Over the years, Suzuka has earned a reputation as a track that showcases drivers’ talents, and this year was no exception, with Max Verstappen delivering a perfect Saturday lap and then 53 flawless race laps to claim his first win of 2025.
A performance worthy of a true Champion, yet after the Japanese Grand Prix, one question arose: was Max Verstappen’s victory the crowning achievement of a magical weekend, or was it a missed opportunity for McLaren with a faster car? As is often the case, the reality lies somewhere in between.
“It seemed like we were on our way to pole position when Max managed to pull off what looked like a near-perfect lap,” admitted McLaren team principal Andrea Stella. Verstappen was sublime, and Red Bull, as in other instances, found their way back to the front during the night between Friday and Saturday, analyzing the data from the track and discarding the setup prepared in the simulator.
But this is where the problem lies, in those struggles to find a balance for a car that, at times, can be fast, especially on a track that suits its characteristics, but often leaves its potential unfulfilled due to its still limited operating window.
On the other side, McLaren smiles halfway, aware they failed to capitalize on a race they should have won with the MCL39. And it’s a lost win on two fronts, largely on Saturday, when neither Lando Norris nor Oscar Piastri were able to put together a pole lap.
Paraphrasing George Russell, opportunities are created when McLaren’s two drivers fail to capitalize, as the overall superiority of the MCL39 does not seem to be in question. It is in that thin margin that Verstappen inserted himself, shattering McLaren’s hopes of another win.
On a track full of fast corners, with only one DRS zone and low tire degradation, these factors allowed the poleman to take control, making track position even more crucial than elsewhere. But did McLaren still have an opportunity to turn things around?
Lando Norris has doubts about the strategy
“Maybe we could have varied the strategy a bit more, with an overcut or an undercut. For some reason, we stopped in the same lap, so we’ll discuss some things. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I probably should have tried to do an undercut,” Norris said after the race.
But was it feasible? There was a subtle opportunity to try something different at the end of lap 20, when Oscar Piastri unexpectedly came into the pits. And it was precisely at that moment that McLaren’s tactical options were nearly nullified, because it was logical that Norris would stop on the following lap.
In fact, the Englishman wouldn’t have been able to continue for two more laps without the real risk of being overtaken by his teammate. As a result, Red Bull simply had to cover it, calling Verstappen in on the same lap.
Looking at it more broadly, McLaren wasted their best chance to play a two-on-one strategy at the very moment they called Oscar Piastri into the pits: this not only alerted Red Bull to their strategy but also removed the element of surprise, the only tool that could have disrupted the cards for the papaya team.
Oscar Piastri stopped to avoid taking risks
So, the question arises: why did the team call Piastri in first? The answer comes in two parts. Everything started when George Russell stopped for his first pit stop at the end of lap 19, triggering the pit stop chain, with a pit loss of about 21.5 seconds.
The decision to stop Piastri on the following lap was more about anticipating the distance than the short term, as there wasn’t a real risk of immediately being undercut by Russell, who was already almost five seconds behind. In fact, even Charles Leclerc, the most at risk, didn’t respond immediately, staying out for another lap, as the Mercedes driver would have found himself in traffic.
But let’s suppose Leclerc had stopped on the following lap, at the end of lap 20. Even though it was a remote possibility since Ferrari was waiting to create enough of a gap to rejoin ahead of Pierre Gasly, at that point, three options would have emerged: call Norris in to try an undercut on Verstappen, bring Piastri in right away to avoid Leclerc, or do a double pit stop, which would have carried risks and caused time loss for the second car in.
Essentially, McLaren wanted to cover Piastri and make sure he stayed in podium contention, even at the cost of missing the chance to surprise Red Bull. But was there an alternative? Perhaps, but it would have required courage and flexibility.
Was there an alternative to surprise Red Bull?
Looking at the gaps at the end of lap 20, when Piastri came in, Norris had about 21.7 seconds of advantage over Oliver Bearman, the driver McLaren hoped would provide the window for a different strategic move. A time that would have actually been enough to come in and rejoin ahead, as long as everything went perfectly.
The pit stop would have had to be just above two seconds, and Lando would have had to defend his position from Haas in turns 1 and 2. A narrow margin, more of a gamble than a certainty, but Russell’s pit stop sped up the process, making that the only chance to surprise Red Bull.
Waiting another lap to ensure the window on Bearman wouldn’t have given any advantage. The only hope was that Verstappen would stay out, not risking losing track position in case of a Safety Car, but the fear of being undercut was too real not to come in at the end of lap 21, especially since the Dutchman had a comfortable window to avoid getting stuck in traffic.
But this is where the second level of analysis comes in. The possibility of making an undercut at the end of lap 20 was more of a gamble than a certainty, and it would have required some flexibility. If the pit stop hadn’t been perfect or something had gone wrong, Norris could have found himself rejoining behind Bearman, who was not a major obstacle given the performance and tire difference.
Maintaining the status quo to avoid penalizing anyone
Realistically, it would have been difficult to see Norris lose his position to Piastri, who could have stopped without issue the following lap. However, hypothetically, if the British driver had ended up behind his teammate while trying that gamble to win the race, what would McLaren have done? Would they have asked for a position swap?
Right now, the Woking team is in a complex situation in managing their drivers. With such a competitive car, they know their two drivers could potentially fight for the drivers’ title, and it’s clear they don’t want to penalize either of them, remaining as neutral as possible, even at the cost of missing opportunities.
A point of view also shared by Christian Horner, Team Principal of Red Bull: “I think the problem is that they have two drivers fighting for the drivers’ championship. I think the problem is they decided to let them race freely. So this is the compromise that inevitably follows.”
Leave a Reply