The positives, negatives, and challenges of Formula 1’s updated 2026 regulations
In just three races, the new regulations in Formula 1 have sparked differing views within the paddock and among supporters.
On one side, Max Verstappen has criticized the changes as “anti-racing,” prompting him to reconsider his future in the sport. Conversely, a notable rise in overtakes has been cited as a justification for the new rules, often referenced by those either genuinely excited about this new phase or those aiming to gain a competitive edge.
A more balanced evaluation of F1 in 2026 likely resides in a nuanced perspective. Certain aspects of the new regulations have indeed enhanced the entertainment value on race days, yet they also possess a dual nature—some drawbacks encroaching upon the critical area of safety.
Following the Japanese Grand Prix, the FIA released a statement acknowledging some concerning deficiencies in the new regulations and reiterated its intention to convene a series of meetings to explore possible solutions (an initial meeting with technical directors is scheduled for Thursday, followed by further discussions with team principals and F1). Canceled races in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia have provided the sport with additional time to thoughtfully adjust the rules ahead of the next event in Miami on May 2—aiming to reduce the likelihood of unintended repercussions.
With the forthcoming meetings in view, ESPN examines the positives, negatives, and challenges from the first three races of 2026.
The good
Let’s begin with the positives, particularly the increased level of action observed on race days this year compared to 2025.
As per the unofficial F1 database, FORIX, the number of overtakes at each round this season has more than doubled in comparison to the same events last year. In Australia, there were 39 overtakes (up from 17 in 2025), in China, 71 overtakes (up from 31 in 2025), and in Japan, 43 overtakes (up from 15 in 2025).
Amidst the criticism of F1’s new regulations, it is easy to overlook how monotonous the racing had become in 2025, with outcomes often determined by the initial corner. This year, variations in start-line performance among leading teams have generated excitement through changes in positioning before reaching the first corner.
However, the nature of overtaking this year has left many observers unimpressed, often criticized as being “artificial.” The additional electrical power available under the new regulations allows drivers to utilize “boost” or “overtake” modes to execute relatively straightforward passes on competitors who are not using full power on the same stretch of track. Furthermore, the phenomenon of “yo-yo racing”—where a driver uses their boost to overtake only to be re-overtaken on the next straight when their battery power depletes—inflates the statistics without contributing significantly to the overall action.
Nonetheless, races are undoubtedly more dynamic in 2026. For one of the sport’s veteran drivers, this marks a notable advancement.
“That is how racing should be,” seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton remarked when discussing “yo-yo racing” ahead of the Japanese Grand Prix. “It should be back and forth, back and forth. It shouldn’t be just one move and then that’s it.”
“If you think back to karting, it’s the same concept. Drivers going back and forth, you can never break away. No one has ever referred to go-karting as yo-yo racing. It’s the best form of racing, and Formula 1 has not been the best form of racing in a long, long time.”
Hamilton’s perspective is supported by the events at the Japanese Grand Prix.
Despite a significant amount of passing and re-passing related to battery usage, the overall spectacle felt like an improvement compared to the tedious and processional 2025 race. Additionally, the contest for victory between Oscar Piastri and the two Mercedes drivers was building toward an exciting finish before a safety car allowed Kimi Antonelli to overtake both rivals and dominate the latter half of the race. In fact, in two of the three races this year, safety cars have influenced the lead battle.
Setting aside the contentious issue of battery-assisted overtakes, other aspects of the 2026 regulations have positively impacted racing. Adjustments to the aerodynamic rules seem to have succeeded in facilitating closer following of cars in high-speed corners.
The FIA aimed to structure the regulations so that a car 20 meters behind a competitor retains 90% of its total downforce, thereby enhancing its chances of attacking the car ahead. This figure has increased from 70% at the end of last year, as the previous generation of cars became increasingly sensitive to aerodynamics and struggled in the turbulent wake created by the car in front.
While evidence regarding the achievement of the 90% target remains largely anecdotal at this point, numerous drivers have indicated that it is now easier to follow a rival through high-speed corners.
“Out of all the cars that I’ve driven in 20 years, this is the only car that you can actually follow through high speed and not completely lose everything that you have [in terms of grip],” Hamilton added. “You can stay behind now.”
A reduced minimum weight limit and smaller dimensions have also led to more agile cars that have generally received praise from the drivers. Although these changes have been somewhat overshadowed by complaints regarding battery management, F1’s rule makers deserve recognition for these early successes.
The bad
While a few drivers have expressed support for the fluid racing under the new regulations, none have had anything positive to say about the effects these changes have had on qualifying. The management of energy has become such a crucial performance differentiator during a qualifying lap that drivers are now rewarded for adhering to the power unit’s algorithm rather than maximizing grip. This means utilizing some high-speed corners to gather energy instead of pushing the limits to lower overall lap time by deploying that energy on the straights.
“High-speed corners have now become the charging station for the car,” Fernando Alonso stated after qualifying in Suzuka. “You go slow there so you can charge the battery in the high speed, and then you have full power on the straight.”
The lackluster nature of qualifying in 2026 was most apparent at Suzuka’s renowned 130R corner. After deploying energy from the previous corner, cars approached 130R faster than last year but subsequently lost speed through the entry, apex, and all the way to the following chicane as the electrical power depleted and energy harvesting commenced. The outcome was drivers slowing by more than 50km/h (31 mph) in a section of the circuit where the challenge had always been to maintain as much speed as possible.
“It hurts your soul when you see your speed dropping so much; 56 km/h down the straight,” world champion Lando Norris remarked after qualifying. “It’s not like the lap times are drastically off. A 1:26.9 was pole last year, and it’s a couple of seconds [off], which is significant, but it’s also not an enormous amount.
“So it still feels special. It still feels like it’s an on-the-edge lap, and you’re taking risks here and there, but does it feel as amazing as last year? No, I don’t think any track will.”
“We’d better get used to that.”
The situation becomes even more complicated if a driver makes a minor mistake in a high-speed corner that forces them to reduce throttle input below 98% for more than a second. As part of a safety mechanism designed to prevent cars from entering straights unexpectedly slowly by not deploying electrical energy, the power units have a permitted ramp-down rate for electrical deployment that begins at full deployment before gradually decreasing the electrical power.
By making an error and lifting off the throttle in a corner that would typically be taken flat out, the driver triggers the ramp-down process in an area where their engineers had not anticipated it would be utilized. This means more power might be consumed initially, but it disrupts the carefully planned deployment strategy for the remainder of the lap, ultimately leaving the car with less electrical power at a more critical section of the circuit later in the lap.
This issue affected Ferrari driver Charles Leclerc during qualifying in both China and Japan, leading him to express his frustrations over the team radio in Suzuka.
play0:34Leclerc ‘still convinced’ new F1 cars are good for racing
Charles Leclerc reflects on his third-place finish at the Japanese Grand Prix.
“I honestly cannot stand these rules in qualifying,” he stated. “It’s a f—ing joke.”
In the calm of the media pen after the session, he elaborated on his frustrations.
“The thing is in Q3, that’s where you want to get out on the track and try things you’ve never tried before, taking risks that you’ve never taken before, and that’s been rewarding for most of us throughout our careers, and now this is not possible anymore,” he explained. “Every time you go a little bit over the limit, any time you have a bit of a snap, this costs energy on the power unit side, and then you pay the price more. I feel like at the moment, consistency is paying off more than being brave and trying something new, which is unfortunate and makes qualifying a bit less challenging.”
Williams driver Carlos Sainz succinctly summarized the 2026 qualifying experience after a similar disappointment in Suzuka.
“The more you pushed, the slower you went,” he remarked.
The lasting appeal of F1 qualifying has always been witnessing drivers push their cars to the absolute limit. In 2026, that is no longer the case, and for anyone tuning in on a Saturday, no amount of overtaking the following day will compensate for that absence. The issue has been acknowledged by the sport and is anticipated to be a central topic in the upcoming discussions.
The ugly
During preseason testing, several drivers and team personnel expressed concerns regarding the potential for a serious accident early in the season. The speed differential between a car deploying full electric power and one harvesting was so significant that it seemed inevitable that someone would eventually be caught off guard by the disparity and end up in a precarious situation.
After several near misses, the anticipated incident occurred on lap 21 of the Japanese Grand Prix when Oliver Bearman found himself approaching Spoon corner at 308km/h (191 mph) with full deployment, while Franco Colapinto’s Alpine was traveling at just over 250km/h (155 mph) with no electrical deployment. Colapinto positioned his car in the center of the track, as any driver would have done in previous years, but the 50km/h (31 mph) closing speed surprised Bearman, forcing him to veer onto the grass to avoid a collision. Once off the circuit, Bearman lost control of his Haas and spun into the barrier at the corner’s exit.
The impact registered 50G on the in-car accelerometer, and Bearman was fortunate to escape with only a contusion on his right knee. The incident underscored what many had feared would occur, and F1 can consider itself fortunate that the outcome was not more severe.
“We’ve discussed that being a possibility since these cars were conceptualized,” Piastri stated following the accident. “Yeah, it’s what we’re dealing with, with the power units, and there’s no straightforward way to address it. I think we recognize as a sport that there are numerous aspects we need to adjust, many things that need to change, particularly regarding safety, yes, there are some issues that need to be addressed promptly.”
Piastri’s team principal, Andrea Stella, was among the most vocal advocates for addressing this issue during preseason testing. Following the Bearman incident, he has called for the closing-speed problem to be prioritized at the upcoming meetings.
“Regarding the incident involving Oliver, I think this situation, where you know that the closing speed can be as significant as it can be with a car lifting or being in a super clip while other cars have deployment, is not surprising—we already mentioned that in testing,” Stella said. “It is on the FIA’s agenda concerning aspects of these 2026 regulations that should be improved. We do not want to wait for incidents to occur before implementing actions.
“So today something happened. I think Oliver, fortunately, seemed to have emerged with just some bruises, but nothing too serious. We have a responsibility to implement the measures that, especially from a safety perspective, should be put in place.”
What that solution, or any of the solutions to the issues raised above, will look like remains to be determined. Minor adjustments related to energy management and software are anticipated in the short term rather than any sweeping changes, with safety likely being the primary focus. Ideas proposed on Thursday by the FIA and teams’ technical heads will then undergo further discussions among team principals, the FIA, and F1 before final decisions are reached.
Source: espn.com
