Ferrari Threw Away a One-Two With an Unnecessary Final Pit Stop

Charles Leclerc was nearly two seconds a lap faster than Carlos Sainz — and finished third because Ferrari panicked with two laps to go.

Charles Leclerc was the fastest Ferrari at Mexico City by nearly two seconds a lap. He finished behind his teammate. The reason isn't bad luck or a slower strategy — it's that Ferrari brought him into the pits with two laps remaining when he was guaranteed a podium.

Key Finding

Leclerc had the pace to win but lost 30 seconds in the pits chasing a fastest lap that didn't matter.

Leclerc ran the same tyres — then added a final stop

LEC vs SAI — tyre strategy across 71 laps

The green bars are identical for 69 laps. Then Leclerc bolted on softs for a two-lap sprint that cost him second place.

LEC: M→H→S | SAI: M→H

Key Finding

Leclerc had the pace to win but lost 30 seconds in the pits chasing a fastest lap that didn't matter.

Carlos Sainz won this race on a one-stop strategy: mediums to lap 32, then hards to the flag. Leclerc ran the exact same plan — medium to lap 31, hard to lap 69 — and was closing the gap to Lando Norris in second when Ferrari called him in for soft tyres with two laps left.

The stop dropped him from third to fifth. He clawed back past George Russell and Lewis Hamilton to finish third, 34 seconds behind his teammate. The math is simple: Leclerc lost more time in the final pit stop than he could ever recover in two racing laps.

The gap was stable — until Ferrari intervened

LEC vs SAI — gap between them on every lap

The huge dive at lap 69 is the final pit stop. Leclerc went from racing Norris for second to recovering from fifth.

LEC aheadSAI ahead

Final gap: SAI ahead by 34.4s.

Key Finding

Leclerc had the pace to win but lost 30 seconds in the pits chasing a fastest lap that didn't matter.

Ferrari's reasoning was transparent: go for fastest lap. But fastest lap only awards a point if you finish in the top ten, and Leclerc was already there. What it doesn't award is track position, which is what he actually needed to challenge for the win.

The hard tyres weren't falling off a cliff — Leclerc's degradation was effectively flat across the stint, losing just one-hundredth of a second per lap. Sainz was managing the same compound to the end without issue. There was no strategic reason to pit. The tyres were fine. The gap to Norris was manageable. Ferrari panicked.

Key Finding

Leclerc had the pace to win but lost 30 seconds in the pits chasing a fastest lap that didn't matter.

The final insult: Leclerc did set the fastest lap on his out-lap after the stop — lap 71, a 78.3-second flier on fresh softs. But by then he'd already surrendered second place and any realistic chance of pressuring Sainz for the win.

Here's what Ferrari needs to understand before São Paulo: when your faster driver is on the same strategy as the leader and closing the gap, you let him race. You don't invent a problem that doesn't exist. You don't sacrifice 30 seconds of track position for a fastest lap point when a podium position is on the line. Someone on that pit wall made a call that turned a potential one-two into a win and a distant third.

Key Finding

Leclerc had the pace to win but lost 30 seconds in the pits chasing a fastest lap that didn't matter.

At São Paulo, the question isn't whether Leclerc has the pace — Mexico proved he does. The question is whether Ferrari will let him use it, or whether they'll find another way to intervene when he doesn't need the help.

Jamie Carver

@@jamiecarver_f1

Tap to continue