We were due a mad one, weren’t we? There’s usually at least one Formula 1 race per year which goes off-script, usually thanks to a few lashings of rain, and Brazil gave us this year’s instalment of a break with the usual competitive order.

Despite the trials and tribulations of qualifying — held on Sunday morning thanks to the Saturday downpour — Max Verstappen transcended the conditions to eclipse his own 2016 triumph at Interlagos with a drive that has given him the match point and the advantage in this year’s title fight.

PLUS: The 10 unseen factors critical to Verstappen’s Brazil F1 rise

The rain also gives the lesser lights a chance to shine, and the likes of Alpine and Yuki Tsunoda produced assured drives in Brazil — albeit with varying degrees of pay-off. Let’s delve into what we learned at this year’s Brazilian race.

1. Verstappen pulls out one of his — and F1’s — greatest drives to dispel recent furore

Verstappen was in a league of one as he rose from 17th to victory

Photo by: Red Bull Content Pool

Simply lovely. Verstappen’s trademark (literally and figuratively) phrase perfectly encapsulated his Sunday afternoon endeavours in the rain, which concluded with a victory that enters the pantheon of great wet-weather drives.

There’s Ayrton Senna at Donington 1993, Damon Hill at Suzuka ’94, Michael Schumacher at Barcelona ’96, Lewis Hamilton at Silverstone 2008, Verstappen’s earlier Brazil entry in ’16 — now, Brazil 2024 must be included among them. Does it surpass them all? That’s up to you, dear reader — it’s entirely subjective.

Personal opinion, but the continued pre-weekend debate about Verstappen’s Mexico actions was getting tiring. He’d got his penalties and responded defiantly to the questioning on Thursday, but sometimes it’s better (albeit in a desperately cliched phrase) to ‘do the talking on-track’. That’s where a wet Brazil race washed away the sour taste of the previous weeks.

Read Also:

Verstappen was incensed by the situation he was placed in during qualifying. He’s right in that it took an exceedingly long time for race control to show the red flag after Lance Stroll’s Q2 shunt at Curva do Sol, although it was only to the detriment of a position or two; the five-place penalty for an engine change dangled precariously over the Dutchman’s head like the sword of Damocles. And, after the frustration of an aborted (not abandoned) start and the glacially slow formation laps, Verstappen was charged up and ready to pounce.

He reeled off the moves on the first lap, earning Christian Horner’s subsequent comparison with Senna’s opening gambit at Donington over 31 years ago. The Turn 1 moves on Hamilton, Pierre Gasly, and Oscar Piastri were also excellently judged; he had a perfect feel of his Red Bull’s adhesion on the intermediate tyres, and a post-restart move on leader Esteban Ocon put the inevitable beyond all doubt. This was Verstappen at his very best and, in the context of the title fight, it was a significant victory against Norris.

2. Norris’ title chances are all but over

Norris needs a huge turnaround in the points standings to become champion

Photo by: Zak Mauger / Motorsport Images

Verstappen now has a 62-point advantage in the drivers’ championship over Norris. Furthermore, he simply needs to retain a 60-point advantage by the close of the Las Vegas weekend to sew up his fourth title on the spin. Outscoring Norris in Vegas will do the job adequately, without the need for various permutations going forward (and to save a title being decided in the Qatar sprint race).

Read Also:

Norris’ outside chance at a title perhaps looked a little more solid when the grid lined up at Interlagos — the McLaren driver had, after all, sat on pole; Verstappen was mired in 17th. A decisive swing in the title action looked possible, and indeed one came to pass, but in the other direction to the earlier run of play. Norris sunk to sixth, Verstappen won by 19.5s, and there’s several factors involved here.

Firstly, Norris encountered an old enemy: the start. We’ll get onto the aborted one in a bit, but the ‘proper’ start was defined by the McLaren driver’s poorer getaway versus that of George Russell, who vaulted into the lead.

Subsequently, the key turning point emerged when the rain had worsened, and the virtual safety car was called for Nico Hulkenberg’s beached Haas. Norris and leader Russell received the call to pit for new inters, calls timed just as the VSC was ending. They emerged behind the Ocon/Verstappen/Gasly pack, although there was enough time for Norris to finally pass Russell before Franco Colapinto produced a red flag.

On the restart post-red flag, Norris went off at Descida do Lago and let Russell scamper past again. Carlos Sainz’s shunt injected the safety car back into the race and, on the restart here, Norris again overcooked it at Turn 1 for Charles Leclerc and Piastri to steal past.

Piastri gave up the place to help Norris, but the damage was already done; some can be attributed to tyre-change luck but, equally, Norris simply made too many mistakes on the day.

Read Also:

3. Alpine only needed one race for a P6 swoop

A disastrous season got a whole lot sweeter for Alpine with a double podium

Photo by: Lubomir Asenov / Motorsport Images

A week ago, Alpine was celebrating the point that Pierre Gasly had scored in Mexico to bring the beleaguered French outfit to three points of Williams. The British team was holding onto eighth in the constructors and hoping for a big pay-day in, say, a wet or wild affair that could help it keep tabs with Haas and RB.

Instead, James Vowles’ squad took a seven-figure sum out of its yearly budget for accident damage; Alex Albon’s car was too heavily damaged in qualifying to continue with the weekend, while Colapinto’s chassis was repaired for the start after his own Q1 prang.

Colapinto then added more work for the mechanics when he crashed at Turn 14 on the 32nd lap, producing the red flag and ensuring Williams was not going to get points. This was a prime opportunity for Alpine to leapfrog it in the constructors’ championship.

And yet, there was more — Haas and RB perhaps did not expect to be collateral damage in Alpine’s day of days, but finishing second and third (plus Gasly’s seventh in the sprint) yielded a 35-point haul that hurled it above the two teams battling over sixth in the constructors’ championship.

Read Also:

RB at least lessened the damage through Yuki Tsunoda’ seventh-place and Liam Lawson’s ninth-place finishes, but it nonetheless sets up a three-way scrap between the teams all looking for the extra winnings that come with better championship placings.

It was also the result that Alpine needed after a dismal year, another one defined by driver clashes, managerial upheaval, and the added uncertainty over the Renault powertrain project for 2026. The battle for sixth is not won, however; Alpine has 49 points, Haas has 46, and RB is on 44. It’s a closely contested and lucrative battle, as there’s around $20 million difference between sixth and eighth…

4. FIA’s rulebook forgotten as stranded Stroll sets up start shenanigans

A shambolic opening to the race eventually saw Norris and Russell fined

Photo by: Zak Mauger / Motorsport Images

Chaos is often known to transform F1’s biggest brains into melted camembert, and keeping one’s own grey matter cool — and not let it degenerate into an oozing mess — can often be the decisive factor between victory and defeat. When Lance Stroll attempted to recover from a languid off at the Descida do Lago by driving straight into a gravel trap, the subsequent events descended into farcical scenes on the grid.

The race director called for an aborted start, rather than an abandoned one. Both Norris and Russell went around again; confused, the other drivers on the grid tentatively followed the leaders around again — even though the protocol is to remain on the grid and shut the engine off.

Moderately confusing nomenclature aside, the clue should have been in the flashing amber lights. That Norris and Russell escaped with financial penalties rather than sporting ones can be considered lucky; Lawson, Ocon and Tsunoda were let off the hook as they’d just copied the front row occupants.

Russell was in further strife, as Mercedes changed the pressures of his and Lewis Hamilton’s intermediate tyres while still on the car when the aborted start was properly aborted. Per the sporting regulations, the tyres need to be off the car for pressures to be adjusted, but Mercedes got away with a €5000 fine for each car owing to the time constraints — particularly as the access gate to the grid was not opened in a timely manner.

F1’s rules are complicated and arguably arcane in places, but each team employs people to know them inside-out. «All sorts of procedures have been breached here, Max,» Gianpiero Lambiase told his driver — demonstrating a) that ‘GP’ was very aware of the situation, and b) why he’s one of the people to be promoted to replace the out-going Jonathan Wheatley.

5. Hulkenberg produced F1’s first black flag in 17 years

Hulkenberg’s return to action after a push by marshals earned him an early finish

Photo by: Lubomir Asenov / Motorsport Images

Nico Hulkenberg has past grievances with the apron of run-off at Interlagos’ opening corner. It was here that, after a clash with Lewis Hamilton in 2012, his best chance of an F1 win went begging. And 12 years later, the German found himself in a bizarre position where he was perched upon a slight lip in the run-off; the Haas’ rear wheels were off the ground as the skidblock sat on the asphalt.

The marshals gave the German a push to ensure he could free himself, but relying on outside assistance to get the car back on track is a bookable offence. Indeed, Hulkenberg got shown the black flag — the signal of an instant disqualification — while the cars were parked up in the pitlane during the Colapinto-induced red flag period. The Haas driver would not be allowed to resume.

A waved black flag is a rare sighting, and its most recent fluttering emerged 17 years ago at the Canadian Grand Prix. In that race, following Adrian Sutil’s crash at Turn 4, the pitlane was closed for the safety car and later re-opened, but it took time for the red light at the end of it to turn green. Both Giancarlo Fisichella and Felipe Massa defied the red light and took to the circuit anyway, both earning disqualifications on the spot.

«[The marshals] came out, they pushed me off and they were really happy with themselves,» Hulkenberg said. «They were partying and pushing me on and saying, ‘come on, go, let’s go, this race isn’t finished’. In that moment, you don’t really think and you don’t care, to be honest as well. You just continue and you deal with the consequences later.»

6. RB isn’t changing its name, but it’s changing its name

Pick a name, any name — RB will be Racing Bulls next year

Photo by: Lubomir Asenov / Motorsport Images

When Minardi was sold to Red Bull GmbH, it became Scuderia Toro Rosso and the name stuck for almost 15 years. A simple translation of Red Bull into Italian, it was a cool name and showed the lengths that the energy drink giant’s higher-ups went to in keeping the team’s heritage and Italian identity alive.

It was rebranded for 2020 to AlphaTauri, as Red Bull wanted to market its own clothing range to the wider world. Although it was a slightly more cynical name change driven by marketing over prestige, there were at least examples of fashion houses renaming F1 teams; Benetton took over the Toleman squad in the 1980s, for example, although we’ll spare the story of Andrea Moda’s purchase of Coloni here…

PLUS: The salvation story behind Benetton’s emergence as an F1 team

After four seasons, the name changed again. Wishing to sell its identity to the highest bidder, AlphaTauri became RB: these were two letters that could be appended onto any title sponsors to retain some degree of consistency (although the team preferred VCARB as the official acronym for Visa CashApp RB). Perhaps it’s realised that, if its title sponsors absconded, VCARB might not work long-term…

When the team revealed its new identity, it was keen to point out that RB definitely did not stand for Racing Bulls. Even though the holding company is «‘Racing Bulls S.p.A», RB was just a couple of letters that defined a through-line for each future naming deal.

It has backtracked now. After much soul-searching, and one imagines Peter Bayer and Laurent Mekies wistfully skipping rocks upon a still, sunset-lit pond here, RB DOES stand for Racing Bulls. From next year, you’ll see the Racing Bulls branding become a bit more prominent — even if it does sound like a little bit of a Pro Evolution Soccer rendition of the lead Red Bull team’s name.

But allow me to ask this: what was wrong with Toro Rosso?

7. Rain remains the great leveller — unless you’re a superstar or a rookie

Haas stand-in Bearman had a number of offs, but wasn’t immune

Photo by: Zak Mauger / Motorsport Images

Wet weather has long been considered to be the ultimate test of a Formula 1 driver. The performance disparities between the cars largely subsides; there are still key differences, sure, and outright downforce is one of them. But the engineers can mitigate that to a degree with set-up and wing levels, and then it’s up to the driver to switch on the range of wet-weather tyres and drive to the limit.

Of course, Verstappen was a cut above. Ocon and Gasly were also hugely impressive; although Gasly’s sole F1 win didn’t come in wet conditions, it did occur in weird circumstances. Both are a dab hand when the going gets tough.

But it also shows the disparity between the experienced runners and those new to the game. Liam Lawson is the exception here; he was thrown into wet-weather running on his Zandvoort debut last year, so he’s got knowledge of what it takes to hustle an F1 car around a wet track. For Franco Colapinto and an unwell Kevin Magnussen’s replacement Ollie Bearman, however, it was a much more difficult afternoon.

Colapinto dropped his car in Q1, and then produced the red flag in the race for his Turn 14 crash after recently stopping for new tyres. For his part, Bearman was involved in an early prang with Colapinto and then had to extricate his car from the barrier on the exit of Ferradura after sliding wide.

The two have built up enough good will to be largely excused in their impressive performances this year, particularly as more experienced drivers (Sainz and Stroll among them) endured their own slip-and-slide moments throughout the weekend.

Colapinto crashed in qualifying and did so again during the race to bring out red flags

Photo by: Andrew Ferraro / Motorsport Images

The unexpected downpour that forced qualifying for Formula 1’s Brazilian Grand Prix to be postponed has prompted great intrigue about a unique ‘what if’ scenario.

And it is that, if the weather in Sao Paulo remains treacherous on Sunday morning and the rescheduled session cannot run, how will the grid for the F1 race be formed?

The matter has no definitive answer because, quite amazingly, there is nothing in the 2024 F1 Sporting Regulations that lays out definitively how a grid will be defined if qualifying cannot take place.

Quite why this is the case is not clear, but interestingly it is something that has been addressed for the 2025 season with an amendment to the regulations already stating how a grid will be put together in such circumstances.

A new Article 42.1 of the Sporting Regulations states that “in the exceptional circumstance” that qualifying does not take place then “with acceptance of the Stewards that the session cannot take place, the grid for the race will be defined based upon the drivers’ championship classification.”

That alteration was put in after the most recent F1 Commission and World Motor Sport Council meetings last month, but it is understood it came too late for an agreement to be reached for them to added to the 2024 rules.

Rain falls ahead of the qualifying

Photo by: Red Bull Content Pool

So where does that leave things under the current circumstance for defining a grid right now?

There are two regulations here that potentially deal with the scenario of forming a grid when no qualifying times have been set – although neither are explicit in whether or not they deal with the circumstances of there being no qualifying session.

There is Article 39.4b that details a scenario of dealing with drivers who are “unclassified.” This is for any driver that “failed to set a time in Q1 or SQ1, or if all their laps were deleted.”

The rules then go on to explain that the classification of such a driver will be allocated “in accordance with the order they were classified in P3 (or, in the case a Sprint Session is scheduled, P1).”

This rule is intriguing though because it can be subject to a great deal of interpretation.

One viewpoint is that if qualifying is cancelled, because all drivers did not set a time in Q1, then everyone is ‘unclassified’ so on a sprint weekend that order would be decided by P1.

That would mean the fastest driver in opening practice, Lando Norris, taking pole position – with Max Verstappen being handed 15th on the grid before being moved back another five places because of his engine grid penalty.

Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing

Photo by: Red Bull Content Pool

However, such an interpretation of the rules is not shared by everyone because there is a viewpoint that if qualifying is cancelled, but SQ1 has taken place, then the wording of 39.4b) actually means that any driver who did a lap in sprint qualifying is ‘classified’.

In that case, article 42.3 is triggered which deals with how the grid order is handed out.

This states: “Classified drivers who have received 15 or less cumulative grid penalties will be allocated a temporary grid position equal to their qualifying session or sprint qualifying session classification plus the sum of their grid penalties.»

In this case, it can be interpreted that the grid order for classified drivers is taken from their sprint qualifying classification.

That would mean Oscar Piastri takes pole position for the grand prix ahead of Norris, with Verstappen down in fourth place before his grid penalty.

All of this debate about the interpretation of the regulations is superseded, however, by the International Sporting Code.

A test case for this came at the 2019 Japanese Grand Prix when there was a risk of the grid not being formed in similar circumstances when qualifying was rained off on Saturday morning and delayed until Sunday.

Charles Leclerc, Ferrari SF90, Carlos Sainz Jr., McLaren MCL34, and Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari SF90, in the pit lane at the start of Qualifying

Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images

Amid fears that qualifying may not even take place then, the stewards issued a note detailing what would happen if they had to form a grid without it.

They noted that “the FIA Formula 1 Sporting Regulations are silent on the subject.”

Instead, they exercised the authority that was handed down to them under Article 11.9.3b of the International Sporting Code to decide how the grid would be formed.

This ISC rule gives the stewards total authority to “amend the Supplementary Regulations” – which effectively means they can decide how a grid is formed.

Read Also:

At the time they concluded that this would be based on the second free practice times from Suzuka, which was the last competitive session that took place because Saturday was a complete wash-out.

In the event that Sunday qualifying does not happen in Brazil then a repeat circumstance of the stewards picking which session determines the grid will be enacted – and would most likely be the sprint qualifying result.

However, there is nothing to stop them choosing any criteria they want.