, which he overtook again at Turn 12 on lap 49 to reclaim second place.
By the time Charles Leclerc returned to P2, Andrea Kimi Antonelli was already 16.8 seconds ahead. Only seven laps remained, leaving the Ferrari driver with insufficient time to convert his superior closing pace into a serious challenge for victory.
The sequence supports Marc Surer’s view that traffic and wheel-to-wheel battles played an important role in determining the final result. Charles Leclerc repeatedly demonstrated the speed to overtake his rivals, but each contest delayed his progress towards the Mercedes.
Ferrari’s Hard tyre pace raises questions about a possible Austin victory
Perhaps the strongest argument for Ferrari having missed an opportunity comes from the performance of the SF-26 on Hard tyres during the final stint.
After fitting the C2 compound, Charles Leclerc produced some of his most competitive lap times of the Grand Prix. In clear air around the period when he overtook Max Verstappen for second place, the Ferrari driver was approximately 1.4 seconds per lap faster than Andrea Kimi Antonelli.
That advantage demonstrated the potential of Ferrari’s package under favourable conditions. It also raised the possibility that choosing the Hard compound at the first pit stop, rather than the Medium tyre, could have significantly changed the strategic picture.
The strong performance of Ferrari’s Hard tyres at Austin became one of the most encouraging aspects of the team’s race, especially after the difficulties experienced earlier in the afternoon.
Nevertheless, Charles Leclerc’s late advantage arrived after Andrea Kimi Antonelli had already established a substantial lead. The Mercedes driver was also managing a different strategy, having completed his final pit stop much earlier than the Ferrari.
Ferrari’s pace therefore provided an indication of what might have been possible under different circumstances, but the finishing order reflected the combined effects of strategy, track position and the time spent fighting other drivers.
Could Ferrari have beaten Andrea Kimi Antonelli at the United States GP?
Marc Surer’s assessment places considerable emphasis on the opportunities Charles Leclerc lost during his battles with Max Verstappen and Lando Norris. The Ferrari driver had the pace to compete, but his race was repeatedly interrupted by situations that prevented him from concentrating solely on the Mercedes ahead.
The early exchange with Max Verstappen allowed Andrea Kimi Antonelli to build a lead, while Ferrari’s first pit-stop decision placed Charles Leclerc on a two-stop trajectory. The second stop then forced him to recover positions once again before he could begin reducing the deficit to the race leader.
By the time Charles Leclerc secured second position on lap 49, the advantage Mercedes had accumulated was too large to overcome in the remaining distance.
The result ultimately combined disappointment with encouragement for Ferrari. Charles Leclerc demonstrated considerable speed, particularly on Hard tyres, but the Scuderia could not turn that performance into its second victory of the season.
Whether a different first-lap outcome or an earlier switch to Hard tyres would have been enough to defeat Andrea Kimi Antonelli remains an open strategic question. For Marc Surer, however, the central conclusion is clear: the time Charles Leclerc lost in his battles with other drivers prevented him from making full use of a Ferrari that he considered fast enough to win.
Leave a Reply