Max Verstappen has addressed the chances of seeing him drive for a team other than Red Bull before the end of his current contract amid long-standing interest from Mercedes

View Image

(Image: Clive Rose, Getty Images)

Max Verstappen has confirmed he has no intentions of changing teams ‘at this point in time’, dashing Mercedes’ aspirations of bringing him to Brackley. Toto Wolff has been chasing the four-time world champion’s signature since Lewis Hamilton ended his Mercedes career in 2024.

Verstappen remains tied to Red Bull until the conclusion of the 2028 season and has made clear his ambition to finish his F1 journey with the Milton Keynes outfit. Yet, during the peak of Red Bull’s internal chaos and performance difficulties last year, speculation emerged that he might depart the team.

The 28 year old admitted to holding discussions with Mercedes leadership, and team principal Wolff made no secret of his ambition to bring the 71-time Grand Prix victor into the Silver Arrows’ fold.

Verstappen ultimately decided to remain, backing new boss Laurent Mekies to guide the operation in the proper direction. Nevertheless, with fresh technical regulations taking effect for the 2026 season, the battle for the Dutchman’s services is anticipated to intensify this year, with almost three-quarters of the grid facing contract expiry in December.

According to the Dutchman, however, Mercedes may be wasting their efforts. Discussing his future plans with Blick, Verstappen stated: “I’m 28 now, and I have a contract with Red Bull until 2028..

“I want to fulfil that contract. At this point in time, I’m ruling out a change of team. It’s a shame that my friend and mentor Helmut Marko won’t be by my side in 2026. I’ll miss him.”

When pressed on whether he’d definitely be retired by 40, he responded: “You can bet on it. At 40, I might still be in the pits as team boss in another series.”

Whilst Verstappen believes Milton Keynes is his best option right now, that could shift rapidly if the season begins and Red Bull find themselves languishing in the midfield or lower. The four-time world champion has been clear that he requires competitive machinery to remain with Mekies’ outfit.

Just how competitive Red Bull will prove to be remains uncertain. When questioned about the hierarchy, he said: “The same question is even harder to answer for 2026. None of us have any idea about the new car or the engine.

“I think that during the first tests in Barcelona starting on 26 January, we’ll be spending more time in the garages than out on the track. Hopefully, we’ll all be a bit wiser after the two tests in Bahrain in February.”

The atmosphere surrounding Aston Martin’s Formula 1 operation is currently thick with what can only be described as a “weird fog.” For fans and observers alike, the Silverstone-based outfit has become a puzzle of conflicting narratives, oscillating wildly between boundless optimism and stark, grounding reality. As the sport barrels toward the transformative regulations of 2026, the team that promised to be the next great disrupting force seems to be suffering from an identity crisis. Are they on the verge of a Honda-powered dynasty, or are they paralyzed by the fear of their own ambition?

The Honda Rollercoaster: Hype Meets Reality

The partnership with Honda was meant to be the final piece of the championship puzzle—a bespoke engine deal that would elevate Aston Martin from a customer team to a true works outfit. Initially, the rhetoric was dazzling. Koji Watanabe, the usually reserved President of Honda Racing Corporation (HRC), was notably upbeat, speaking of 24-hour operations at the Sakura plant and a synergy with Aston Martin that promised “something special.” The imagery was deliberate: a flare fired into the night sky, signaling to the world that the grind was over and glory was imminent.

However, the tone has shifted dramatically in recent weeks. In a surprising pivot, Watanabe admitted in a separate interview that “not everything is going well.” It wasn’t a declaration of failure, but it was a sobering admission that stands in stark contrast to the promotional fireworks. This shift suggests an engineering program deep in the trenches of discovery, where integrating a complex power unit into a new chassis reveals a hydra of technical headaches.

The timing of this reality check is exacerbated by the progress of their rivals. Audi, the other newcomer to the engine game, recently completed a successful shakedown, generating genuine intrigue and belief among the fandom. While Audi is hitting procedural milestones, Honda is walking back its hype. This caution is likely born of trauma; Honda remembers all too well the public humiliation of their 2015 return with McLaren. They learned the hard way that promising victory while still debugging the system is a recipe for disaster. By lowering expectations now, Honda is attempting to inoculate itself against the toxicity that defined the “GP2 engine” era.

The Broken Tools: Newey’s Warning and Stroll’s Defense

If the engine situation is ambiguous, the chassis side offers its own set of alarms. Adrian Newey, the legendary designer whose arrival was hailed as a coup, has been candid about the team’s infrastructure limitations. Specifically, Newey has highlighted that the team’s simulator—a fundamental research tool in modern F1—is not correlating properly with on-track reality. In an era where testing is strictly limited, a drift between the virtual world and the real world can lead a team down a development cul-de-sac from which it takes months to reverse.

This technical deficit provides context for Lance Stroll’s recent, rare public statement. The Canadian driver, often the target of criticism, bluntly stated that the team simply does not have the “right tools” to compete at the front yet. While cynics might view this as self-preservation or “damage limitation” from a driver eager to avoid being scapegoated, it aligns perfectly with Newey’s assessment. Stroll is essentially asking his father, team owner Lawrence Stroll, for patience and resources. He is signaling that despite the shiny new factory and big-name hires, the feedback loops required to win championships are not yet clean.

The team is in a painful transition, trying to shed its “customer team” skin—analogous to taking off a generic store-bought jacket—and fit into a bespoke Honda tuxedo. The fit isn’t right yet, and until the simulator issues are resolved, Aston Martin will be gambling on upgrades rather than relying on driven certainty. As seen in 2023 and 2024, when promising starts evaporated after failed upgrade packages, the cost of “getting it wrong” is a tumble down the midfield order.

Alonso’s “Piece of String” and the Driver Market

Amidst this technical uncertainty, Fernando Alonso remains a fascinating anchor. The Spaniard, who previously claimed he would retire if the team nailed the 2026 regulations, has shrewdly changed his tune. His commitment is now open-ended, based solely on whether he remains “competitive and fast.” It is a contract as long as a piece of string, allowing him to ride the wave if the car is fast or exit gracefully if the project stalls.

Alonso’s maneuver is a masterclass in leverage. He knows the team needs him—not just for his driving, but for his morale-boosting presence. The “Aston Martin Fernando” is a team player who mucks in with the mechanics and keeps spirits high, a stark contrast to the moody figure seen in his final McLaren years. He provides a necessary counterweight to the uncertainty surrounding Lance Stroll, whose performance has been inconsistent.

But the real intrigue lies in the whispers of who might join him. With Max Verstappen seemingly off the table for now (despite Honda’s flattering comparisons of the Dutchman to Ayrton Senna), rumors of an Aston Martin pursuit of Charles Leclerc refuse to die. While Leclerc is emotionally and contractually tied to Ferrari, the “smoke” suggests legitimate interest from the Silverstone camp. For Aston Martin, courting a driver of Leclerc’s global stature—the second biggest influencer in F1—signals their intent to be a destination for elite talent. For Leclerc, it serves as a warning shot to Ferrari: stepping up, or risk losing their star to a team that is ruthlessly ambitious.

Lawrence Stroll: The Captain’s Dilemma

At the center of this swirling vortex is Lawrence Stroll. His public posture remains one of relentless ambition, but the pressure is mounting. After eight years of ownership (tracing back to the Force India buyout), the operation has secured only one race win. The billionaire’s “captaincy” offers stability, but it also introduces the volatile element of emotional investment.

Engineers and staff crave clarity. They want to know that decisions are made based on data, not nepotism or emotion. The continued presence of Lance Stroll in the seat remains the elephant in the room. If the goal is truly a world championship, hard questions about the driver lineup are inevitable. The fear for many within the team is the “nuclear option”: that if the project fails to deliver or if Lance decides to walk away, Lawrence might simply sell up and leave, abandoning the ship he built.

However, the arrival of heavyweights like Newey and the partnership with Honda suggests a doubling down rather than an exit strategy. The team is trying to behave like a mature front-runner before it actually becomes one. The vague messaging we are seeing now is likely a strategic attempt to temper expectations, buying time for the “super team” elements to actually gel.

The 2027 Endgame

Ultimately, the confusion around Aston Martin’s 2026 prospects points to a simpler truth: 2026 is likely a year of survival and discovery, not domination. The team’s true target is almost certainly 2027. By then, the Honda partnership will have bedded in, the simulator correlation issues should be resolved, and the influence of Adrian Newey will be fully integrated into the car’s DNA.

Fans craving instant gratification may be disappointed. The team is asking for delayed gratification to prevent a “false dawn.” They are wary of hype because they know how quickly it turns to venom when results don’t follow. The conflicting messages—Honda’s caution vs. the brand’s ambition—are the sounds of a team wrestling with the brutal reality of Formula 1 engineering.

Aston Martin is attempting a metamorphosis that few teams have successfully navigated. They are shedding the “underdog” tag to become a titan. It is a messy, confusing, and high-risk process. But if they can survive the “fog” of 2026 and keep their star talents motivated, the glorious future they have been promising might finally arrive—just a little later than advertised. For now, the hype train has slowed down, but it hasn’t stopped. It’s just checking the tracks to make sure it doesn’t crash.

The winter of 2026 was supposed to be a time of frantic uncertainty. With the sport facing its biggest technical overhaul in history—a 50/50 split between internal combustion and electrical power, combined with complex active aerodynamics—the paddock expected chaos. But while the public’s attention has been successfully diverted by flashy livery reveals and corporate marketing fluff, a far more dangerous narrative is quietly unfolding behind the high-security gates of Milton Keynes.

A leaked strategy report regarding the RB22 has just pulled back the curtain on Red Bull Racing’s preparations, revealing a testing plan so aggressive and premeditated that insiders are calling it a “hack” of the 2026 regulations. While Ferrari and Mercedes are still navigating the dark, Red Bull appears to have already built a flashlight.

The Incineration of Pre-Season Norms

The traditional playbook for a major regulation change is well-known: build a “mule car”—a basic, interim vehicle designed to test systems and gather baseline data without revealing your hand. It is a safe, logical, and conservative approach. And according to leaked reports from the Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya, Red Bull has decided to incinerate it.

While Audi was busy distracting the world with high-profile filming days in early January, Milton Keynes was finalizing a maneuver that has stunned technical analysts. Red Bull has reportedly decided to skip the placeholder phase entirely. The RB22 that will hit the track for its private shakedown in Barcelona will not be a rough draft; it will be a machine featuring an aerodynamic configuration nearly identical to the final Bahrain Grand Prix package.

This is the “Barcelona Gambit.” It is a psychological warning shot fired directly at the bows of Maranello and Brackley. Most teams use these early private runs just to check for hydraulic leaks or basic assembly errors. Red Bull, however, intends to use them to teach the RB22 how to manage complex air vortices at 300 km/h. By bringing high-stakes, near-final hardware to the very first lap, they are creating a massive data gap that their rivals may find impossible to bridge before the lights go out in Sakhir.

Building a “Digital Organism”

Speed on a stopwatch is merely a secondary objective for Red Bull in these early sessions. The true prize—and the reason for this aggressive timeline—is the mastery of systemic behavior.

The 2026 regulations represent a quantum leap in complexity. The challenge isn’t just building a fast engine or a slippery chassis; it is making them talk to each other. The leaked testing logs reveal an intense, almost obsessive focus on how the electronics, the massive new 350 kW power unit, and the active aerodynamics integrate under duress.

Red Bull is essentially teaching the car’s electronic brain to manage the transition between the low-drag “X-mode” (for straights) and the high-downforce “Z-mode” (for corners) with surgical precision. While competitors are likely to be struggling with basic software handshakes and “childhood problems,” Milton Keynes is already fine-tuning energy recovery cycles.

This concept of “Systemic Dominance” ensures that when Max Verstappen or his teammate pushes to the limit, the car reacts instinctively. Red Bull isn’t just building a fast car; they are building a “digital organism” that manages its own complexity in the background, allowing the driver to focus purely on hitting the apex.

The Benchmark Doctrine: A Commitment to Certainty

Perhaps the most terrifying aspect of the leak for rival teams is Red Bull’s adoption of what insiders are calling the “Benchmark Doctrine.”

Usually, the time between the first test and the first race is spent in a frantic search for upgrades to fix correlation issues. Red Bull has flipped this script. The leaked plan confirms that the team will introduce only limited new parts during the official pre-season tests. This is not a lack of development; it is a display of supreme confidence.

By using the Barcelona-spec RB22 as an absolute measuring stick, Red Bull has decreed that every future update must beat this near-perfect “V1.0” by a significant margin to be cleared for production. This avoids the “ghost-chasing” trap where teams get lost in reactive development cycles, trying to fix problems they don’t fully understand.

Furthermore, this premeditated roadmap suggests that updates for the entire first half of 2026 are likely already finalized and sitting on a server, waiting for a pre-scheduled green light. Red Bull is not reacting to the track; they are dictating the track’s response.

Enrico Balbo’s Army of Data

Behind this aggressive strategy lies a massive expansion of human capital, led by the analytical genius of Enrico Balbo.

Red Bull is acutely aware that their current wind tunnel facility is an aging relic compared to the state-of-the-art laboratories in Maranello. To counter this, Balbo has spent months on a high-stakes hiring mission, recruiting a legion of specialists from the aerospace and data sectors. These are experts in Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), dynamic simulation, and verification whose sole job is to ensure that simulation numbers match the real world with 100% accuracy.

This “army of data” has spent over a year refining the RB22’s surfaces to an extreme level. By prioritizing “brains over bricks,” Red Bull has turned their facility disadvantage into a non-factor. In the 2026 reset, the team with the most accurate algorithms—not just the newest tunnel—holds the keys to the kingdom.

The Ultimate Hack: The “Safety Net of Air”

The elephant in the room has always been the Red Bull Powertrains project. Building an internal combustion engine and a high-voltage electrical system from scratch is a monumental risk for a team with no prior manufacturing history. It is a gamble that could destroy most constructors.

This is where the ultimate “hack” of the 2026 regulations takes place.

Red Bull has designed the RB22’s aerodynamics to be so efficient that the chassis can actually compensate for temporary horsepower deficits. They are building a “safety net of air.” By mastering energy management software early—utilizing Ford’s Silicon Valley expertise to manage battery cycles smarter, not harder—the RB22 is designed to stay competitive even if the power unit isn’t perfect out of the box.

Red Bull’s answer to the engine war is clear: make the chassis so dominant that the engine’s early struggles become irrelevant. It is a holistic insurance policy against the unknown.

The War is Already Live

When you strip away the camouflage and technical jargon, the leaked testing plan reveals a calculated intent to dominate the reset. Red Bull understands that the 2026 era will be a graveyard for teams that react too late to the complexity of active aero and electrical deployment.

By treating their early Barcelona laps as high-stakes rehearsals for systemic behavior rather than a simple search for speed, they are locking in a level of operational certainty that no other team currently possesses. The dangerous silence coming from Milton Keynes isn’t about hope; it’s about a plan being executed with clinical efficiency.

As the final pieces of the puzzle fall into place, one thing is becoming increasingly evident: The RB22 is not a machine built out of fear of the regulations, but a weapon designed to exploit them. While the rest of the world frantically searches for a compass to navigate the new era, Red Bull is already holding the completed map.

The war for 2026 has just begun, and if these reports are true, Red Bull may have already won it.

The desert air hung heavy over the Yas Marina Circuit, thick with the scent of burning rubber and the palpable tension of a dynasty in decay. Lewis Hamilton, the seven-time World Champion, the man who once made winning look inevitable, had just crossed the line in eighth place. It was a fittingly dismal end to the worst season of his illustrious career.

The statistics were damning, a cold splash of reality for the millions of fans who still worship at the altar of #44. Zero podiums—a statistic that hadn’t darkened his record since his rookie year in 2007. A massive 86-point deficit to his teammate, Charles Leclerc. And perhaps most humiliating of all, three consecutive Q1 eliminations to close out the year in Las Vegas, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi.

As Hamilton emerged from his cockpit, the media swarm descended. They didn’t come with praise; they came with the words of his critics. They relayed the biting commentary of Ralf Schumacher and the “concerned” legacy-talk of Nico Rosberg. The narrative was clear: the magic is gone, the reflex is slowing, and it is time to step aside.

But then, amidst the noise and the flashing lights, Hamilton delivered a response so sharp, so unexpectedly defiant, that it instantly silenced the paddock. He didn’t offer excuses. He didn’t apologize. He simply said:

“They’re not on my level.”

Five words. Five words that split the Formula 1 world down the middle. Was this the delusion of a fading star refusing to accept the dying of the light? Or was it the supreme confidence of a master strategist who knows that the game board is about to be flipped? To understand the gravity of this moment, we must look beyond the disaster of 2025 and into the revolution of 2026.

The Anatomy of a Collapse

To appreciate the weight of Hamilton’s defiance, one must first acknowledge the depth of the hole he is in. The 2025 season wasn’t just bad; it was a catastrophe. Hamilton scored a mere 156 points compared to Leclerc’s 242. In the brutal meritocracy of F1, being beaten by your teammate is a sin; being destroyed by him is a crisis.

The qualifying battle ended 19-5 in Leclerc’s favor. In races, the Monegasque driver finished ahead 18 times. For the first time in Ferrari history, a full-time driver suffered the ignominy of three straight Q1 exits. It was, by every measurable metric, a nightmare.

It was this blood in the water that attracted the sharks. Ralf Schumacher, writing for Sport1, didn’t mince words. While admitting Hamilton was technically correct—that critics who hadn’t achieved his success shouldn’t judge—he twisted the knife. Schumacher suggested that Ferrari could no longer afford to fight for a championship with only one competitive car. He argued that Hamilton’s preference for stable rear-ends made him ill-suited for modern machinery and that the veteran should make way for fresh blood.

Nico Rosberg, Hamilton’s old nemesis, added his voice to the chorus on Sky Sports F1. “It’s not a worthy way to end his career,” Rosberg lamented, cataloging the spins, the lack of pace, and the “scratches on the legacy.”

It was a public undressing of a legend. But what Schumacher and Rosberg failed to calculate was that Hamilton wasn’t looking at the SF25—the car that had betrayed him all year. He was looking at the SF26.

The 2026 Revolution: A New Battlefield

Hamilton’s “not on my level” comment wasn’t a reference to his current form; it was a projection of his future capabilities under the radically different 2026 regulations. The sport is bracing for the most dramatic overhaul since the turbo-hybrid era began in 2014, and these changes seem tailor-made to reset Hamilton’s career.

The primary shift is the death of the “ground effect” era. The floor tunnels that defined the cars of 2022-2025—and created the unpredictable, stiff handling characteristics that Hamilton loathed—are being removed. They will be replaced by partially flat floors. This single change eliminates the porpoising and ride-height sensitivity that plagued Hamilton for years.

Furthermore, the new cars will feature active aerodynamics. Wings will shift shape mid-lap, toggling between high-downforce “corner mode” and low-drag “straight mode.” The cars will be smaller, lighter, and crucially, they will require a different driving style.

Schumacher’s criticism that Hamilton needs a stable rear end might actually be his undoing. While Schumacher predicts the new cars will be “nervous,” the removal of ground effect usually leads to a more consistent, predictable platform—exactly the kind of machinery that allowed Hamilton to win six titles with Mercedes. If the 2026 cars behave more like traditional race cars and less like stiff, aerodynamic bricks, the critics might find that the “old” Lewis Hamilton has been there all along, just waiting for a car that speaks his language.

The Frankenstein Power Units

However, the 2026 regulations bring their own monsters. The new power unit regulations mandate a 50/50 split between the internal combustion engine (ICE) and electrical power. The MGU-K output will triple to 350 kW. On paper, it sounds futuristic. In the simulator, it’s a horror story.

Drivers like Max Verstappen and Carlos Sainz have sounded the alarm. The batteries drain so quickly that cars are losing up to 450 horsepower in the middle of straights. Imagine thundering down the Monza straight at 200 mph, only to have the engine derate violently, forcing you to downshift while still at full throttle just to maintain momentum.

Pat Symonds, an engineering legend, called the resulting vehicle a “camel”—a compromised mess. Lance Stroll called it “sad.” The teams tried to block it, begging the FIA to reduce the electrical reliance to save the racing spectacle, but the motion failed.

This chaos is where Hamilton sees his opportunity. History shows that when the rulebook is torn up, experience and adaptability reign supreme. The chaotic, energy-management-heavy style of racing predicted for 2026 requires a cerebral driver, one who can manage tires, fuel, and now, a volatile battery state, all while battling wheel-to-wheel. Who better than the man who defined the hybrid era?

Ferrari’s Gamble: The SF26 Secrets

Behind the scenes at Maranello, Ferrari has made bold engineering choices for the SF26, directly influenced by Hamilton’s feedback. They have accepted that the SF25 was a failed architecture—fast but fragile, capable of pole positions but destroying its tires in the race.

For 2026, Ferrari is adopting push-rod suspension at both the front and rear—their first rear push-rod layout since 2010. This is a massive strategic shift. Push-rods offer better packaging and, more importantly, consistent mechanical control over ride height. Instead of chasing peak downforce that disappears the moment the car hits a bump (the weakness of the SF25), the SF26 is designed for stability and exploitability.

Even more radical is the engine. Ferrari has committed to steel alloy cylinder heads. It sounds archaic compared to modern aluminum, but steel allows for combustion chamber pressures and temperatures that were previously impossible. In a formula where energy efficiency is king, this thermal advantage could be the difference between winning and running out of battery power on the final straight.

This car is being built around Hamilton. His specific demands for clean, predictable feedback have shaped the ergonomics and the information flow of the cockpit. Ferrari isn’t just building a fast car; they are building a Lewis Hamilton car.

The Verdict

So, was Lewis Hamilton arrogant? Perhaps. But in the high-stakes world of Formula 1, arrogance is often just a premature statement of fact.

We are staring down the barrel of three scenarios. In one, the SF26 is a masterpiece, Hamilton returns to form, and Ralf Schumacher’s comments become a footnote in the history of bad takes. In another, the “Frankenstein” regulations ruin the racing, and Ferrari’s technical gamble pays off simply because their car breaks down the least, handing Hamilton an eighth title by attrition.

But there is a third, darker scenario: The critics were right. The years have taken their toll, the new cars are too nervous, and the “Not on my level” comment becomes the tragic epitaph of a champion who didn’t know when to quit.

Testing begins in Barcelona on January 26th. The world will be watching. But one thing is certain: when Lewis Hamilton spoke those five words, he wasn’t talking about the past. He was telling us that he is ready for the war to come. And in Formula 1, you should never, ever bet against Lewis Hamilton when he has something to prove.

In the high-octane world of Formula 1, speed is the currency that buys affection. We are hardwired to worship the spectacular: the smoking tires of a qualifying lap, the heart-stopping bravery of a late-braking overtake, and the visceral roar of an engine pushed to its mechanical breaking point. History remembers the daredevils, the drivers who danced on the razor’s edge of catastrophe. But while speed captures the headlines, it is control that captures the championships. And no one understood this cold, hard truth better than Alain Prost.

Prost, often dubbed “The Professor,” remains one of the most enigmatic figures in motorsport history. His legacy is frequently overshadowed by the fiery, spiritual intensity of his arch-rival, Ayrton Senna. Yet, a deeper look into Prost’s career reveals a startling reality: his approach to racing was arguably more dangerous to his competitors than raw speed ever could be. Prost didn’t just beat you; he dismantled the very logic of your race, turning your own aggression into a liability.

The Philosophy of Risk: Racing as a Problem to be Solved

From the moment he arrived on the grid, Alain Prost treated Formula 1 not as a contest of bravery, but as a complex equation of risk management. In an era defined by mechanical fragility—where turbocharged engines were ticking time bombs and tires were temperamental—Prost realized that the fastest driver was often the first to break down.

His mindset was revolutionary in its pragmatism. He understood that a Grand Prix wasn’t decided in the first corner or by a single “purple sector” on the timing screens. It was decided by the accumulation of small, almost invisible decisions made over the course of 300 kilometers. While his rivals were extracting 100% of the car’s performance at every moment, accepting a high probability of error or failure, Prost was operating at 98%.

This wasn’t a lack of speed; it was a surplus of intelligence. By driving slightly within the limit, he made his performance repeatable. He wasn’t interested in the volatility of brilliance. He was interested in the inevitability of the result. In a sport governed by chaos, Prost introduced the most terrifying variable of all: certainty.

The Art of Invisibility

To the casual observer, watching Alain Prost drive could be underwhelming. There were no dramatic corrections at the steering wheel, no clouds of tire smoke from locked brakes, and rarely any visible wrestling with the car. His driving style was so fluid, so economical, that it often looked slow.

But this “absence of spectacle” was his greatest weapon. Prost’s inputs were a masterclass in mechanical sympathy. He braked earlier than the aggressive late-brakers, but his release of the pedal was so smooth that he carried immense speed to the apex without unsettling the chassis. His throttle application was progressive, caressing the tires rather than punishing them.

This had tangible, race-winning consequences. By reducing the stress on the suspension, gearbox, and tires, Prost drastically reduced the likelihood of component failure. In the 1980s, when cars broke down with frustrating regularity, Prost’s ability to nurse machinery to the finish line was not luck—it was a skill. He wasn’t just driving the track; he was managing the car’s lifespan in real-time.

Lap times that appeared effortless were actually the result of structured execution. He didn’t need to push the car to its jagged edge to be fast. He simply removed the inefficiencies—the wheelspin, the slides, the corrections—that slowed others down. He proved that efficiency, not drama, is what sustains performance.

Unsettling Senna: The Weaponization of Consistency

Nowhere was Prost’s philosophy more potent—and more disruptive—than during his legendary tenure at McLaren alongside Ayrton Senna. The late 1980s gave us the greatest rivalry in sport, a clash not just of personalities, but of fundamental ideologies.

Senna was the poet of speed. He sought the limit in a spiritual quest, extracting peak performance in moments of undeniable brilliance. His qualifying laps were religious experiences. Prost, however, approached the same Honda-powered machinery with a cold, calculating objective: maximize the season, not the lap.

In 1988, both drivers annihilated the field, winning nearly every race between them. But the internal dynamic was telling. Senna pursued victory with a relentless, almost desperate aggression. He needed to dominate. Prost, conversely, prioritized the long game. He focused on finishing positions, reliability, and points.

This is where Prost’s genius became psychological warfare. By maintaining a relentless, error-free baseline, he forced Senna to take extreme risks to bridge the gap. Prost didn’t need to be faster than Senna to beat him; he just needed to be constantly present in Senna’s mirrors, waiting.

Prost’s consistency denied his rivals any breathing room. If Senna made a mistake, Prost was there. If Senna’s tires faded, Prost was there. If Senna’s engine blew from over-revving, Prost was there. This pressure—the pressure of a rival who simply would not go away—forced competitors into a corner. To beat Prost, you had to drive a perfect race, every single time. And in Formula 1, the harder you try to be perfect, the more likely you are to crash.

Prost didn’t defeat Senna by neutralizing his speed. He defeated him by shaping the conditions under which that speed mattered. He shifted the burden of risk entirely onto the Brazilian, watching calmly as the volatility of “maximum attack” took its toll.

Winning the Slowest Way Possible

There is an old racing adage: “To finish first, first you must finish.” For Prost, finishing was an active achievement. His races were defined by what didn’t happen. Fewer spins. Fewer collisions. Fewer recovery drives.

He turned “staying in the race” into a competitive weapon. In chaotic wet races or high-attrition events, Prost would often recede into the midfield, letting the hotheads eliminate themselves, only to emerge in the lead in the final laps. It wasn’t magic; it was patience.

This approach created an asymmetry in the championship tables. Points lost through crashes are gone forever. Points gained through consistent podiums compound like interest in a bank account. Prost understood that a championship is a war of attrition. You don’t win it by winning every battle; you win it by surviving the war with the most resources left.

The Perfect Exit

Perhaps the ultimate testament to Prost’s control was the way he left the sport. In 1993, returning from a sabbatical to drive for Williams, he didn’t struggle to adapt to the new, tech-heavy era of active suspension and traction control. He mastered it.

He secured his fourth World Championship with the same measured, deliberate style that had defined his rookie years. And then, he did something almost unheard of in elite sports: he stopped.

There was no decline. No sad final season driving for a backmarker team. No erosion of his skills. Prost retired as the champion, on his own terms. He understood that knowing when to stop is just as important as knowing when to push. It was the final, definitive act of control—a man dictating his own destiny rather than letting the sport retire him.

The Legacy of Control

Alain Prost’s legacy is often quieter than Senna’s. He doesn’t have the tragic mythology or the highlight reel of heroic, smoking-tire slides. But his significance to the sport is arguably deeper.

He taught Formula 1 that championships are built on the mundane, unsexy work of consistency. He showed that a driver’s greatest tool is their mind, not their right foot. In a world addicted to the extreme, Prost demonstrated the overwhelming power of the center.

Today, when we look at the driven precision of modern F1, we are looking at a sport made in Prost’s image. He was the first modern driver, the prototype for the analytical champions of the 21st century.

Speed captures our attention. It thrills us and scares us. But as Alain Prost proved time and time again, speed is just a variable. Control is the constant. And in the end, control decides the outcome.

Former Jaguar and Williams Formula 1 driver Antonio Pizzonia was arrested in the United States after an alleged assault at a karting track in Texas, where he was present to watch his son compete

View Image

Antonio Pizzonia raced 20 times in F1 for Jaguar and Williams(Image: AFP)

A former Formula 1 driver was arrested in the US following an alleged assault. Video footage circulating on social media captured ex-racer Antonio Pizzonia, who previously drove for Jaguar and Williams in F1, involved in a confrontation with another bloke at a racing event in Texas on Saturday.

TMZ reports that Pizzonia was taken into custody at a local jail around 6pm following his arrest. Montgomery County Police released a mugshot of the Brazilian before he was subsequently let go, having paid for his bail, according to Brazilian media.

The alleged incident occurred at a karting circuit where Pizzonia had turned up to support his son, Antonio Pizzonia Neto, who was racing. Video clips shared online show a man gesturing and pointing his finger at a young driver wearing a helmet – thought to be Pizzonia’s son – from behind a metal fence.

That individual then gets walloped with a flying kick from Pizzonia, who suddenly appears in shot, before landing a punch with his right fist. Onlookers managed to pull the pair apart, though this didn’t stop the former F1 driver from being arrested.

Following his release, the 45-year-old took to Instagram to address the incident: “Everyone, I’m okay and I’m back at home. Indeed there was an incident to which, today, I would have reacted in a different way.

“I understood at that moment that my son, a child, was being coerced by an adult and instinctively I defended him. Thank you to everyone for your messages of support.” Pizzonia has also shared several videos on his story, showing him playing with his daughter at home.

Now 45, he has continued to race beyond his brief F1 career, which lasted three seasons from 2003 to 2005. He made his debut with Jaguar, racing alongside Mark Webber but was dropped after 12 Grands Prix, having failed to score a point.

He was kept on as a test driver by Williams and raced four times in 2004 in place of the injured Ralf Schumacher, earning six points. Pizzonia remained a reserve for 2005 but again got opportunities to drive, racing five more times for Williams and adding two more points to his career total.

However, he did not secure a permanent race seat for 2006, with the team choosing to sign newly-crowned GP2 champion Nico Rosberg, a future F1 champion with Mercedes.

After that, Pizzonia raced a few times in GP2 himself but primarily participated in motorsport events in his homeland. He competed in the Brazilian Stock Car championship over many years, though recently returned to Europe for the BOSS GP Racing series, where he won the Open Class title in 2023 and 2024.

In the high-octane theater of Formula 1, championships are rarely lost on a single corner or a failed pit stop. More often, they are lost in the quiet, invisible moments where psychology shifts and authority is ceded. As the dust settles on the 2025 season, with Lando Norris crowned the new World Champion and Red Bull’s Max Verstappen narrowly missing out on a miraculous comeback, the forensic analysis of the year has zeroed in on one specific afternoon in Italy. It was the day Oscar Piastri, then the championship leader, made a decision that Max Verstappen described with characteristic brutality as “selling his soul.”

The 2025 Italian Grand Prix at Monza was supposed to be a coronation of sorts for Piastri. Arriving at the Temple of Speed with a commanding 34-point lead in the Drivers’ Championship, the Australian sensation was in the form of his life. He held the momentum, the mathematical advantage, and the aura of a champion-in-waiting. But by the time the checkered flag fell, that aura had been punctured—not by a rival, but by his own team.

The Moment Authority Shifted

The incident in question occurred midway through the race. McLaren, intent on maximizing team points and maintaining internal harmony, ordered Piastri to yield his position to Lando Norris. The justification was procedural: Norris had lost time due to a slow pit stop, and the team judged that the “fair” on-road order required Piastri to step aside.

In a vacuum, it was a logical, fair-minded request. But a Formula 1 title fight does not exist in a vacuum. It exists in a shark tank. Piastri questioned the call briefly, his voice crackling over the radio with a hint of hesitation, before ultimately complying. He moved over. He let Norris through.

To the casual observer, it was a display of exemplary professionalism. To Max Verstappen, watching from the cockpit of a struggling Red Bull, it was a catastrophic surrender.

“Obey once without absolute justification, and you sell your soul,” Verstappen later remarked in a candid interview with Swiss outlet Blick. “From that moment, the team owns the leverage, not the driver.”

Verstappen’s critique cuts to the core of what it means to be a champion. In his view, Piastri wasn’t just sacrificing track position; he was sacrificing the psychological hierarchy of the team. By obeying an order to disadvantage himself while leading the championship, Piastri validated a system where “fairness” superseded his own ambition. He signaled to McLaren that he could be moved, that his title lead was negotiable, and that procedural symmetry was more important than his individual dominance.

The High Cost of “Fairness”

The consequences of Monza were not immediately visible on the scoreboard, but they were structural. According to paddock insiders, the dynamic within McLaren shifted overnight. Before Monza, Piastri was the protected leader. After Monza, he was merely one half of a duo.

The championship fight, which should have tightened around Piastri’s protection, instead destabilized. McLaren maintained a “level playing field” doctrine, insisting both drivers were free to race. But as Verstappen noted, this apparent equality was a poison chalice for the man in the lead. Piastri now carried the immense pressure of defending a title lead without the strategic insulation that usually accompanies it. Every strategy call became conditional. Every marginal scenario was filtered through a lens of internal fairness rather than the external threat posed by rival teams.

“The pressure no longer came from rivals alone; it came from within the garage,” noted one F1 analyst. While Piastri remained fast and consistent, he was no longer untouchable. Norris, conversely, gained what experts call “strategic oxygen.” Emboldened by the team’s willingness to intervene in his favor, Norris began to drive with a new aggression, knowing the system was porous enough to allow his ascent.

Verstappen’s Ruthless Verdict

Max Verstappen’s take on the situation was devoid of sympathy. When asked if he would have complied with a similar order while leading the championship, his answer was instantaneous: “Definitely not.”

For the Dutchman, defiance in such a scenario is not about selfishness; it is about self-preservation. “Comply once,” he argued, “and the team learns it can overrule you again. That isn’t cooperation; it’s surrender.”

Verstappen’s comments sparked a war of words with Lando Norris. The British driver fired back, accusing the Red Bull ace of “talking nonsense” and lacking a clue about McLaren’s cultural values. Norris framed the conflict as a clash of philosophies: Red Bull’s chaotic aggression versus McLaren’s structured process. He suggested that McLaren chose harmony even at a cost.

But in defending the system, Norris implicitly defended the outcome that benefited him. The title fight morphed from Driver vs. Driver into Philosophy vs. Philosophy. Was it better to be ruthless and hated, or fair and vulnerable?

The Unraveling of a Dream

As the season barreled toward its climax, the abstract cost of Piastri’s obedience became painfully concrete. The 34-point buffer he enjoyed at Monza eroded not through crashes or mechanical failures, but through a slow, grinding erosion of priority. The “fairness” McLaren prided itself on meant that when the margins narrowed, there was no firewall to protect Piastri.

By the season finale in Abu Dhabi, the tables had turned completely. The final standings read like a tragedy for the Australian: Lando Norris, World Champion. Max Verstappen, a resurgent second place, missing the title by just two points after clawing back a staggering 104-point deficit. And Oscar Piastri, the man who had controlled the season in late summer, languishing in third.

The data supports the narrative of a psychological collapse. Following Monza, Piastri’s driving lacked the razor-sharp edge of the early season. He didn’t lose the title in a single moment of weakness on track; he lost it because the team environment had ceased to prioritize his victory.

Red Bull’s Chaos vs. McLaren’s Symmetry

The irony of the 2025 season lies in the contrast between the two top teams. Red Bull Racing spent the latter half of the year in absolute turmoil, capped by the shock dismissal of team principal Christian Horner after the British Grand Prix. By Verstappen’s own admission, the team was in chaos, and no one believed a comeback was possible.

Yet, within that instability, the authority structure never wavered. Red Bull rallied around one objective: Max Verstappen. Strategy flowed one way. Decisions had a single beneficiary. While McLaren was busy balancing the scales of justice between Norris and Piastri, Red Bull was sharpening a spear tip.

Verstappen’s near-miss—recovering from over 100 points behind to finish within a breath of the title—stands as a testament to the power of a singular focus. It haunted McLaren’s approach. “When teams hesitate to choose outcomes, the outcomes are chosen for them,” Verstappen noted. McLaren didn’t implode; they functioned exactly as designed. The discomfort for Piastri fans comes from the realization that this design was never built to support a runaway champion.

A Legacy Redefined

As the paddock looks toward the new regulations of 2026, the scars of 2025 remain fresh. Max Verstappen enters the new era emboldened, voted the season’s top driver by peers who view his refusal to yield as a strength. Lando Norris enters as a champion, validated by the result.

But Oscar Piastri enters 2026 with a heavy question mark hanging over his helmet. It is not a question of his speed or his talent—both are undeniable. It is a question of his authority. Did his obedience in 2025 permanently redefine how far he is allowed to go?

McLaren proved that fairness can indeed win championships—Lando Norris has the trophy to prove it. But Max Verstappen proved something far more uncomfortable: that fairness can dilute power when a title fight demands imbalance.

The lesson of Monza is clear. Championships are not always decided by what you do wrong. Sometimes, as Oscar Piastri learned in the most painful way possible, they are decided by what you allow others to decide for you.

The 2026 Formula 1 season was supposed to be the dawn of a revolutionary new era. Instead, just weeks before the engines are set to fire, the paddock is gripped by rumors of chaos, production delays, and a race against time that some teams are destined to lose.

As the Formula 1 world turns its gaze toward Barcelona for the highly anticipated “behind closed doors” pre-season testing, a bombshell report has sent shockwaves through the sport. According to emerging leaks and paddock whispers, up to three teams—including a suspected top contender—are in danger of missing the start of testing entirely. The reasons range from last-minute chassis redesigns to severe weight limit struggles, painting a picture of a grid that is far less prepared for the radical 2026 regulations than anyone dared to imagine.

The “Late” Arrivals: A Top Team in Trouble?

The most alarming development concerns the upcoming Barcelona test sessions, scheduled between January 26th and January 30th. This five-day window was intended to be the first shakedown for the new generation of cars, a critical opportunity to verify reliability before the official Bahrain testing. However, sources from Motorsport Italia and other outlets suggest that not everyone will be present when the pit lane opens.

Rumors indicate that at least two, possibly three, teams are scrambling to finish their cars. The whispers suggest that while some teams might just be playing tactical games with the weather, others are genuinely behind the manufacturing curve. The most terrifying prospect for fans is the suggestion that a “top team” is among the stragglers.

With Audi already hitting the track and McLaren projecting confidence, the spotlight of suspicion has fallen heavily on the other giants of the grid. Could it be Red Bull, struggling with the monumental task of their own engine project? Or is it Ferrari, a team historically prone to winter drama? The uncertainty has created a tense atmosphere, with every day of silence from the factories amplifying the anxiety. Missing these initial days in Barcelona wouldn’t just be embarrassing; in a year of brand-new regulations, it could result in a data deficit that takes half a season to recover from.

Ferrari’s “Unspecified Delay”: Chaos or Calculated Risk?

At the center of the storm is Scuderia Ferrari. The Prancing Horse is facing intense scrutiny following reports of a “chaotic” production phase in Maranello. While Team Principal Fred Vasseur has publicly stated his desire for the team to operate “under the radar,” the current silence is being interpreted by some as a sign of trouble.

Insiders report a peculiar situation regarding the SF26 (this year’s challenger). While drivers Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton have reportedly completed their seat fittings—using advanced 3D scanning technology rather than the traditional foam casting—the car itself had not been “fired up” at the time of the reports.

The delay appears to stem from the chassis department. Sources suggest that the final build of the new car suffered an “unspecified delay,” triggered by sudden, late changes prior to assembly. This necessitated further testing and validation, pushing the timeline dangerously close to the deadline.

This revelation has split opinion among analysts. On one hand, it could be a sign of a fundamental flaw discovered at the eleventh hour—a disaster scenario that would force Ferrari to rush a “patch-job” car to Spain. On the other hand, it might be a calculated gamble. Did Ferrari’s engineers find a loophole or a significant performance gain that was worth delaying the build for? In the high-stakes world of F1, a week of delay for a tenth of a second in lap time is a trade often accepted, but the margin for error is non-existent.

For Charles Leclerc, this season is pivotal. Entering another year in red, the pressure is mounting. Rumors persist that if the 2026 car fails to deliver championship-contending performance, the decade-long relationship between the Monegasque driver and the Scuderia could come to an abrupt end. With Lewis Hamilton joining the fray, the internal dynamics are already complex; a slow car would be the match that lights the powder keg.

Aston Martin’s Heavy Burden

While Ferrari battles production timelines, Aston Martin is reportedly fighting a different enemy: gravity. Shocking reports claim that the Silverstone-based team is currently projecting to be roughly 15kg over the minimum weight limit.

In modern Formula 1, weight is lap time. Being 15kg overweight is a catastrophic handicap, potentially costing the team upwards of half a second per lap purely on physics. This issue highlights the immense technical challenge of the 2026 regulations. The new power units are heavier, yet the minimum weight limit for the cars has been reduced by approximately 30kg. Simultaneously, crash testing and safety standards have become more stringent. This “perfect storm” of engineering constraints has left teams scrambling to shave grams wherever possible.

Lance Stroll, usually guarded in his comments, offered a surprisingly candid assessment, admitting, “We don’t have all the tools.” This sentiment was echoed by reports concerning Adrian Newey, the design genius recently recruited by Aston Martin. Newey is reportedly already focused on a major upgrade package targeting weight reduction, tentatively scheduled for the fifth or sixth race of the season.

If true, this means Aston Martin accepts they will start the season on the back foot. It draws unparalleled comparisons to the 2022 Red Bull, which also started overweight but eventually dominated. However, can Aston Martin rely on “doing a Red Bull” against competitors like McLaren and Mercedes, who seem to have hit their targets? The fear is that by the time Aston sheds the weight, the championship train will have already left the station.

Red Bull’s “Sleepless Nights”

Over at Red Bull, the mood is one of grim determination rather than boisterous confidence. The team is embarking on its most ambitious project yet: becoming an independent engine manufacturer with Red Bull Powertrains.

Laurent Mekies of the RB team (Red Bull’s sister outfit) offered a damning assessment of the winter ahead, warning that “a few very, very difficult months await us,” citing “sleepless nights” and “headaches.” While this might be an exercise in managing expectations, it aligns with earlier comments from Christian Horner, who hinted that beating Mercedes immediately with a first-year engine would be a tall order.

The concern for the Red Bull camp is real. If the engine is underpowered or unreliable, Max Verstappen—arguably the greatest driver of his generation—could find himself fighting for podium scraps rather than wins. The implications for the driver market are explosive; if Verstappen spends 2026 watching the rear wings of McLarens and Mercedes, his phone will undoubtedly be ringing with offers from rivals.

The Barcelona Gamble

The decision to possibly skip the first day (or days) of the Barcelona test is a high-stakes gamble driven by necessity. The specific testing rules for this session allow teams to run on three out of the five available days. This flexibility was designed to account for weather, but struggling teams are using it as a lifeline to buy extra production time.

However, Barcelona is a circuit that demands respect. Its mix of high-speed corners, technical chicanes, and long straights makes it the ultimate test bench for aerodynamics and tire wear. Skipping it to focus on the Bahrain test (which follows shortly after) means missing out on crucial correlation data. If a team arrives in Bahrain and discovers a correlation issue that could have been spotted in Spain, their season is effectively compromised before the first light goes out in Melbourne.

A Omen in the Sky?

Amidst the technical despair and political maneuvering, a bizarre statistical anomaly has captured the imagination of the Tifosi. On March 3rd, 2026, a rare “Blood Moon” (total lunar eclipse) will occur.

F1 historians have noted that since the championship began in 1950, there has been only one other Blood Moon on March 3rd. That year was 2007—the last time a Ferrari driver (Kimi Raikkonen) won the World Drivers’ Championship.

Is it a cosmic sign that the chaos in Maranello will ultimately resolve into triumph? Or is it merely a fun coincidence to distract from the very real possibility of a missed deadline? As the clock ticks down to January 26th, the factories are burning the midnight oil. The 2026 season hasn’t started, but the race for survival is already underway.

SHOCK HEALTH REVEAL: Dr Punɑm Krishɑn hɑs reveɑled she is bɑttling cɑncer, opening up ɑbout ɑ diɑgnosis thɑt cɑme ɑs ɑ complete shock

Strictly Come Dancing star Dr Punam Krishan has revealed she is battling breast cancer as she shared the ‘shock’ diagnosis on Instagram on Sunday.

The doctor and TV star, 42, said she was given the devastating news five months ago and has been ‘to some very dark places’ since.

Dr Punam, who took part in the BBC series in 2024, explained that despite being in ‘fear’, she is taking things one day at a time.

She wrote: ‘Here goes… Five months ago, I heard the words nobody ever wants to hear: You have cancer.

‘I still find it hard to write that sentence. But it’s my reality and my truth.

‘I’ve spent almost 2 decades as a doctor, supporting patients and families through difficult diagnoses. And yet, nothing – absolutely nothing – prepares you for being on the receiving end yourself.

‘The shock. The fear. The trauma. In that moment, knowledge means very little.’

Strictly Come Dancing star Dr Punam Krishan, 42, has revealed she is battling breast cancer as she shared the ‘shock’ diagnosis on Instagram on Sunday

The doctor and TV star said she was given the devastating news five months ago and has been ‘to some very dark places’ since; pictured 2024

She continued: ‘I was diagnosed with breast cancer.

‘Since then, I’ve taken things one day at a time because that’s all I could do. I’ve been incredibly fortunate to be cared for by the most extraordinary NHS team, from my GP through to my breast and oncology teams. And still… it’s been really hard. Much harder than I ever imagined.

‘I’ve kept this private while going through treatment, trying to protect my energy and most of all – my children.

‘My husband, my family and a small circle of friends have carried me through in ways I’ll never forget. When something like this happens, you realise very quickly what – and who – truly matters.’

Punam, who is the resident doctor on BBC’s Morning Live show, explained that she had a ‘gut instinct’ that something was wrong and urged fans to get checked.

She said has completed her treatment and has decided to share the scary news now with fans as she is ‘still shaken’ and feeling ‘heavy’.

The BBC star penned: ‘I’ve now completed treatment and I’m healing. Grateful. Relieved. Still shaken. All of those things can exist at once.

‘I’m sharing this now because carrying it quietly has been heavy. Because I’ve always believed in honesty.

Dr Punam, who took part in the BBC series in 2024, explained that despite being in ‘fear’, she is taking things one day at a time

She wrote: ‘Here goes… Five months ago, I heard the words nobody ever wants to hear: You have cancer. I still find it hard to write that sentence. But it’s my reality and my truth’

Punam explained that she had a ‘gut instinct’ that something was wrong and urged fans to get checked early

‘And because life rarely looks like the highlight reel, even when it seems that way from the outside.

‘Cancer doesn’t discriminate. I had no family history. I was well. I’m a doctor. And yet – here I am.

‘What I’ve learned most is this: early detection saves lives. It saved mine. My story began with an unusual feeling – a gut instinct. Listening to it mattered. Please know your body. Trust yourself. And act early if something doesn’t feel right.

‘This experience has changed me. It’s taken me to very dark places mentally – conversations about your own mortality will do that – but it’s also stripped life back to what truly matters.

‘Your health is everything. Not work. Not possessions. Not perfection. I have so much more to share when I’m ready. For now, thank you for being here and for holding space with such kindness.’

Punam’s friends and Strictly pals quickly took to the comments to send their love including her former dance partner Gorka Marquez and professional dancer Amy Dowden, who has also suffered breast cancer.

Gorka penned: ‘I know you and I Know you will get through this! And we will be sat having a coffee and a croissant’.

Amy wrote: ‘You got this pink sister xxxxxxx sending so much love xxxxxxxxx’

Others penned: ‘Sending so much love to you; Sending you all the love ..You’ve got this; You know I adore you – you did everything right – Sending so much love and duas;

‘Sending my love!!!!! Speedy recovery xx; Thank you so much for sharing and raising awareness about early detection. Sending you lots of love’.

Dr Punam’s Strictly pals took to the comments to send their love including her former partner Gorka Marquez and professional dancer Amy Dowden, who has also suffered breast cancer

Punam is happily married to Scottish Conservative health spokesman, Dr Sandesh Gulhane, who she shares two children, a son Aarish, 12, and a daughter Ellora, five

Punam took part in the 2024 series of Strictly and came in eleventh place with comedian Chris McCausland going on to win the Glitterball.

She is happily married to Scottish Conservative health spokesman, Dr Sandesh Gulhane, who she shares two children, a son Aarish, 12, and a daughter Ellora, five, with and regularly shares snaps of the family on Instagram.

The star is a broadcaster on TV, radio and national newspapers, who is passionate about using her platform to teach people more about their physical and mental health.

The NHS GP is one of the resident doctors on BBC Morning Live and on BBC Radio Scotland’s Phone In Surgery.

She is also an author of How to Be A Doctor And Other Life-Saving Jobs and published You And Your Body last year.

Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world and affects more than two MILLION women a year

Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in the world. Each year in the UK there are more than 55,000 new cases, and the disease claims the lives of 11,500 women. In the US, it strikes 266,000 each year and kills 40,000. But what causes it and how can it be treated?

What is breast cancer?

It comes from a cancerous cell which develops in the lining of a duct or lobule in one of the breasts.

When the breast cancer has spread into surrounding tissue it is called ‘invasive’. Some people are diagnosed with ‘carcinoma in situ’, where no cancer cells have grown beyond the duct or lobule.

Most cases develop in those over the age of 50 but younger women are sometimes affected. Breast cancer can develop in men, though this is rare.

Staging indicates how big the cancer is and whether it has spread. Stage 1 is the earliest stage and stage 4 means the cancer has spread to another part of the body.

The cancerous cells are graded from low, which means a slow growth, to high, which is fast-growing. High-grade cancers are more likely to come back after they have first been treated.

What causes breast cancer?

A cancerous tumour starts from one abnormal cell. The exact reason why a cell becomes cancerous is unclear. It is thought that something damages or alters certain genes in the cell. This makes the cell abnormal and multiply ‘out of control’.

Although breast cancer can develop for no apparent reason, there are some risk factors that can increase the chance, such as genetics.

What are the symptoms of breast cancer?

The usual first symptom is a painless lump in the breast, although most are not cancerous and are fluid filled cysts, which are benign.

The first place that breast cancer usually spreads to is the lymph nodes in the armpit. If this occurs you will develop a swelling or lump in an armpit.

How is breast cancer diagnosed?

Initial assessment: A doctor examines the breasts and armpits. They may do tests such as a mammography, a special x-ray of the breast tissue which can indicate the possibility of tumours.
Biopsy: A biopsy is when a small sample of tissue is removed from a part of the body. The sample is then examined under a microscope to look for abnormal cells. The sample can confirm or rule out cancer.

If you are confirmed to have breast cancer, further tests may be needed to assess if it has spread. For example, blood tests, an ultrasound scan of the liver or a chest X-ray.

How is breast cancer treated?

Treatment options which may be considered include surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and hormone treatment. Often a combination of two or more of these treatments are used.

Surgery: Breast-conserving surgery or the removal of the affected breast depending on the size of the tumour.
Radiotherapy: A treatment which uses high energy beams of radiation focused on cancerous tissue. This kills cancer cells, or stops them from multiplying. It is mainly used in addition to surgery.
Chemotherapy: A treatment of cancer by using anti-cancer drugs which kill cancer cells, or stop them from multiplying.
Hormone treatments: Some types of breast cancer are affected by the ‘female’ hormone oestrogen, which can stimulate the cancer cells to divide and multiply. Treatments which reduce the level of these hormones, or prevent them from working, are commonly used in people with breast cancer.

How successful is treatment?

The outlook is best in those who are diagnosed when the cancer is still small, and has not spread. Surgical removal of a tumour in an early stage may then give a good chance of cure.

The routine mammography offered to women between the ages of 50 and 71 means more breast cancers are being diagnosed and treated at an early stage.

For more information visit breastcancernow.org or call its free helpline on 0808 800 6000

TRIPLE TRAGEDY AT SEA: A 45-year-old mother and her 15-year-old daughter who were swept out to sea have now been named and pictured — alongside the “hero” who lost his life trying to save them

A mother and her teenage daughter who were swept out to sea have been named and pictured.

Grace Keeling, 15, was wave-watching with her mum at Withernsea, Yorkshire, on Friday afternoon when she got caught in the water, it is understood.

Sarah Keeling, 45, bravely waded into the sea trying to reach for her daughter after hearing her call out for help.

She was joined by Good Samaritan Mark Ratcliffe – a member of the public who heroically tried to assist with the rescue.

The bodies of Ms Keeling and 67-year-old Mr Ratcliffe were recovered from the freezing water on Friday evening, while searches for Grace are ongoing.

Today, the mother and daughter were named and pictured for the first time since the tragedy took place.

Mr Ratcliffe’s family described him as a ‘true selfless hero’ after he died trying to stop the pair being swept out to sea.

He selflessly braved 12ft waves after seeing the teenager get into difficulty in the water.

Mother and daughter 15-year-old Grace Keeling and Sarah Keeling, 45, were swept out to sea at Withernsea, Yorkshire, on Friday

Mark Ratcliffe, 67, a member of the public, also died after bravely trying to assist with the rescue

Emergency services were called to Withernsea following a ‘number of people in difficulty in the water’ on Friday afternoon

Mr Ratcliffe was recovered from the water unconscious shortly before 10pm on Friday and died soon after, Humberside Police said.

The two adults came within inches of saving the teen, it is understood.

In a heartbreaking tribute to Mr Ratcliffe, his family said: ‘A true selfless hero with a heart of gold, who was so cruelly taken trying to save others.

‘So many lives are now shattered that you’re gone. You were loved by so many people, and we will all miss you forever.

‘A loving husband, father, son, brother and the best grandad anybody could ever wish for. Sleep tight, we love you, we miss you.’

Mr Ratcliffe’s son bid an emotional farewell to his father on Facebook, adding: ‘Bye Dad I miss you and I will never forget the true hero and role model you were. I will continue to make you proud.’

Friends of Ms Keeling took to social media on Sunday night to pay tribute to the mother, who was described as a ‘caring, loving person’.

One friend wrote: ‘I am genuinely heartbroken about seeing this. Sarah was one of the most genuine, respectful, lovely women I have ever met, years and years and one of my clients from the beginning. My heart to her husband and family.’

Another friend said: ‘Absolutely heartbreaking news. Sincere condolences to the families at this awful time, known Sarah for years, such a caring, loving person. Life is so cruel at times.’

The area had been cordoned off while emergency services launched their search operation

The HM Coastguard helicopter hovers above the sea as part of the rescue operation

Cafe owner Paul Whitehead, 60, said the teenager was on some steps when a ‘huge wave’ crashed into her and swept her away.

He told how his staff had tried to help by throwing a life ring to the girl.

‘This was a tragic accident. The girl was enjoying the spectacle of the waves, but the sea was so rough she got swept away by the force of the water,’ Mr Whitehead told The Sun.

‘One of my staff tried to help her with a life ring. The girl grabbed the ring, but the sea was so rough she couldn’t hold on.’

A statement from Humberside Police said: ‘Following reports of concerns for safety for people in the water in Withernsea, with the permission of the family, Humberside Police can now confirm that a mother and daughter, 45-year-old Sarah Keeling and 15-year-old Grace Keeling, were involved in this tragic incident, alongside 67-year-old Mark Ratcliffe, a member of the public who died trying to assist with the rescue.

‘The bodies of Sarah Keeling and Mark Ratcliffe were recovered on the evening of Friday, 2 January 2026. Searches are still ongoing to locate Grace.

‘Both families continue to be supported by specially trained officers.’

Humberside Police previously confirmed that two bodies were pulled from the water. They called off their search for the girl on Saturday night after being hampered by blizzards and sub–zero temperatures.

The tragedy came hours after a 51–year–old from Kettering died after getting into difficulty in the sea at Brighton on New Year’s Day.