After the Jogo Hoje editorial desk’s deep dive into what the FIA actually changed for 2026, we went straight to the only place that matters: the stopwatch and the on-track scraps. In Miami, Oscar Piastri got his first proper look at the updated regulatory technical direction, and his verdict sounds polite until you read between the lines.
The short version? Qualifying moved a bit because the energy recovery rules were tweaked, but the race itself didn’t get the big, dramatic makeover people hoped for. You can feel the FIA trying to engineer more friction in the system, yet the racing still comes out wearing the same old face.
What Piastri saw that was different in Miami
Piastri’s key point was practical: the rules landed where they were supposed to land, but only partly. The limite de energia na classificação was adjusted through a reduction in the energy recovery limit in qualifying, forcing drivers to run closer to the ceiling during the one-lap battle. That’s why qualifying looked different first.
But when the lights went green for the race, the Australian didn’t see a new world order. He said he finally experienced something he had been craving to see all season: real overtaking and real defesa de posição across the full race distance, not just a quick pass followed by a reset.
And still, he was blunt about the overall rhythm:
- Piastri felt the energy recovery tightening in qualifying helped “a bit”
- He claimed it didn’t solve the bigger issues driving the lack of sustained track battles
- He insisted the race was “basically the same” in outcome and feel
Why qualifying changed more than the race
Qualifying is where the FIA’s levers show up fastest, because the cars are forced into a short, high-stakes energy story. Lowering the energy recovery limit in qualifying creates a sharper push-and-pull: you can’t just chill and wait for the perfect moment. You have to manage bursts with more discipline, and that tends to tighten gaps.
That’s the part that makes sense. The strange part is the one Piastri keeps pointing at: Miami didn’t turn racing into a sequence of constant, clean ultrapassagem opportunities. If the FIA’s goal is more overtaking, why didn’t the race variance follow?
Even Piastri’s most telling detail is really about performance geometry. He said it felt like the speed of closure was massive, and that changes everything about defending. You’re not just reacting to a car with similar pace. You’re reacting to a car that can appear “late” and still arrive “fast”.
The explanation behind the closing speed
Here’s where Piastri’s analysis turns tactical. He described an in-race moment involving McLaren teammate Oscar’s own position relative to George Russell style pace swings: at one point, Russell was about a second behind, then managed to get past him by the end of a straight. That kind of jump isn’t just “good driving”. It’s a signal that speed of closure is producing surprise moments that are hard to anticipate while defending.
Piastri called it “a bit random”, and honestly, that’s the most accurate word for how it felt on track. When the closure rate is that steep, the defender’s job becomes less about perfect timing and more about guessing the car’s energy and traction behaviour under pressure.
- High closing speed reduces the defender’s margin for late braking and line selection
- It increases the chance of a pass that happens “within one straight”
- It makes planning energy usage during defense of position feel like a gamble
And when Piastri says he almost repeated the same manoeuvre minutes later, that’s the tell: the track produces the same physics-driven outcomes even if the drivers try to out-think them. The downforce and traction balance may be within the new regulamento técnico, but the overall race script still reads like the old one.
What the Australian’s assessment says about the FIA
Piastri isn’t denying progress. He’s acknowledging a small improvement in the qualifying picture via the energy recovery limit in qualifying. But he’s also pointing to an uncomfortable truth for the FIA: changing the energy ceiling in qualifying doesn’t automatically rewire racecraft if the speed differential and closure dynamics remain.
So the FIA gets partial credit. The scepticism is earned when Piastri says the race was “basically exactly the same”. If the regulatory technical updates were meant to make ultrapassagem more frequent and less dependent on rare timing windows, Miami didn’t deliver that step-change.
Now, with the next stop being the GP do Canadá from 22 to 24 May, the question becomes whether Canada’s layout will amplify the difference between qualifying pace management and race-day execution. That’s where you find out if this is a Miami-specific story or a bigger, system-level reality.
What to expect before the Canadian GP
Canada usually punishes sloppy energy planning and rewards drivers who can keep momentum without burning the tyres or the battery at the wrong time. If the FIA’s updates primarily improved qualifying through energy recovery constraints, then we’ll watch for whether drivers can translate that into consistent race pressure.
Expect more debate around:
- How teams manage the energy recovery window from stint to stint
- Whether speed of closure leads to more sustainable overtaking or just more one-straight surprises
- Whether defesa de posição becomes more strategic, or stays mostly reactive
And yes, we’ll keep an eye on downforce behaviour because it often dictates traction zones and, by extension, where the pass actually sticks.
O Veredito Jogo Hoje
Jogo Hoje’s take is straightforward: the FIA nudged qualifying with the limite de energia na classificação, and that created a noticeable tweak in the order. But Piastri’s “basically the same” isn’t just a quote, it’s a diagnosis. If the speed of closure stays so explosive that defence becomes guesswork, then the rules are treating symptoms, not the disease. We want more controlled pressure and repeatable ultrapassagem; Miami gave us moments, not a transformation. Assinado por quem vive de tática e não de esperança.
Perguntas Frequentes
What changed in the 2026 Formula 1 rules?
In the updated 2026 framework, the FIA adjusted how energy recovery is constrained, including a revised energy recovery limit in qualifying, which affects how aggressively drivers can deploy power during the qualifying phase.
Did the new rules improve overtaking in F1?
They may have helped the qualifying rhythm, but Piastri’s Miami assessment suggests that race overtaking still depends heavily on speed of closure and timing. He reported more genuine overtaking and defesa de posição, yet also said the races felt “basically the same”.
Why did Piastri say the races continue to feel the same?
Because while the limite de energia na classificação improved how cars behaved in qualifying, the in-race dynamics—especially the massive speed of closure that makes defending feel “incredibly difficult”—did not shift enough to change the overall race pattern.
