The chaos of the Bahrain Grand Prix at Sepang was not simply about the weather. The rain exposed a more interesting problem: how well did the teams really understand the behaviour of the Malaysian circuit in wet conditions?
Ferrari, in particular, paid for the wrong strategic choice at the most delicate stage of the race. When the Grand Prix finally started after more than an hour and a half of waiting, the circuit appeared to be drying but was still too wet for slick tyres. Ferrari chose Softs for both Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton, while other teams opted for intermediates. The result was immediate: both Ferrari drivers lost ground, while those on intermediates benefited from the actual track conditions.
But that leads to another question: was it really so difficult to anticipate that Sepang might take considerable time to dry?
Sepang is not an ordinary circuit
The recent history of the Malaysian circuit contains information that should not simply be ignored. Sepang was completely resurfaced in 2016, and the work also included changes to certain track profiles and the drainage system.
Some sections were specifically reprofiled to improve the evacuation of water during the intense tropical downpours for which the region is known. Additional drainage grilles were also installed at points considered particularly critical.
What happened in the years after that resurfacing is even more relevant. Problems involving water remaining on the track surface were subsequently reported, and in 2023 the circuit underwent another significant programme of work.
The section between Turns 7 and 12 was resurfaced, with further work carried out around Turn 9. Sepang International Circuit itself explained that the previous major intervention had taken place in February 2016 and that corrective work had later become necessary following reports concerning water on the track.
One thing is therefore certain: Sepang was not a surface that had remained unchanged since 2016.
Sepang was different in 2026, but not completely unknown
Before Formula 1 returned to Malaysia, Pirelli analysed the circuit directly. The tyre manufacturer highlighted that Sepang had a relatively abrasive surface and confirmed that several areas had been resurfaced in 2023.
Pirelli also explained that, despite those interventions, the general characteristics of the asphalt remained very similar to those measured in 2017.
More importantly, Pirelli made another fundamental point clear: the teams had very little genuinely significant data relating to the current generation of Formula 1 cars because the previous race at Sepang had taken place in 2017.
That is where the challenge becomes important. When recent data from current cars is limited, teams have to compensate by analysing everything else available to them: the circuit’s history, changes to the asphalt, previous track behaviour, weather conditions, drainage and, above all, earlier episodes of heavy rain.
The question Ferrari needed to answer before choosing Soft tyres
No engineer could reasonably be expected to calculate with mathematical precision exactly how many minutes Sepang would need to dry after a specific tropical downpour. But that was not the fundamental question Ferrari needed to answer.
The real question was much simpler: after an enormous amount of rain falls, how quickly can the circuit become suitable for slick tyres?
That distinction matters enormously. At Sepang, it is not enough to observe that the rain has stopped and that a drier racing line is beginning to appear in certain areas. Teams also need to understand how quickly that line will widen, how long the areas away from it will remain wet and, most importantly, whether enough water remains on the surface to make slick tyres the wrong choice.
That is exactly what Ferrari encountered at the start. The circuit appeared to be drying, but remained too wet. Ferrari fitted Soft tyres to both cars and immediately paid the price, an error the team subsequently acknowledged after the race. The consequences of that opening call and the recovery that followed are detailed in the analysis of Ferrari’s Sepang tyre mistake and Lewis Hamilton’s comeback.
Did Ferrari focus too heavily on the track looking dry?
This is perhaps the strongest criticism that can be directed at Ferrari’s pit wall. It does not necessarily mean that anyone inside the team was unaware of the history of Sepang’s asphalt.
There is not enough evidence to claim Ferrari possessed a specific document capable of predicting the exact drying time of the circuit. The issue is different.
The strategy appears to have placed greater emphasis on the possibility that the track would dry quickly than on the opposite risk: that the surface could remain extremely wet even after the rain itself had stopped.
At that moment, the tyre choice was decisive. Max Verstappen and Kimi Antonelli were among the drivers who opted for intermediates, while Ferrari committed to Softs. The comparison on track quickly favoured the first interpretation.
The different compound choices and stint structures from the race can also be examined through the ScuderiaFans F1 Tyre & Stint Analysis.
Old asphalt was not the problem at Sepang
There is also an important misunderstanding to avoid. It would not be accurate simply to say that Sepang’s asphalt was old and therefore no longer drained properly.
Pirelli assessed the general characteristics of the surface in 2026 as remaining very similar to those recorded in 2017, while the circuit had undergone further work in 2023 as well as additional levelling and cleaning in the weeks leading up to the Grand Prix.
It therefore cannot be claimed that ageing alone had simply closed the pores in the asphalt and caused water to remain on the surface. That would be a technical oversimplification.
The more relevant point is that a circuit which has undergone different interventions over time, and which has historically required particular attention to drainage, also needs to be studied in terms of how it behaves in wet conditions.
Ferrari had an even bigger problem during the Sepang race
The decision to start on Soft tyres was not Ferrari’s only problem at Sepang. The conditions completely reshuffled the race, while Charles Leclerc’s contact with Nico Hülkenberg and the subsequent puncture complicated the situation further.
Despite everything, Lewis Hamilton recovered to the podium and Charles Leclerc climbed back to fourth place. Ferrari therefore demonstrated that the potential to rescue the weekend was there. More coverage of the two drivers’ race can be followed through the dedicated Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc sections.
That makes the initial mistake even more interesting. This was not a race that had been lost from the beginning. Ferrari had the opportunity to choose the right tyre at the decisive moment, but misread the transition from wet to dry conditions.
The track had already provided clues
The point is therefore not to accuse Ferrari of failing to understand that Sepang is an old circuit. That would be far too simplistic.
The more relevant question is whether every available piece of information was used to construct the worst-case scenario before the tyre decision was made.
There were several factors to consider. Sepang was returning to the Formula 1 calendar after nine years. The 2026 cars were completely different from those that had competed there in 2017. Pirelli had highlighted the shortage of current data, while the circuit itself had undergone substantial work.
Some sections had been resurfaced again in 2023, and drainage had already been modified during the circuit’s recent history. Sepang is also exposed to extremely intense rainfall, making the circuit’s behaviour in wet conditions one of the most important variables to understand.
None of those factors makes it possible to predict the future perfectly. But together they certainly make one question worth asking: “If a downpour arrives, how long will this track really take to dry?”
Given Ferrari’s tyre choice at the start, that is now a difficult question to avoid.
Ferrari lacked more than outright pace at Sepang
Lewis Hamilton eventually reached the podium, while Charles Leclerc finished fourth. Considering how disastrous the opening laps had been, that result could even be viewed as positive.
Yet that recovery is precisely why the strategic question remains. Ferrari did not necessarily need to predict the exact amount of water covering every centimetre of the circuit. It needed to interpret the wet-to-dry transition correctly.
In a race where rain had already caused a delay of more than 90 minutes and completely transformed the circuit conditions, the margin available for an aggressive gamble on slick tyres was probably too small. A broader breakdown of how the team managed the changing race can be found in the Ferrari Bahrain Grand Prix strategy analysis.
Modern Formula 1 teams have access to an enormous amount of data, and Ferrari’s wider car and performance developments can be followed through the ScuderiaFans Ferrari technical analysis section. But data is useful only when the individual pieces are connected.
Perhaps the most important lesson from Sepang is therefore a simple one: knowing that a track is drying is not enough. The crucial questions are how it is drying, how quickly that process is happening and, above all, where the remaining water is located.
This time, Ferrari got that prediction wrong.
Leave a Reply