The Madring: The Most Boring Race on the F1 Calendar

Formula 1 has a new problem: the Madring.

After months of anticipation, the first-ever Spanish Grand Prix at Madrid’s new circuit promised to give Formula 1 something different…

A brand-new track, a huge crowd, a spectacular setting and, hopefully, another circuit capable of producing the kind of racing that makes F1 so compelling.

Instead, Sunday’s race was, for long periods, incredibly difficult for motorsport fans to watch.

Kimi Antonelli took the victory in the inaugural Spanish Grand Prix, with Max Verstappen finishing second and Lando Norris third.

Antonelli’s win was certainly significant as his eighth victory of the season, but the result was shaped more by strategy and circumstance than by the racing produced on track.

Norris had led from pole and looked extremely strong before a badly timed Virtual Safety Car left him vulnerable, eventually dropping him to third.

This is perhaps the biggest problem with the Madring: there simply weren’t enough genuine opportunities to overtake.

A Layout That Looks Better Than It Races

On paper, the Madring is an interesting circuit.

At around 5.4 kilometres long and featuring 22 corners, it combines fast sections, tight corners, heavy braking zones and the highly distinctive La Monumental section. There is plenty going on, and visually the circuit certainly has character.

But, for me, a circuit shouldn’t be judged by how interesting the track map looks. It should be judged by the racing it produces.

The Madring’s biggest weakness became painfully obvious on Sunday: there are next to no overtaking opportunities.

There are long sections where cars can follow one another, but following is not the same as racing. A driver can be faster, have fresher tyres and have overtake mode available, yet still be unable to get close enough to make a move.

It was a problem we saw multiple times across yesterday’s 57-lap race, with the frustration evident among both drivers and fans, particularly in the post-race interviews.

Where Were The Overtakes?

Overtaking and wheel-to-wheel battles were supposed to be one of the big tests for the new circuit.

Would the long straights and heavy braking zones create opportunities? Would the 2026 regulations, which have produced some fascinating changes in how cars race each other, make the track work?

The answer from Sunday’s race was pretty clear.

No, not really.

Reports counted just four on-track passes after the opening lap. That is an astonishingly low number for a modern Formula 1 Grand Prix, particularly one taking place on a brand-new circuit.

The problem wasn’t simply that there weren’t many overtakes. It was that there were so few moments where it even looked as though an overtake might happen.

Verstappen defending from Norris late in the race was a perfect example. Norris appeared to have the pace, but pace alone wasn’t enough. He could get close, but getting alongside Verstappen, or even getting far enough alongside to launch an attack, seemed almost impossible.

Instead of drivers attacking one another, we ended up watching gaps being managed.

When Strategy Became More Important Than Racing

Ironically, the most important moments of the race happened away from overtaking.

Norris had done almost everything right, starting on pole, building a lead and looking capable of controlling the race. Yet the Virtual Safety Car changed everything.

Antonelli and Verstappen were able to benefit from the timing of the stoppage, while Norris was left on the wrong side of the strategy after passing the pit entrance.

Antonelli eventually won, despite suggesting afterwards that Norris deserved the victory.

Mercedes executed their pit and tyre strategies well, and Antonelli ultimately had the race pace of a deserving winner.

But the end result does highlight an uncomfortable truth about the Madring.

If the circuit doesn’t allow a driver who has lost out strategically to fight their way back through the field, then strategy becomes disproportionately important.

At other tracks like Bahrain, Baku or COTA, where you have multiple heavy braking zones, long straights and alternative racing lines, losing a position through a pit-stop gamble at least gives you an opportunity to fight for it back at a later stage.

From our first outing at the Madring, it seems you might just have to sit in your position and wait.

The Answer Isn’t Artificial Overtaking

As fans, of course we don’t want the Madring to become a circuit where drivers simply blast past one another at 200mph, treating every lap like an overtake mode simulator.

Overtaking should still require commitment, and drivers should have to position their cars properly, brake late and take a risk.

But the track needs to give a realistic opportunity to do it.

The best circuits on the F1 calendar generally give drivers multiple ways to attack. If you miss one opportunity, there is another one coming. If you defend one corner, perhaps you compromise yourself for the next. That’s racing.

Yet the Madring didn’t really offer that.

It felt too easy for the car in front to dictate the pace and too difficult for the car behind to change the situation.

And when that happens, the race quickly becomes a procession.

What Should Change Before Next Year’s Race?

The good news is that the Madring doesn’t have to remain this way.

Formula 1 has already seen plenty of circuits evolve after their debut, and the Madring should be no different.

Personally, I would like to see the layout changed before next year’s race, with the priority being to create one or two additional genuine overtaking opportunities.

The most obvious would be to look at Turns 18 and 19. Removing or significantly simplifying that section could create a much longer run into the final corners, giving drivers more time to get alongside and attack under braking.

I’d also look at the Turns 10 and 11 chicane before La Monumental. Opening that sequence up could allow cars to follow more closely and carry more momentum into the enormous banked corner, potentially creating opportunities to race side-by-side rather than simply queue behind one another.

Finally, the exit of Turn 22 needs to be improved to create a stronger acceleration zone onto the main straight and give the following car a better chance of attacking into Turn 1.

The goal shouldn’t be to completely redesign the circuit.

The Madring has some genuinely interesting characteristics, and I think there is a good track buried underneath the problems we saw on Sunday.

These changes would simply make better use of the track that is already there.

If a driver is three tenths of a second faster, that advantage should actually mean something. If a driver has better tyres, they should be able to attack. If someone makes a mistake, the car behind should have a chance to capitalise.

At the moment, the circuit doesn’t consistently allow that.

The Madring Deserves Another Chance

Every new circuit needs time, so we shouldn’t write off the Madring after just one race. Teams learn the track, engineers understand the tyres, drivers find the limits and organisers can identify what works and what doesn’t.

But Formula 1 shouldn’t ignore what happened on Sunday either.

The first impression matters, and the Madring’s first impression was not a good one from a racing perspective.

The spectacle surrounding the Grand Prix was impressive; the event had plenty of atmosphere, while the circuit itself looked spectacular.

But Formula 1 ultimately needs to produce a race.

And Sunday didn’t produce enough of one.

Kimi Antonelli may have made history as the first winner at the Madring, but if the circuit wants to become a long-term favourite on the F1 calendar, something needs to change.

For next year’s Spanish Grand Prix, fans don’t want to see a completely different circuit.

They just want to see a Madring where drivers can actually race each other.

Because a Formula 1 circuit shouldn’t simply be a place where 22 cars drive around for 300 kilometres.

It should be a place where the fastest drivers and best cars are given the opportunity to prove themselves.