Liam Lawson’s swift removal from Red Bull’s Formula 1 team after just two races has once again highlighted the impact of modern F1’s stringent testing limitations on young drivers’ careers.
The 23-year-old Liam Lawson has been “reassigned” (demoted) to the Racing Bulls outfit, effectively resetting his competitive aspirations. Where he once had the chance to fight for podiums and even victories, he now faces the challenge of becoming a consistent points scorer in the midfield—a stark contrast that outlines how F1’s testing constraints can hinder driver development.
How Formula 1 cut down on Testing
Despite having made several appearances as a substitute for Daniel Ricciardo in 2023 and completing the final six races of 2024, Lawson is, for all intents and purposes, still a rookie in Formula 1. His limited track time has left him disadvantaged in what should have been his first full season as a Red Bull race driver.
With the team selecting him to partner Max Verstappen, one would expect Lawson to have had ample preparation. However, over two years, he competed in just 11 race weekends. Unlike in previous eras, he had no opportunity to sharpen his skills in another racing series while fulfilling his reserve duties, nor was he eligible for the mandatory rookie FP1 sessions due to exceeding the two-race experience threshold.
Consequently, Red Bull had to allocate those valuable FP1 outings and post-season tests to Isack Hadjar instead. Hadjar enjoyed seat time in both the RB20 during an official session and an older AlphaTauri at Imola in early 2024—track time that Lawson never had.
Apart from a 100-kilometre filming day at Silverstone and a tyre test in October, Lawson was effectively shut out from driving a current Red Bull F1 car throughout 2024. When he finally secured his seat, he was given only a day and a half of running in the Bahrain pre-season test. Completing just 149 laps—the second-fewest of any driver—he was thrown straight into Grand Prix weekends with minimal preparation.
This scenario highlights the rigid restrictions in place today. Not long ago, teams had the freedom to test extensively. In 2007, for example, Lewis Hamilton completed over 1,000 laps before making his debut with McLaren. That level of preparation is unheard of in today’s F1, where testing is tightly controlled.
Why is F1 testing so limited?
Before 2008, teams could conduct near-unlimited testing as long as they had the resources. This allowed prospective drivers to accumulate mileage, engineers to experiment with car development, and junior mechanics to gain hands-on experience in a less pressurised setting.
However, in the interest of cost control, F1 began limiting testing mileage. Initially, teams were given an annual cap of 30,000 kilometres, with young driver sessions exempted. By 2010, this allowance was halved to 15,000 kilometres, and in-season tests were cut back further. The changes continued over the years, with the introduction of structured pre-season tests, reduced in-season sessions, and highly regulated young driver events.
Fast-forward to today, and teams are now permitted just three days of pre-season testing—down from a previous six—and no in-season testing beyond Pirelli’s tyre testing programme. The current landscape offers minimal opportunities for seat time, making it difficult for young drivers to adapt without immediately being thrown into high-stakes race weekends.
The impact on Lawson and other young drivers
If the regulations from the early 2000s were still in place, Red Bull could have set up a private test between races, giving Lawson a crucial opportunity to refine his understanding of the RB21. In previous eras, such solutions were commonplace, allowing teams and drivers to work through difficulties away from the pressures of a race weekend.
However, F1’s modern cost-controlled environment has prioritised financial fairness, making extensive testing unfeasible. While this ensures that smaller teams remain competitive, it also forces young drivers to learn on the job, reducing the margin for error and increasing pressure on teams to make swift driver changes.
One remaining avenue for development is the Testing of Previous Cars (TPC) programme, which allows teams to run cars that are at least two years old. While these sessions don’t aid in current car development, they still offer valuable experience. Mercedes, for instance, used this to help Kimi Antonelli adapt to F1 machinery by running him in a 2022 car throughout 2024, giving him crucial preparation before his anticipated promotion.
Red Bull, however, did not take this route with Lawson. Given Sergio Perez’s contract extension in 2024, the team likely saw no need to invest in additional test outings for Lawson. By the time Perez’s struggles raised doubts over his seat, the window for such a programme had passed. The lack of preparation ultimately left Lawson on the back foot when he was finally given his chance in 2025.
A frustration shared by experienced drivers
It’s not just rookies who feel the impact of these restrictions. Even experienced drivers moving to new teams struggle to adapt under the current system. Carlos Sainz, for example, voiced his frustration after switching from Ferrari to Williams.
“Even though I’m obviously no rookie, that day and a half of testing, I think, is frustrating for me too, but I cannot imagine even for a rookie,” Sainz said.
“I understand how difficult that makes things and how tricky the start of the season will be for some of these guys. At the same time, if you could get that TPC, also that is relevant, and that can still help a lot, but experience is experience, and you only gain that on track with a real car that you’re going to drive that year.”
Sainz’s comments reflect a wider issue in modern F1: the severe lack of preparation time. For drivers like Lawson, stepping into an untested car with no recent experience is a monumental challenge—one that could have been mitigated with additional mileage in an older car.
While cost control remains a priority, F1 must also consider the unintended consequences of limiting track time. As seen with Lawson, a lack of preparation can derail promising careers before they even begin. If the sport continues down this path, teams may need to rethink their approach to driver development to avoid repeating the same mistakes.
