F1 rule tweaks have not fixed fundamental problems

After the Miami Grand Prix, Formula One is roughly where it was before a series of rule tweaks, writes Gary Anderson. Photo / Getty Images

Four races into the new Formula One regulations and perhaps the only thing everyone understands is how complicated they are. Plenty of fans, as well as the drivers, are unsatisfied by what we have seen. So much so that in the four-week gap before the Miami Grand Prix, there were several tweaks to how teams can operate their new cars.

Without going into too much detail – it would make for a very lengthy column – they focused on the electrical deployment available to the teams. They were largely aimed at improving the qualifying spectacle so that drivers could be flat out more often, and also avoid the dramatic closing speeds in races, as seen in the Ollie Bearman/Franco Colapinto crash at Suzuka.

Did they work as intended in Miami? I do not think so – at best it was a marginal difference. The problem is that it is not easy to understand fully how the changes have worked at this point. Suzuka was a difficult track for energy harvesting while Miami was much better, so even with no tweaks it would probably have been better in the problem areas.

In some ways there was progress, but that was mainly down to the teams introducing chassis updates. The grand prix qualifying was the best and closest session of the season. Four different teams made up the top four places and only 0.385s separated them, compared with 0.627s last time out at Suzuka. In the sprint, McLaren ended Mercedes’ dominance by qualifying first and third and finishing first and second.

This was partly because of an energy deployment tactic that McLaren used to give them an advantage. Once the other teams worked out what they were doing and followed suit it was more equal. Neither of those things is a problem, as such, as it is always down to the teams to get the best out of what they have to work with.

The problem is that the harvesting issues and super-clipping were not as prevalent in Miami, but they were still present. Drivers were lifting a little at the end of the main straight in order to charge up the battery for their flying lap. The safety issue regarding excessive closing speeds appeared to be improved, but that does not mean that we will not see it again. I believe we will.

McLaren's Australian driver Oscar Piastri, who finished second in the sprint race at the 2026 Miami Formula One Grand Prix. Photo / AFP

All this behind-the-scenes stuff is frustrating because even the most engaged viewer is going to find it hard to understand whether a driver is on pole because he rang the neck of the car or because 40 people back at base came up with a clever strategy on how to use the battery’s energy. Ultimately, we are roughly where we were before the rule tweaks.

People always ask me whether it is the car or the driver that makes the difference. At different times in Formula One it has been more one than the other, but currently the sport has gone too far towards the car being the dominant factor. The technical and engineering aspects are important to Formula One and always have been. That should not be shied away from as we do not want Formula One to become a spec series where everyone has the same car.

Yet once the car has been set up and released from the garage, I want the driver to be responsible for how fast it goes. We are not seeing that at the moment and probably never will with these regulations. Ultimately, I think the tweaks were a token gesture to fundamental problems.

When devising these regulations, Formula One put the cart before the horse. It all started off with the intention of a 50-50 split between the internal combustion engine and the battery. They then worked out solutions to the problems that cropped up from there. That is why we have active aero, because the battery pack would run out over a lap unless drag was significantly reduced on the straights. I am not saying we should get rid of electrical power in Formula One – it has its place. It should, however, augment what the internal combustion engine does. At the moment, the battery power is dominant – that is what is causing so many problems.

Despite the front that Formula One and Liberty Media are putting on, more drivers are becoming vocal with their frustrations. Lando Norris wants Formula One to get rid of the battery. Lance Stroll said that driving a Formula Three car, as he did in the break, is “a thousand times” more fun than driving the 2026 Formula One cars. The head of the FIA has now said they are looking to move to V8 engines for the next era of Formula One, with little electrification.

I support this statement from the head of the FIA but I would say do not throw the baby out with the bathwater, there is room for a much-reduced hybrid package, a “noisy” non-turbo V8 engine on sustainable fuel with a power split of 80/20 is achievable. People inside and outside the sport will welcome that, but it is astonishing this is being said four rounds into the regulations. It sums up where Formula One is at the moment.

Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.