The qualifying format for the Le Mans 24 Hours has changed this year. In Hypercar, six cars were knocked out on Wednesday night, with a few surprises along the way. Let’s take a look.

Leading times from each manufacturer

1. Cadillac V-Series #12 3m22.847s
2. BMW M Hybrid V8 #15 +0.040s
3. Ferrari 499P #51 +0.316s
6. Porsche 963 #5 +0.697s
9. Alpine A424 #36 +1.098s
10. Toyota GR010 Hybrid #8 +1.141s
15. Aston Martin Valkyrie #009 +2.022s
17. Peugeot 9X8 #94 +2.393s

Peugeot missing in action

No, we weren’t expecting both 9X8s to make it into Hyperpole. But we were hoping the gap to the competition would be smaller.

From the very first flying lap, though, the result was clear: for Peugeot, qualifying practice turned into an extra free practice session.

Peugeot's WEC problems explained

Read more

In the end, Stoffel Vandoorne was 2.3 seconds off the benchmark time, which explains the downcast expressions in the French camp last night.

“With the package we have under the 2025 Le Mans regulations, I didn't expect to set these times [of the leaders],” said Jean-Marc Finot, Senior VP of Stellantis Motorsport.

“I didn't think we could break the 3m26s barrier. A Hyperpole appearance would have been unthinkable.

“We know we have a disadvantage in terms of pace due to the specific regulations [implicitly referring to the Balance of Performance].

“We're going to fight to have the cleanest race possible and do our best within the constraints we've been given. It's disappointing not to be at the front for the biggest race of the year.”

Mixed fortunes at Porsche

Last night, Porsche Penske Motorsport didn’t know what to think. In the final seconds of qualifying, Felipe Nasr managed, just in time, to push the #4 963 into the top 15, allowing Porsche to get all three cars into Hyperpole 1.

But just before midnight came the blow: disqualification for the #6 car, with which Kévin Estre had set the fourth fastest time, just 0.513 seconds off the pace.

“The stewards considered the minimum car weight did not comply with the relevant regulations,” said a statement from the officials.

That means the #6 Porsche will start from the back of the Hypercar field - bad news for the team and 2024 polesitter Kévin Estre.

Toyota in distress

Last year, after a spin by car #7, no Toyotas made it to Hyperpole. This year, one will. Brendon Hartley posted the 11th best time in car #8, 1.141s off the fastest. A big gap, but nothing compared to the disappointment suffered by Nyck de Vries.

Over two seconds off the pace (2.215s), the Dutchman ended up 17th, denying team-mate Kamui Kobayashi a chance at a record fifth Le Mans pole.

“I got a yellow flag in the Porsche Curves with the Alpine (#35), and on the second lap you lose the peak of the tyre,” De Vries explained.

“I was still on a decent lap, but I caught up with the Alpine too early in the last chicane. We could have finished 10th or 11th, but no better than that. Brendon got the maximum out of the car.”

Not exactly reassuring...

Cadillac on top

Second and third in Hyperpole last year, the Cadillac V-Series.R once again showed its strength at Le Mans.

Alex Lynn set the best time with a 3m22.847s, while Sébastien Bourdais, Jack Aitken and Filipe Albuquerque finished (prior to the Porsche’s disqualification) fourth, ninth, and 13th respectively.

“That was lovely,” said Lynn. “The car was great. Honestly, no complaints. I didn’t make any set-up changes between runs and just improved my performance. It’s a strong start, we’ll take that.”

On Thursday afternoon, Cadillac will have four V-Series.Rs in Hyperpole 1. Will that be enough to earn its first-ever Le Mans pole position?

Ferrari looking strong

Since the test day, Ferrari has been claiming it doesn't have the fastest car... while every one of its rivals says otherwise. Still, last night, the three 499Ps once again made a very strong impression.

Though they posted “only” the third, sixth, and 12th best times, the Ferraris did so using just a single set of tyres, unlike many of their competitors in the qualifying practice. Combined with consistent free practice pace, Ferrari has reinforced its status as the heavy favorite to repeat its 2023 and its 2024 wins.

BMW scares itself

For a long time, the #15 BMW was stuck in the pitlane. But when it finally got out, Dries Vanthoor showed his speed once more. Remember, last year, he had set the fastest lap of the week in qualifying.

The Belgian clocked the second-best time, just 0.040s behind the #12 Cadillac. BMW’s strong showing was confirmed by Robin Frijns, who took eighth in the #20.

“Super happy with the qualifying,” said BMW Motorsport Head Andreas Roos. “We easily got both cars into Hyperpole 1 and hope to reach Hyperpole 2.”

Alpine slightly off pace

Tenth place for the #36 A424 and 15th for the #35 (before the disqualification of the Porsche #6). Still, a bit more was expected from the two French LMDhs.

• Mick Schumacher's breakout WEC year

“It was tougher than expected,” admitted Mick Schumacher. “We maximised our package in this case, but there is still work to be done. It's very hard at the moment to know what the others are doing…”

But both cars are in Hyperpole, and that’s what matters most.

Aston Martin, the pleasant surprise

One of the highlights of the qualifying practice was the promising performance of the Valkyrie LMH. For a long time, Marco Sorensen kept the 1009 in the top 15, before being bumped out by the #4 Porsche.

However, the disqualification of the #6 Porsche 963 ultimately hands a Hyperpole 1 spot to Aston Martin THOR - excellent news after its tough start to 2025.

“I'm really happy, because I think we deserve to be in,” Sorensen said. “We definitely had the pace to be in Hyperpole 1.”

Hypercars eliminated before Hyperpole 1:
#7 Toyota (Conway/Kobayashi/De Vries)
#94 Peugeot (Duval/Jakobsen/Vandoorne)
#93 Peugeot (Di Resta/Jensen/Vergne)
#99 Porsche (Jani/Pino/Varrone)
#007 Aston Martin (Tincknell/Gamble/Gunn)
#6 Porsche (Estre/Vanthoor/Campbell)

Team WRT and AO Racing lead in LMP2 and LMGT3

In LMGT3, Team WRT dominated a qualifying session reserved for FIA Bronze-rated drivers.

Driving the #46 BMW M4 he shares with Valentino Rossi, Ahmad Al Harthy beat Ian James (Aston Martin #27) and Ryan Hardwick (Porsche #92) by 0.208s and 0.380s respectively. Now it’s up to the Silver and professional drivers.

In LMP2, last year’s poleman made headlines again. Driving the #199 AO Racing ORECA 07, Louis Delétraz set the best time, ahead of Ben Hanley (#22 United Autosports ORECA) and Alex Quinn (#45 Algarve Pro Racing ORECA).

But to hope for a second consecutive pole position, the Swiss driver will need Dane Cameron to set one of the eight fastest times in Hyperpole 1.

Senior FIA figures have been warned that the governing body’s credibility is at risk if they vote in support of proposed changes to the statutes put forward by president Mohammed Ben Sulayem.

This week's FIA General Assembly meeting in Macau is set to make a call on Thursday on a number of modifications to the statutes.

The proposed revisions include potential FIA presidential candidates being barred from standing if there is anything in their record that questions their professional integrity.

Furthermore, there is a plan to bring forward the deadline for presidential candidates to declare they are standing, increase the power of the president to appoint Senate members and also open the door to alter the composition of the World Motor Sport Council to limit numbers of the same nationalities sitting.

In a surprise development late on Wednesday ahead of the vote, one of the FIA’s founding member clubs, the Austrian OAMTC (Osterreichischer Automobil-, Motorrad- und Touring Club), sent a letter to FIA members sitting on its World Council for Automobile Mobility and Tourism (WCAMT) warning them of dire consequences if they back the revisions.

The lengthy letter, which was first reported by Reuters but has been seen by The Race, outlines the club's views and the legal advice it has been given amid growing concerns about the direction of the FIA. An FIA spokesperson contacted by Reuters said they were unaware of the letter.

Rather than feeling that the governing body had benefitted from the promises Ben Sulayem made about increased transparency and better governance prior to taking charge in 2021, the OAMTC said it is alarmed at what it feels is the dismantling of internal checks and the suppression of dissent.

"Damage to the FIA's credibility as an organisation has already occurred through repeated governance mis-steps and failings," it wrote.

"These are not anomalies: they are features of a system of governance that is malfunctioning, due to the absence of normal internal debate and discussion."

It added: "The FIA's standing in comparison to other international organisations is threatened by the self-inflicted wound of governance failure."

The OAMTC is mindful of the impact that recent controversies have had. These include changes to the statutes last year relating to the ethics and audit committees, as well as WMSC members being barred from meetings because they had not signed new non-disclosure agreements.

While Ben Sulayem has argued that the latest statute changes strengthen the governing body and ensure that it has access to the best people possible, not everyone is convinced.

The OAMTC states that, with Ben Sulayem set to stand again and potentially benefit the most from the revisions, that it would be bad for the FIA to support the modifications now.

In the letter that accompanied its analysis, which is published in full below, it urged members to either vote against the changes to the statutes or ask for more time for them to be analysed.

It argues there are big dangers associated with pushing something through that could be viewed as helping the current regime in an election rather than the governing body as a whole.

"Where there is even a risk of these changes appearing to benefit the current FIA administration, and not the FIA itself, the changes should not be adopted," it said.

"There is ample time for more careful reflection, and if these are desirable changes they will still be desirable at a future General Assembly after the next election.

"Further, there is a material risk that the proposed FIA Statute changes will be found legally invalid, as they have been endorsed through World Council meetings that were not properly constituted, having intentionally excluded elected members from participating and voting (due to those members not having signed punitive side contracts with the FIA, exposing them to personal penalties and damages)."

The OAMTC also expressed fears that, in light of previous changes to the statutes, the FIA had "entered a dark period of democratic backsliding."

It added: "In every such example, changes to bolster the sitting regime are cast as necessary for the greater good, and objectors are cast as the enemies of progress. In every such example, the outcome is a diminished and less capable system of governance.

"For the FIA the risks are immense. Already the world's public commentators routinely note the FIA's weak decision-making, repeated unforced errors and apparent lack of rigour and process.

"While this is survivable, the real threat comes from the growing erosion of confidence among members and stakeholders such as public bodies, governments, motorists, motorsport fans, and actual and potential key commercial partners, and even, potentially, law enforcement authorities capable of intervening in the FIA's affairs."

The OAMTC's letter in full

Vienna and Macau, 10 June 2025 

Cover letter 

Dear Members and Friends, 

The Österreichischer Automobil-, Motorrad- und Touring Club has conducted an  analysis, including with the benefit of external legal advice, on the proposed changes  to the FIA Statutes to be considered and voted on during the General Assembly in  Macau in June 2025.  

In view of the importance of the changes proposed, and the content of the advice  received, we have decided to share the key conclusions of our analysis with other FIA  members. This is attached.  

We appeal to all members to support our motion to remove the voting on the proposed  FIA Statute changes from the General Assembly’s agenda. We propose to postpone the  consideration of these amendments to a later General Assembly to allow for proper  review and analysis especially given the majority of the proposed changes having a  significant impact on the upcoming election cycle.  

There is no urgency regarding these proposed changes. Seen in the context of other  recent developments and previous changes to the FIA Statutes, they risk further  contributing to the erosion of the FIA’s reputation for competent and transparent  governance. It cannot be – and is not – a coincidence that changes relevant to the FIA’s  elections have been promoted by the FIA’s leadership at the same time as the FIA’s  incumbent President has announced an intention to run in those elections.  

Where there is even a risk of these changes appearing to benefit the current FIA  administration, and not the FIA itself, the changes should not be adopted. There is  ample time for more careful reflection, and if these are desirable changes they will still  be desirable at a future General Assembly after the next election.  

Further, there is a material risk that the proposed FIA Statute changes will be found  legally invalid, as they have been endorsed through World Council meetings that were  not properly constituted, having intentionally excluded elected members from  participating and voting (due to those members not having signed punitive side 

contracts with the FIA, exposing them to personal penalties and damages). We therefore  urge the FIA members to pause, and not vote on these proposed changes now, pending  a proper review of the legality of these proposals.  

We would urge all members to support us with our motion and in any case to consider voting against the proposed FIA Statute changes.  

Yours faithfully,  

Österreichischer Automobil-, Motorrad- und Touring Club

1 

The highest standards of governance? 

(1) The FIA has entered a dark period of democratic backsliding. Recent actions and  changes within the FIA are inviting comparisons with the excesses of political leaders  intent on deconstructing the checks and balances that come with responsible  governance. Governance systems, whether in politics or in governing bodies such as  the FIA, face a crisis when oversight-free decisions become possible, and systems of  accountability are undermined and made ineffective.  

(2) In every such example, changes to bolster the sitting regime are cast as necessary for  the greater good, and objectors are cast as the enemies of progress. In every such  example, the outcome is a diminished and less capable system of governance.  

(3) For the FIA the risks are immense. Already the world’s public commentators routinely  note the FIA’s weak decision-making, repeated unforced errors and apparent lack of  rigour and process. While this is survivable, the real threat comes from the growing  erosion of confidence among members and stakeholders such as public bodies,  governments, motorists, motorsport fans, and actual and potential key commercial  partners, and even, potentially, law enforcement authorities capable of intervening in  the FIA’s affairs.  

The expectations, and the opportunity 

(4) We all know the promise and potential of the FIA to take its place on the world stage  as one of the foremost international sporting and governing bodies.  

(5) The expectations for bodies at our level are described in many global contexts, and are  well summarised in a February 2024 declaration of EU Sport Ministers¹to: “[p]romote  values in sport and sport organisations, governed in compliance with the principles of  democracy, transparency, integrity, solidarity, gender equality, openness,  accountability, accessibility, social responsibility and respect for fundamental and  human rights.” In the same declaration, Ministers “[a]sk the sport governing bodies to  adhere to the highest standards of good governance […] while acknowledging their  fundamental role in safeguarding the organisation of their sport”. 

(6) As described in the FIA’s own Code of Ethics²the “FIA bears a special responsibility  to safeguard the integrity and reputation of motor sport, automobile mobility and  tourism […] worldwide”. 

The Promise 

(7) The current FIA leadership was elected on a promise to implement the highest standards  of governance. The FIA President’s 2021 election manifesto included the commitment  to ensure that “governance structures are compliant with best practices” and in order  to do so the team would:  

¹ See Declaration of EU Sport Ministers, February 2024 here. 

² See FIA Code of Ethics, 8 December 2017, here.

2 

(a) introduce a revised governance framework, reinforcing the role of the World  Councils, becoming the de-facto Boards of Directors. Increase responsibility  and authority of World Councils; and 

(b) design a more effective oversight model, to align stakeholder priorities. 

(8) The manifesto also provided that by the end of the first presidential term, the FIA would  have: “a world class governance and transformed operating model, established a  unified, business-driven management structure, empowered World Councils to drive  strategy, effective commissions and working groups, transparent budgeting and  thorough reporting”.  

The reality 

(9) A thorough external review and audit of the FIA’s management process and governance  structure was indeed commissioned by the FIA from McKinsey and delivered in 2022.  

(10) It identified multiple weaknesses, especially relating to the lack of checks and balances  in the existing governance structure, and the lack of appropriate reporting lines and  mandates for various internal functions with oversight functions. The prominent theme  across the relevant recommendations was to enhance independence, for example to  enhance the role and reporting lines of the FIA’s Ethics Committee and its Audit  Committee.  

(11) None of the critical changes proposed in the report regarding enhanced governance  have been implemented.  

(12) Instead, amendments to the FIA Statutes were passed in December 2024, which have  largely dismantled the role of the FIA’s Ethics and Audit bodies and limited their ability  to perform their roles effectively, and with the necessary independence.  

(13) The fundamental changes to the FIA’s Ethics function were as follows:  

• Certain members of the Ethics Committee are now proposed by the FIA Senate, not  the FIA Members themselves, bringing appointments closer to the FIA leadership’s  team.  

• Limitations on who can serve as a member of the Ethics Committee because of  other FIA roles have been removed, reducing independence. Now, the Ethics  Committee can only carry out “an initial assessment” in relation to an ethical  concern but the FIA President and the President of Senate have the authority to  decide whether to take further action. Ethics enquiries can – in effect – be  suppressed.  

• The FIA’s Compliance Officer could, in the past, investigate any suspected  irregularity and make a report to the Senate, the President of the Senate and in case  the investigation concerned the FIA President, to the Ethics Committee. This  function has simply been deleted.  

(14) The fundamental changes to the FIA’s Audit function were as follows:

3 

• Previously the Audit Committee had the function “to assure the accuracy,  relevance and permanence of the accounting methods adopted for drawing up the  consolidated and corporate accounts of the FIA and to check that the internal  procedures for the collection and control of information guarantee this”. This  function has been deleted and now the Audit Committee has the ability to review  accounting methods only if requested by the President of the Senate. Financial  scrutiny outside of the FIA leadership’s control has been abandoned.  

• Previously the Senate was required to ‘act on the advice of the Audit Committee’.  This requirement was abandoned, allowing the Senate now only to ‘consult’ the  Audit Committee if it deems necessary. The Audit Committee’s role and function  as a necessary interlocutor on financial audit matters has been vastly reduced.  

(15) Instead of enhancing independent governance, as promised in the FIA leadership’s  election manifesto and as recommended by external consultants, the 2024 FIA Statute  changes have had the effect of dramatically undermining and compromising the FIA’s  ethics and audit functions, as well as eliminating entirely the Compliance Officer’s  investigative role. The changes centralise decision-making power with the FIA  President and the Senate President, and allow Ethics Committee members to hold roles  within FIA Members, raising concerns about the Committee’s future autonomy and  ability to safeguard the FIA’s integrity and reputation. 

(16) At the same time, the FIA has faced significant and repeated criticism regarding serious  concerns over its integrity, transparency, and good governance. The FIA’s President  was investigated for interfering in the running of two F1 races during the 2023 season  by the FIA’s compliance officer, Paolo Basarri, who was subsequently dismissed. In  the last year, there have been multiple dismissals and abrupt departures of high profile  individuals within the organization including its CEO Natalie Robyn, sporting director  Steve Nielsen, single-seater technical director Tim Goss, the head of the audit  committee, Bertrand Badre, committee member Tom Purve and in April 2025 deputy  president for sport, Robert Reid.  

(17) Several of those departing have been subjected to extensive non-disclosure agreements  to prevent them from speaking out about their experiences. Nonetheless, public  comments from departing FIA officials have all centred on similar themes: the collapse  in internal governance standards, the abandonment of commitments to reform, and a  governing body ready to go to extremes to eliminate oversight, reduce transparency and  punish legitimate disagreement.  

The silencing of dissent 

(18) The WMSC’s 28 members, like other FIA officers, are elected representatives with a  mandate to serve the FIA. They have confidentiality requirements in place since their  appointment and are bound by Article 4 of the FIA Code of Ethics which requires them  to keep confidential any information communicated to them in the course of exercising  their duties.  

(19) In the face of growing internal concern regarding the actions of the FIA leadership, and  facing the reality that existing internal bodies and officers would prove incapable of  constraining the administration, the FIA’s leadership has also taken steps to limit the  risk of external criticism. Specifically, it has sought to smother the possibility of debate 

4 

or criticism regarding FIA actions emerging by demanding a personal contractual  commitment – outside the FIA’s Statutes or governance terms, outside of the FIA’s  internal regulations and outside employment law – from each relevant FIA officer  requiring them to pay up to €50,000 to the FIA in the event they breach confidentiality  terms set by the FIA, plus the possibility of an additional undisclosed damages payment  to the FIA.  

(20) The terms imposed mean that the FIA itself will decide if someone has breached the  terms of the confidentiality requirements. The person or body who will make such a  determination is not identified, nor is there any requirement regarding process, a  hearing, a time frame, a right of appeal, or any definition of what ‘confidentiality’  means in this context. Simply put, the process is designed to convey – and does  effectively convey – that the current FIA leadership will on its own determine whether  critics may be required to pay €50,000 and face other consequences if they dissent  publicly about anything the leadership claims is confidential, all while internal means  of voicing concerns have effectively been dismantled.  

(21) It has also become clear that the FIA’s leadership has itself been unable to maintain a  coherent legal or logical basis for its demands. It has offered or agreed different contractual commitments with different parties – who gets a better or different contract,  the terms of those different contracts, and the basis for any contracts being different are  wholly unexplained. The fact that differences can exist at all illustrate that this is not  and was never an objective, rules-based requirement, but rather a personal and  personalised means of controlling each individual outside of the FIA’s governance.  

(22) The purpose of these supplemental constraints – not provided for in any FIA  governance documents or statutes, and not replicated in any arm of any known global  governing body – is principally to limit the risk of the FIA’s membership or the public  finding out about the governance concerns that are being expressed within the FIA itself.  

(23) Elected Members of the WMSC, the World Council for Automobile Mobility and  Tourism (“WCAMT”) and other officers who have declined to submit to these  extraordinary measures have been excluded from performing their functions, including  by being excluded from the meetings of the bodies they have been elected to serve on.  Such exclusion of the elected Members may have wide-ranging effects, including on  the validity of the decisions taken by the WMSC and WCAMT in the absence of these  Members. For this reason, the recently proposed FIA Statute changes cannot be said  with certainty to have been validly put for the General Assembly’s consideration.  

The next wave – the election cycle 

(24) It is essential to understand the above context to appreciate fully the implications of the  FIA Statute changes now being put to the FIA’s membership.  

(25) The process of deconstructing the internal checks and balances within the FIA is largely  complete, though one possible route remains through which the FIA’s leadership might  face accountability: the ballot box.  

(26) The suite of additional changes to the FIA Statutes now proposed are designed to be  impactful upon the upcoming election cycle and beyond, specifically on the FIA’s 

5 

mobility functions. In each case, and taken together, the majority of these changes  represent attempts to create advantages for the incumbent FIA leadership team.  

(27) An assessment of each of these proposed changes and its implications is included in the  Annex to this document.  

Reputational and Legal Risk to the FIA 

(28) Damage to the FIA’s credibility as an organisation has already occurred through  repeated governance mis-steps and failings. These are not anomalies: they are features  of a system of governance that is malfunctioning, due to the absence of normal internal  debate and discussion.  

(29) The FIA’s standing in comparison to other international organisations is threatened by  the self-inflicted wound of governance failure.³ 

(30) While French and Swiss courts and other law enforcement authorities might typically  be reluctant to intervene in the internal affairs of the FIA, members should be aware  that genuine risks arise in circumstances where typical governance norms are exceeded  and decisions are taken which cannot authentically be shown to be a reflection of the  interests of the federation, but appear to reflect other interests. This is a risk in relation  to personnel, in relation to dealing with internal and external parties and in respect of  the commercial affairs of the FIA. External scrutiny is both more likely and more risky  when our own internal processes have failed.  

Your vote matters 

(31) Through the practices of the current FIA leadership and the incremental changes of the  FIA Statutes over the last two years, the FIA’s governance has deteriorated.  

(32) This has not gone unnoticed by the world’s press, and the many constituents that the  FIA’s member clubs and associations represent, and our ability to hold the FIA up as  an example of appropriate governance on the international stage is diminishing.  

(33) There is no objective need for any of the proposed FIA Statute changes identified, and  there is certainly no urgency. The proposed changes are technical and may appear trivial  to some voting members, but if accepted would represent an acquiescence in the further  deconstruction of the FIA’s reputation for good governance. In addition, the proposed  changes were approved through World Council meetings which were improperly  constituted, having unjustifiably excluded elected Members from attending and voting  without any legal basis supported by the FIA’s Statutes.  

(34) We, the voting members, will all bear the consequences of our votes long into the future.  

(35) We therefore urge all members to consider the broader context of these changes, to  consider their potential impact on the election, if these are really necessary and if they  could not instead be considered and debated at a later post-election General Assembly. 

³ See the IOC Code of Ethics, Section D “Good Governance and Resources” 2024, Article 11, page 15, here,  which outlines that the basic universal principles of good governance of the Olympic and Sports Movement, in  particular transparency, responsibility and accountability, must be respected by all Olympic parties.

6 

(36) We express our gratitude to all members who will support our motion to remove the  voting on the proposed FIA Statute changes from the General Assembly’s agenda. 

7 

ANNEX  

ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED STATUTE CHANGES 

Each of the eight proposed statute changes raises issues of fairness and consistency. They are particularly problematic in view of the demonstrated governance issues that already exist.  These are discussed in turn below.  

Overview: The period for submitting the complete presidential list for the FIA Presidential elections will be moved forward by four weeks, to no earlier than 70 days and no later than 49  days before the election. The deadline for submitting candidatures for the World Motor Sport  Council (“WMSC”) will also be moved forward by four weeks, to 84 days before the election.  

Purported Justification: According to the FIA, the current timeline leaves the Nominations  Committee with insufficient time to verify the eligibility of candidates and to seek  clarifications.  

Commentary: The current FIA leadership is understood to have already identified the  candidates it intends to put forward in the upcoming election cycle. The stated desire to enhance  candidate vetting means, in reality, enhanced vetting of proposed opponents. Exactly as the  FIA leadership has disabled the independence and effectiveness of its Audit and Ethics  committees, there should be no realistic expectation that the vetting process under the  administration’s control will prioritize scrutiny of the current President’s own candidates and  allies. It is a well-recognised feature of the FIA’s election system that publicly declaring for a  given list – in particular in opposition to the sitting administration – entails risks of being dis favoured, at least in the period between declaration and the election. It has never been  necessary before in the FIA’s long history. This proposal is intended to discourage  opposition, and to expose candidates launching challenges to prolonged lobbying and  pressure in ways that are unlikely to be replicated for the incumbent’s candidates. 

Overview: 21 of the 28 WMSC members, namely the 7 Vice Presidents for Sport and 14 elected  WMSC members must be of different nationalities. Additionally, the Senate may propose up  to two candidates for the WMSC who do not necessarily represent a Full Member with a  competition on the International Sporting Calendar.  

Purported Justification: The stated aim is to broaden the pool of eligible candidates and  enhance the WMSC’s expertise. 

Commentary: The purpose of these changes is to allow the FIA leadership to hand-pick  supporters irrespective of the long-standing principle of balanced international representation,  and to disregard the traditional requirement that candidates be from Full Members with a  competition on the International Sporting Calendar. This is intended to ‘stack’ the WMSC  with supporters rather than encourage diversity of opinion. 

8 

Overview: The start of the four-year term for members of the Audit Committee, Ethics  Committee, and Nominations Committee will be aligned with the term of the presidential list  members, with a transitional provision so that new members serve until the end of 2029.  

Purported Justification: To allow consistency and synchronization in the terms of office across  the key FIA bodies. 

Commentary: This change would blatantly reduce the independence of oversight bodies if their  terms are tied to the term of the executive leadership. It means, in essence, that committee  members themselves would have an interest in election outcomes, and signals to committee  members that supporting continuity in the governing administration could lead to continuity in  committee appointments. The issue with this proposal is particularly acute with regard to  the Nominations Committee – due to their critical role in vetting election candidates, they – self-evidently – should not have terms tied to the same election cycle or outcome.  

Overview: The World Council for Automobile Mobility and Tourism (WCAMT) will include  three representatives from Region I, who will be WCAMT vice presidents. These vice  presidents will be drawn from Region I’s three regional subdivisions. The three vice presidents  will be (a) the President of Region I (who may come from any of the three Region I  subdivisions), and (b) two other vice presidents, though these may not come from the same  subdivision as the President of Region I.  

Purported Justification: The Statutes (at Article 14) enumerate that, apart from the Region 1  President, the two ‘other’ vice presidents from Region 1 will be appointed by the MENA  Mobility Council and ACTA, thereby appearing to assume that the President of Region 1 will  always be appointed by Region 1’s third subdivision, the EuroCouncil. The change purports  to make clear that the President of Region I may come from any of Region 1’s subdivisions,  and therefore the ‘other’ Vice-Presidents will not necessarily be from the MENA Mobility  Council or ACTA, but could be from any of the three subdivisions. 

Commentary: Despite its superficial appeal, this change leads to an undemocratic result. The  President of Region I is elected by the three Region 1 subdivisions (referred to here as A, B  and C). If a candidate from subdivision A did not have support within subdivision A, he/she  might still be elected as President of Region 1 with support mainly from subdivisions B and C.  In this scenario, subdivisions B and C would have ‘their’ candidate as President of Region 1,  and would also each nominate a vice president. Subdivisions B and C would have double  representation, and subdivision A would have no representative chosen from its ranks. This  creates a concerning imbalance between subdivisions and potentially undermines due  democratic process and representation. 

9 

Overview: An eligibility criterion will be introduced requiring that candidates for the  presidential list, World Council for Automobile Mobility and Tourism, WMSC, and the Senate  must not have “elements in the record” that could “call into question their professional  integrity”.  

Purported Justification: This criterion, already applicable in some other contexts, allegedly  promotes consistency and upholds the integrity and reputation of the FIA’s leadership. 

Commentary: Good governance requires clear, objective, and transparent standards for  disqualification from elections, as well as an independent process for assessing candidates’  records to prevent abuse or arbitrary exclusion. In circumstances in which the FIA’s leadership  appears willing to threaten or dismiss opponents, and circumvent standard governance  processes, there can be no confidence that this arbitrary criterion would not be used to exclude  candidates on vague or politically motivated grounds. The fact that this vague test is used  elsewhere within the FIA is no comfort – the other contexts in which this test is used are not  contested elections with rival campaigning candidates, but nomination processes. Also, the  other contexts in which this test is used are amenable to verification and internal judicial  oversight if required. There is no process or time for any verification or internal judicial  oversight to occur in an election cycle, and the process itself could unfairly damage a  candidate.  

Overview: The Senate currently approves the confirmation or dismissal of up to four  independent and qualified members of the Senate. This change would make this solely a  prerogative of the FIA President.  

Purported Justification: This change, which takes aways a Senate power, is claimed to  “provide the Senate with more flexibility in having the expertise required for the many and  varied topics it has to deal with and which may require an urgent decision”.  

Commentary: Apart from the absurdity of the justification (that taking away the Senate’s power  gives it more flexibility), this plainly and nakedly allows the FIA President to hand select (and  dismiss) the Senate members who have the principal job of overseeing the FIA’s activities,  including the President’s own activities. Self-evidently giving the FIA President authority  to select and dismiss the Senate members weakens the ability of the Senate to perform its  oversight functions, including and especially oversight of the President himself.  

Overview: An administrative manager in each Region would oversee the Region’s activities  and be appointed and dismissed by the President of the relevant Region, the President of the  Senate and the Deputy President for Automobile Mobility and Tourism by two-thirds majority.

10 

In addition, the President of the Region would chair the Regional Council of the sub-division  from which he/she comes from. 

Purported Justification: The administrative managers’ appointments supposedly aim to enable  the Regions that have a similar positioning within the FIA to collaborate effectively and  promote the sharing of experiences. 

Commentary: The proposed harmonization undermines the Region’s autonomy to consider and  appoint its own representatives. This further erodes the Region’s independence, and seeks  to subsume elements of the Region’s internal governance into the broader FIA’s  governance.  

Overview: Any subdivision of the Automobile Mobility and Tourism Region can apply to  become a Region in their own right while any new sub-division must consist of a minimum ten  Full Members.  

Purported Justification: The stated aim is to promote consistency as now only the subdivisions  that exist can apply to be Regions and to ensure sufficient and appropriate membership  representation within a subdivision.  

Commentary: The statement that the changes promote consistency is absurd given that only  Region I has subdivisions and only these subdivisions could become Regions in their own right  under the FIA Statutes. Rather than supporting regional autonomy, this proposal in fact  promotes disintegration of the Regions, and undermines cohesiveness, making small sub 

divisions easier to control by the FIA itself. This proposal contradicts the AIT and the FIA  merger agreement as well as the FIA President’s 2021 election manifesto’s promise to  support bespoke regional plans for growth and to reinforce the regional model.

Formula 1 teams will be explicitly banned from exploiting any tyre cooling tricks from next year via an intriguing new amendment to the 2026 technical regulations.

There has been an increased focus on tyre temperature management this season with pacesetter McLaren's main advantage widely accepted as being how it is able to keep its rubber cooler than its opposition can.

Rivals have been intrigued by how McLaren is so much better in this area, and have been scratching their heads trying to work out just what its secret is.

Suspicions that it could be doing something outside of the rules have been repeatedly shut down, however, with the FIA having completed numerous checks of the MCL39's wheel assemblies and braking systems – including a more detailed inspection after the Miami Grand Prix.

The governing body's stance has long been that McLaren's design is legal but clever – as whatever cooling it is doing is being done by airflow generated by the forward movement of the car.

However, that has not stopped theories that there is room for some form of exploitation within the regulations.

This idea gained some traction because, while the FIA's stance was that tyre cooling devices are not allowed, there is nothing definitive in the regulations that outlaws them.

The only reference to such systems is in Article 10.8.3 relating to the treatment of tyres, which forbids anything that heats or 'maintains' temperatures.

Some suggested that anything that helped cool the tyres was not actually covered in the regulations because this was technically different to 'maintaining' the heat.

In an intriguing move therefore, this week's World Motor Sport Council meeting has approved changes to F1's 2026 technical regulations that now close off what some felt was a grey area.

What has changed

The 10.8.3 article relating to tyre temperatures has been overhauled now for next season - as detailed below.

THE OLD WORDING

d. The only permitted type of tyre heating devices are blankets that comply with the design prescriptions listed in Article C10.8.4.

e. Any other device, system or procedure (except for driving of the car) the purpose and/or effect of which is to heat, or maintain the temperature of the hubs, or brakes, above the ambient air temperature, or to maintain their temperature if they are already warm, is prohibited. 

THE NEW WORDING
Key revisions in bold

d. The only permitted type of tyre heating devices are blankets that comply with the design prescriptions listed in Article C10.8.4.

e. With the exception of air entering through the apertures defined in C3.16.6 and C3.16.16, and the blankets permitted in (d) above. Any device, system or procedure (except for driving of the car) whose purpose and/or effect is to heat, cool, or maintain the temperature of the complete wheels, hubs, or brakes is prohibited.

There are two minor but important changes here that will have an influence on any team that may have been seeking to exploit things in this area.

The first is that there is now a specific mention that any attempt to "cool" things is now outside of the regulations – which is a step beyond it just covering something that heated up or maintained temperatures.

Furthermore, the scope of the rules now includes the "complete wheels" rather than just the hubs or brakes – so the area where teams are not allowed to do anything trick has been expanded.

This could prevent the idea of teams channelling airflow to this wider area to find a way around the wording of the previous rules.

It is also interesting that a new article 3.17.1 that covers suspension fairings has also added a clause that these now: "must be internally sealed to prevent any internal airflow."

It would not be impossible to think that a team could channel airflow through the suspension fairings to feed cool air towards the wheel assemblies to help manage temperatures.

Closing the door

The changes to the regulations in this area are not necessarily a response to cover off anything that McLaren may or may not be doing.

Instead, it is fairly common practice for the FIA to tidy up regulations to prevent teams escalating developments in a certain area if grey areas have been exposed.

These are often discussed with the competitors themselves in meetings of the Technical Advisory Committee, where it is often agreed how best to close off certain complicated design avenues that may have opened up.

So the changes to the 2026 rules may well be more about preventing teams taking tricks to the next level next year rather than stamping out something that has been taking place already this season. 

Energy harvesting tricks prevented?

The revised 2026 regulations tidy up a lot of areas.

One other notable addition is a clause that has been added that should prevent drivers needing to conduct wild energy harvesting tactics next year in qualifying sessions to get their battery to maximum power.

There has been talk of drivers needing to rev their engines hard through low-speed corners to help with harvesting.

This was something design genius Adrian Newey mentioned as likely.

"It's certainly going to be a strange formula in as much as the engines will be working flat-chat as generators just about the whole time," he said last year.

"So, the prospect of the engine working hard in the middle of Loews hairpin [in Monaco] is going to take some getting used to."

With it likely to be a challenge at some tracks without heavy braking zones to achieve the maximum charge of 8.5MJ per lap, freedom had already been put in the rules to limit this to 8MJ at some venues.

Now however an extra rule has been added that allows the FIA to pull this back to 5MJ when required.

The new Article states that this will happen: "at Competitions where the FIA determines that the harvesting strategies required to achieve the above limit are excessive."

The danger of drivers needing to drive in a strange way on qualifying out laps could pose some potential safety headaches if things got extreme, which is what the new 5MJ limit should help avoid.

While Alex Palou's record of winning all but one race in IndyCar this year took a blow when he was taken out in Detroit, the 'other Palou' on the IndyCar ladder still has his incredible run of form intact.

Dennis Hauger - the 22-year-old Norwegian formerly of Red Bull's Formula 1 junior programme - has won four of the first five Indy NXT races and added three poles at tracks he has never been to or even seen before in some cases. Most people have decided that the Andretti Global driver has already done enough to confirm an IndyCar seat next year.

That makes sense, given this is the best start to an IndyCar second-tier feeder-series season since Alex Lloyd's run in 2007, just under 18 years ago. And think of the names that have come through since then, like Josef Newgarden, Pato O'Ward, Colton Herta and Kyle Kirkwood - who arguably has the best junior single-seater resume in North American racing history. None had a run like Hauger’s.

What does Hauger make of people already declaring him a 2026 IndyCar driver then?

"I don't really care until I see a contract," he laughs during an interview with The Race.

"It's been a good start and I'm happy that I'm getting the attention too, and obviously my goal is to go up to IndyCar.

“I knew before heading into this season I had one shot and one year in Indy NXT to try and get the results to mark myself as a worthy driver to the IndyCar series and so far I think we're doing the job."

Hauger was the successor to Oscar Piastri as FIA Formula 3 champion with Prema Racing in 2021, and followed that up with 10th, 11th and 8th in F2 with the latter two seasons spent with MP Motorsport.

It's no surprise after the more recent finishes that F1 wasn't on the cards, but there were a lot of options and it's clear where Hauger's focus lies from the decisions he took.

"It's never straightforward," he says of his decision to choose Indy NXT, to uproot his life to come to America, and to at least pause any dreams of F1.

"We had options here and there, even back in F2, and we were looking at long-distance racing, Formula E, different things. Outside F1, I was looking like what's the best series to be in for the future and where could I see myself and and the goal there was clearly IndyCar.

"We were looking at IndyCar, but we don't have that kind of budget and honestly, we're fighting to keep this budget for this year in Indy NXT as well.

"So it's hard work off track, but when I got the opportunity to go to Indy NXT with Andretti it was an opportunity I couldn't miss.

“If you win this championship you get prize money and you get an opportunity to go to IndyCar. So I feel like that's a really cool part of the series."

It feels eerily similar to 2022 and Linus Lundqvist - who wasn't sure he'd have the budget to complete the season but won the title. Hauger is still nine races away from achieving that, with a strong team-mate in reigning USF Pro 2000 champion Lochie Hughes just one of the drivers behind him who could cause him serious issues.

Going back to the Palou comparison, many believed - including himself - that he'd need to win an Indianapolis 500 to be considered among the greats. He achieved that last month in what was his first win on an oval.

Hauger has a somewhat similar achievement to do if he wants to be Indy NXT champion and a future IndyCar driver: to even race on an oval!

His first one is coming up this weekend at Gateway.

He tested at Nashville's oval earlier in the season and was, you guessed it, fastest of anyone, but Gateway isn't flat like Nashville and racing on an oval with other cars at speed is far different to driving around it in practice. Hauger knows that.

"You feel like a superhero when you're driving in those speeds around an oval," he adds.

"It's a weird and cool feeling.

"I think qualifying shouldn't be too bad. But we go to a track now where we have to lift and I haven't experienced that before. I think I'll be fine for qualifying mode. But again, the race will be just so different.

“So I'm just looking at loads of videos and onboards and stuff like that, just get my head wrapped around it as much as I can."

Given his results so far, it's easy to forget he's never raced an oval, hadn't driven most of the tracks we've been on, and is in his first season of driving an Indy NXT car.

Yes, he's 22 years old and has experience from championships at the elite level of what most people would call the top level of junior single-seaters. But that doesn't mean how he has performed in 2025 in Indy NXT should be expected and certainly isn't the norm.

He's been asked a lot about F2 being good preparation for Indy NXT but that's not always the case. The F2 car is similar to an IndyCar, whereas the Indy NXT car is similar to a rally car! You couldn't drive an F2 car on the ragged edge and sideways because it would destroy the Pirellis for starters.

"Detroit, I saved tyres too much at one point, and I just messed up my balance a bit because of that," says Hauger, who says he's still learning how to drive and push this car in the limits it really works in. F2 was a blessing and a curse for his preparation, but every weekend he's fighting through it.

"It [the car] moves around, and I love that when you're on the oversteery side and you have to wrestle it a little bit, and this car really allows you to just push through the limits a bit like that.

"And also just the tyres are so different, very different compounds, and it's a sort of tyre that makes you push more throughout the race and a different qualifying sequence.

"Literally every single thing this year is different than what I've done before, which I think a lot of people take lightly just because I come from F2, but there's still a lot of new things for me this year with the car and the tyres, of course, but the tracks every time I go to a track this year, it's a completely new track, everyone else knows them. So it's a lot of different factors this year."

Looking at the results, you'd think it more likely a good IndyCar driver had dropped back into Indy NXT for a year rather than believing what you see here had been achieved by a rookie driver so new to everything.

The championship isn't anywhere near won and those toasting '2026 IndyCar driver Dennis Hauger' are doing so way too soon. On driving talent alone, yes he's good enough, but when a budget is as tight as his is, these things are never guaranteed.

His first oval race this weekend will be a big marker of how ready he is for that next step. If he keeps performing at the level he has consistently, there literally will be no way he won't be on that top-level grid next year.

It's been nothing short of remarkable.

Lance Stroll will return for the Canadian Grand Prix after surgery on his hand and wrist, and has tested at Paul Ricard ahead of his home Formula 1 race.

Stroll had surgery after a cycling accident in 2023 and missed that year's pre-season testing.

The Aston Martin driver took part in qualifying for the 2025 Spanish GP but missed that Sunday's race due to recurring pain in his hand and wrist.

The team confirmed the surgery was complete on Tuesday after the race at Barcelona, but it was still unclear whether the driver would take part in his home race. Aston Martin reserve Felipe Drugovich was a possible replacement, which would have taken him out of the Valkyrie cockpit for the Le Mans 24 Hours.

"We are pleased to confirm that Lance Stroll will be back with the team competing in Montreal this weekend," read Aston Martin's statement before the 2025 Canadian GP.

"He had a successful medical procedure to resolve the symptoms he has been experiencing and completed some laps in an old F1 car at Paul Ricard earlier this week. Lance is feeling fit and healthy, and is excited to compete in front of his home crowd."

Lance Stroll added: "I was always going to fight hard to be ready to race in front of the Montreal crowd. I’m feeling good after my procedure and put some laps in at Paul Ricard this week to prepare."

There was previously some confusion over Stroll's withdrawal from the Spanish GP.

Aston Martin was warned by the FIA over Stroll's failure to comply with the driver weighing procedure after Spanish GP qualifying, because Stroll did not return to the FIA weighing scales after the session.

He was summoned to a hearing on Saturday evening but the FIA was later informed that he would withdraw from the race and undergo pain that he had suffered from for six weeks.

The stewards received a medical report and letter from Stroll detailing his need for urgent medical attention after Q2 to treat pain in his right hand and wrist.

An Aston Martin spokesperson later stated that "Lance was upset".

Stroll has picked up 14 of Aston Martin's 16 points so far this season and sits 12th in the drivers' championship ahead of the 2025 Canadian GP.

After so many years of flirtation and rumour, double World Superbike champion Toprak Razgatlioglu is finally coming to MotoGP having signed a Yamaha deal that puts him on a Pramac bike for 2026.

As well as creating plenty of excitement, the news also raises plenty of questions about Razgatlioglu’s chances, the consequences for the rest of the rider market, the timing and for WSBK.

What’s so special about Razgatlioglu?

Even if you don’t follow World Superbikes, you’ll probably be aware of Razgatlioglu’s big reputation - especially given how often he’s been linked to MotoGP moves in the past.

A curiosity-quickly-turned-superstar after arriving to World Superbikes in 2019, Razgatlioglu traded Kawasaki for Yamaha (in slightly acrimonious circumstances), gave Yamaha a world title, traded Yamaha for BMW (in slightly acrimonious circumstances), gave BMW a world title - and is now committing to his biggest change yet.

He has dazzled with his renowned hard-braking style, with team managers and rivals alike marvelling at the brake pressure he's able to induce and control, but that style (which has led to doubts over just how well he can adapt to MotoGP) is secondary to the pure, indisputable results - and the showmanship this man from a family of stunt riders brings to his racing.

Once part of a WSBK 'big three' with Alvaro Bautista and Jonathan Rea, Razgatlioglu ascended as his two veteran rivals declined.

His last season with Yamaha, giving Bautista a big run for his money on what was widely seen as an inferior R1, was a harbinger of what was to come - a 2024 campaign with BMW in which he (aided by 'superconcession' status but more than contributing from his side) turned a mid-pack WSBK programme into not just the frontrunner it once was before, but a profoundly dominant force.

He’s also a huge sporting hero in his native Turkey. The chances of MotoGP returning to race at the superb Istanbul Park track again sometime soon have just hugely increased.

Factory seat demands and Yamaha fallout?

Razgatlioglu joining MotoGP with a satellite Yamaha might be a surprise given he and manager Kenan Sofuoglu had held out for a factory team seat in the past - and that the Yamaha bridge seemed burned when his original MotoGP tests with it proved unimpressive and prompted some recriminations from both sides afterwards.

But top sportspeople are (or should be!) pragmatists, Yamaha is a different place now and the Razgatlioglu camp has clearly cottoned on at last to the fact that satellite MotoGP teams are not the outcasts they once were.

The majority have equal specification bikes to their suppliers’ factory teams and many have directly-factory-contracted riders. Pramac’s already won a MotoGP title with Jorge Martin and Ducati, and with Yamaha on the up again it’s not inconceivable that it could one day repeat that feat with its new partner and the right rider and circumstances.

Razgatlioglu will be 29-years-old at the start of the 2026 season, so there was a degree of ‘now or never’ about this move, and this was the best immediate option.

The friction over the previous Yamaha MotoGP tests was more with previous team boss Lin Jarvis, who did not seem to be a Razgalioglu fan, whereas new managing director Paolo Pavesio worked with Razgatlioglu when he was a Yamaha World Superbike rider and is understood to have been vital to putting this deal together.

Wasn’t he being lined up by Honda?

The most recent Razgatlioglu to MotoGP rumour had involved Honda and the prospect of a big money offer to spend one year with (and hopefully transforming) Honda’s currently struggling World Superbike team before moving to MotoGP with it for the 2027 rule changes.

That didn’t come to fruition and the floating of Razgatlioglu may have been part of internal machinations in Honda’s WSBK programme and different factions’ efforts to secure a big star name.

On the MotoGP side, Jorge Martin’s surprise availability looks like it has become Honda’s focus, as in theory it only has one potential vacancy (currently injured works rider Luca Marini’s contract ends this year) anyway. A return to Pramac wouldn’t hold the same lure for Martin as a factory Honda deal given his determination to be a works rider now even though he won the title on a satellite bike.

Can Razgatlioglu actually succeed in MotoGP?

Expectations should be kept under control for 2026. Some in the World Superbike paddock rate their reigning champion so highly they think he could win on his MotoGP debut.

But regardless of whether a Pramac Yamaha even has a hope of that sort of performance in 2026, Razgatlioglu must surely see next year as a learning season.

Razgatlioglu finally makes MotoGP switch with Yamaha

Read more

He has no experience at all of racing top-level prototype bikes, which are stiffer and less forgiving than production machinery and less suited to the spectacular, front-end-biased and ultra-successful riding style he uses in WSBK. That style won’t work well with the current MotoGP Michelins either.

And the careful way Yamaha announced Razgatlioglu’s deal on Tuesday suggests his current BMW contract might limit how much he can do or say for his new employer within 2025.

Will he even get the traditional post-season Valencia test? Yamaha wouldn’t let him ride for BMW in the equivalent World Superbike test when he swapped teams at the end of 2023, so BMW may return the favour now and that will be a costly loss of mileage.

Given all that, just making semi-regular Q2 appearances would probably constitute a successful 2026 for Razgatlioglu - and that’s a lot less than his massive fanbase will hope for.

It’s all about the new MotoGP rules for 2027 and the series’ switch to Pirelli tyres then, though we don’t yet know how different Pirelli’s MotoGP tyres will be to its World Superbike tyres on which Razgatlioglu produces such magic.

Until that big reset, 2026 has to be regarded as a useful learning season when any success will be a bonus.

Who goes to make way for him?

Though Jack Miller’s Pramac Yamaha contract is only for one year, it’s his team-mate Miguel Oliveira who looks far more vulnerable.

Oliveira’s contract is believed to contain a clause that would allow him to be released if he is last of the Yamaha riders in the championship mid-season - and with his injuries this year meaning he’s 23rd in the standings right now with just two points, he’s not on very firm ground. Not that it’s his fault, as his score would be far higher but for the injury caused by Fermin Aldeguer crashing into him.

Oliveira admits urgent pressure to keep Yamaha MotoGP seat

Read more

But in the small amount of fair comparison that was possible pre-season and at the opener, Miller was the more impressive of the Pramac duo and his performances since have certainly merited a contract extension.

He’s consistently the second-best Yamaha behind incumbent superstar Fabio Quartararo - which in itself should raise questions about Quartararo’s works team-mate Alex Rins, who’s never shown his old form since his nasty 2023 leg injury. But there’s very little chance of Yamaha not honouring the contract with Rins that it extended through 2026.

If Oliveira is out of Pramac, that probably means out of MotoGP - with no viable gaps on the grid for 2026 that he could move into at present. A return to the Aprilia ranks as it reshuffles without Martin is very unlikely to appeal for Oliveira.

What does this mean for World Superbikes?

As much as the World Superbike world is thrilled to see its star taking on the best of MotoGP, there’s no doubt that a rider of that talent and profile will leave a big void in its paddock as he’s been such a huge part of its storylines and appeal in recent years.

That might be compounded by his 2025 title rival Nicolo Bulega swiftly following him to MotoGP - as Bulega’s new Ducati deal includes 2026 MotoGP test duties that surely line him up for a 2027 series switch.

Ducati WSBK star's new deal sets him up for MotoGP future

Read more

The World Superbike Championship has thrived on its narrative of stars grown in its own paddock and support series taking on MotoGP converts in recent years.

But take Bulega and Razgatlioglu out of the 2025 standings and it’s mostly former residents of the MotoGP paddock in their wake: Danilo Petrucci, Bautista, long-time Moto2 racer Andrea Locatelli, Sam Lowes, Moto2 convert Xavi Vierge, Andrea Iannone and Iker Lecuona, and only then at 10th in the championship comes Axel Bassani as the next true graduate of the production racing ladder in the standings after Razgatlioglu.

There will certainly be good and lucrative WSBK seats up for grabs, with BMW, Ducati and Honda all shopping in the rider market.

Some in the WSBK world hope or even expect for an influx of MotoGP riders in their direction. Right now though the interest doesn’t seem to be there - Miller for example having been linked with various Superbike deals but committed to staying in MotoGP. Johann Zarco is another who’s doggedly stuck to the MotoGP path when he could’ve switched. Superbikes may be a great career move for Oliveira now, though.

Lazy perceptions of World Superbikes as a series where it’s easy for past-their-best or never-actually-good-enough MotoGP riders to win titles do its level and quality of racing a disservice. But Razgatlioglu was a particularly potent weapon to throw back at that accusation.

The colours of Genesis - Hyundai's premium brand - Magma Racing are already very much in evidence at the Le Mans 24 Hours circuit.

And not only because a full-scale model of the GMR-001 is displayed in the Village. In fact, one car that will line up on the starting grid this Saturday is already bearing the colours of the marque.

Cyril Abiteboul’s team has its own unique approach to preparing for its debut in the top class of endurance racing next year. Here’s everything you need to know…

Genesis on the grid… in LMP2

There’s no need to remind you that Genesis has no prior experience in endurance racing, or in motorsport at all, for that matter.

The parent company Hyundai has performed well in the World Rally Championship and various touring car classes, but that’s about it.

Since the goal is to quickly establish itself at the front of the field, the team has decided to use LMP2 as a way to gain experience in endurance racing.

All the details of Hyundai's ambitious Genesis WEC/IMSA project

Read more

“Even though the car is run by IDEC Sport, it is running in Genesis Magma Racing colours and there are plenty of Genesis Magma Racing and Hyundai Motorsport people involved behind the scenes," Genesis Magma Racing team principal Abiteboul said of the 2025 LMP2 entry.

“The idea of starting with Genesis Magma Racing in 2026 from nothing, with no exposure to endurance racing, quickly became very scary.

“It is the best option for everyone involved with Genesis Magma Racing and Hyundai Motorsport to learn about endurance racing, its code, its requirements, its community, to understand what we need to succeed when we enter WEC in 2026.

"This will help us get up to speed and have a sort of rolling start when we debut the GMR-001 Hypercar in 2026."

To successfully carry out its Hypercar programme, Genesis Magma Racing will rely on several familiar names with deep experience in endurance racing, such as engineers Mathieu Leroy (ex-Porsche) and Justin Taylor (ex-Audi, Ferrari, Cadillac). Some mechanics and engineers have also been transferred from the WRC programme.

This preparation season is also about allowing the key players already confirmed for the Hypercar project to get to know each other and build communication.

This gradual ramp-up is quite unique. While manufacturers often place their drivers in the other categories to familiarise them with endurance racing, this is the first time we’ve seen a manufacturer prepare in this way.

The drivers being monitored, part of what GMR calls the 'Trajectory Programme' are competing in the #18 ORECA 07 dressed in Genesis colors.

The two chosen drivers are Britain’s Jamie Chadwick and France’s Mathys Jaubert. In the European Le Mans Series, they share the wheel with Daniel Juncadella, after former Williams Formula 1 driver Logan Sargeant ultimately declined Hyundai's offer.

However, since Juncadella is racing with Corvette and TF Sport in the WEC, he is being replaced this week by three-time Le Mans winner Andre Lotterer at Le Mans.

As a reminder, Lotterer (above , left) - along with multiple IMSA champion Pipo Derani (above, right) - is one of the only two drivers officially announced by Genesis for its Hypercar programme.

Why IDEC Sport?

When GMR announced its intention to lean on an LMP2 team in 2025 to prepare for its Hypercar debut, many discussions took place with several racing teams. TDS Racing, CLX Motorsport (formerly Cool Racing), Vector Sport, RD Limited, and IDEC Sport were all considered.

“With the target we set ourselves to race in the World Endurance Championship in 2026, we didn’t have the opportunity to build a whole new team from nothing,” Abiteboul explained.

“Partnering with an experienced team in endurance racing was an easy decision. It’s also about access to locations, to people, and to understanding all the administrative aspects of endurance racing that we need to be aware of for 2026.”

“When we compete with the GMR-001 Hypercar, we’ll be racing against well-established teams, many of which have GT programmes that serve as a base for their sportscar pyramid,” he added. “Because we’re entering directly into the WEC Hypercar class in 2026, we don’t have that - we only have the tip of the pyramid.”

The decision to chose IDEC Sport was certainly influenced by Genesis Magma Racing's choice to set up at the Paul Ricard circuit, in IDEC Sport’s facilities.

“We are going to have an entire building that we will adapt to our needs and that can support our operations for the next four years,” Abiteboul said.

What are their chances this weekend?

The primary goal this week is clearly to prepare for the Hypercar debut.

“It is a chance for the team members in our Trajectory Programme to feel the atmosphere and excitement unique to Le Mans, to be ready to perform in 2026,” explained Abiteboul.

“They will be able to see first-hand the extremely busy and competitive environment Genesis Magma Racing is stepping into and understand more of what is needed for a strong execution next year.”

But the former Renault F1 team principal and his troops are still competitors at heart. As is IDEC Sport, which finished third in LMP2 last year and is also fielding a second ORECA 07 under its own name. And of course, success breeds hunger.

The GMR/IDEC Sport duo made a stunning debut in endurance racing by winning both of their first LMP2 races in the ELMS, at Barcelona and Paul Ricard.

“It is a bit surreal,” said Chadwick. “It’s a bit beyond our expectations. What a perfect start to the year.”

In the end, almost unintentionally, Chadwick and her team-mates arrive at Le Mans labelled as favourites or at least as strong outsiders to watch.

During last Sunday’s test day, the #18 ORECA 07 flew under the radar. Lotterer set a best lap of 3m38.301s, 2.531 seconds off the class-leading time set by Pietro Fittipaldi (#22 United Autosports ORECA 07). But the focus was elsewhere…

And what about the GMR-001?

Meanwhile, the GMR and ORECA teams continue to work on their Hypercar, which adheres to the IMSA-based LMDh regulations and a full-scale model is being shown this week at Le Mans for the first time in Europe.

More importantly, the V8 twin-turbo engine that will power the car successfully completed its first fire-up at Hyundai Motorsport’s headquarters in late February, right on schedule.

As a reminder, the basic architecture of this V8 engine is derived from the inline four-cylinder engine used in Hyundai’s WRC car, with both units sharing around 60% of components. Design work on the V8 began in June 2024 and was completed four months later. Assembly of the first engine took place in early 2025 to meet the fire-up deadline.

“With the time we had available to develop the engine, we immediately knew we did not have time to completely design a new engine from scratch,” said Hyundai Motorsport technical director Francois-Xavier Demaison.

“For the main part of an engine, you need a long time to design, validate, and of course produce.

"Every part needs to be tested over many kilometres, and the I4 engine from our World Rally Championship car has already been well proven. It became the logical step to carry over as many parts as possible from the 4-cylinder engine.”

Additionally, Genesis Magma Racing has begun working with Dynisma, having purchased one of the company’s cutting-edge DMG-360XY simulators to support the development of the GMR-001 Hypercar and preparation for the 2026 WEC.

The car’s roll-out is still scheduled for sometime this summer, and we expect to learn more about the team structure this Friday, during a press conference held on-site at Le Mans.

The sheer number of teams being caught breaking the rules in IndyCar this year is taking its toll on the paddock.

McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown has decided his team needed a "whistleblowing hotline" for his employees to flag when they've been asked to do something that "isn't right".

Now that's not to say Brown thinks his team is cheating, and McLaren hasn't been involved in any serious issues this year.

But he's still taking serious action - inviting concerned staff to contact him or team principal Tony Kanaan directly - which paints a picture of the feeling in the paddock and maybe points to there being some unnerved team principals in the series right now.

"What I've done with the team, and I've reiterated it now, is: here's how McLaren goes racing, here's what's acceptable, here's what's not acceptable, and here's a whistle-blowing hotline," Brown explained.

"So if your boss tells you to do something that you know is not right, here's my phone number or here's Tony's phone number.

"I've gone in and preached many times, but I took the opportunity just so it's totally clear to everyone at McLaren.

"And it doesn't mean you're not doing a ride-height wrong one day or a wing angle - you are going to make mistakes, that happens in sport.

"But there's a difference between that and ‘let's go design, manufacture, build something'. There is no, ‘I put it in the wrong bowl'."

IndyCar's month of controversy

• Penske qualifying scandal repercussions
• Penske sacks senior staff
• 2024 Indy 500 winning car admission
• Penske drivers' contrasting reactions
• Andretti and Prema lose Indy 500 results
• IndyCar's plan to tighten its tech

The Indianapolis 500 in particular - partly because of its nature as the most popular IndyCar event with the biggest spotlight - produced significant scandals, with Penske and Andretti sanctioned for modifying parts which are purposefully protected in the rule book and not open to modification, while Prema Racing was pinged for a front-wing infraction that may well have been naivety caused by the team competing in an oval race for the first time, but equally was a part incorrectly sized.

This has almost certainly led to team bosses throughout the paddock - such as Brown - reiterating what is and isn't acceptable for their racing teams.

Penske's Indy 500 qualifying scandal initiated the firing of the team's senior management: its president Tim Cindric (with the team since 1999), managing director Ron Ruzewski and general manager Kyle Moyer.

That showed how seriously Roger Penske was taking the transgression, which had made it two too many for Penske after the push to pass scandal from 2024.

Penske having modified rear crash structures against the rules at the Indy 500 also flagged up the need for IndyCar's technical inspection process and procedures to be reviewed to avoid similar incidents happening in the future.

Despite the modified attenuator being spotted in pre-qualifying inspection, the #12 car was passed and allowed to head out to the pits for qualifying, before the following #2 Penske car was failed and then the #12 team was informed its car would fail post-session scrutineering.

Brown was part of a meeting with IndyCar senior leadership in Detroit that covered matters such as the calendar, need for a new car, and technical inspection, which is often shortened to ‘tech' in IndyCar parlance.

"Obviously tech's the big conversation, so I think we need both a lot more investment in tech and technical inspection," said Brown.

"We need templates, we need lasers, we need videoing. We need investment in that so you can do a better job looking back, looking forward."

IndyCar is already exploring changes to technical inspection and also how to implement a more outward, visibly independent structure for its governance.

Brown said he has "no doubt" that Roger Penske isn't intervening directly with scrutineering or race control, but every time there is a problem with Team Penske, people use it to complain about the fact that Penske owns the championship and also owns a race team that competes in it.

"Perception is reality," Brown uses this phrase to eloquently explain the nuanced view that, whether Penske is intervening or not (he believes he isn't and there's certainly no proof to suggest it is) there are people who will accuse him of it and pedal that narrative when the opportunities arise, simply because they can, or they are not Team Penske fans.

As I've written countless times in the last month, it would be better for Roger Penske to have the independent bodies in place so that his and IndyCar's name are not dragged through the mud every time this kind of thing happens.

In terms of how the independent part of it would work, Brown reckons "it's more about who can tell them what to do, and as long as whoever can tell them what to do, that body of people are independent, and you need to have some sort of majority, super majority, then I think it doesn't really matter who pays for it".

Doug Boles had only been in a new role as president of IndyCar - he was already Indianapolis Motor Speedway president - for a few months and is the person tasked with overseeing these changes.

He's been given a "s**t sandwich for dinner" reckons Brown, having to deal with all of these enormous issues so early in the role.

Technical inspection will be one of his priorities now. Finding an existing independent body - like the FIA for example - would take time and be expensive. Starting a new body from scratch would also be time consuming and expensive. There's no way to cut corners.

As Brown alluded to, there's a long list of things to sort so this only adds to the pressure Boles is unfortunately under.

IndyCar desperately needs a new car, this being the 13th season of the current one, but until the engine manufacturers commit, it's hard to finalise that car. Brown says "I feel Chevy feels very committed to the sport", hinting McLaren's partner wants to stay, but said he didn't know about Honda because he is not supplied by it.

With the calendar attracting some bigger events and the series working on more of those for the future, the car, engine manufacturers and technical inspection process are the big topics in IndyCar right now.

It's lucky to have Brown, who even called out other team owners after the Detroit meeting.

"I'm disappointed in some of the team owners that when The Captain [Roger Penske] is not around, they say one thing, and when The Captain's around, they say another.

"And I think that does a disservice, actually, to Roger, because he probably gets conflicting information."

Whether you agree with Brown and his views on IndyCar - he has too many of them to outline in this feature alone - he says what he thinks without hesitation and more people doing so is never a bad thing when so many questions over the series' future are undecided.

The Formula 1 movie is now just a few weeks away from what Hollywood super-producer Jerry Bruckheimer admits is a scary release.

F1, starring Brad Pitt and the brainchild of the key people behind Top Gun: Maverick, with Lewis Hamilton formally attached to the project from early on via a producer’s credit, will be in theatres on June 25 internationally and June 27 in North America.

The filmmakers and actors spent two seasons travelling to and filming at various F1 races, in addition to plenty of more conventional work behind the scenes.

And through that came a new experience even for Bruckheimer, someone whose work in television and film spans several decades and some of the highest-grossing films of all-time - and who, in an interview with The Race, opts for an unusual example of how this world has turned him into a self-described “newly converted” fan.

“Just being part of this amazing circus,” Bruckheimer tells us. “It’s just fascinating to see how this is all organised and what an amazing job they do.

“I mean just moving…like the whole Mercedes trailer, it's unbelievable. It's like a military operation.”

F1’s other-worldly logistical competence is unlikely to be a central plot point in the movie, but it was a very welcome quality when it came to executing such a bold undertaking, turning the paddocks, grids and tracks into temporary live movie sets in the middle of grand prix weekends.

And with so much filming in front of a live audience, it was inevitable that little moments would leak out, and the release of teasers and then full trailers have exposed more of the film’s plot points and visual spectacle.

It is, unsurprisingly, a very visceral offering - very Hollywood, as most of the drivers who were given a screening of the film recently in Monaco would say. But many are giving it the benefit of the doubt for a simple reason.

This has been a massive commitment to trying to capture parts of F1 like it never has been before, and show respect to those who love the nuances of grand prix racing - two things that come across very clearly in conversation with Bruckheimer.

'We wouldn’t have made it' without access

There are two elements to being ‘in’ F1 that should stand out very strongly in this movie - being immersed in F1’s world, and being put into the cars themselves.

As far as the first point goes, eventually every significant stakeholder - from CEO Stefano Domenicali to the team bosses, drivers, and individual race promoters - showed a huge amount of flexibility to capitalise on this opportunity and give the film what it needed.

“We wouldn't have made it, quite frankly,” Bruckheimer says when asked what kind of film this would be without F1’s buy-in

“Unless we do it the right way, we're not going to make it. So that's just the way it works.

“But I think the fact that we had Lewis [Hamilton] as the entree, he's not going to bless something unless - you know how particular Lewis is.

“He had a confidence in Joe [director Joseph Kosinski]. I saw him [recently] and because he's seen the movie a number of times in various forms. I said, ‘How do you feel?’

“And he said, ‘You guys lived up to everything you said you were going to’.”

Hamilton has been assisting regularly in ensuring the film’s authenticity. He was drafted in early by Kosinski (below, right) and Bruckheimer as they had offered him a small role in Maverick, but filming clashed with his F1 commitments.

But there are two other stories from Bruckheimer that have cropped up time and again in off-record briefings and now various interviews.

One predates the F1 movie itself - he recalls approaching the US Navy to get access to the Top Gun school to film the original, and being rebuffed by the leader at the base. So they circumvented the admiral, went to US Navy secretary John Lehman, who saw the potential such a film could have on recruitment - so signed off on giving access.

“We were much smarter this time,” Bruckheimer says. “We went directly to Stefano, so we didn't go through all the intermediaries that can say no, and he was, ‘how can we help you? What can we do?’”

But once through the door, another hurdle emerged. The filmmakers needed help from the teams to pull off everything they wanted to do - ranging from filming on the grid before the start of actual races to getting all the cars lined up to film a red flag scene - and there was, as is now well documented, a little uncertainty from a particular Mercedes competitor…

“Since Mercedes built the car and there was a rivalry with Red Bull, Christian [Horner], of course, felt that, ‘oh my god, we're going to be the villains here’,” says Bruckheimer.

“And so it was a process of showing him things, showing all the teams and the drivers, how we did Top Gun and how we're going to do this movie, by skinning the cars the way we skin the jets in Top Gun. And they slowly came onboard. They were less sceptical.”

It wasn’t just the competitors, though. Asking for five or 10 minute chunks of track time in-weekend to shoot various scenes and get Pitt and Damson Idris on track put a toll on already stressed weekend schedules.

“We had to prove to them, ‘if you give us five minutes, we're off in five minutes’,” says Bruckheimer. “It's not five and a half minutes, it's five minutes.

“The hardest one was Vegas, because they'd never done it before, so they were the most scared. But we did get access, and the next year we got even more access, so they realised that we're men of our words.”

Getting the actors to drive

Taking viewers into the driving seat comes quite literally through the camerawork that goes even beyond what was used on Top Gun: Maverick inside the fighter jets.

Technology has evolved even in the few intervening years between these two films and Kosinski has tried to take full advantage.

F1 drivers' verdict after watching new F1 movie

Read more

“Joe loves authenticity, and he put six cameras in the cockpit,” says Bruckheimer.

“Well, he took it to another level on this movie.”

Essentially, F1 benefited from being able to use more cameras, with more flexibility on how to be used now they are remote controlled and can pan from car to car.

This, combined with getting the actors to actually drive the adapted F2 machines (as well as stunt drivers assisting other scenes) means the filmmakers could literally go from a camera facing Pitt to the same one moving round to see Charles Leclerc or George Russell.

Already, it is obvious this brings two benefits.

One is that you can see the characters really are driving the car and driving it relatively competently - which is obvious. Maybe the average moviegoer won’t notice but an F1 fan will surely appreciate the detail. The other benefit is the visceral feeling that the imagery conjures - something that special effects and external shots simply would not match.

Unsurprisingly, Pitt and Idris were very keen participants. Pitt even said he wouldn’t make the movie if it was just going to be CGI. But the idea itself was from Kosinksi who “wanted to do it as real as you can possibly do it” - to the point Bruckheimer says that “when we were casting for Damson’s role, we put him out in the car before we cast him to see if he could drive.

“If he wasn't coordinated, he wouldn't have got the part,” adds Bruckheimer.

“And he was great. He's a good athlete. And I think even Lewis was surprised what a good athlete Brad is, because don't forget, he’s done a lot of motorcycle work and riding so he had really good hand-eye coordination, so he was a natural when he got in the car.

“Damson, coming from [London], they don't drive much there, so it was a little more of a learning process for him! But he caught on really quickly.”

What fans should get out of this

Pitt’s role is as ex-driver Sonny Hayes, who returns to the grid well, well past the age of a normal driver - old enough to make Fernando Alonso feel like he still has many years ahead of him.

Inevitably, the basic plot outline existing without any context has opened the door for a lot of mockery and criticism. But it does get addressed - and Hamilton apparently helped smooth out the storyline.

“Brad was driving Daytona because first [in the script] we had him in dune buggies,” says Bruckheimer.

“And Lewis said, ‘No, you can't go from that into an F1 car, but you could from driving in Daytona, the 24 hour race, going into one of our cars’.

“And then we showed him the first section, and he said, ‘not right, he needs to have lessons on the steering wheel, he just can't get in that car and understand the steering wheel’. So we do a little section of him being briefed.

“It's just those little details that he added to add to the authenticity, which I hope fans will understand.”

“And you know, his age – we see online, ‘oh, he couldn't be able to drive the car’. We deal with it in the movie.

“We try to touch all the buttons that a real F1 fan would say, ‘oh, wait a second’.”

That point is significant. Dedicated fans of anything can be very protective, and so it is with F1. Any attempt to share it with a ‘new audience’ has to be done right, to get them to engage, but then there is no guarantee it will be well received by die-hards. It’s a very tricky line to tread.

The Netflix Drive to Survive docuseries is a case in point. There are often accusations of fans ‘gatekeeping’ when they criticise some of the Netflix show’s, err, ‘techniques’. But that’s really because it’s meant to be an accurate portrayal of F1, and sometimes it isn’t.

Whereas the F1 movie isn’t pretending to be a documentary, so extra creative licence is inevitable and, in fact, is probably essential, if this film is to land the way the people behind it want it to.

“I want them to see that we made the movie the right way, by having our actors actually drive, by working with Lewis, working with all the various teams, working with F1, to show we did everything possible to make the movie as authentic as possible,” Bruckheimer says about what he wants people who already love F1 to get out of this film - “[while] understanding it's still a Hollywood movie.

“It's not a documentary. So you have to understand that.

“But everything that Brad and our drivers do in the races, a Formula 1 driver has done in the past. So all these tricks that he does because he doesn't have a fast car, other drivers have done this.

“Now, some of your fans won't realise that - ‘oh, that never happened’. It happened.

“There's a crash in the movie, and it's based on the Martin Donnelly crash. And we got his permission, we did all the right things to do it.”

What about new fans?

The other core target group is a much, much bigger one - the hypothetical ‘new fan’ that every sport, every media outlet, every entity with skin in the game often chases.

Throwing F1 onto the big screen is the championship’s single biggest opportunity to get someone who would never normally watch a race, to give it a go. Trying to judge what kind of conversion there might be is a fool’s errand, but the hope is of course that it does have an impact - otherwise so many people wouldn’t have bothered helping over the last couple of years.

Everything F1's risking with its new movie

Read more

In trying to court those unfamiliar with F1, then, what will a film that has so much detailed, behind-the-scenes footage use to win people over? What about this world will be shown?

“How exciting this world is, what gifted athletes these drivers are - nobody realises, unless you do a hot lap, how difficult it is and what your body goes through just doing one lap,” says Bruckheimer.

“These guys are doing 50 laps every other weekend or every weekend. So I think we show the beating it takes and what it takes, how you have to train, what you have to do during the week prior to the race, we try to touch on every little aspect of it to add to the authenticity.”

Bruckheimer has produced well over 50 Hollywood movies since the 1970s. Those include Beverley Hills Cop, Flashdance, Con Air, Bad Boys, Pirates of the Caribbean and National Treasure. To say he has been through this process a lot is an understatement. And yet, as the release of F1 approaches, he admits putting it out for the world is “always scary, as smart as we think we are”.

“This movie tested very high, but I've had movies test very high that nobody showed up to,” he says.

“But they're still good movies, it’s just people weren't interested.

“It's our job to market the movie to the non-F1 fans, because we'll get a lot of the racing fans. It's the other fans we need.

“When we previewed the movie, we did what they called a blind preview, which means you're invited to a film, we're not going to tell you what it is. So we announced the title, and one of the women said, ‘I have no interest in racing’.

“We did a focus group afterwards, and that same woman said ‘I wanted to leave [before the start], [but] I loved this movie. I'm going to tell my friends to go see it’.

“So we’ve got to get her in the theatre, and we’ve got to get a younger audience in the theatre.”

For a long time, the starting grid of the Le Mans 24 Hours was determined by engine displacement. It was only in 1963 that it started being decided by lap times, with two notable exceptions.

Get ready for the Le Mans 24 Hours with The Race

• What we learned from the Le Mans test day
• Schumacher's finally embracing post-F1 life - and it's paying off
• Is the other Aston Martin project as lacklustre as it's looked?

In 1980, pole position was awarded to the crew with the best average time between both drivers. John Fitzpatrick (Porsche) set the fastest lap in qualifying, but he only started second, behind the Rondeau of Henri Pescarolo/Jean Ragnotti.

In 1991, the front rows were reserved for the new 3.5L normally aspirated prototypes that met the new WSC regulations. The polesitter, Jean-Louis Schlesser (Sauber Mercedes), started from the sixth row behind 10 WSC cars, the fastest of which was the Peugeot 905 driven by Philippe Alliot/Mauro Baldi/Jean-Pierre Jabouille.

Introduced in 2020, the Hyperpole format added drama to the battle for pole position at Le Mans. Another change that year was the way the grid is arranged: cars are now lined up first by category, then by lap time. So, Hypercars fastest to slowest, then LMP2, fastest to slowest, and so on.

The goal of Hyperpole was to create a more TV-friendly format.

This year, the ACO has decided to spice things up even more by splitting the Hypercars from the LMP2 and LMGT3 categories and by separating the Hyperpole into two parts.

How does it work?

The first session - simply called qualifying practice session - takes place on Wednesday evening.

LMP2 and LMGT3 cars will go out on track before the Hypercars. The 12 fastest cars in each of the LMP2 and LMGT3 categories will move on to Hyperpole 1. In Hypercar, the 15 fastest cars will qualify for Hyperpole 1, which takes place on Thursday.

From there, the top eight LMP2 and LMGT3 cars from Hyperpole 1, along with the 10 fastest Hypercars, will advance to Hyperpole 2. It’s at the end of H2 that we’ll know who takes pole position.

Schedule (times local)

Wednesday
1845-1915 - LMP2 & LMGT3 qualifying practice session
1930-2000 - Hypercar qualifying practice session

Thursday
2000-2020 - Hyperpole 1 (LMP2 & LMGT3)
2030-2050 - Hyperpole 2 (LMP2 & LMGT3)
2105-2115 - Hyperpole 1 (Hypercar)
2140-2155 - Hyperpole 2 (Hypercar)

Key regulations to know

Hypercar and LMP2 entries are allowed 24 tyres for free practice and qualifying. LMGT3 entries have 28.

The tyres allocated for H1 and H2 (12 in total, or three sets) are reserved exclusively for those sessions.

In WEC, Michelin determines the tyre compound used in Hyperpole for Hypercars, but not at Le Mans. Teams can choose between hard, medium, or soft compounds.

In LMGT3, only the Bronze-rated driver can take part in qualifying. Additionally, in all three categories, teams must use two different drivers for H1 and H2

The minimum reference weight for drivers is now 78kg in Hypercar and 82kg in LMGT3. Any driver below the reference must carry ballast. For Hyperpole, the ballast is calculated based on the lighter of the two drivers selected.

What do the drivers think?

Sébastien Buemi (#8 Toyota), four-time winner: “I like this new format because there will only be Hypercars on track when we go for a flying lap.

"In the past, we were often blocked by slower classes, especially in the Porsche Curves, where overtaking is tricky. That can be really frustrating. Now, it should come down purely to the car's potential and the driver’s talent.

"On the other hand, having to change drivers between H1 and H2 complicates things. It means both drivers need to prepare for flying laps, and that takes up more time in free practice. Given how little grid position affects the race result at Le Mans, I’m not sure it’s necessary.”

Kévin Estre (#6 Porsche), 2024 polesitter: “Having the classes separated is great news. If we want the fight for pole to be a real show and a highlight of the week, then it’s much better not to have your lap ruined by catching a slower car.

"Splitting Hyperpole into two parts adds even more spice. Plus, we get an extra set of tires, so that’s no big deal.

"But having to change drivers between H1 and H2 makes things more complicated. You don’t want to sacrifice your free practice and race prep just to do low-fuel, new-tire qualifying runs.

"Another issue is the ballast, which is based on the lighter driver. If Matt [Campbell] is selected for one of the Hyperpole sessions, I’ll have to carry 10 extra kilos. That’s not ideal.”

Loïc Duval (#94 Peugeot) – 2013 polesitter: “What I like about this format is the team aspect, which is unique to endurance racing as multiple drivers are involved. But I preferred the format we had for a while, where all practice sessions contributed to setting the grid.

"The great part was that pole could be set at any moment, even in the final minutes, which kept the fans on edge. It kept the suspense alive for two days and it was thrilling to follow. It wasn’t always the driver you expected who set the fastest time.

"And while some drivers like having a traffic-free lap, I think traffic is part of the charm of endurance racing. So in the end, I liked the old format better, though I still prefer this new one over the 2020 version with the original Hyperpole format.”

Formula 1's flexi wing clampdown at the Spanish Grand Prix proved to be a bit of a damp squib for those who expected it to be a game-changer.

The form book was not ripped up, as McLaren locked out the front row and secured a 1-2 finish, and elsewhere it was hard to see anyone who had particularly lost or gained much.

As Mercedes technical director James Allison said: "I think if space aliens were watching it from afar, they would probably not have detected that a technical directive happened in Spain."

But just because there was no revolution, and pacesetter McLaren did not seem slowed down at all, that does not mean F1 is not going to see long lasting effects.

It could be as we head to circuits with different characteristics – especially those that require a much bigger compromise between high-speed and low-speed corners – that the impact may well be more evident.

As McLaren team principal Andrea Stella admitted in Spain, while the new stiffer front wings have not produced a dramatic change in the competitive order, they have changed the nature of the cars.

For as they lose the gains that a flexi wing offered for addressing low-speed understeer and high-speed oversteer, teams are having to choose where to take the hit.

"In terms of balance, when you have less of an aero-elastic effect, you will have a slightly more pointy car in high speed, and slightly more understeering in low speed," Stella explained.

"But everything is so small that it's within the noise, within the noise of a variation from one lap to the other."

The impact may be small, and that be especially true for a well-balanced car such as the McLaren that has made big gains in suspension dynamics this year, but in a year where details matter, it is being felt.

For Allison, whose team made good gains in improving its car balance with flexi wings last season, the outcome of the technical director has definitely triggered a change.

"It does have an effect," he said last week. "The fact that the wings stiffen up means that it tends, all other things being equal, to make the car more nervous as you turn into a high-speed corner.

"But you can mitigate that with other parts of the set-up of the car, and even if you can't mitigate them fully, neither can everyone else.

"So while it is less optimal as a design for the car's performance, the fact that everyone else is having to eat it as well means that the relative pecking order doesn't shift a lot."

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner suggested that, with teams able to seek balance through other tools such as suspension and differential settings, it was no real surprise that things had not been so different in Spain.

He also reckoned that the impact was minimised by the fact teams had known about the flexi wing changes coming for months – so would have been well prepared to work around things.

"There's been enough time for teams to get their head around it," he explained.

"For us it was a very, very minor impact. It was a slight characteristic change, but nothing much. It was a change, it's a change for everybody, and I think people have had time to  adapt."

But as F1 heads to tracks with different characteristics, with Montreal consisting mainly of low and medium-speed corners but with suspension compromises because of the kerbs, the Red Bull Ring offering a wider speed range and then Silverstone being pretty high-speed, a much clearer picture of the impact will emerge.

And there is another aspect to Spain that perhaps fell under the radar. That is of whether the competitive picture did change – but perhaps not enough to shake up the order yet.

Sure McLaren was dominant, but as Stella admitted – on a hot day when its car usually excels – rival Red Bull was close on pace terms as Max Verstappen's three-stopper was not far from paying off.

"We thought it was not going to be a problem because we had already overtaken him [Verstappen] on track, and we should have a decent pace advantage," explained Stella.

"But the reality is that he was fast. He was fast and when we went on the medium tyres in the second stint, we were pushing, controlling the pace, and he was catching up very rapidly, more rapidly than we hoped for.

"At some stage we even asked our driver, 'we should push more', and both gave answers like, 'I'm not sure I have much more pace than this'."

Ferrari boss Fred Vasseur reckoned that differences triggered by the TD were there if you looked closely – but it was never going to be big enough to completely close down a three-tenths of a second advantage that McLaren's rivals believe it has right now.

"If you change the delta performance by one tenth, it can make a huge difference in terms of position - but not compared to McLaren, because they are still, for me, two to three tenths ahead," said Vasseur.

"I think that if you take the picture of the race, on lap 40, we were five seconds behind Norris at one stage. That pace was much better than three/four races ago when we were lapped in Miami. I don't want to say that it's the front wing…

"But even if it's not the biggest performance contributor, you have to take it into consideration, because for one tenth, you move completely, you change completely the grid, and it means that it can be a position differentiator."

Plus maybe we did see some surprises in the pack that perhaps were not so linked to the flexi wing rules – like Sauber's super strong Barcelona where it scored its best finish for three years.

As Alpine's Pierre Gasly said on a weekend his squad was back in the points:  "I'm not going to lie, it's a bit strange. Williams looked the fastest car of the midfield the whole season and you come here and they are not.

"Sauber didn't look particularly competitive the whole season and you come here and suddenly they are overtaking a Ferrari.

"For sure, I think we might see a few differences with this new front wing…"

The jury remains out for now, but Canada should give us a better clue about just what the real impact will be.

World Superbike champion Toprak Razgatlioglu's long-anticipated move to MotoGP has been made official by Yamaha, which has given him a factory contract and a satellite ride at Pramac.

The breakout star of the current WSBK era, Razgatlioglu won a world title for Yamaha in 2021 but left the manufacturer two years later, enticed by a reportedly big-money offer from BMW - while also irked by Yamaha's lack of enthusiasm for arranging a MotoGP move for him following a complicated private test at Jerez.

His signing proved immediately transformative to BMW's WSBK fortunes with a title in his first season in 2024.

But that instant success put Razgatlioglu - who, along with manager Kenan Sofuoglu, had long flirted with the idea of a switch to grand prix racing - on the MotoGP radar again.

And now Yamaha has made the move a reality, confirming Razgatlioglu as a 2026 Pramac rider. It has announced no further details about the deal, but Razgatlioglu will have logically signed on a multi-year deal that should cover both the end of the current regulations cycle and the start of the new one in 2027.

"We are thrilled to welcome Toprak back into the Yamaha family," said Yamaha MotoGP boss Paolo Pavesio, who knows Razgatlioglu well from WSBK and is thought to have been instrumental in the move.

"His transition to MotoGP is both a 'homecoming' and an exciting new challenge that's been set up with the clear goal of progressive growth over time.

"We believe 2026 is the right time to make the move that many fans have been waiting for."

Razgatlioglu was thought to have had some reservations about making the move in 2026, given it's MotoGP's final season with MotoGP as its sole tyre supplier - and the adaptation to Michelins from the WSBK Pirellis, which Razgatlioglu has exploited masterfully particularly with his famous hard-braking style, has been the biggest question mark in whether he could reach the same heights in MotoGP.

But Pirelli is taking over the MotoGP supply from Michelin in 2027 - this coming in addition to the change to 850cc engines, the reduction on aero and the ban on ride height devices.

So while Razgatlioglu's potential will likely be capped in '26, the move will have come with an eye on maximising his preparation - in terms of embedding into the MotoGP structure and development testing - to be a key player in MotoGP's next tech era.

Though expected for a while, it will come as a blow to BMW, which has been very Razgatlioglu-reliant in securing WSBK results since signing the Turk.

BMW has also been floated as a potential MotoGP entrant for 2027, but talk of that has gone gradually quiet - and Razgatlioglu's defection to Yamaha could be taken as another indication no premier-class programme is forthcoming from BMW.

Who makes way?

The announcement of Razgatlioglu for 2026 means one of Pramac's two current riders - Jack Miller and Miguel Oliveira - will need to find alternative employment.

Nominally this would be Miller, who had signed on a one-year deal - so is a known free agent at the end of the season - versus what was announced as a two-year deal for Oliveira.

Yet Miller has generally impressed on the M1 and has outperformed Oliveira from early on - with Oliveira's chances of turning the tide in that battle badly damaged when an injury in round two of the season forced a multi-round absence.

The Race's sources have indicated Oliveira's current championship position leaves him vulnerable to a reported clause in his contract that would allow Yamaha to sideline him for 2026. Oliveira himself seemed to acknowledge as much during the latest MotoGP round at Aragon.

For now, Yamaha has only said that "further details regarding the 2026 line-up of the Prima Pramac Yamaha MotoGP Team will be communicated in due course".

It is fair to say that Audi's journey towards its official Formula 1 debut in 2026 has not been as smooth as it would have hoped.

Having already taken over a Sauber team that was below par in competitive terms, and behind the ballpark when it came to infrastructure, technology and head count, things have not been helped by what has appeared to be a fair share of politics and upheaval too.

Last year this culminated in the departure of Sauber CEO Andreas Seidl and Audi's chief representative Oliver Hoffman amid suggestions of a power struggle between them.

And when their ultimate replacement, CEO Mattia Binotto (now head of the F1 project) arrived, he was far from overawed by what he found.

As he famously remarked in an interview we did at last year's Abu Dhabi Grand Prix: "When I came in there was not only zero points, but really even no plans nor developments. And that's what concerned me the most."

Fast forward six months and Binotto's brow is not quite as furrowed. He even dares to suggest that he is finally having some fun again in F1.

"I'm enjoying, enjoying a bit more at the moment, which is great," he tells The Race in an exclusive interview.

"There have been steps which have been made, going in the right direction, which has given internal credibility to the project.

"People now first realise that we do have the resources, the budget, to make things, to improve tools, to hire people, and I think that's creating certainly a different mindset and spirit inside the team." 

A changed team

Sauber is certainly a world away from where it was 12 months ago. Back then it was nailed to the bottom of the constructors' championship, and it failed to score any points until the Qatar Grand Prix - round 23 out of 24 at the start of December.

Now, after Nico Hulkenberg added a healthy dose of points to the 2025 tally with fifth place at the recent Spanish GP, Sauber is eighth in the standings – ahead of Aston Martin and Alpine.

On pitstops, an area which new team principal Jonathan Wheatley suggested offers a public snapshot of ultimate potential, it is operating in a different world too.

From the botched stops that marred the start of its 2024 campaign, it has set the best times out of everyone at two races this year (Miami and Spain) and lies third overall in the DHL Fastest Pitstop standings behind Ferrari and McLaren.

At its factory, while the team is aware that some of its infrastructure still needs work – like the correlation processes between its windtunnel, simulator and track – some aspects have moved on a lot.

There has been a lot of recruitment over the winter, with about 150 more people hired. This has been helped by changes to the financial regulations for 2026 that allow for adjustments based on cost of living in the country a team is based in. It is also establishing an engineering hub in the UK as part of its expansion.

Investments have been made towards a new simulator, and an evaluation process has begun on a revamp of its Hinwil facility to make it better suited for F1 – although that is a project that could take two to three years to reach fruition.

The biggest change though from Binotto's perspective is not one that can be seen as a physical thing; it is one of attitudes and belief.

Asked about the largest difference you'd see evidence of in Hinwil, he said: "I think the first thing you will feel is the energy.

"You will not see a new building in three months or six months, you will not see a new simulator, because all that type of infrastructure and investment will require time."

Progress has also been accelerated by the arrival of new team principal Wheatley from Red Bull – with Binotto saying the pair of them are instantly aligned on what needs to be done.

"His help is huge thanks to not only the competence and skills, but the big experience he has," he explained.

"We both have had a parallel path into F1, very similar experience, racetrack, mainly, I think we have the same understanding on what's about. We have the same understanding of what's required and where the gaps are.

"So we even do not discuss much between us, because I think it's really one world that we understand."

A new mentality

While Binotto has had to work hard to sort out the immediate competitive difficulties that Sauber faced, he knows well too that the biggest challenges are ahead.

For beyond delivering improvements to the Sauber team itself, he is going to have to plot the merging of the Hinwil-based operation with Audi so that it operates as a cohesive unit.

"[We want to] create really the one team, the one team spirit and the one team sense," he said. "At the moment, it's two different companies, two different sites, and two different locations."

Integration means lining up the different kinds of mindsets that come from independent teams and manufacturers – a merger that has not always produced the best results in the past.

The potential for corporate meddling was one of the reasons that Red Bull rolled back from doing a deal with Porsche for 2026 and instead chose to build its own engine.

Binotto does not believe that manufacturer involvement in F1 teams is necessarily a bad thing, as it is also a means of getting things done.

"I don't think it's a matter of making it more difficult," he said. "It's a matter of turning it into an advantage, because at the end, a big corporate like Audi can certainly support our projects, because there is a lot of resources.

"Whenever they decide that something needs to be achieved, they will put everything in place that's achievable."

While getting the cohesiveness will not be as straightforward as it was for Binotto when he was team boss at Ferrari, with engine and chassis departments within walking distance of each other there, he does not see the distance between Hinwil and Neuburg being a barrier to success.

"There are teams which are proven that you can win, having an engine in Japan, and a chassis in England," he said in a clear reference to Red Bull's success with Honda. "So I don't think that's an obstacle.

"Certainly the closer you are better it is. But as I said, there are things that have proven that is not necessary. So instead, it's only for us three and a half hours drive. So we are pretty close.

"At the end, it's the same company. We have teams producing both chassis and the engine. So myself feeding both organisations should give us an advantage."

The politics question

The series of senior management changes at the team over the past 12 months has inevitably triggered a perception that the Audi operation has been over-run by politics and power battles.

But while certainly some elements of that were true when it came to Seidl and Hoffmann, Binotto does not see things as simplistic as changes being the sign of an organisation in trouble.

Instead, he thinks it is a strength that, if wrong decisions have been made in terms of structure or what individuals are doing, then action is taken to address this rather than ploughing on blindly.

"I think it would be so great that you do everything right since the very start," he reflected. "That is true in any business.

"I think our task is to make the right decisions each time we take a decision. If you can make it even earlier, that would be great. But sometimes it takes time to get to what is the right decision, because as well, sometimes you need to evaluate."

He thinks it completely normal for a team setting out in F1 for the first time to change and evolve as it better understands things.

When asked if the politics had held the squad back, he replies: "You call it politics - I would not call it politics.

"I think it's very normal that a young organisation is changing roles and positions at the start of its journey.

"What is most important first is to decide and finalise what are the leads of the projects.

"And then after, it's really looking into the internal organisation and continuously improving it.

"So it's not about getting rid of people. It's about adding people that may increase the quality of the whole organisation.

"If I look back as well to my past experience, when I started [with Ferrari] in '95 and when we have won in 2000, many people changed."

From Binotto's perspective, one of the critical things needed was to merge the Audi and Sauber leadership structures – so it became one system and not just a chassis maker and engine supplier.

He says this was the trigger for the most recent management change that involved the departure of Audi's F1 engine chief Adam Baker last month. 

The bumpy road ahead

While Binotto is "convinced" that Audi now has the structure in place it needs for 2026, as well as a team that is moving forwards, he is not pretending it is mission accomplished.

In fact, he accepts that the world will be different next year – as the attention and expectation on his squad will be much bigger when it becomes Audi.

"I know once there will be the Four Rings on the bodywork, the pressure will rise, and not only external, the fans, but certainly as well the internal pressure," he said.

"Then it's really about the brand reputation and brand performance. So we are training our muscles today because we know we'll be in the fight for next year."

But despite knowing that expectations will be different next year, there is no suggestion that the result will be a dramatic step forward from now.

There is huge uncertainty about how the competitive picture will shake out next year for each of the engine manufacturers – with nobody sure exactly where they will end up.

But, in perhaps the clearest indication yet of where Audi thinks its progress level stands, Binotto is leaning towards it being a more challenging campaign than a successful one.

"The power units are such a big change, such a big challenge," he said. 

"For Audi, for the very first time in F1 doing their own power unit, it's a completely different type of exercise compared to what we were used to. I think, in terms of level of competitiveness, in terms of technology, it is so different.

"We are [going] through our learning phase at the moment, so I'm not expecting that will be the best power unit in 2026.

"I think we may face even bumpy periods on reliability and performance. But that, I would say, it's not unexpected. That's normal when you raise your competition level and your objective.

"So again, our objective is winning in 2030 and our objective is to have the best power unit in 2030. And here I think we've got a good plan in place."

He added: "The team in Neuburg is very motivated. Audi has invested in the right infrastructures. We've got all the dynos which are required, and all the means.

"So I think whatever will be 2026, which we cannot judge now, we know that for us, we are far from where we believe we would like to be.

"But again, I don't think that will be a defeat at all. I think it's simply the start of our journey. It will be a first step into our 2030 objective to become champion."

Sauber may have come a long way since Binotto arrived to get the Audi operation in shape – but there is still a very long way to go before it is where he wants it.

Arvid Lindblad has been granted a Formula 1 superlicence after the FIA World Motor Sport Council made an exception for Red Bull’s 17-year-old protege.

Lindblad is currently third in the Formula 2 standings with two wins.

He cleared the 40-point threshold to be eligible for a superlicence by winning the Formula Regional Oceania title (formerly known as the Toyota Racing Series in New Zealand), and made his F1 testing debut in a private Red Bull run earlier this year.

However, the FIA’s licence regulations typically require a driver to be 18 when they apply for either a free practice superlicence or a full superlicence, and Lindblad only turns 18 in August.

The request for a superlicence for Lindblad, which was heard by the FIA WMSC in Macau on Wednesday, came as Red Bull sought to take advantage of a change to the FIA regulations last year.

That gave the governing body the power to award a 17-year-old a superlicence if they “have recently and consistently demonstrated outstanding ability and maturity in single-seater formula car competition”.

Though that requires an arbitrary judgement, it was always expected that Lindblad would clear the threshold given his title-challenging form in Formula 4, Formula 3 and now F2, plus his Red Bull F1 test.

The FIA has confirmed that a superlicence has been granted, marking an unprecedented moment since the age limit was first introduced - in the wake of Max Verstappen's shock F1 graduation as a 17-year-old after just one year in Formula 3. 

Lindblad is highly rated within the Red Bull organisation and is tipped to get an F1 race seat sooner or later at its second team Racing Bulls.

It is understood that Red Bull submitted the request months ago, but it was only now heard because it was the first time the WMSC had convened since.

The primary intention is for Lindblad to be able to participate in Friday practice sessions and help fulfil the requirement for Red Bull and Racing Bulls to run a rookie twice in each car (although Isack Hadjar has ticked that box for his Racing Bulls entry).

The timing of the superlicence being granted is helpful given the potential for Red Bull to make - or need - driver line-up changes this year.

Firstly, world champion Max Verstappen is very close to an automatic one-race ban after amassing 11 licence penalty points. Lindblad would obviously not step in for him but a rejig to cover Verstappen would potentially leave a vacant seat at Racing Bulls to be filled.

Secondly, it is possible Red Bull choose to update its Racing Bulls line-up independently of that later in the year. Liam Lawson was dumped by Red Bull after just two races, and replaced by Yuki Tsunoda - who has struggled alongside Verstappen just like his predecessors.

While Tsunoda is 99% certain to complete the 2025 season with Red Bull, it is possible that Red Bull opts to give Lindblad F1 experience later in the year at Racing Bulls if Lawson continues to be comprehensively outperformed by Hadjar.

Formula E has announced a 2025-26 season calendar headlined by a move to Formula 1’s Miami Grand Prix venue for its United States round.

It used a version of the track around Miami’s Hard Rock stadium for its Evo Sessions celebrity/influencer event earlier this year - but its actual race was at the nearby Homestead circuit, using an infield course within the NASCAR oval.

2025-26 Formula E calendar

December 6, 2025: Sao Paulo
January 10, 2026: Mexico City
January 31, 2026: Miami
February 13-14, 2026: Jeddah (double-header)
March 21, 2026: Jarama
May 22-23, 2026: Berlin Tempelhof (double-header)
May 16-17, 2026: Monaco (double-header)
May 30, 2026: TBC
June 20, 2026: TBC
July 4-5, 2026: Shanghai (double-header)
July 25-26, 2026: Tokyo (double-header)
August 15-16, 2026: London ExCeL (double-header)

Now Formula E will race on the Miami street track, albeit using a slightly different circuit configuration, with its January 31 date kicking off a multi-year deal.

"The US is obviously such a key market for Formula E," said its chief championship officer Alberto Longo.

"We have gone from Homestead speedway to Miami Hard Rock international circuit, which is absolutely a good uplift, a better venue especially for Formula E.

"We have five different layouts of track in Miami at the stadium and we have definitely chosen the right configuration for Formula E, the one which will give more spectacle. Definitely hopefully we will be there for many, many years."

Miami joins Mexico City, Jeddah, Monaco and Shanghai on the list of current F1 venues that also host Formula E, but it’s an F1 venue from the distant past that provides the other major addition to the 2025-26 Formula E schedule.

As reported by The Race last month, Madrid's Jarama track - an F1 Spanish GP venue until 1981 - will be the home for Formula E’s first Spanish event since Valencia 2021. Pre-season testing was rapidly switched to Jarama last winter after the devastating floods in the Valencia region put the circuit out of commission.

Longer-term, Kiro team backer Cupra is known to be keen for Formula E to race in Barcelona - and a version of epic 1960/70s F1 venue Montjuic Park may be used for that.

"Obviously in Spain you have a lot of venues that we are discussing with," Longo replied when asked about the Montjuic prospect by The Race.

"Barcelona is one of them, Montjuic is one of the venues that we have been discussing. We would love to be there, definitely. It’s exactly what we want to do: be racing in the streets of the biggest and most beautiful cities in the world and Barcelona ticks all the boxes for us.

"So we would definitely love to be racing there, and why not do it every other year together with Madrid? Madrid and Barcelona could eventually have alternate races year on year.

"But it’s too early. We are discussing with some other cities in Spain such as Seville and Malaga. Definitely we would love to have more than just Madrid on the calendar."

Two to-be-confirmed slots in May and June may be taken by a return to Sanya for a second Chinese event alongside Shanghai - and by the currently-absent Jakarta round.

Longo hopes a fresh deal for that event can be finalised during its 2025 edition in a fortnight.

The 18-race calendar will be Formula E's longest ever if the two TBCs come off,

The Asian leg of the calendar shifts to slightly later than in recent seasons, with the potential Sanya/Jakarta events and then Shanghai and Tokyo covering late May to late July dates.

That moves the season finale in London to mid-August, for what Longo suggested may be the quirky part-indoor ExCeL track’s last Formula E event given he suspects the incoming faster Gen4 cars will not be suitable for it - though alternative UK venues may be hard to find as discussions with Silverstone have not yet come to anything.

Sam Smith's verdict

For its 12th season Formula E has delivered a typically wide-ranging but idiosyncratically quirky calendar once more.

And TBCs again!

When Formula E CEO Jeff Dodds was telling media back in April that he believed this would be the first-ever Formula E calendar not to feature TBCs, some of us who have covered it for years simply glazed over.

Formula E has a seriously tough job in putting its schedule together. Gone are the days of races in the middle of central Paris, Hong Kong and Rome. The calendar is now a compromise schedule that essentially is generally built around three-to-four pillars. These are Mexico, Monaco, Tokyo and London.

It is also formed in the complex freight routes and logistical challenges required and it is a full-time job just getting the cadence and venues in a position where you can build any kind of calendar.

The big ‘win’ here is clearly at last getting back to downtown Miami. It was very beneficial for Formula E to do its Evo Sessions mega-marketing-and-influencer activation in March, as that helped the Hard Rock Stadium track owners see what the all-electric world championship can do on many levels.

Does the Miami upgrade from Homestead mask the fact a second US date wasn’t forthcoming? Probably, yes.

The fact that Tokyo has a third season of differing dates must be frustrating but civil engineering work around the Big Sight, Ariake venue forced Formula E Operations’ hand here.

The knock-on of this was to push the London finale back into mid-August. Not ideal but it at least means that the FIFA World Cup will be out of the way.

Big question marks still affect the Asian leg with possibly Jakarta and Sanya slotted in, although they are both at critical and complex stages of negotiations.