Last Updated on March 12 2026, 10:39 am
After months of speculation over who will come out on top following the biggest ever upheaval in F1’a technical regulations, the answer was Mercedes. Some suggested this was entirely inevitable given this was the result of the last big change in F1 powertrain architecture in 2014.
George Russell romped to pole position, a massive 0.8 seconds ahead of the team’s nearest rival, Isack Hadjar. And bar some early squabbling with Charles Leclerc for the lead of the Grand Prix on Sunday, it was Russell who cruised to his sixth career F1 victory ahead of his team mate and just over 15 seconds ahead of Charles Leclerc’s Ferrari in third place.
Of course ten of those seconds could be attributed to the fact that Ferrari inexplicably decided not to pit under either of the early virtual safety cars, which then makes the result more interesting in terms of the gap between the two teams.
Ferrari delighted with “mini turbo” performance
Melbourne too is an outlier, and one of the worst circuits on the calendar for electrical energy recovery, given the lack of big braking zones and the medium high speed turns which sap the battery as the drivers power on down the track.
Another bright spot on the horizon for Ferrari was their much discussed small turbo design did its job at the start of Sunday’s race. Being smaller than the Mercedes architecture, it can spin up much more quickly, offering extreme internal combustion engine acceleration before the battery kicks in at around 90kph.
Starting in just fourth place, the Monegasque driver snaked up the outside of the fast starting Isack Hadjar in his Red Bull. Then as though threading the eye of the needle, Leclerc squeezed himself between the Red Bull and Russell’s W17 Mercedes and into the lead of the race.
The pair duelled for lap after lap with ten changes of the lead before lap 11, when the unfortunate Isack Hadjar’s Red Bull gearbox gave up the ghost. Mercedes pitted for fresh rubber, whilst Ferrari decided to retain track position, a decision Charles Leclerc later suggested may have been incorrect.
F1 Insider: Williams Racing facing major delay with ‘Operation Bikini’ weight-loss plan
George Russell’s strange behaviour after Australian GP
After such a frenetic start, the remainder of the race played out with its usual predicability, Ferrari stopped for their drivers for new tyres between laps 25-28 and the Mercedes drivers moved ahead of them during the pit stop. The remainder of the ‘race’ appeared to be a cruise for George Russell, although the one bright spot on the horizon was the fact that his team mate Kimi Antonelli kept him honest finishing under three seconds behind the British driver.
Adjusting for Ferrari’s potential strategic blunder, Lelcerc would have been just a couple of seconds behind Antonelli and five behind Russell, yet there are those who suspect after showing too much of their hand in qualifying, Mercedes decided to turn down the power for the Grand Prix.
In the post race interviews and in the drivers cool down room, the exchanges between George Russell and Charles Leclerc were quite revealing. Leclerc stated over the microphone: “Mercedes showed they had very strong pace today, we fought hard, but in the end they were quicker.”
In a bizarre moment several minutes later in the cool down room, Russell raised the topic of the relative pace between the teams again. ”You were NOT slow,” he insisted demonstrably, repeating again “you were NOT slow,” to Leclerc. Charles responded with a wry grin, referencing the chasm in between Russell and his qualifying time, “Yeah but… Yesterday guys,” he shrugged in a knowing fashion.
Liam Lawson fumes at ‘what a piece of sh…” Sergio Pérez after aggressive Melbourne battle
Would you like to see more TJ13 Formula 1 coverage? Add us to your favourites list on Google to receive trusted F1 news.
Veteran F1 reporter suggests Mercedes turned down their engine
Russell was almost too quick to hit back, “I think you guys screwed up Q3, because no one really improved [except us],” to which Leclerc refused to respond. In the moment it felt like George Russell was ‘on message’ with a pre-prepared polemic to assuage any accusations that Mercedes had turned down their power unit after qualifying and before the Australian Grand Prix.
Others too have their suspicions, including Sky F1 veteran pit lane reporter, Ted Kravitz. Speaking to camera on his post race ‘Notebook” review show he summarised the result. “The thing that we all thought was going to happen happened, which is that it was a Mercedes one-two…. hey didn’t run away with it…..maybe they had their engine turned down, not quite sure. We haven’t seen their full performance quite yet. Handed an easier run by Ferrari, I think it’s fair to say.”
Now Spanish national newspaper MARCA has taken up the theme, claiming Mercedes are not showing their hand deliberately, to ensure their rivals do not have access to the “Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities” (ADUO) which the FIA have designed to prevent a single powertrain manufacturer from dominating the sport.
To this end F1’s governing body will review the performance of the different power units three times during the 2026 season. These will be after race 6 in Miami, race 12 set to be in Belgium and round 18 in Singapore. Certain thresholds will trigger certain allowances for PU manufacturers to catch up
Christian Horner to Aston Martin F1 as Newey fails as team principal
FIA engine catch up programme under scrutiny
A 2-4% deficit would see a manufacturer allowed one additional in season upgrade. A deficit of greater than 4% would see a further additional upgrade allowed. Manufacturers who qualify will receive extra time including dyno testing hours and in certain cases an increase in the PU cost cap.
Ironically, all this is designed to prevent the years of dominance the sport suffered at the hands of Mercedes starting in 2014. Clearly Honda are set to qualify for the special measures and may even get an earlier review than race 6 in Miami, such is their plight. However Mercedes are said to be keen to ensure Ferrari, RBPT and Audi do not qualify.
Fortunately the modern day FIA has come out of the ark and will not merely measure the performance deficits by lap times in qualifying and time differentials at the chequered flag. They will have an internal combustion engine (ICE) Performance Index for each Power Unit (PU) manufacturer. This process is highly technical and data-driven to ensure it cannot be easily manipulated by Mercedes intentionally running more slowly than is possible – known as “sandbagging.”
The FIA will use a combination of hardware and software measurements and calculations to verify each PU’s real world output levels. The cars are fitted with advanced torque sensors on the rear axle which should provide real time high fidelity data on exactly the amount of torque each PU is delivering. This moves beyond the static dynamometer tests used by F1’s governing body previously.
Verstappen put on notice by Red Bull rookie: ‘I am not letting him pass’
Mercedes 1-2 Melbourne finish: An ominous statistic
This measure of performance will deliver a number to compare directly with the ICE output in an attempt to ensure no team is sandbagging. Yet by never running their PU at at full potential, a team theoretically can still evade detection from the FIA.
It was not only Kravitz who suggested Mercedes might be sandbagging, his ex-F1 entering colleague Bernie Collins noted that qualifying way exceeded anyone’s expectations of Mercedes after the pre-season tests.
“We all suspected, going into the season, that Mercedes would be a step ahead,” she stated on the Sky F1 post race broadcast. “In qualifying, the step was maybe way more than we thought it would be. But in the race, even when they’re in free air, both sets of cars, their lap times were pretty consistent across both sets. Maybe Mercedes were managing, we don’t know.”
Expectations this coming weekend are that the Shanghai International Circuit will prove a very different challenge for the F1 teams, and maybe the Mercedes power unit will not be so dominant given the track configuration. But history demonstrates, a team claiming a 1-2 as did Mercedes at the season opener in Melbourne, has gone on to win both championships at the end of the year.
MORE NEWS – F1 Insider: Williams Racing facing major disaster
Would you like to see more TJ13 Formula 1 coverage? Add us to your favourites list on Google to receive trusted F1 news.
NEXT ARTICLE – Honda fight back: ‘Aston Martin F1 are part of the problem’
The all new Honda – Aston Martin partnership is not functioning as team owner Lawrence Stroll had hoped. In fact its fair to say the all new F1 relationship is a complete car crash.
Whilst scathing is not a term one would use when describing the Silverstone team principal Adrian Newey’s rhetoric, he repeatedly laid the blame for Aston Martin’s current plight firmly at the foot of the team’s engine partner when giving interviews at the season opener in Melbourne.
Newey was thrust into the role of team principal, following a November visit to Honda’s Sakura base in early November 2025. The lack of readiness of the Japanese manufacturer was so shocking, Andy Cowell – the guru behind the Mercedes 2014 dominant power unit – offered to step down as Aston Martin team principal and assist with the urgent problem solving required with Honda…. CONTINUE READING
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.
A.J. Hunt is Senior Editor at TJ13 and a career journalist with experience in both print and digital sports media. Having trained in investigative journalism and contributed to several European sports outlets, Hunt brings rigour and polish to every article. His role is to sharpen analysis, check facts and ensure TJ13’s daily output meets the highest editorial standards.
