Last Updated on August 29 2025, 10:06 am
McLaren has confirmed that its drivers Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris will continue to be free to follow split strategies during races, even as both remain firmly in the fight for the Formula One world championship. The team’s stance follows the events of the Hungarian Grand Prix, where differing strategic choices saw Piastri miss out on what many considered a nailed on victory, while Norris capitalised on a bold one-stop gamble to secure the win.
Despite the drama in Budapest, both Piastri and Norris have publicly supported McLaren’s approach. Each has emphasised that the flexibility to take different paths during races is essential, even if it occasionally produces outcomes that leave one side of the garage feeling hard done by. Conversations in the aftermath of Hungary focused on refining the execution of such choices rather than abandoning the practice altogether.
The Hungarian Grand Prix served as the perfect case study of the risks and rewards of split strategy. Norris made the call to switch to a one-stop, a decision that leapfrogged him ahead of two-stopping Piastri and ultimately handed him victory. For Piastri, that same divergence left him on the wrong end of the outcome, prompting questions about whether McLaren’s approach might prove destabilising in the long run.
Piastri upset in Budapest
The optics were ripe for speculation. On one side, a jubilant Norris celebrated a tactical masterstroke, while on the other, Piastri appeared the victim of circumstance. Yet both drivers have since
Speaking in Zandvoort, Piastri was measured in his assessment. The Australian noted that in any racing scenario, the last car in the queue has more freedom to roll the dice. For him, the Hungary outcome was less about fairness and more about acknowledging the structural complexity of managing two title contenders within one outfit.
“It would be unfair to neutralise that,” he explained, referring to the natural ebb and flow of strategic divergence. He confirmed that discussions within the team were “very productive,” ensuring that lessons were learned without placing restrictions on future races. Piastri concluded that McLaren’s current philosophy — giving its drivers agency to call their own strategies — remained the right approach, even if the implementation sometimes proved painful.
Norris says racing unpredictable
Norris was equally clear that the Hungarian incident should not be treated as a template. For him, adaptability is McLaren’s asset, not a liability. He insisted that his call to stay on a one-stop was driven less by a vision of race victory and more by the pragmatic need to undercut Mercedes driver George Russell. The fact that it snowballed into a race-winning strategy was, in Norris’ telling, more fortune than foresight.
“You don’t even need to be smart to do something different,” he remarked with a hint of mischief, claiming that the situation presented him with an obvious choice. Yet his broader point was serious: racing is inherently unpredictable, and a team that clamps down on its drivers’ ability to think on their feet risks strangling its own potential.
Norris admits there was not the usual harmonious atmosphere within the team due to the differing strategies in Budapest which for some robbed Piastri of a deserved win. “Maybe it was not a perfectly harmonious race between us as a team because it didn’t fall exactly into the place of what we would normally go by.
Russell’s explosive Antonelli statement
McLaren to allow further split strategies
Here, dear jury, is where McLaren’s approach edges into the territory of theatre. On one hand, Zak Brown and Andrea Stella appear to have built the most harmonious garage in recent McLaren memory. On the other, they are walking the high wire of Formula One politics, where harmony tends to last only as long as the last lap chart. It is all well and good to declare unity when the constructors’ prize glitters in the distance, but one wonders how jovial the atmosphere will remain if, say, Piastri misses out on the title by a margin identical to the points Norris took off him in Hungary.
The idea of split strategies sounds noble in theory, almost egalitarian. Both drivers have their shot, both get to flex their race craft, and the team looks magnanimous in the process. Yet history shows that such systems usually collapse under the weight of human ambition. Ferrari tried it with Sebastian Vettel and Charles Leclerc, and the result was two drivers squabbling like siblings fighting over the last slice of pizza. Red Bull never pretends — Max Verstappen is the chosen one, full stop. McLaren, meanwhile, insists it can have its cake and eat it, too.
The irony is that Norris and Piastri have, at least for now, handled the situation with maturity that belies their relative youth. Both are eager to present the narrative that they are first and foremost team players, conscious of the constructors’ crown. Both speak the right words about flexibility and reviews and tweaks. Yet beneath the politeness, the reality is unavoidable: Formula One drivers are not wired to play second fiddle, especially when they can see F1 immortality.
Can McLaren keep their drivers under control?
Norris may well insist Budapest was an anomaly, but in the ruthless world of F1, anomalies have a way of hardening into precedents. Once you’ve tasted victory by calling your own number, the appetite for deferring to the team’s conservative playbook becomes much harder to muster. Piastri, meanwhile, faces the uncomfortable truth that patience, while noble, rarely wins championships.
For McLaren, the challenge is as much about psychology as it is about strategy. How do you maintain parity without slipping into paralysis? How do you encourage initiative without breeding suspicion? The answer, if one exists, likely lies in transparency and in the shared goal of securing the constructors’ championship. Yet even this noble aim has its limits. When the season reaches its final laps and one driver edges ahead, the temptation to tilt the scales will grow stronger.
The Budapest fallout is therefore less about who won or lost on the day, and more about whether McLaren can manage the long game without fracturing the team spirit. Ferrari lurks, Mercedes stir, and Red Bull continues to menace even in their wobblier moments. Against such opposition, McLaren’s margin for internal drama is slim.
Cadillac unusual step, using Ferrari car for F1 prep
Why Cadillac will test with Ferrari’s 2023 car – With McLaren runaway leaders in both Formula One championships this year, the only question remaining is which of their drivers will claim their maiden F1 drivers’ title. Whilst that’s the big issue to yet be resolved, there’s much for the other teams to achieve although ultimately it will be a season of disappointment for Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes.
Yet it is the biggest change in F1 car and power unit design regulations for a generation which is gathering momentum with weekly updates coming on how the drivers are finding the simulation of the next generation of F1 cars together with this weeks admission from the FIA that the rules of engagement for 2026 are “not finalised.”
Cadillac will become the eleventh F1 team next year, after a long battle to join the sport was only resolved at the 2024 USGP. They will become the sport’s first brand new team since Haas F1 made their debut in 2016. Unlike Haas, who had complete freedom to do as they pleased until pre-season testing in 2016, Cadillac are bound by many of the restrictions the current teams face…. READ MORE
With over 30 years of experience in Formula 1 as an insider journalist, I have built trusted connections across the paddock, from race engineers and mechanics to senior team figures. At The Judge 13, I and a handful of trusted colleagues share exclusive Formula 1 news, expert analysis and behind-the-scenes stories you will not find in mainstream motorsport media.
From what I remember, it was NOT Norris’s call to try the one-stop strategy – it was his engineer’s call. DON’T take credit for someone else’s suggestion, please!
Oscar need only look at himself for Norris taking a divergent strategy. Had he concentrated on racing Leclerc at the start instead of rushing over to baulk Norris, the latter might well have not lost two places. From fifth it was essential for him to attempt a different strategy to either win or come second.