Ferrari’s Formula 1 title hopes with Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc are widely considered to have suffered a decisive blow after Monza. The situation now looks critical, but the calendar still contains several rounds and the Scuderia could yet recover valuable ground if the SF-26 finds stronger circuits later in the season. The question is whether Ferrari should abandon its championship ambitions altogether. A statistical model offers a more objective answer, stripped of emotion and philosophy.
The debate is particularly relevant for Lewis Hamilton’s 2026 F1 title prospects after Monza. Ferrari’s current performance deficit has made the task increasingly difficult, but the numbers also show how earlier strategic choices, including the use of team orders, could have influenced the championship picture.
Monte Carlo model assesses Lewis Hamilton’s F1 title chances
We developed a simplified Monte Carlo simulation covering 20,000 possible scenarios from the current point of the season until the end of the year. The aim is to explore the different ways the championship could unfold through to Abu Dhabi, or Imola. The calculation starts from the current standings and the present competitive order, with Ferrari showing inferior pace at this stage.
The Scuderia also surrendered several points to McLaren during the most recent weekend. By contrast, the Woking team currently appears to have a car on a clear upward trajectory and is planning further developments for the Azerbaijan Grand Prix. Those upgrades could significantly alter the competitive balance.
Andrea Kimi Antonelli is undoubtedly the dominant figure in Formula 1 at present. The Italian has demonstrated both his own potential and the superiority of the machinery available to him. Andrea Kimi Antonelli produced a historic achievement at Monza, although one technical detail must also be considered: Mercedes configured its car entirely with the race in mind. The engineers had known for some time that a penalty would have to be served.
Why recent Ferrari and Mercedes race pace matters to the model
The model analyses the difference in race pace between Ferrari and Mercedes over the most recent Grands Prix using a simplified structure. It also incorporates specific periods in which the two SF-26s were running faster than the W17.
The clearest example is Zandvoort. In the Netherlands, Ferrari showed stronger pace throughout the race, but starting position was the main problem. The drivers also faced an unusually demanding performance threshold to complete overtakes on track. At Zandvoort, a driver needed an advantage of around 1.6 seconds per lap to overtake an opponent, whereas at Monza the required margin was only around 0.35 seconds.
The model also takes into account a higher level of mechanical fragility for Mercedes, a parameter that the German team’s engineers continue to monitor closely. These variables matter because a championship simulation cannot be based purely on average lap time; reliability, overtaking difficulty and circuit characteristics can all influence how many points are realistically recoverable.
Ferrari team orders could have increased Hamilton’s championship chance
The first scenario reflects Ferrari’s current approach, with Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc allowed to race freely on track. The second adopts a more ruthless logic and evaluates the possible impact of team orders. That raises a legitimate question: how different might the championship have looked if Ferrari had established a hierarchy earlier and committed fully to supporting one driver?
The traditional concept of a clear number one and number two driver largely belongs to another era. Such a rigid division no longer reflects the normal dynamics at Maranello or at most other Formula 1 teams. Decisions of this kind are generally postponed until much later in the season. That is not always beneficial, as Ferrari’s recent team-orders debate involving Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc has illustrated.
The graph tracking championship gaps after the last three races produces revealing results. In Hungary, the probability of remaining in the fight for the world championship was still relatively high, approaching 30%. The statistical model also includes the possibility of mechanical failures or accidents affecting each driver.
Applying what is defined as the Contender rule — effectively introducing a hierarchy through team orders — increased the probability of success further. Ferrari’s decision to keep both drivers on equal terms therefore becomes an important variable when assessing how the championship situation evolved. The team had already faced questions over why Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc remained equal in Hungary.
Technical factors behind Ferrari’s collapse in title probability
Team orders alone, however, do not explain the decline in Ferrari’s championship prospects. In Hungary, the team failed to execute properly. The pit wall got the race strategy completely wrong and threw away a podium that had been fully within reach.
The analysis therefore does not suggest that imposing a hierarchy would automatically have guaranteed Ferrari a genuine title challenge. There is also an important performance factor. The absolute potential of the car has not necessarily fallen away, but the Scuderia has repeatedly failed to maximise that performance on track.
The Hungaroring suited the SF-26 extremely well. In the Netherlands, the car had the pace required to fight for victory. Monza, by contrast, was always expected to be a much more difficult venue. Frédéric Vasseur had warned about the car’s limitations well before the Italian weekend, while media coverage and public expectations arguably exaggerated Ferrari’s chances of success.
That distinction remains important when judging the SF-26 after the Italian Grand Prix. As our analysis of Ferrari’s biggest weakness at Monza highlighted, one difficult circuit does not necessarily prove that the car lacks competitive pace everywhere.
Madrid could offer Ferrari another stronger opportunity
The Madrid circuit could once again suit the characteristics of the SF-26. Ferrari has already gathered early information from its running at the new venue, while the Madring layout and Ferrari’s initial driver feedback suggest a very different challenge from Monza.
For that reason, an assessment based exclusively on the Italian Grand Prix cannot establish that Ferrari has completely lost its underlying pace. The engineers had expected meaningful help from the ADUO update, although that development was never supposed to be the decisive element capable of eliminating the gap to Mercedes on its own.
The next races will also provide a clearer picture of what the latest power-unit development can deliver away from Monza. The recent ADUO2 analysis from the Italian Grand Prix showed why engine performance and energy deployment remain important parts of Ferrari’s wider competitiveness.
Ferrari should still find competitive windows, but the gap is now enormous
Ferrari will almost certainly encounter further windows of competitiveness before the end of the championship. Certain circuits should allow the SF-26 to operate closer to its preferred performance range, giving Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc more opportunities to challenge near the front.
The championship deficit, however, has now grown to proportions that are increasingly difficult to recover. The key questions concern the effect of the new engine at other circuits, Ferrari’s ability to maximise results when opportunities arise and whether development of the SF-26 can continue in the correct direction.
The statistical picture therefore points to a broader conclusion. Ferrari’s title chances have not disappeared simply because of one poor weekend at Monza, nor can their decline be attributed solely to the absence of team orders. Performance, execution, strategy, reliability and driver management have all contributed. The problem is that, with the championship gap now so large, Ferrari has far less margin left to waste any future opportunity.
Leave a Reply