Interlagos rarely disappoints when Formula One rolls into town, and Sunday’s São Paulo Grand Prix was no exception.
A wet-weather classic ended in a win for the ages by Max Verstappen, who charged from 17th on the grid to snap a 10-race victory drought. Doing so put him on the brink of a fourth world championship as Lando Norris paid the price for a strategy miscue and a Turn 1 mistake.
It proved to be a strange weekend for F1 as rain forced qualifying to be delayed until early on Sunday morning before some unprecedented on-track infringements led to penalty questions that delayed the post-race result being made official.
Unsurprisingly, it led to lots of questions in our regular post-race mailbag, so let’s get to it.
Editor’s note: Questions were lightly edited for clarity and brevity.
What do Lando Norris and McLaren need to improve to become unquestionable contenders? It feels like they have left too many points on the table, and there have been too many ‘what ifs.’ Secondly, does Norris have ‘it’? Because Verstappen undoubtedly does. — Alex R.
Lando Norris saw his hopes of winning a maiden F1 championship all but end on Sunday in Brazil. Although this will still be a big year for McLaren, potentially ending with its first constructors’ title win since 1998, there will definitely be an element of ‘what if,’ as you say.
I view this year for McLaren as being like Red Bull’s 2009 season or Mercedes in 2013. It’s the season where you learn as a team how to win a championship by being involved in the kind of situations that, as much as you can plan for, you need to experience to understand how to handle. In both Red Bull and Mercedes’ cases, that learning year would be instrumental to the success that would follow.
This is the first time Norris has truly competed at the front in F1 and the first time he’s properly fought against Verstappen — a situation he told me back in April that he relished finally arriving. McLaren has an excellent group of people under team principal Andrea Stella. The scrutiny is always greater for things like strategy slip-ups or team order decisions when you’re at the front, but I’m sure the team will adjust. I really do believe that it will just come down to experience, for both Norris and McLaren, for the points missed this year to be scooped up in the future.
As for Norris having ‘it’? I still think we need to reserve judgment if ‘it’ (which I’m going to read as the qualities that separate good from great F1 drivers) is what he has.
Norris has been superb this year. His demolitions of the field at Zandvoort and Singapore stand out as two of the best displays by anyone this season. But what Verstappen did on Sunday at Interlagos showed why he remains on another level. We still have not seen that kind of performance from Norris in F1. — Luke Smith
Are full wets fit for purpose? As soon as the rain in F1 goes above the limit for intermediates, it seems either the drivers call for the race to be stopped and/or the stewards seem to bring out the safety car. We rarely seem to get to the point where drivers are using full wets. Are the stewards too cautious? Do the drivers need a tire between inters and full wets? If they’re not going to use full wets, why bother carting them ‘round the world? — Darren S.
“You should’ve sent us out. This is ridiculous. We should go out!” Lewis Hamilton said to F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali Saturday lightheartedly while walking past as F1 TV interviewed Domenicali. “If you give us better wet tires or blankets, we’d be able to run in this. I’m putting you on the spot right now.”
Over time, the drivers have been fairly critical of Pirelli’s wet tires and their performance. The intermediates perform better, and when the conditions worsen to the point where the full wets are preferred over intermediates, it’s likely that F1 should not be racing. Case in point, the safety car came out when the conditions became dicey. A few drivers had pitted for the wet tires before the safety car was deployed, while others remained on intermediates because of the performance differential.
It’s been a longtime conundrum for Pirelli and F1: How do you race in the wet? — Madeline Coleman
Why is Max inquiring about the presence of British journalists? It seems quite odd. — Gyozo N.
During Sunday’s post-race news conference in Brazil, Verstappen said he would like to ask a question. “I appreciate all of you being here, but I don’t see any British press?” he said. “They had to run to the airport? Or they don’t know where the press conference is?”
It was a cheeky comment that sparked a fair few laughs in the room, coming off the back of a couple of weeks during which Verstappen had drawn criticism for his actions on track.
Damon Hill, the 1996 world champion and pundit for Sky Sports, had been particularly critical of Verstappen’s tactics. (Hill is British.) When Hill talked up Verstappen’s display after the race to Red Bull team boss Christian Horner, Horner replied, “I think we’re going to have to get that on record that Damon said something nice.”
So where were the British journalists on Sunday in Brazil?
The post-race news conference typically starts about 45 minutes to an hour after the race finishes. The top three are required to do the podium and then their TV pen interviews before attending. The news conference timing also usually clashes with the media sessions arranged for team principals, often meaning journalists have to pick one or the other.
Logistics can also be tricky sometimes depending on where the news conference room is located, sometimes not near the media center or the paddock. We’re often running around to try and go from place to place, depending on who we need to speak to or the biggest story. It’s therefore not always possible, or the priority, to attend the post-race news conference.
It’s also worth noting that Brazil was a lighter race for on-site media, given it was the last in a triple-header. For transparency, writing as a British journalist for an American publication who very regularly attends the post-race news conference, I’d long planned to miss Brazil to avoid spending a month solid on the road after running the Chicago Marathon the week before Austin. I’ll still end the season having done 20 of the 24 races this year in person.
The post-race news conference in Brazil was largely attended by local journalists. The first question after host Tom Clarkson was through his opener was from a French newspaper journalist — who actually asked one to Verstappen instead of the two French drivers!
Fair play to Verstappen for making the comment. He deserves all the credit and respect after a drive for the ages. It certainly would have silenced many of his critics, regardless of their nationality. — Luke Smith
Can you please explain why there were only fines given out for Mercedes changing the tire pressures as well as why Lando was fined instead of grid penalties for his start? The cynic in me says there was some home cooking going on, or everyone just wanted to make their flights on time . — Phil G.
I highly doubt it was simply everyone wanting to go home because, for example, the first Mercedes decision (on Lewis Hamilton’s car) was not issued until after 7 p.m. local time, over three hours after the FIA sent out the provisional race classification (around 3:30 p.m. local time) and when a Mercedes team representative and the drivers reported to the stewards. The stewards also had other situations to analyze, such as the aborted start incident, Nico Hülkenberg’s black flag and Carlos Sainz’s alleged “dangerous driving.” The stewards have come under heavy criticism recently, but they do have a job to do.
Let’s dive into the Mercedes situation. The team received two €5,000 fines because both cars breached Article 30.5 a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations. The stewards acknowledged that this type of infringement would typically result in a sporting penalty with it being a competitive session. However, they did consider the circumstances. You might recall that the beginning of the São Paulo GP was quite chaotic. Lance Stroll beached his car during the formation lap, and the start had to be aborted. This led to a 10-minute period where teams were able to ready the cars for the restart.
“Given the layout of the circuit and the access point to the grid from the pit lane, the time period for the team to get to the grid was extended,” the stewards’ decision stated. “The gate to access the grid was not immediately opened. The FIA accepted that given this short notice, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the teams to follow the procedure prescribed in the technical directive.”
Mercedes allegedly lowered the pressure of the tires fitted to both cars; however, the FIA Technical Delegate determined that the tire pressure was still “within the allowed parameters,” per the stewards’ decision.
According to the stewards, “Given the unusual circumstances surrounding the compressed timetable, aborted start, the grid access logistics and given the stipulation from the Technical Delegate that the tire pressures were within the correct parameters, the Stewards determine that a fine for a breach of procedure is appropriate in this case.”
That being said, the stewards added, “This decision should not be considered as a precedent for any similar breach in the future as the circumstances are considered unique.”
With Norris, he set off on another formation lap despite the aborted start signal being given rather than staying stationary and waiting for the new start, as he was supposed to do. His actions caused the others behind him to follow, so he was fined and reprimanded. It may have been the first time this type of incident has happened.
“As the driver was on the front row of the grid, this triggered following drivers to take similar action. At some point, the Race Director, realizing that for practical reasons all cars would now need to do an extra formation lap, gave an instruction to the teams for all cars to proceed and return to the grid to follow the correct aborted start procedure.”
TL;DR: Truly unique circumstances. — Madeline Coleman
What’s your take on the impression that Liam Lawson has made since joining RB? Lawson seemed to exhibit more of the same driving at Interlagos, be it assertive for someone with eyes on Sergio Pérez’s seat or aggressive/bullheadish given his battles with his own teammate Yuki Tsunoda, Perez or Oscar Piastri. I’m partial to Perez’s comments last week about how Lawson has returned to the grid, in addition to Lawson’s poor form in flipping the bird during the race. Nonetheless, RB seems willing to overlook those things if Lawson demonstrates strong performance. I’m just uncertain that he has shown that. Thoughts? — C Y.
Feuding with Fernando Alonso in Austin. Scrapping with Sergio Pérez in Mexico and flipping him off. Qualifying fifth in Brazil and battling — and beating — Pérez again to score points. Yep, it’s been quite the return to F1 for Liam Lawson.
I don’t think what happened in Mexico was particularly welcome for Red Bull. Of course, Lawson was entitled to fight Pérez, but to do so quite so strongly and then to react the way he did was not a great look. The clip of him waiting to see Christian Horner after the race summed the situation up very well, and Lawson did at least apologize — even if he said in Brazil that he’s “not here to make friends.”
Red Bull will be more interested in his performance, and the signs have been positive so far. He’s twice beaten Pérez, who is driving a much faster car, on the road. His defense at Interlagos in tricky conditions was really impressive. Taming some of the aggression from Mexico would be wise, but Red Bull will be encouraged to see that kind of fight in him.
Lawson is doing a decent job of making his case not only for the RB seat in 2025 but also for a move up to the senior Red Bull squad if it decides to part ways with Pérez. He has picked up four points in three races and has been very close to Yuki Tsunoda on pace.
Is it the kind of impossible-to-ignore form Verstappen exhibited before his Red Bull promotion in 2016? No. But so long as Pérez continues to look as lost as he does, it might be enough for Lawson. — Luke Smith
How important is your team spot in the pit lane, and how is that determined for each race? (This is my first year following F1 and what a great year it’s been — hooked for life now!) — Anonymous U.
First off, welcome! What a season to start following F1.
At a majority of the circuits, the spots are determined by the previous season’s constructors’ standings. Pit lane will start with the FIA, weighbridge, and a spot for the scrutineers before it gets to the teams, the previous year’s constructors’ champion being first. There is an advantage as it gives a clear run to the box; however, they will likely face traffic exiting the pits. This is helpful at tracks with shorter pit lanes, like Zandvoort and Monaco, because they don’t have to dive into their box at an angle like other teams that are surrounded by competitors.
That being said, some tracks move the garages so fans can have a better view of certain teams. Silverstone does this each year due to the layout of the pit lane, which means those at either end of the pit lane are often out of sight from the grandstands.
If any other questions come to mind, please don’t hesitate to let us know here. We have an explainer series called Between the Racing Lines, a guide to help any fan — regardless of how long they’ve watched the sport or how they discovered it — navigate F1. — Madeline Coleman
Top photo: SIPA USA
