As Formula 1 debates how to inject more drama into its Sundays, the FIA’s proposal to make two pitstops mandatory in 2026 has been met with a collective shrug – or outright skepticism – from team bosses and even a split opinion within Pirelli itself.
After three consecutive one-stop races in Baku, Singapore, and Austin, the idea surfaced in the Mexico Grand Prix drivers’ briefing and landed on the agenda of the F1 Commission.
Yet when the topic came up again in Friday’s team bosses press conference at the Sao Paulo Grand Prix, the reaction was tepid at best.
A Rational Collective Push Back
Racing Bulls’ Alan Permane was the first to sound the alarm about the unintended consequences of forcing multiple stops on teams.
“Everyone likes two stops or more, but we have to be careful,” Permane warned. “One of the things that makes a two-stop race tricky is when the tyres aren’t really suited for two stops.
“So you need to have tyres that demand the two-stop race. If you force a two-stop, you can end up with everyone doing the same strategy and actually have the opposite effect.
Racing Bulls team principal, Alan Permane.
“And don't forget, we've seen plenty of races with one guy on a one-stop and one guy on a two-stop, and then the guy on a one-stop being chased down by the two-stop – but that will obviously disappear.
“So I think we need to think very carefully. And we are. And I'm sure the F1 Commission will debate it, and I'm sure we'll come to the right answer.”
In other words: tampering with strategy could backfire – especially if tyres aren’t designed to make those extra pit stops meaningful.
Tyres Still a Fundamental Factor
McLaren team principal Andrea Stella echoed Permane’s concerns, arguing that the variability fans crave already exists when tyre degradation is right.
“I agree with Alan,” Stella said. “The tyres remain the fundamental factor to have some variability in the race. And in particular, whenever there's some degradation, I think we can see overtaking and pit stops.”
Williams boss James Vowles went further, suggesting that the rule could end up homogenizing strategies rather than diversifying them.
“My biggest worry would be that we end up, all of us, doing the same strategy to within a lap of each other because you're forced that way because of the two stops,” Vowles cautioned.
“So, to the key point, let's get the key foundations right, which is tyre degradation and the gaps between the tyres.
“And I don't mind a forced rule then that puts us in that circumstance, but I have a worry that immediately where we are now – I think you'll get less variability in next year's races, and that concerns me.”
Even Pirelli Not On the Same Page
The debate has also divided Pirelli, F1’s sole tyre supplier. Motorsport director Mario Isola recently called the two-stop idea “better for the show,” saying it would add unpredictability.
But his chief engineer Simone Berra publicly disagreed, arguing that imposing two stops could make races less dynamic.
“I’m not personally in favour of the two-stops imposed,” Berra said. “I’m not sure that two-stops will improve the show in general…
“The risk is that the more rules you put on the table, then the more similar situations you have in terms of strategies. So basically all the teams will do the same.”
Berra added that some of F1’s best races have come when one-stop and two-stop strategies coexisted naturally, producing unpredictable late-race chases – precisely what a mandated approach could erase.
He also suggested the sport should first see how the 2026 regulations affect overtaking before deciding how to “improve the show.”
For now, the consensus is clear: the two-stop idea looks like a hard sell. Teams want freedom, Pirelli wants balance, and fans – as ever – just want good racing.
The FIA may have hoped to script more excitement, but Formula 1’s insiders appear united in reminding them that the best drama can’t be forced.
Read also: Verstappen cautious on two-stop mandate amid 2026 ‘unknowns’
Keep up to date with all the F1 news via X and Facebook
