The 2026 Formula 1 season has not even begun yet, and the FIA, led on the technical side by Nikolas Tombazis, is already facing a particularly delicate issue. The power unit case linked to compression ratios could generate clear competitive disadvantages and potential disputes with the teams. The ADO (Additional Development Opportunity) mechanism could be triggered immediately, effectively confirming a regulatory framework that would already contain its first significant grey area.
FIA: a very complex relationship to manage with Formula 1 teams
At the beginning of his experience with the International Federation, Nikolas Tombazis focused almost exclusively on the technical side of the sport, dedicating himself to drafting the regulations and overseeing their correct application by the teams. Faced with the enormous number of engineers employed by the Formula 1 teams, Nikolas Tombazis could rely on a relatively small group within the FIA, making every verification process an extremely demanding challenge.
For this reason, the former Ferrari engineer openly admits how difficult it was to continuously improve both himself and the methodologies used to ensure the cars’ compliance. Dialogue with the teams regarding regulatory changes was particularly delicate. Every party, while formally pursuing the good of the sport, inevitably also sought to maximise the interests of its own team.
The perspective was therefore twofold: on one hand, the benefit for Formula 1 as a whole; on the other, the competitive advantage for a specific team. Over time, Nikolas Tombazis learned how to decode these two layers of evaluation, fully aware that every technical or sporting request always carried a strategic component aimed at gaining an edge over rivals.
FIA: Nikolas Tombazis’ legislative approach to Formula 1 is difficult on multiple levels
After years of experience, the Greek engineer has developed a sharp sense of realism. As a result, decisions and interactions always leave a complex aftertaste: the pressure generated by responsibilities and conflicting interests makes the job extremely demanding, but at the same time intellectually stimulating from a technical, human and political standpoint.
Within a Formula 1 team, pressure is directly linked to on-track results, whereas at the FIA, mistakes are inevitably exposed to public scrutiny. Every error becomes a subject of criticism, and the technical director naturally becomes the main target. For this reason, Nikolas Tombazis highlights that the responsibility of ensuring fairness and technical integrity is just as heavy within the International Federation.
Every decision must balance strictness with sensitivity, fully aware that technical interventions have a profound impact on the future of the championship and on competitive balance between teams. His experience shows that even in a regulatory environment, leadership requires equilibrium between firmness and pragmatism, the ability to assess risks and opportunities, and the skill to mediate between collective needs and individual interests.
The unwritten rule the International Federation should apply
An excerpt from an interview given by Nikolas Tombazis to Motorsport Magazine perfectly illustrates how difficult and problematic it is to satisfy the teams, especially when dealing with mid-season changes or, as is happening now at the dawn of a new regulatory era, with teams operating at the very edge of the regulations and exploiting grey areas.
The Mercedes case is emblematic, with Red Bull also seemingly involved. The reference is to the alarm raised over Ferrari power units which, just like those of Audi and Honda, could suffer if the most effective compression ratio solution were to be confirmed. There is no doubt about the integrity of the International Federation, but the possibility that it could find itself with limited room for manoeuvre in the face of potentially worrying situations is a genuine concern.
To give an example: postponing the elimination of a confirmed irregularity to the following season, because it violates the spirit of the rule while exploiting a legal loophole, effectively creates double damage. On one hand, it preserves the competitive advantage; on the other, even knowing that the solution will be banned the following year, it forces all teams to replicate it in order to avoid suffering a major disadvantage for an entire season.
The DAS case can be accepted, given that the advantage was relatively limited. But gaining an extra 15 horsepower throughout the entire championship, along with greater efficiency in managing battery recharge — which from 2026 will also occur in corners through the use of the internal combustion engine — would represent a completely distorting scenario. For this reason, the FIA should, regardless of circumstances, ban such situations by appealing to common sense.
The FIA therefore finds itself in a race against time to close these technical loopholes before they define the next era of Formula 1. The challenge for Nikolas Tombazis and his team is not just about writing rules, but about ensuring that the spirit of competition isn’t sacrificed at the altar of clever engineering. If the governing body fails to act decisively now, they risk a lopsided championship where the winners are decided in the courtroom and the design office rather than on the asphalt of the world’s greatest circuits.
Leave a Reply