Immediately after last week’s Australian Grand Prix, a widely heard conclusion in the media centre after the chequered flag was: “I’m not entirely sure what to make of this.” Because what exactly had we all been watching in the paddock Down Under – an enjoyable spectacle or artificial racing that is quite far away from what F1 should be?
While, yes, there were plenty of overtakes, particularly in the first half of the race, does that automatically mean high entertainment value? As expected, F1 highlighted the number of overtakes on social media, but the question that inevitably follows is: what kind of overtakes were they?
In most cases, they were moves created by large differences in energy management, sometimes even unintentionally, as Gabriel Bortoleto explained. In the opening phase, it effectively became a yo-yo effect. A driver would deploy electrical power on one straight to make an overtake, but would then be left with an empty battery and therefore be countered on the next straight.
Yes, that officially counts as two overtakes, but is someone flying past due to a large energy delta on the straights really how we want F1 to look? For purists who already considered DRS overtakes artificial, this takes it one step further.
The overtakes that typically receive the most appreciation from fans are different. Think of how Max Verstappen passed Oscar Piastri around the outside at Imola last year, or how Piastri overtook Lewis Hamilton around the outside at the end of the 2025 Australian Grand Prix. Drivers arriving side-by-side into the braking zone — we hardly saw that during the first race of 2026. So while the pure number of overtakes was high, the way they came about was not exactly memorable.
While the prevailing sentiment among many journalists immediately after the race was uncertainty, the drivers were far more outspoken after a short walk to the media pen. Lando Norris had already said on Saturday that, in his view, F1 had gone from the best cars of all time to the worst, and on Sunday he responded as follows when asked about the racing in 2026: “Even worse.”
Norris was one of the leading voices to speak out against the new F1 rules, while Bearman called overtake mode “ridiculous”
Photo by: Andy Hone/ LAT Images via Getty Images
While it can be debated whether last year’s cars were truly the best cars ever – many people in the paddock feel differently given the numerous downsides of the ground-effect era – Norris was certainly not alone in his criticism that the race felt “too artificial”. Almost every driver who spoke to the media shared that view, with Oliver Bearman providing the most amusing anecdote.
“On lap 1 and lap 2, I didn’t really know what was happening. I was just like, I guess I’ll try this boost button, and see how it works. And then I was just flying past everyone on the straights, so it was quite funny. It was like I was in F1 and everyone else was in F2. But then, of course, you have to recharge the battery again, because otherwise you’re dead into the next straight,” the Haas driver said.
“It’s a bit ridiculous, to be honest, to have that much delta in a button, and to lose that much on the next straight. It’s also very non-linear, so what you gain on the straights where you use the boost, is a quarter as much as what you lose on the next straight.”
All of this perfectly highlights the tension between two factors that the FIA and F1 must balance: keeping the series relevant and attractive for car manufacturers, while also delivering a product that appeals to both fans and drivers
Bearman’s conclusion was clear, similar to what Verstappen had already said in Bahrain: “That’s not racing, that’s Formula E.” In Australia, Verstappen told the Dutch TV crew he had seen many “Mario Kart-like things” happening in the midfield.
If you line up all the quotes from Sunday, it becomes clear that only the Mercedes and Ferrari drivers were relatively positive about the new regulations. Not entirely coincidentally, those are the two teams that have proven to be the most competitive so far.
The overall picture is that the sentiment among drivers is largely negative, although it should be noted that Melbourne was one of the most challenging circuits on the calendar in terms of energy management. It may not be as extreme at every circuit, and the FIA has already stated that it will evaluate the situation after the Chinese Grand Prix weekend to see whether adjustments are needed.
Verstappen also took aim at the new F1 rules in Australia
Photo by: Mario Renzi / Formula 1 via Getty Images
Those adjustments could relate to both the harvesting side of the equation – for example by allowing super clipping up to the full 350 kW – and the deployment side, where reducing the share of electrical power in race trim could theoretically be an option. Verstappen and Carlos Sainz, among others, have already urged the FIA to look into possible adjustments, although those would not change the fundamental DNA of these regulations – for that it is simply too late.
That DNA has a lot to do with how this ruleset came into existence. The power unit regulations were finalised first, partly to convince Audi – and therefore the Volkswagen Group – to commit to the series, and also to keep Honda involved. The chassis regulations were then partly designed around that to make the engine formula work, something Pierre Wache has described as “patch on patch”.
Read Also:
Red Bull’s technical director was referring to how the rule makers moved from one issue to another. Because the amount of drag had to be reduced significantly, active aerodynamics were introduced. That, in turn, eliminated DRS as an overtaking tool and required the introduction of overtake mode. The result is a package that is far more complex than most drivers would like, and one that, according to them, has pushed pure racing into the background.
However, all of this perfectly highlights the tension between two factors that the FIA and F1 must balance: keeping the series relevant and attractive for car manufacturers, while also delivering a product that appeals to both fans and drivers. It is a difficult puzzle, because – as several teams in the paddock rightly point out – F1 is nowhere without its manufacturers. With only Ferrari, Mercedes and perhaps Red Bull as power unit manufacturers, the balance might be somewhat fragile. With five manufacturers, F1 is now firmly anchored, although the question remains at what price it has cost the racing.
In defence of the FIA and the current regulations, it should be said that the broader automotive landscape changed a little bit after the 2026 rules were finalised. Ford Racing director Mark Rushbrook told Autosport that the brand’s wider strategy has shifted in recent times, as the American manufacturer had initially planned to stop producing road cars powered solely by internal combustion engines, but has since reversed that decision.
Together with FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem, who last year – notably also during the Chinese Grand Prix – already tried to prepare the ground for a different engine formula, it may be possible to steer things in another direction for the future, perhaps even earlier than 2031.
After the sprint weekend in China, a first evaluation will take place, when – according to James Vowles – four or five options are on the table. The big question remains, however, to what extent those options can really have a significant impact. The current complaints concern the fundamentals of the regulations and those are directly linked to everything mentioned above: the balancing act between relevance for manufacturers and delivering a strong racing product for both drivers and fans. Finding the ideal balance remains a difficult task, as the Melbourne weekend has clearly demonstrated.
Can F1 strike the right balance with its current rules or will it be forced into major changes?
Photo by: Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images
We want to hear from you!
Let us know what you would like to see from us in the future.
– The Autosport.com Team