Mike Evans

Disappointed to hear that the DF guys got death threats yesterday. Let's tone down the crazy in this industry. Please, everybody.

@NedjoK @F1_Jordan Again, he’s not in the front. This happens with new regs. Every time.

@mikeev @F1_Jordan x.com/autosport/stat…

I think we criticised these regulations too early…. They’ll get on top of this, but the reality is cars nobody understands how optimise yet is clearly producing better racing.

@JunaidSamodien_ If you’re lucky enough to attend in person, sprint weekends are the way to go. So much more on track action. Could be awesome with the new regs.

Formula 1 says SPRINTS are hugely popular among fans, but I see a lot of pushback. I, for one, am not a huge fan of the Sprint. How do you think they can change the regulations to make the SPRINT more of 100% push from start to finish? An engine just for Sprints? A special tyre?

@Antsamp701 @the_zb_ Would especially be much cooler if the "OT" mode resulted in more ICE revs (instead of more battery deployment, which comes at a cost). Would probably sound neat too.

@Antsamp701 @the_zb_ Longer term, IMO the best solution is to bring back the MGU-H. No one should have listened to Audi. And Porsche just recently proved that it *IS* road relevant. I'd also be perfectly happy with raising the ICE revs. Not wed to the 50/50 split whatosever.

My initial visceral reaction to the race has subsided. I admit I had a very strong negative reaction to what I saw. I’m calmer now. But that doesn’t mean several of the points don’t still stand. Here’s how I’m feeling: The race weekend, to me, had “allure value” because it was analyzing something new and it was the first time we saw the cars racing in earnest. But that isn’t the same as “race spectacle” value. I don’t think it had the latter, mainly due to the behavior of the cars. The “allure” value won’t sustain things for very long. Do I think it was a good race? Personally not my cup of tea. I don’t like how this formula seems destined to be extremely predicated on management. Will it be worse on some tracks than others? Very likely yes. But that will still characterize these cars unless changes are made. What we saw in reality is that the energy starvation mostly removed the opportunity for later braking moves, and for driver skill to make a difference in the high speed. Both of those things seem to be “off limits” due to harvesting needs. When I see that, it does make me feel like a core facet of F1 is just gone. It’s telling when you get two drivers with similar cars and a Tyre offset like Norris and Verstappen, and unlike we would’ve seen in GE, absolutely nothing happened because there wasn’t enough energy for anything to happen. Lots of “overtakes”… but is that honestly what they were? I feel this is a strategically inflated number, and I’m not at all shocked that F1 is promoting and highlighting that. It was predominantly state-of-charge position swapping, as drivers realized they could dump the battery to get ahead, but had no hope of staying there if they did so. With a few genuine moves sprinkled in. Some people may like this, but I personally don’t yet find it enjoyable. It hindered my enjoyment of seeing cars go W2W. Is it a new type of W2W? I suppose you could say that. But it feels more like a cat and mouse management game. I have zero desire for that to be such a huge part of the sport, I want to see a deeper level of unbridled aggression in the driving. The PU is what is currently holding that back, because the chassis seems better suited to it now. The “battles” on track looked very very different, due to everyone having to mostly converge on harvesting and deployment methods. It caused all but 2-3 engagements to be very lackluster and fizzle out. One positive - right now, the cars can follow more closely with less detriment than the 2025 cars. It feels like 2022 again. But just like then, the teams will surely be figuring out more aero tricks that generate outwash and turbulence that will push this in the “negative” direction, because that’s always how it plays out with aero. Qualifying, to me, was the worst part. I didn’t enjoy a single bit of watching super clipping and harvesting in high speed corners, on a flying lap that had to be built around energy constraints. This is akin to saying “we are going to put just enough fuel in the car for you to go hard in throttle about 80% of the time, now you decide.” I just absolutely do not like anything about that. Could Australia have been further down the “worst case scenario” end of the spectrum than other tracks? Yeah, probably so. I’m calmer. But my general impressions don’t really change - I think this is a generally poor regulation set that is bound by physics constraints, and they need to respond with some quick adjustments.

@Antsamp701 @the_zb_ Wait... so were DRS overtakes, where the lead car was punished by being in front, "real racing"?

@mikeev @the_zb_ Because the fact that you have to lico before cornering to charge the battery is completely anti-racing. Any attempt of racing in a classic sense, late braking, aggressive lunges etc. is instantly punished with a depleted battery and your opponent cruising by instantly.

@Antsamp701 @the_zb_ The variable performance over a lap was due to some teams knowing when to deploy electrical energy, and others still figuring it out. How is this any different from some teams having better performance in a straight vs corners due to aero decisions/capability?

@mikeev @the_zb_ U seem to be new to F1, otherwise u would realize that the flaw with these regs is not the performance gap between teams. It's the fact that the drivers need to LiCo to maintain battery health or else they get screwed on the straight. That applies to all teams and drivers.

@Antsamp701 @the_zb_ Serious question: are you new to F1? Are you expecting all of the cars, especially at the very beginning of new regs, to have equal performance? It has literally never worked like that.

@the_zb_ Everyone is using the example of the power surge passing and repassing between Merc and Ferrari at the start. But if it wasn't for Ferrari's insane race starts, allowed by software and batteries instead of driving skill, none of that would be happening in the first place.

@ButStotch @the_zb_ Did you somehow miss how the previous regs worked? Algorithmic PU management is nothing new. Lighter, smaller cars with no DRS should be seen as a step in the right direction. Not a wrong one. I swear, it's as if some of you have been asleep since 2013.

What's next? AI assist driving? This is the wrong direction for F1. If the FIA don't budge, there should be a breakaway - either a new class (F1 Raw) or a new federation (like LIV golf). I'm certain the middle east oil boys will happily back a F1 Raw class. Leave sustainability and batts to the FIA.

@NedjoK @F1_Jordan Yes, I think everyone is in full agreement that the rules need an adjustment. Especially for qualifying. I'd also drop OT mode entirely. It's unnecessary in these regs.

@mikeev @F1_Jordan x.com/i/status/20309…

@_aarava Differential performance over a lap is nothing new. It's just amplified. And as you noted, it will be reduced over time. Mercedes getting time to test their homologated engine before customers is a big factor that no one is talking about. A rule that probably needs a look.

Having digested that first 2026 F1 race more. My thoughts - No denying seeing Merc v Ferrari for an F1 race lead again was great in the opening laps. The race overall was entertaining, but the nature of that as Leclerc put it was a bit "Mario Kart".... ...with time, teams developing/learning efficicency use of battery, maybe it'll settle into a happy middle ground? If not, the yo-yo flow of that race will be a common theme. Basically like watching an F1 Game race IRL lol. Is that a bad thing? Ppl always have commented the game races are more entertaining....Up for debate when its real life. Also, Ferrari, why no pits under VSC? They surely could have had a go for P2 at least without the lost delta. Amazing rookie debut from Arvid Lindblad, punchy racing, love it. Audi first points in F1, really happy to see! Piastri, devastating, but long ol season. One where McL might not be in a title frame? So in reality, its but a blip on what his season can still be. Hope we see a steep learning curve rise of Kimi Antonelli, hes got a race winning car now, time to find that next level to get his first ever F1 race win. I think it can happen in the first 5 races. Hamilton smiling and seeming energised after that race, where he did visibly look more in his element, so good to see. Hope we see more of that for the whole year 🙏

@NedjoK @F1_Jordan Every regulation change has winners and losers. And this is all still quite new. The drivers are being challenged, and that's a good thing. Go back and review the race reactions after Australia 2014. Especially Vettel's interviews.

@mikeev @F1_Jordan x.com/i/status/20306…

@_Dan_Castell I swear, these people won't be happy until we're back to a boring DRS train and overtakes only happening in the pits.

@_Dan_Castell So wait- Sunday's race overtakes were "artificial", but when a 2025 McLaren/RedBull/Mercedes could rip through the field from the back (with DRS to boot), that was "real" racing? My dude, differential performance in F1 has always been a thing. Batteries don't change that.

If you genuinely enjoyed that race, despite knowing full well it was all completely artificial then you must be extremely smooth brained

@ironatcox @F1_Jordan What exactly was “artificial” about it? This is F1. Cars have always had performance deltas at different parts of a track. Now it shifts temporally as well. Driver reaction post-race followed the trend after every major rule change: the top loved it, descended down the order.

@mikeev @F1_Jordan The race did not turn out great lmfao. If watching 10 laps of artificial cat and mouse described by one of the two drivers as “mushrooms in mario cart” is great racing to you, I’ve got news for you: this happens every single Formula E race. You’d love it!

@simplecrackers3 @_Dan_Castell It's better.

@_Dan_Castell Literally the same as DRS/ KERS/ERS for the past 15 years….

Means nothing when the overtakes are all done because the guy in front runs out of battery power. I’d much rather less overtaking than watching this nonsense play out

@CanadianLakers @_Dan_Castell It's different than DRS in that it's LESS artificial. Deployment (especially OT) comes at a cost. It's the same for everybody. But it's new and different, and that alone is causing the purists to crash out on social media.

@_Dan_Castell How is this so different from DRS? At least now we aren’t waiting all lap for the single passing zone at the end of the longest straight.

@nick_mccleery My aversion to that idea is the inevitable positive feedback loops that this creates. Unless you have regs that go along with it that limit development in some way (like current F1 with wind tunnel time being an inverse function of previous season placement).

@mikeev It's a good aim but I think it doesn't have to be a pure cost cap. Football's financial fair play rules might be a good model; you can't run at a loss, have more budget if you make more money etc.

Simple: 1. More strictly controlled cost cap. 2. 1960's-era engineering freedom, only make the rule book even thinner: basically set the outer dimensions of the car, and other than that- let them go wild.

@AnEnglishName1 @VSClive @tiff_tv @F1 They complained about qualifying, which I understand. It looked less spectacular. After the race they were more positive. Admittedly still mixed though. I expect it will improve as they wrap their heads around it, and visit more favorable tracks.

@VSClive @tiff_tv @F1 That drivers are complaining says a lot.

Don't worry the new Gen Z fans that @F1 and Liberty really want to please have no idea what's really going on. An overtake is a thrilling moment whatever ...