The 2025 Azerbaijan Grand Prix was supposed to be a new chapter of hope for Lewis Hamilton and Ferrari, a chance to prove their connection and potential after years of struggle. With an impressive performance in practice, especially a commanding lead in the FP2 session, all eyes were on Hamilton’s qualifying performance. However, instead of consolidating the positive signs, fans and experts witnessed a sudden “collapse,” raising a massive question: what happened to the seemingly perfect formula, and where did Ferrari go wrong?

From FP1 Disaster to FP2 Dominance: An Unbelievable Ride

Hamilton’s journey in Baku did not start smoothly. In the first practice session (FP1), he described his experience as a “disaster”. The Ferrari SF25 was almost “undriveable under braking”, an extremely serious issue on a street circuit like Baku, where high-speed zones abruptly transition into tight, technical corners. With a driving style built on absolute precision at the braking points, Hamilton couldn’t attack the limits of the track without confidence in his braking system.

However, the transformation between FP1 and FP2 was almost “cinematic”. From an uncontrollable car, Hamilton was “flowing with it”. He declared that the brakes finally “worked perfectly”, allowing him to confidently push the limits, attack the curbs, and navigate the technical sections with his signature skill. He not only topped the timesheets but did so with authority, clocking a 1:41.293—even faster than the previous year’s pole position time at the same circuit. This wasn’t a coincidence; it was a powerful statement: the seven-time champion seemed to have found his rhythm with the SF25.

This euphoria didn’t come from nowhere. Ferrari had listened to Hamilton’s feedback, reacted quickly, and found a setup that allowed the SF25’s true potential to be unlocked. Telemetry reinforced this perception: Hamilton was faster than his teammate Charles Leclerc in the technical sections of the circuit, where aerodynamic downforce makes the difference. His pace in these areas was superior, creating great optimism within the team. Everything seemed aligned: a technical setup suited to the track’s demands and a driver who was beginning to feel “in communion” with his machine. The puzzle pieces were falling into place, and all signs pointed to Saturday’s qualifying being the consecration of this joint effort.

The Sudden Collapse in Qualifying: The Unpredictable Variables

But in Formula 1, as has happened so many times, the sport has its own way of reminding us that the most perfect balance can also be the most fragile. And on Saturday, many variables changed.

First, the weather conditions were no longer the same as Friday. The track temperature had dropped slightly, the wind had changed direction, and the humidity in the air began to complicate the reading of the tires’ behavior. These seemingly minor details completely altered the delicate balance of the Ferrari. The optimal operating window of the tires was narrower than expected, and Ferrari failed to get Hamilton on track at the precise moment to extract maximum grip from the compounds. This directly affected the preparation for the fast lap. On a circuit like Baku, where long straights allow tires to cool before the most demanding lateral-load areas, properly heating the rubber before an attempt is an art. Ferrari failed in this preparation. The result was a first sector lacking grip and an immediate loss of confidence for Hamilton. In Formula 1, when a driver cannot trust the grip level from the very first meter, the lap is lost before it even begins.

Second, beyond the tire issue, there was an equally decisive factor: the aerodynamic downforce configuration. Ferrari’s strategy of opting for higher downforce on the SF25 had paid off on Friday, in conditions of long runs with plenty of corners and little traffic. However, in qualifying, where the priority is pure speed on a single attempt, that same decision became a structural disadvantage. While teams like McLaren and Red Bull managed to leverage the DRS effect and low downforce to maximize their top speed on Baku’s endless straights, Hamilton’s Ferrari struggled to reach the necessary speeds. This wasn’t a matter of engine power, but of drag. The car simply wasn’t efficient enough on the straights to be competitive, which heavily penalized the overall lap time. Subsequent analysis revealed a significant difference in top speed between Hamilton and other drivers who had opted for lower downforce setups. Although Hamilton maintained excellent pace in the technical sections of the second sector, he lost too much ground on the straights of the first and third sectors. It was an imbalance that not even his talent and precision could correct.

Questioning Team Management and Lessons from Defeat

Amid all the technical issues and changing conditions, the team’s management was also called into question. Ferrari did not react with the necessary tactical aggressiveness to modify the plan on the fly. There was no reconfiguration of the approach, nor an optimized second chance. Hamilton went out with the car in non-ideal conditions and with a lap strategy that was not adapted to the changes in the environment. The result was a disappointing qualifying session, not only in terms of grid position but also for the “brutal” contrast between Friday’s expectations and Saturday’s reality. What should have been a turning point became a warning. The potential is there, but the execution still lacks the level of precision needed to turn a promise into a result. Qualifying in Baku was a “cruel” reminder that in Formula 1, the margin between glory and frustration is microscopic.

Although the final result of the 2025 Azerbaijan Grand Prix was a major disappointment for Lewis Hamilton and Ferrari, as is often the case in the history of great champions, the most painful defeats not only leave scars but also open doors. In this case, Saturday’s fall was not just a sporting setback; it was a profound learning opportunity, a moment of clarity that served to expose the fragilities of a relationship still in formation between a legendary driver and a team in reconstruction. Because if there’s one thing that characterizes great teams and great drivers, it’s their ability to transform frustration into useful information and motivation.

For Hamilton, this failure was a blow that came just when he seemed to have found a turning point. Having led a practice session for the first time with Ferrari had generated a wave of both internal and media enthusiasm. But that euphoria, as intense as it was fleeting, was also a “mirage”. Qualifying showed with “brutal” honesty that there is still a long way to go. It wasn’t just a technical issue on Ferrari’s part; the defeat was also “revealing” in that while there are obvious technical advances, strategic and operational execution errors still persist, errors that can nullify all that progress in minutes. The lack of synchronization in tire management, the lack of tactical reaction during qualifying, and the choice of an inflexible aerodynamic configuration are all symptoms of a team that is still struggling to become a truly consistent force.

The fall in Baku should be seen as a diagnosis, not a conviction. Because if anything is clear, it’s that the car has potential and so does the driver, but both still need a “common language”. The most worrying thing is not to have failed, but not to have learned from it. Therefore, whatever comes next will be fundamental. Will we see Ferrari act with more strategic flexibility in the coming weekends? Will they optimize the SF25’s configuration without compromising speed on the straights or stability in the corners? Will Hamilton maintain the level of technical and personal commitment that he has begun to show? Those are the questions that matter.

And now, was Baku just an isolated “stumble,” part of the adaptation process between Hamilton and Ferrari, or a deeper sign that this project is still far from consolidating? Are we facing a turning point or a promise that will be “diluted” with the passing of the races?