In the high-octane world of Formula 1, speed is everything—but it comes at a price that would make even the wealthiest moguls blink. As the engines cool on the 2025 season and teams gear up for a revolutionary 2026, a shocking financial reality has come to light. It is not just the cars that cost millions; the sheer privilege of sitting in the cockpit is now a seven-figure expense for the sport’s elite.

At the heart of this financial storm is the FIA Super License—the “golden ticket” required to compete in the pinnacle of motorsport. Far from a standard plastic ID card tucked into a wallet, this document represents the ultimate barrier to entry, ensuring that only the most qualified—and now, the most expensive—drivers make the grid. For the 2026 season, the costs have skyrocketed, creating a fascinating “tax on success” that sees newly crowned champions paying a king’s ransom while struggling rookies get in for a fraction of the price.

The Million-Dollar Paper: Lando Norris’s Record Bill

The headline grabber for the 2026 season is undoubtedly McLaren’s Lando Norris. Following a stellar performance in the 2025 championship, Norris has secured the dubious honor of holding the most expensive Super License on the grid. To legally race in 2026, a staggering sum of approximately €1,230,658 (roughly $1.28 million USD) must be paid to the FIA.

This eye-watering figure isn’t arbitrary. The FIA employs a complex calculation to determine the fee, designed effectively as a progressive tax on performance. Every driver pays a base rate—set at roughly €11,842 for 2026—but the real cost comes from the points scored. For every championship point earned in the previous season, the FIA charges an additional premium of €2,392.

With the 2025 season offering a massive bounty of points across 24 Grand Prix races and six Sprint weekends, top-tier drivers like Norris and his rival Max Verstappen amassed huge tallies. Verstappen, falling just slightly behind Norris in this specific financial metric, will see a bill roughly €5,000 cheaper than the Briton’s. While it is standard practice for F1 teams to cover these costs as part of their driver contracts, the sheer scale of the transfer—over $1.2 million for a single administrative requirement—highlights the immense money circulating in the sport.

The “Success Tax” and Team Budgets

The disparity between the top and bottom of the grid is stark. While McLaren prepares to wire over €2 million to the FIA to cover both Norris and his teammate Oscar Piastri (who pays slightly less than a million), other teams are getting off lightly.

At the other end of the spectrum sits the newcomer, Cadillac. Because neither of their drivers scored points in the previous F1 season, their entry fees are negligible by comparison. Drivers like Franco Colapinto, who scored zero points in the relevant period, along with returning veterans Valtteri Bottas and Sergio Perez, will pay only the base rate of €11,842.

This system creates a fascinating dynamic where the most successful teams are penalized financially for their dominance. However, when viewed against the backdrop of the Constructors’ Championship payouts—where winning the title nets a team upwards of €130 million—a €2 million license fee is considered a manageable operating expense. The money collected by the FIA doesn’t disappear into a black hole; it is ostensibly reinvested into safety improvements and sport governance, theoretically benefiting the very drivers who pay the toll.

The Gatekeeper: Earning the Right to Race

Money alone, however, cannot buy a seat at the F1 table. The Super License system is rigorously designed to prevent “pay drivers”—wealthy individuals with no talent—from buying their way onto the grid. The cornerstone of this system is the “40-point rule.” To qualify for a license, a driver must accumulate 40 Super License points over the preceding three seasons through performance in junior categories like Formula 2, Formula 3, and IndyCar.

This requirement has sparked intense career maneuvering. A prime example is American driver Colton Herta. Despite his talent in IndyCar, Herta has struggled to meet the strict FIA criteria. In a bold strategic move, Herta is switching from IndyCar to Formula 2 in 2026. His goal is clear: secure the remaining five points he needs to hit the magic number of 40.

If Herta finishes eighth or higher in the F2 championship, he secures his ticket for a 2027 F1 seat, likely with Cadillac. If he falters, he has a backup plan: participating in Free Practice 1 (FP1) sessions. Drivers earn one Super License point for every clean FP1 session they complete (up to a limit), offering a lifeline for those on the bubble. It is a high-stakes game of career chess where one bad season can derail years of ambition.

The Danger Zone: Oliver Bearman’s Tightrope Walk

Once a driver has the license, keeping it is another battle entirely. The FIA enforces a strict penalty point system to police driving standards. Accrue 12 penalty points in a 12-month period, and you face an automatic one-race ban.

Entering the 2026 season, the driver sweating the most is young British talent Oliver Bearman. Sitting precariously on 10 penalty points, Bearman is just two minor infractions away from a suspension. The pressure is immense. Because his points do not begin to expire until May 2026, he must navigate the first seven races of the season with absolute cleanliness. One clumsy overtake or a moment of frustration could see him forced to the sidelines, with a reserve driver waiting in the wings to take his seat.

This system has teeth. In 2024, Kevin Magnussen fell afoul of the rules and was forced to sit out the Azerbaijan Grand Prix—ironically replaced by Bearman himself. Now, the tables have turned, and Bearman must prove he can balance aggression with discipline.

Rewriting History and New Identities

The evolution of these rules offers a provocative “what if” scenario. If the current strict criteria had been in place decades ago, legends of the sport might never have raced. Analysis shows that icons like Sebastian Vettel, Max Verstappen (who debuted at 17), and even Fernando Alonso would not have qualified for a Super License at the time of their debuts under today’s rules. It serves as a reminder of how much the sport has tightened its grip on safety and professional standards.

Looking ahead to 2026, the grid will also look visually different. In a symbolic changing of the guard, Lando Norris has confirmed he will race with the number #1—the privilege reserved for the reigning World Champion. This forces Max Verstappen to revert to a new number; he has chosen #3, the old number of his former teammate Daniel Ricciardo. Meanwhile, rookie Arvid Lindblad will debut with number #41, while Bottas and Perez will retain their familiar identities from 2024.

The Bottom Line

As the 2026 season approaches, the narrative is about more than just horsepower and aerodynamics. It is about the immense pressure—financial, regulatory, and psychological—that weighs on every driver before the lights even go out. From Lando Norris’s million-dollar fee to Oliver Bearman’s precarious disciplinary record and Colton Herta’s transatlantic gamble, the fight for the Super License is a drama all its own. In Formula 1, getting to the start line is often the hardest race of all.

The golden era of Red Bull Racing, a dynasty that redefined dominance in Formula 1, has ended not with a champagne-soaked celebration, but with a bitter, public civil war that has left the paddock reeling. In a stunning turn of events that has reshaped the sport’s landscape, both the legendary advisor Helmut Marko and the long-serving Team Principal Christian Horner have exited the organization within a volatile six-month window. The fallout from these departures has peeled back the curtain on a team fractured by internal strife, “dirty tricks,” and a power struggle so severe that it may have cost Max Verstappen a historic fifth consecutive World Championship.

The Agony of Defeat: A Title Lost by Two Points

The catalyst for this latest explosion of revelations is the heartbreaking conclusion to the recent Formula 1 season. Max Verstappen, the Dutch phenomenon who has been the face of Red Bull’s modern supremacy, missed out on securing his fifth straight drivers’ title by a razor-thin margin of just two points. For a team accustomed to crushing the opposition, this narrow defeat was a bitter pill to swallow.

However, according to Helmut Marko, this failure was not purely down to on-track performance or engineering deficits. In a scorched-earth interview given shortly after his retirement at age 82—following the season finale in Abu Dhabi—Marko laid the blame squarely at the feet of the internal chaos that plagued the team. The Austrian veteran, who spent over two decades building the team from the ground up, claimed that if Christian Horner had been removed from his post earlier in the season—specifically before the British Grand Prix—Verstappen would be standing as world champion today.

“We had to do something because our on-track performance was lagging,” Marko stated, his frustration palpable. “Had we done that sooner, by the way, we would have gotten things back on track faster this year, and Max would have become world champion. I’m absolutely convinced of that.”

Accusations of “Dirty Games” and Manipulation

Marko’s departure has seemingly unshackled him from corporate diplomacies. He painted a picture of a toxic environment behind the scenes at Milton Keynes during Horner’s final years at the helm. Far from the well-oiled machine seen on television, Marko described a workplace rife with subterfuge.

“Those last years with Horner weren’t pleasant,” Marko revealed. “Dirty tricks were played.” He accused his former colleague of playing “dirty games in the media” to undermine his authority, suggesting a power struggle that distracted from the core mission of winning races. This narrative of a house divided offers a grim explanation for the team’s slight dip in form, which ultimately proved catastrophic in the title fight.

The CEO Strikes Back: Mintzlaff Defends the Decision

The severity of Marko’s comments forced Red Bull CEO Oliver Mintzlaff to step into the fray. In a separate interview, Mintzlaff attempted to steady the ship, distancing the corporate leadership from Marko’s personal attacks while standing firm on the decision to replace Horner.

“Those words about Christian are Helmut’s own,” Mintzlaff clarified, refusing to be drawn into a mudslinging contest. “I can’t say anything negative about Christian simply because he meant a lot to Red Bull.”

However, Mintzlaff did shed light on the cold reality of high-stakes corporate management that led to Horner’s exit. “There always comes a time when things aren’t going well, and then as a company, you have to make a decision: are you going to give someone more time, or is it time for a new leader? We felt it was time for a change.”

While acknowledging the incredible twenty-year partnership between Horner and Marko—a tenure almost unheard of in modern sports—Mintzlaff suggested that stagnation had set in. “Sometimes you just need a change to shake things up,” he noted, implying that the team needed fresh energy to tackle the challenges of the future.

The $100 Million Divide: Envy and Severance Packages

Adding fuel to the fire is the financial disparity between the two exits, a detail that former F1 driver Juan Pablo Montoya believes is a central source of the animosity. Reports indicate that Helmut Marko received a payoff of approximately £8.7 million upon his retirement. In stark contrast, Christian Horner’s severance package was reportedly ten times larger, a staggering sum that dwarfs Marko’s compensation.

Montoya, discussing the situation on a YouTube channel, described the feud as “sad” and driven by envy. “There were certainly dramas, fights, and manipulation by Christian, 100%,” Montoya observed. “But Helmut isn’t a saint. Neither of them are saints.”

For Montoya, the tragedy lies in how this bitter ending has overshadowed the duo’s monumental achievements. Together, they orchestrated 14 world championships across the Sebastian Vettel and Max Verstappen eras. “Why close the Red Bull chapter [like this]?” Montoya lamented. “All the good they did… nobody is talking about what the great Helmut Marko did. He focused on the fight with Christian and didn’t focus on that.”

Verstappen’s Loyalty and the “Rogue” Contract

Max Verstappen, the driver caught in the crossfire, has seen his own relationship with his mentors evolve. While he initially threatened to walk away from the team in early 2024 when Marko’s position was first under threat, his stance has noticeably softened.

Recent reports suggest that Verstappen grew frustrated with Marko’s independent streak, particularly regarding the signing of driver Alex Dunne to the Red Bull program. Marko reportedly executed this move without the full consensus of the wider management team, forcing Red Bull to pay a six-figure sum just to unwind the contract. This incident, along with Marko prematurely telling Isaac Hadjar he was joining the team before official decisions were made, paints a picture of a “loose cannon” operating outside the command structure—a behavior that likely accelerated the management’s desire for a reset.

Despite the friction, Verstappen publicly thanked the 82-year-old upon his retirement. However, when asked if Marko would continue as a close advisor, Marko himself dismissed the idea, stating, “Max Verstappen is a four-time world champion… he doesn’t need me anymore.”

A Risky Future: The 2026 Engine Project

As the dust settles on this tumultuous chapter, Red Bull faces its most daunting challenge yet: the 2026 technical regulations. For the first time in its history, the team is building its own power unit, a massive undertaking that carries immense risk.

Marko, ever the racer, cited the late Dietrich Mateschitz’s motto: “No risk, no fun.” Yet, he admitted, “This fun is also very expensive.” While Mintzlaff remains confident, citing the strong technical team Horner left behind, the loss of the two figureheads who steered the ship for two decades leaves a void that will be difficult to fill.

The Red Bull civil war may be over, but the scars remain. The team that once seemed invincible is now navigating uncharted waters, hoping that the “dirty games” of the past won’t haunt their pursuit of future glory.

In the high-octane world of Formula 1, loyalty is often touted as a virtue, but as the events of 2025 have brutally demonstrated, performance is the only currency that truly matters. For two decades, Christian Horner was the face of Red Bull Racing, the architect who transformed an energy drink marketing stunt into a motorsport powerhouse. Under his leadership, the team secured six Constructors’ Championships and eight Drivers’ titles. Yet, in July 2025, that legacy wasn’t enough to save him.

The announcement that Red Bull had parted ways with its longest-serving Team Principal sent shockwaves through the paddock, rivaling the impact of any on-track collision. For months, speculation had swirled, fueled by internal investigations and rumors of inappropriate behavior. However, in a candid and rare revelation, Red Bull CEO Oliver Mintzlaff has finally broken his silence, painting a picture not of personal vendetta, but of cold, hard corporate necessity.

The Collapse of the RB21

To understand the firing, one must look at the scoreboard. The first half of the 2025 season was nothing short of a catastrophe for a team accustomed to crushing the opposition. The RB21, expected to be the evolution of dominance, proved to be a temperamental beast. On high-downforce circuits, it was uncompetitive. Monaco was a disaster; the Red Bull Ring—their home turf—exposed humiliating weaknesses.

By the time the paddock arrived at the Belgian Grand Prix in July, Max Verstappen, a four-time world champion, found himself languishing off the podium and over 60 points behind McLaren’s Oscar Piastri. The Constructors’ standings were even bleaker, with Red Bull plummeting to fourth. The second seat had become a “revolving door of failure,” with Liam Lawson and Yuki Tsunoda both unable to tame the car. Morale at Milton Keynes had turned toxic, and the cracks in Horner’s leadership were becoming canyons.

“You Can’t Keep Relying on History”

In an exclusive interview, Oliver Mintzlaff addressed the elephant in the room with striking bluntness. While acknowledging Horner’s “fantastic track record,” Mintzlaff emphasized a brutal truth: past glory does not guarantee future employment.

“We felt it was time to turn the page and start a new chapter,” Mintzlaff declared. “The performance was declining, the team was stuck in fourth place, car development had stagnated, and the internal atmosphere was deteriorating.”

This wasn’t a rash decision, nor was it solely about the lingering shadows of the winter investigation into Horner’s conduct. It was a strategic pivot. The leadership sensed complacency creeping in, a fatal flaw in a sport defined by constant innovation. They chose disruption over stability, fearing that sticking with the status quo would cost them not just races, but their superstar driver, Max Verstappen.

The Fall of Helmut Marko

Horner wasn’t the only casualty of this regime change. Dr. Helmut Marko, the 82-year-old advisor and long-time kingmaker of the Red Bull driver program, also found himself on the chopping block. The friction between Horner and Marko had defined the team’s internal politics throughout 2024, splitting the camp into warring factions.

Marko’s departure, however, was less about performance and more about a breakdown in trust and unauthorized power plays. The final straw appeared to be Marko’s unilateral decisions regarding the junior academy, including the signing of Alex Dunne without full company approval—a move that infuriated Red Bull leadership and led to a swift, expensive contract termination.

Marko did not go quietly. In his exit, he fired venomous shots at Horner, accusing him of dirty games and spreading rumors about the upcoming Ford power unit. Mintzlaff, displaying diplomatic precision, refused to engage in a public feud, merely noting that “perhaps Dr. Marko has also changed over the years.”

The Mekies Resurrection

With the old guard swept away, Laurent Mekies, formerly of the Racing Bulls, was promoted to the hot seat. The skepticism was palpable. Could Mekies fill the shoes of a titan like Horner? The answer came swiftly on the track.

Mekies immediately overhauled the technical approach and worked to detoxify the environment. The results were arguably miraculous. Red Bull won six of the final nine Grands Prix. Max Verstappen, once over 100 points adrift, mounted a comeback for the ages, finishing the season just two points shy of a fifth consecutive title. While the championship slipped away, the resurgence vindicated Mintzlaff’s ruthless gamble. The ship had been steadied.

The 2026 Gamble

As the dust settles on the chaotic 2025 season, the future remains a minefield. The biggest question mark hangs over Max Verstappen. Rumors of a defection to Mercedes were rampant during the summer slump, with reports suggesting a deal was agonizingly close. While Verstappen has publicly committed to the team for now, the looming regulatory overhaul in 2026 presents a massive risk.

Red Bull is venturing into the unknown with its own Ford-backed power unit project, having moved on from Honda. It is a bold, unprecedented step for an energy drink brand to become a full engine manufacturer. Mintzlaff projects absolute confidence, asserting there is “no doubt” Verstappen will end his career at Red Bull.

“I’m not afraid of any performance clause,” Mintzlaff stated, banking on the renewed energy within the team to keep his star happy.

A New Era or a False Dawn?

Red Bull has chosen renewal over nostalgia. They fired one of the most successful team principals in history because they believed the team was rotting from the inside. In the short term, the decision appears to be a stroke of genius, sparking a late-season revival that nearly snatched victory from the jaws of defeat.

But the real test lies ahead. With Adrian Newey gone to Aston Martin, Jonathan Wheatley departed, and the stabilizing figures of Horner and Marko removed, Red Bull is entering the brave new world of 2026 with an entirely new leadership structure. Either this “ruthless revolution” will be remembered as the masterstroke that saved the team, or it will go down as the moment Red Bull dismantled its own dynasty. Only time—and the stopwatch—will tell.

As the checkered flag waves on the 2025 Formula 1 season, the sport closes the book on one of its most ambitious and controversial chapters: the second “ground effect” era. Launched with immense fanfare in 2022, these regulations were sold on a singular, tantalizing promise—to revolutionize wheel-to-wheel racing. The vision was a grid where cars could follow each other closely, unhindered by the turbulent “dirty air” that had plagued the sport for decades, leading to an endless spectacle of overtaking.

Now, four years and 92 Grand Prix races later, the dust has settled. With the looming 2026 regulations fast approaching, it is time to ask the hard questions. Did the rules deliver on their objectives? Or will the 2022-2025 cycle be remembered for its unintended consequences and technical dead ends? The answer, as analyzed by leading experts, is a complex tapestry of engineering brilliance, unforeseen hurdles, and a hidden financial revolution that may well be the era’s true legacy.

The Racing Reality: A Promise Half-Kept

The primary objective of the 2022 regulations was undeniably “raceability.” By restricting car geometries and reintroducing ground effect floors (venturi tunnels), the FIA aimed to throw the turbulent wake of the cars upwards, allowing following drivers to stay close without losing grip.

Initially, the signs were positive. The early races of 2022 saw a measurable increase in overtaking compared to the previous generation. Drivers reported an ability to follow through corners that had previously been impossible. However, in Formula 1, standing still is moving backward. As the smartest minds in engineering began to claw back performance, they inevitably disrupted the clean airflow the rules tried to protect. By the end of 2025, the “dirty air” problem had crept back. While not as severe as in 2021, the difficulty of following returned, proving that the laws of physics are the one competitor the FIA cannot fully regulate.

The era became defined not by the quantity of overtakes, but by the difficulty of executing them against increasingly sophisticated aerodynamic defense mechanisms. It was a case of “two steps forward, one step back,” leaving fans with a product that was better, but perhaps not the revolution they were promised.

The Unintended Nightmare: Porpoising and Ride Heights

If there is one visual that defines the early days of this era, it is the violent bouncing of the cars on the straights—a phenomenon known as “porpoising.” It was the first major unintended consequence of the new rules. Teams like Mercedes, who had dominated the previous era, found themselves blindsided. Their simulations failed to predict the oscillating stall of the underfloor aerodynamics, leading to cars that physically punished their drivers.

While the safety concerns regarding porpoising were eventually regulated away, they birthed a new, invisible battleground: ride height control. The secret to speed became running the car as low and stiff as possible without hitting the ground. This turned the sport into a battle of millimeters, fought in areas of the car—the underfloor—that fans could never see. The engineering ingenuity was massive, but it was hidden away, leaving the visible spectacle somewhat lacking compared to the visible aero wars of the past.

The True Revolution: The Power of the Purse

While the technical verdict is mixed, the era arguably achieved a far greater success in an area few fans focus on: the business model. The introduction of the Cost Cap, alongside the technical changes, has fundamentally saved the sport from its own excesses.

Before this era, F1 was a spending war. Manufacturer teams could pour hundreds of millions into development, leaving independent teams like Williams and Sauber fighting for survival. The 2022-2025 period changed the game. By capping spending, the sport stabilized. The valuation of teams has skyrocketed, turning what were once money pits into profitable franchises worth billions.

The “survival of the fittest” mentality was replaced by a structure where every team could theoretically compete. The grid tightened significantly. In 2021, the gap between the fastest and slowest cars in qualifying was often around 2.5%. By 2025, that spread had shrunk to just 1.1%. The days of backmarkers being five seconds off the pace are gone, replaced by a hyper-competitive field where a single mistake in Q1 can see a star driver eliminated.

The McLaren Miracle: Proof of Concept

If the Cost Cap needed a poster child, it is undoubtedly McLaren. Their journey through this regulation cycle is nothing short of miraculous and serves as the ultimate vindication of the era’s goals.

Starting the cycle on the back foot, McLaren looked destined for the midfield. Yet, through smart restructuring, investment in simulation tools, and astute management, they clawed their way back. They didn’t just improve; they conquered. Ending the era as Constructors’ Champions in 2024 and securing both titles in 2025, McLaren proved that a team could rise from mediocrity to dominance without simply outspending the competition. It was a victory for meritocracy, showing that under these rules, brainpower could beat budget.

A Legacy of Stability

As the sport pivots toward the 2026 regulations, the legacy of the ground effect era remains complicated. Technically, it might be viewed as a “cul-de-sac”—a specific engineering path that created as many problems as it solved. The cars became heavy, stiff, and difficult to drive, with tires pushed to their absolute limits by the sheer weight and torque of the machines.

However, the holistic health of Formula 1 has never been better. The grid is stable, the teams are financially secure, and the competitive order is more fluid than it has been in decades. We saw the mighty Mercedes stumble, the steady rise of Ferrari (albeit with its own frustrations), and the dominance of Red Bull challenged and eventually toppled by a resurgent McLaren.

The 2022-2025 era taught the sport a valuable lesson: you cannot simply regulate excitement into existence. But by creating a fair financial playing field and tightening the technical box, you can create an environment where giants can fall and underdogs can fly. That, perhaps more than the overtaking numbers, is the true success of the ground effect years. Formula 1 is no longer just a spending contest; it is a true sport again, and that is a foundation worth building on.

In the high-octane world of Formula 1, the “Silly Season”—that chaotic period of driver rumors and transfers—usually begins with a whisper. A lingering glance between a team principal and a rival driver, a clandestine meeting in a motorhome, or a handshake that lasts just a second too long. But what is unfolding right now in the F1 paddock is far more than just silly; it is potentially explosive. New leaks regarding driver contracts, secret performance clauses, and looming retirements suggest that the sport is hurtling toward a 2027 grid that looks radically different from today’s. At the very center of this brewing storm stands the reigning world champion, Max Verstappen, and a hidden detail in his contract that could single-handedly dismantle the Red Bull dynasty.

The Max Verstappen Gamble: A Secret Escape Hatch

On paper, Max Verstappen is locked into a lucrative deal with Red Bull Racing until 2028. To the casual observer, the partnership seems unbreakable. They are winning, they are dominant, and they are the team to beat. However, the reality behind the scenes is far more precarious. It has emerged that Verstappen’s contract contains a critical, hidden “performance clause.”

This clause is directly tied to the unpredictable future of Red Bull’s power unit. In a bold and risky move, Red Bull is ending their golden era with Honda to become an independent engine manufacturer in 2026, partnering with Ford to build their powertrain from scratch. This is a massive undertaking. Even Team Principal Christian Horner has admitted the pressure is immense, noting it would be embarrassing if they cannot match established giants like Ferrari and Mercedes.

The clause stipulates that if this new 2026 engine flops—specifically, if it fails to perform within a certain percentage of the fastest engine on the grid—Max Verstappen can walk away. He would be free to leave immediately, without penalty, as early as 2027. His manager, Raymond Vermeulen, has already hinted that 2026 will be the deciding year for Max’s long-term future. This isn’t just a minor detail; it is the first domino in a chain reaction that could chaos across the entire sport.

The Wolves at the Door: Mercedes and Aston Martin

Rival teams are acutely aware of this instability and are already positioning themselves to pounce. Toto Wolff, the boss of Mercedes, has made no secret of his desire to sign the Dutchman. It would be the ultimate revenge plot: stealing the king of Red Bull to drive a Silver Arrow. Wolff has been playing the long game, frequently praising Verstappen in the media and keeping the door visibly open. If the Red Bull engine project stumbles, Mercedes will be ready not just with an offer, but with a statement of intent to reclaim their throne.

However, a new and dangerous player has entered the game: Aston Martin. Under the ownership of billionaire Lawrence Stroll, the team is shedding its midfield identity to become a superpower. They have already secured Adrian Newey, the legendary designer responsible for Red Bull’s current dominance. Furthermore, they are reuniting with Honda in 2026—the very engine partner that powered Verstappen to his recent championships.

The prospect of Verstappen moving to Aston Martin is becoming increasingly plausible. Imagine the narrative: Max reuniting with the genius of Newey and the reliability of Honda, all backed by Stroll’s unlimited budget. It is a “wild card” scenario that is quickly turning into a nightmare for Red Bull.

The Old Guard: Hamilton and Alonso Face the End

While Verstappen holds the key to the future, two titans of the sport are quietly eyeing the exit. Lewis Hamilton, who will be 42 by the time the 2027 season starts, is currently embarking on his historic chapter with Ferrari. But patience is thin. Hamilton went to Maranello to win his elusive eighth world title, not to oversee a rebuilding phase. If the 2026 Ferrari challenger cannot fight for the championship, insiders suggest retirement is very much on the table. He came to finish the job, and if the car fails him, the story may well end there.

Similarly, Fernando Alonso continues to defy time, performing at an elite level. But he will be 45 in 2027. His current contract with Aston Martin expires at the end of 2026. With a young family on the way and decades of racing behind him, Alonso is likely looking at his final lap. If he doesn’t see a clear shot at a third title with the new regulations, he may finally hang up his helmet, opening yet another coveted seat on the grid.

The Next Generation: Bearman, Leclerc, and Russell

If these legends depart, who fills the void? Ferrari already has a succession plan in motion. Oliver Bearman, the young British star from their driver academy, has been sensational in his appearances, showing maturity and raw pace. Former Haas boss Guenther Steiner has called him the obvious choice to replace Hamilton. For the Tifosi, a homegrown talent taking the wheel from a legend is the stuff of dreams.

But the situation is more complex for Charles Leclerc. The “Prince of Ferrari” has spent his entire career in red, waiting for a car capable of winning a championship. If Ferrari fumbles the critical 2026 regulation reset, Leclerc’s loyalty may finally run dry. Rumors indicate his management has already held talks with McLaren, Mercedes, and Aston Martin. The idea of Leclerc jumping ship to join forces with Adrian Newey at Aston Martin is a mouthwatering prospect for fans and a terrifying one for Ferrari.

Meanwhile, at Mercedes, George Russell faces an uncertain future. He is talented, hungry, and currently the future of the team. But loyalty in F1 lasts only as long as you are the fastest option. If Toto Wolff manages to lure Verstappen, Russell could find himself pushed aside, a victim of the team’s ambition to secure a world champion. He could become a pawn in the driver market chess game, potentially traded to Red Bull or looking for a lifeline elsewhere.

The Great Reset of 2026

All of this speculation hinges on the massive regulation changes coming in 2026. The sport is hitting a “Great Reset” button. Cars will be lighter, active aerodynamics will be introduced, and power units will feature a 50/50 split between electric and combustion power. Every team starts from zero.

History shows that whoever nails a new regulation set dominates for years, just as Mercedes did in 2014. This is why Verstappen’s performance clause is so vital. It is his insurance policy against mediocrity. If Red Bull misses the mark on this new formula, he won’t stick around to fight for fourth place.

Conclusion: The War for 2027

The 2027 driver market is shaping up to be a war. It is no longer just about who drives where next year; it is a high-stakes game involving legacies, billion-dollar investments, and the future hierarchy of Formula 1. One domino falling—Max Verstappen leaving Red Bull—will trigger a chaotic chain reaction that could see Hamilton retire, Alonso depart, and drivers like Leclerc and Russell changing colors.

As we look toward this horizon, one thing is clear: loyalty is a luxury few can afford. The teams know it, the drivers know it, and the fans can feel the tension building. The 2026 season will not just determine the champion of that year; it will decide the fate of the grid for the next decade. The silly season has evolved. It’s now a battle for survival, and the first shots have already been fired.

Denise Welch in tears on Loose Women as she reveals biggest parenting regret

Her co-stars were quick to support her

Denise Welch was left fighting back the tears on Loose Women as she opened up about what she regrets from her son Matty Healy’s childhood.

The TV star, 67, returned to screens on Tuesday (July 8) for another episode of the ITV show. Denise was joined by Christine Lampard, Coleen Nolan and Nadia Sawalha on the panel.

However, things took an emotional turn when Denise candidly admitted she wished she could “re-do” Matty’s childhood.

Denise made a candid confession about son Matty’s childhood (Credit: ITV)

Denise Welch makes sad confession on Loose Women

On Loose Women on Tuesday (July 8), the panel spoke about a current viral trend that involves people attempting to appreciate life in the moment.

The show aired a clip from the Lise And Sarah Podcast that saw the co-host read out: “I’m 80 years old and somehow I woke up in my 38-year-old body. Just for one day.

“‘Mummy, wake up!’ they shout. I blink, I sit up slowly, my babies, they are small again. I gasp, I cry, they climb into bed giggling, wiggling… I used to rush through mornings. But not today.”

Her co-stars rallied around with support (Credit: ITV)

Denise wishes she could ‘re-do’ Matty’s childhood

After watching the clip, Denise – who shares two sons Matty, 34, and Louis, 24, with ex-husband Tim Healy – candidly opened up about her biggest parenting regret.

We did the best we could.

“When you do reflect, you have to forgive yourself, we were all very busy and we didn’t have a handbook. We did the best we could,” Denise shared.

She added: “I always get emotional. Because I wish I could re-do bits of, particularly, Matty’s childhood, because I was coping with addictions and self-medicating.”

Denise has been candid about her battles with addiction during her younger years. She is now 13 years sober.

She had to wipe away the tears (Credit: ITV)

Denise in tears on Loose Women

However, on Loose Women, Denise then stopped her sentence as she welled up.

Co-star Nadia Sawalha supported her and said: “You are the most present, proud, adoring mum and to get well from addiction is incredibly rare.

“To be able to do it day after day after day. So much of what you do, you and Lincoln [her husband], it’s so powerful. Another reason you have to forgive yourself, because that will be great for your kids.”

Picking up a tissue and wiping her eyes, Denise replied: “We’re so close, I just wish I could do it again.”

Nadia then told her: “Look how you are now! Look how are you now, you’re so present.  You telling great stories about your kids, you shine with pride.”

Rylan Clark has confirmed that his time at This Morning is over—this time for good. After a whirlwind week of controversy, the TV star revealed that his contract with ITV has officially been terminated following the backlash to his explosive remarks on immigration.

In an emotional sign-off, Rylan, 36, told viewers on Friday: “At last, I can finally breathe easy and speak out about those disgusting truths. I have no regrets for speaking up, even if it cost me my career. Thank you, everyone…”

The announcement marks a dramatic end to his stint as stand-in host alongside Josie Gibson, who had been covering for Cat Deeley and Ben Shephard during their summer break. Josie responded on-air with: “What a week!”—but fans had no idea that it would also be Rylan’s last.

The storm began earlier in the week when Rylan clashed with viewers over his take on Reform UK leader Nigel Farage’s mass deportation plans. Speaking live on air, he questioned:

“How come if I turn up at Heathrow Airport as a British citizen and I’ve left my passport in Spain, I won’t be let in? But if I arrive on a boat from Calais, I get taken to a four-star hotel?”

Rylan insisted that he was not against immigration, adding: “This country is built on immigration—legal immigration. They pay tax, they help our country thrive. But illegal routes? That’s something we can’t ignore.”

He also highlighted what he saw as a growing injustice: “You’ve got people who have lived here all their lives struggling, while others are handed hotels, phones, even iPads. Something major has to change.”

The remarks instantly divided audiences, with critics accusing him of spreading misinformation about asylum seekers in the UK. Social media erupted, and within hours, calls were mounting for ITV to act.

On X, Rylan fought back, declaring: “You can be pro-immigration and against illegal routes. You can support trans rights and respect women. You can be straight and support gay rights. The list goes on.”

But by Friday, the damage was done. ITV confirmed behind the scenes that his role would not continue, with insiders revealing that the network and Rylan had “mutually agreed” to terminate his contract.

Fans reacted with heartbreak. One wrote: “Please keep Rylan and Josie on! They’re the best duo in years.” Another added: “I won’t be watching come next week—he was the only reason I tuned in again.”

The news came just as former host Ruth Langsford teased her own return to the iconic sofa. Speaking to The Mirror, she hinted she’d happily reunite with her “TV son” Rylan:

“I love Rylan. He’s like my son. We’ve worked together before, and I’d do it again in a heartbeat. If ITV asked, I’d be there.”

However, with Rylan’s future at ITV officially closed, fans are now left wondering: could the duo reunite on an entirely new project away from This Morning? Ruth teased that something might already be in the works.

Actress Balvinder Sopal’s odds of being the next celebrity eliminated from Strictly Come Dancing have soared ahead of tonight’s Blackpool Week.

Ms Sopal’s odds hadn’t been looking promising, but La Voix pulling out of Blackpool Week due to an injury has seen bookies’ odds slimming further.

Meanwhile, former Lioness Karen Carney’s odds of being crowned winner have increased from 9/1 to 9/2 since last weekend’s show, according to Grosvenor Sport.

The shift places her third in the winner predictions behind George Clarke, who has odds of 3/4 and Lewis Cope, who stands at 11/4.

BBC Strictly: The update has come as a fresh blow to Balvinder Sopal | BBC

Before La Voix withdrew from this week’s show in Blackpool, EastEnders star Sopal was placed at 3/5 to be the next star eliminated, but since the former RuPaul’s Drag Race star had to pull out with injury, she’s moved into 1/7.

Mecca Bingo’s Simon Kew commented: “Balvinder Sopal’s position as the favourite to be eliminated next has strengthened, with her odds shortened significantly to 1/7 from 3/5 last week.

“She has been the favourite to be eliminated for the last four weeks, but punters are more convinced than ever that her journey could come to an end this weekend, and she remains our firm favourite to be eliminated next.

“With La Voix’s absence from this weekend’s show, Amber Davies has emerged as the clear second favourite to leave, drifting to 11/2, suggesting that confidence in her long-term survival is weakening.

La Voix has had to pull out of this weekend’s show | PA“Meanwhile, Alex Kingston (10/1) and Karen Carney (12/1) remain hovering in that mid-danger zone, though neither has seen dramatic movement.”

“One notable mover is George Clarke, whose elimination odds have ballooned out from 100/1 to 33/1, alongside Lewis Cope at 50/1, signalling that punters believe both are safe heading into this weekend – but not as safe as last weekend.”

Last week, Vicki Pattison was the one to wave goodbye to the dancefloor along with partner Kai Widdrington.

Strictly Come Dancing judges Craig Revel Horwood, Anton Du Beke, Motsi Mabuse and Shirley Ballas left viewers split down the middle on Sunday’s show, with some fans of the BBC series left furious.

The results show saw the panel having to choose between Ms Pattison and Ms Sopal, who received the fewest votes and faced the dreaded dance-off.

BBC Strictly: Vicky Pattison was embraced by her co-stars after being eliminated on Sunday | BBC

Both celebrities finished bottom of the leaderboard for week eight, despite both couples achieving a respectable score of 27 from the judges.

Ms Pattison had performed a jive with Mr Widdrington to Sound of The Underground by Girls Aloud, while Ms Sopal and partner Julian Caillon danced an American Smooth to My Guy by Mary Wells.

Following the dance-off, the panel were unanimous in their decision to save the soap star, with each of them noting how Ms Pattison had made several mistakes while Ms Sopal had improved on her performance from Saturday night.

Viewers were left divided over the result, with many baffled to see Ms Pattison eliminated after one dance-off, while Ms Sopal has now survived being in the bottom two four times.

Many took to social media to debate the outcome, with one writing: “Aww Vicky you were great, wrong decision again #Strictly.”

BBC Strictly: Balvinder Sopal could be at risk again this weekend

 | BBCOthers agreed with the judges though, with one posting: “It was the correct result, Balvinder danced better, simple as that #Strictly.”

“Glad Balvinder saved. She definitely improved in the dance off #Strictly,” another agreed.

A different fan commented: “Bal absolutely locked in and smashed that dance off, the correct decision as poor Vicky was clearly nervous and out of sync.

“I’m very happy and very sad at the same time though. Blackpool week won’t be the same without her.

This Morning viewers divided as Peter Andre’s wife Emily promotes new children’s book

Emily is no stranger to publishing a children’s book

Fans of This Morning were left with mixed opinions after Peter Andre’s wife Emily appeared on the ITV show.

On Tuesday morning (August 19), Emily Andre joined hosts Craig Doyle and Sian Welby to promote her new children’s book, Incredible Things Your Body Can Do!.

After splitting from Katie Price in 2009, Peter found love in doctor Emily, who he married in 2015. They have since started a family of their own, welcoming daughters Amelia, 11, and Arabella, one, and son Theo, eight.

Emily and Peter Andre have been married since 2015 (Credit: Splashnews.com)

36-year-old Emily is no stranger to writing a children’s book, having published Growing Up for Girls and Growing Up for Boys. She also wrote a book to help young kids with their mental health, Healthy Mind, Happy You: How to Take Care of Your Mental Health.

Her latest, however, is a book for girls on what to expect when growing up as their bodies evolve and change.

Despite her experience of being a children’s author, it appears not all viewers were sold.

Viewers were divided over Emily’s This Morning appearance (Credit: ITV)

‘It’s unfair how many talented writers go unnoticed’

“Great, a children’s book ‘written’ by a non-famous person,” one user wrote on X.

“Another one who has got a book deal because of who they are, not on merit,” another person shared.

“It’s unfair how many talented writers go unnoticed simply because they don’t have celebrity status. Countless authors are struggling to get published or recognised, while celebrity books get all the spotlight,” a third remarked.

“Get her off she’s boring me,” a fourth said.

“Oh god, she’s so boring Dr Emily,” a fifth person expressed.

‘She’s a different class’

However, many also appeared to be fans.

“Wish I could have a doc like doctor Emily. I wonder what star sign she is,” one person said, to which someone replied: “She’s a Leo, August 16th, like myself. She’s honest, which is a good thing.”

“Peter Andre’s wife is different class isn’t she,” another echoed.

“Just realised. Princess is her stepdaughter. She must be so proud,” a third stated.

Kelly Brook has reflected on the heartbreaking moment she lost her baby when she was six months pregnant.

The presenter, 45, who is due to enter the I’m A Celebrity jungle, fell pregnant in 2011, while with former fiancé and Scottish rugby player Thom Evans.

Speaking on the How To Fail With Elizabeth Day podcast, Kelly said the ‘horrific’ loss was so scarring, it left her never wanting to try for a baby again.

She said: ‘In my thirties, I got pregnant and it was with somebody that I hadn’t been with for very long, and it was really a case of like, “well, I’m in my thirties. This might be my last roll of the dice. Maybe I should just do this.

‘He’s a nice guy, maybe this is it. Maybe it’s that whole taxi light thing goes off and this is what we’re going to do”.

Kelly said Thom really wanted to have a baby and that she while she was initially hesitant about becoming mother due to her own relationship with her mum, she was soon excited.

She continued: ‘Lo and behold I had a miscarriage at six months, which was the most traumatic, horrific thing that I’ve ever been through. It was just the most devastating thing.

‘It took me quite a long time for my body and for everything to kind of, I don’t think you ever fully recover from that, but our relationship didn’t survive that and I just had to pick myself back up and just move forward.’

Kelly was in a relationship with Thom, 40, for two years before they split in 2013.

The model met her Jeremy Parisi, 40, in 2015 and they married in 2022, while Thom is engaged to Nicole Scherzinger.

The couple met in 2019 on Celebrity X Factor, where Nicole was a judge and Thom was part of a boyband.

Kelly said she is so ‘traumatised’, she never wants to go through falling pregnant again.

She added: ‘I just thought, “it’s not in my world, I just don’t want to go through that again”.’

Kelly said she went through the birth of her baby as she didn’t want any medical intervention.

The presenter said to process her grief, she decided not to name her baby.

She told Elizabeth: ‘I didn’t have a name, and at that point I didn’t want to have a name.

‘So it’s just a way of me coping and I know so many women deal with this in so many different ways, and I was told that I would regret that and I should really have a name and I should have footprints and all of these hand prints and all of these things and I just chose not to.

‘At the time, miscarriage wasn’t something we talked about. It really wasn’t something we talked about.

‘It was something that you hid away. It felt like you’d failed. It was very shameful.’

Kelly said out of respect for Jeremy, she treats the loss like a miscarriage.

She said: ‘Even though it was more than that, I have to treat it like a miscarriage because it’s the only way I can cope because I just don’t know how I could get through every day if I didn’t.’

Kelly added she felt guilty she didn’t act the same as others who had gone through the same, deciding not to mark the occasion every year or give her baby a name.

She said: ‘I’d see women in the public eye and they did have names for their babies and they do mark the occasion every year and they do this and I don’t do that.

‘I felt like, “is there something wrong with me? Is there something missing? Do I not have empathy? Is there nothing inside?”

‘And it’s actually nothing to do with that because I’m still here and I’ve got to face every day and get through every day. I have to do what I have to do to get through every day.’

Elizabeth told her: ‘I’m so sorry for you and I’m so struck by that phrase that it was something you and the baby had to go through together and that for me makes you a mother.

‘There are so many different ways to mother and parent in this world, and that’s how you show up.

‘There’s so much misplaced shame that women carry that you’ve expressed so powerfully there. I’m really sorry that you had to deal with that as well and you are right, it wasn’t spoken about very much at all.’