A double-edged debut: The upsides and risks of starting F1 in 2025
- Kavi Khandelwal
- 8 hours ago
- 6 min read
Written by Kavi Khandelwal, Edited by Benjamin Crundwell
The 2025 Formula One season occupies a singular, almost contradictory space in the history of the FIA World Championship.
It represents the ultimate development peak of the most aerodynamically complex vehicles ever constructed while simultaneously serving as a “lame-duck” period where technical progress is intentionally throttled in anticipation of the 2026 regulatory reset.
For the current crop of rookie drivers, including Gabriel Bortoleto, Kimi Antonelli, Isack Hadjar and Oliver Bearman, this environment created a paradox: they were required to master a platform that is “on rails” with massive underfloor suction, only to be forced to “unlearn” these foundational habits as soon as the sport transitions to a lighter, active-aerodynamics framework in 2026.
Debuting in 2025 brought multi-faceted challenges for these rookies, ranging from invaluable gains in operational “soft skills” against the severe “hard financial” and technical risks inherent in a transitional era.
The technical context: 2025 refinement vs. 2026 revolution
2025 was the fourth and final year of the current technical cycle. These cars generate massive downforce by utilising venturi tunnels on the underfloor. They are characterised by extreme sensitivity to ride height and a reliance on stiff suspension setups to maintain aerodynamic stability.
This “ground-effect” architecture creates a driving experience often described as “on rails”, where high-speed cornering speeds are unprecedented, but the car becomes volatile if the floor’s seal is broken by bumps or kerbs.
The contrast with the 2026 regulations could not be more stark. The “nimble car” concept for 2026 introduces a 30kg weight reduction, a 200mm reduction in wheelbase and a 100mm reduction in width.
Most critically, the 2026 cars will feature Active Aerodynamics, where front and rear wings adjust dynamically between “X-mode” for low-drag straights and “Z-mode” for high downforce cornering.
The power units will also shift to a 50/50 split between internal combustion and electrical power, necessitating a total rethink of energy management.
For a rookie, 2025 is a “trial by fire” because the level of commitment required to drive a ground-effect car at the limit is extraordinarily high, yet the mastery of underfloor suction provides little benefit when the 2026 car demands active management of wing flaps and a highly strategic approach to electrical “Boost Mode”.
Pros: Acclimatisation to the “media circus”
The primary benefit of a 2025 debut was found in the paddock. The modern F1 environment is a relentless “media circus” that requires a specific set of psychological “soft skills” to survive.
For a rookie moving up from Formula 2, the sheer volume of commercial obligations, sponsorship “kicks”, and global travel is often more taxing than the racing itself.
Bortoleto, who debuted with Sauber in 2025, has experienced the full intensity of this transition. For a driver of his profile, particularly as Brazil’s first full-time F1 representative in eight years, the media load is “unreal”.
During his home weekend at the São Paulo Grand Prix, the pressure of constant media scrutiny and commercial activations were immense. Bortoleto noted that the mental load of managing these off-track obligations is a critical component of a driver’s education.
By enduring this in 2025, a rookie ensures they aren’t mentally drained or “starstruck” when they arrive at the 2026 season-opener with a much more complex car.
Cons: The financial destruction of rookie mistakes
While 2025 offered a learning curve for soft skills, it presented a brutal financial reality under the FIA budget cap. Every team was operating within a limited financial framework, and in a year where teams choose to divert every possible cent toward 2026 research and development, a rookie who crashes represents a direct drain on future competitiveness.
The 2025 “Crash Ranking” highlights the severe financial impact of the current rookie class. Bortoleto topped the chart with a massive total repair bill of $3,976,000. The bulk of this came from a disastrous home weekend at Interlagos, where a high-speed Sprint crash at Turn 1 recorded a 91G impact followed by a first-lap collision in the main race.
Other rookies faced similar financial hurdles. Hadjar accumulated $1,971,000 in damages during his debut season with Racing Bulls, including a notableable crash at Silverstone where he rear-ended Antonelli in wet conditions.
Bearman’s initiation at Haas was also costly, with a heavy shunt at the Albert Park Circuit in Australia resulting in both a gearbox and power unit change, contributing to his season total of $1,707,000.
Antonelli was the most disciplined of the high-profile rookies, totaling $910,000 in damages, with a significant portion stemming from a qualifying incident in Monaco.
For backmarker teams like Haas and Sauber, multi-million dollar bills are a strategic loss of resources that could have otherwise been invested into the 2026 chassis.
Pros: Building human infrastructure
Despite the financial risks, 2025 provided an essential opportunity to build real relationships within the team. The chemistry between a driver and their race engineer is a “language” that takes time to develop.
A rookie who used 2025 to build this expertise will be in a far stronger position to troubleshoot an unproven 2026 car.
Nico Hülkenberg has been vocal about the value of his relationship with Bortoleto at Sauber. Despite the team’s struggling 2025 car, the duo built a productive environment characterised by collaborative data-sharing. Hülkenberg, a veteran with deep technical knowledge, has praised his rookie teammate as “fast as hell” and “a machine” at producing consistent laps.
Antonelli shared his experience with working with Peter Bonnington as his race engineer, stating, “At first, I saw him [Bonnington] a bit tense because I'm a really physical guy, I like hugging and touching people and he wasn't used to it but now he's opening up, and I'm so happy when he hugs me.” This shows the deep bond that the two have managed to forge in a season.
These established connections with team’s personnel provide a vital competitive advantage when facing the variables of an entirely new power unit.
Cons: Technology whiplash
One of the most insidious risks of a 2025 debut is the development of “wrong habits”. The high downforce, ground-effect cars of 2025 require a style of driving that rewards maintaining a stable aerodynamic platform.
The 2026 cars, by contrast, will have significantly less downforce and will be more agile. They will require precision management of energy and active aero flaps.
Mastering the current G-forces and high-speed commitment of a car like the W16 or the VF-25 might actually hinder a driver in 2026. This learning to unlearning means that rookies who perfect their “ground-effect” style in 2025 may find themselves at a disadvantage compared to those who enter 2026 without pre-conceived notions of how the car should handle.
The shift requires a total rewiring of muscle memory to handle a car that will likely feel more “nervous” and “skittish” due to reduced grip and narrower tyres.
Pros: Physical conditioning
F1 demands a radical physical transformation. The rookies transition from a 60-minute F2 race to Grand Prix distances exceeding 90 minutes.
Hadjar prepared for this leap with an intense two-week training camp in Qatar. He focused on “long runs” to build the necessary stamina.
Antonelli adopted a similar regime at Mercedes where he utilised the endless pool lengths to improve breathing capacity under load and heavy weight training to withstand punishing braking phases.
This physical preparation is supported by healthy eating habits, which is essential for staying within tight chassis weight limits.
One of the primary focuses in F1 is neck stability, a critical requirement for the 2025 debutants. Bortoleto prioritised neck conditioning in his rookie year, recognising that a stable head allows the brain to process track information more accurately at 200mph (320kph).
He worked to harden the body and automate track adaptation through simulator work, therefore expanding his “spare mental capacity”.
This cognitive bandwidth will be vital for managing the energy deployment and active aerodynamics required by the 2026 regulations.
Cons: Judged on an outdated platform
Technical stagnation stood as the final risk for the rookies. The teams stopped developing their current cars early in this “lame-duck” year to focus on the technical regulations of 2026, leaving rookies in cars that got progressively slower relative to the field.
The Alpine A525 provides a stark example. The team effectively stopped developing the 2025 car by the end of January to focus on 2026. Jack Doohan, starting the season in one of the Alpine seats, found himself in a car that was fundamentally limited.
Since the car was a “dead end”, Doohan’s lack of results led to his replacement by May. This highlighted the paradox: a driver needs a seat to prove themselves, but if they enter during a year of technical stagnation, they risk being judged against an unfair benchmark because the “dead tech” isn’t being updated.
The survival of the most adaptable
The 2025 season was the ultimate rehearsal for the 2026 performance. While the financial risks were high, as evidenced by Bortoleto’s nearly $4 million crash bill, the specialised physical training and track mastery acquired are permanent assets.
The rookies were effectively paying a “learning tax”, trading potential budget cap damage for the operational maturity and physical hardening required to lead a team into a new era. 2025 was about ensuring that when the 350kW electrical beasts of 2026 arrive, they are seasoned athletes ready for a technical fight.
