The new Formula 1 season is experiencing a dilemma similar to what Formula E faced with the Gen3 era. While having more duels on track can create excitement, it does not necessarily guarantee high-quality racing. Nonetheless, these tightly contested battles are exactly what Formula 1 had hoped for when introducing the latest regulations. Unsurprisingly, opinions are divided, and there are clear elements that need to be addressed as soon as possible.
After pre-season testing split between Barcelona and Sakhir, the opening weekends in Melbourne and Shanghai provided a clearer picture of the strengths and weaknesses of this new Formula 1 era. These early races set the stage for an upcoming meeting between the FIA and the teams, where officials and engineers will have the opportunity to thoroughly examine what has worked well and which aspects require targeted interventions.
As expected, the first two rounds of the championship have shown that energy management is a decisive factor, not only for the quantity but also the quality of on-track action. This has led to contrasting opinions even among those living Formula 1 from the inside, particularly the drivers, whose perspectives have been markedly divided.
While Max Verstappen, known for his purist approach to motorsport, has criticized the new regulations, going as far as describing them as a “joke,” Lewis Hamilton praised them, claiming that they provide the best duels he has experienced in Formula 1 since his debut. However, this contrast requires some nuance: while some drivers have struggled to adapt to the new Power Units, the changes to the chassis regulations have been widely appreciated.
The reduced aerodynamic load, simpler and more enjoyable cars to drive, less stiffness, and reduced sensitivity to dirty air are all positive changes. Even the more skeptical drivers have acknowledged these improvements. This was particularly evident in Shanghai, where intense battles occurred in parts of the circuit that last year saw very few overtakes. Yet, the underlying issue remains that the quality of racing is still heavily influenced by energy management.
Track characteristics also dictate how duels unfold. In Melbourne, there were 120 overtakes, nearly triple the number seen in the previous season. Formula 1 celebrated this statistic, although many of these overtakes were simply the result of drivers exchanging positions due to running out of usable energy, losing pace, or being unable to accelerate as they wished.
The Australian Grand Prix accentuated this phenomenon, not only because energy recovery opportunities were limited in both qualifying and the race, but also due to the presence of two long straights that amplified the dynamics of overtaking and counter-overtaking. This artificial aspect is not unusual in Formula 1; similar effects were observed with the DRS system in previous seasons. However, energy management has intensified the effect.
Activating the boost provides a significant surge in power and top speed, aiding overtakes, but it also drains energy extremely quickly. These continuous exchanges of position may look spectacular on television, but seeing drivers overtaken merely because they have depleted their energy or are forced to slow down is not the type of racing Formula 1 should aspire to offer.
In many ways, this dilemma mirrors the challenges faced by Formula E during the Gen3 era, when energy management became even more critical than in previous generations, requiring drivers to use lift-and-coast techniques extensively to conserve battery. Some races in Formula E Gen3 recorded nearly 370 overtakes in a single weekend. While impressive in quantity, the same drivers criticized the outcome as almost a double-edged sword.
The key issue is that quantity does not automatically translate to quality. A racing product must entertain, not just generate statistics. After years in which Formula 1 struggled to provide sufficient overtaking opportunities, due to aerodynamic loss in the slipstream and less effective DRS, having more dynamic races with continuous action is precisely what Formula One Management had hoped for.
The Chinese Grand Prix showed that when drivers have more energy available, racing begins to resemble the past seasons in terms of on-track battles. The smaller battery size, however, encourages a continuous back-and-forth dynamic, with drivers exchanging positions repeatedly. This is precisely the type of racing that engages fans who watch without getting bogged down in the technical details of the regulations.
It is no secret that analyzing the data revealed more closely fought duels than in many previous years. This is partly why Formula 1, together with the FIA and the teams, has taken a measured approach before adjusting certain rules. In many cases, these regulations are already functional, and the focus of discussions is more about mitigating problems in specific parts of the race weekend rather than overhauling the system.
It is evident that hearing drivers complain that they cannot push in qualifying, cannot act instinctively, or must remain below certain limits is not the image Formula 1 wants to portray. In the past, tire management in qualifying also imposed restrictions, and teams will continue to refine their models. However, seeing the raw talent of drivers curtailed on the flying lap is not just an unfortunate side effect; it is a priority that requires attention.
The fundamental issue with the new regulations is their ambition. Pursuing a more electric Formula 1 is not inherently wrong, but it becomes problematic when the tools to exploit its full potential are lacking. Drivers and teams are forced into compromises that limit performance and reduce the natural expressiveness of the cars.
This is a technical cycle that will take time to mature. As with the first generation of Power Units, early challenges will eventually evolve into added value. However, there is also the necessity to highlight the purest aspects of racing, not merely the technological component, which, while fascinating, is not the sole purpose of the sport.
Formula E learned this lesson during the Gen3 era, and its experience informed a shift in philosophy for Gen4. The focus is no longer on artificially inflating spectacle but on designing a racing series that emphasizes the cars and drivers themselves, restoring the centrality of driver skill and reducing the intrusive effects of energy management on racing strategy.
Leave a Reply