Why F1 can't ban algorithms that drivers hate
'Why can't Formula 1 drivers have 100% control of energy deployment?'
It's a question many have asked this year, especially when weekends such as the Belgian Grand Prix exposed how much influence machine-learning algorithms are having on energy deployment and a driver's result in qualifying or the race.
The likes of Oscar Piastri have called it a "pretty crap way of going racing" and there's been growing frustration that drivers have lost too much control of their destiny this year.
That's led some to wonder why drivers can't just have full control of where and when their energy is deployed - but this isn't realistic and could potentially make the glaring battery offsets even worse.
"[The drivers'] comments are understandable," FIA single-seater director Nikolas Tombazis said. "I think their comments are a consequence of the fact that energy is limited, and therefore how you best manage it becomes super critical, and then the various strategies that need to be deployed to do it related to that now.
"I don't think you could go to that extreme [of 100% driver control] because first of all, if it was just really on-off for the driver whenever they want and as much as they like, then they would use all energy on corner exit for a very limited amount of time, and the effects that people are complaining about would be even more obvious.
"Secondly, there are limitations about how much energy you can deploy, or you can recover, or the so-called SOC or state of charge delta, things like that, that are [limitations] in order to prevent, let's say, an arms race and the teams to have an even bigger battery, for example.
"So, because we didn't want teams to have to make a battery twice the size, and then to have cars heavy again, etc [and] I don't think humans can rationally control all of these parameters."
Tombazis is hopeful that F1 readjusting its current 50/50 split between internal combustion engine and battery (which is more like 53/47 in reality) to 60/40 by 2028 will put more power back in the drivers' hands.
"When we go towards a slight readjustment of that balance, I think that will go towards a simplification in that area," he said.
"So I think what they're [the drivers are] complaining [about] now is a consequence of the energy management.
"It is complicated, I've no doubt, and it's more complicated than we would like. Absolutely, 100% I fully agree with them, but I think it's a consequence of the basic core issue."
'A step better'
Tombazis felt it is hard for drivers to see how things can be improved when they are in the midst of their current reality, driving energy-starved cars that are deciding a lot of things for them.
"Oscar is a very intelligent driver, but I think he's actually seeing what he feels currently is prevailing," Tombazis said.
"When we go to the rebalancing, I believe it will be a step better. Will it be eliminated completely? No, but I think it will be a step better."
Piastri has already accepted that, saying on Thursday in Hungary: "I don't expect it to ever fully go away, but as the manufacturers understand it more and work out the regulation restrictions more, in terms of what the code can and can't do, hopefully things will become a bit better."
Those algorithms existed long before the introduction of F1's new rules this year but, with the increased power of the electrical component of the power unit, they've become far more crucial.
That's why, in theory, when their potency is decreased from 47% to 40% by 2028, the algorithms that influence output will have decreased importance and be more accurate because manufacturers will understand the regulations better by then.
