Lewis Hamilton’s disappointing P12 qualifying position at the 2025 Hungarian Grand Prix stirred up a mixture of disappointment and confusion in the F1 community.

However, recent leaks and behind-the-scenes accounts have uncovered an unsettling truth: Hamilton’s struggles were not due to his aging skills or technical inadequacies, but rather the result of deliberate internal sabotage orchestrated by forces within Ferrari.

This troubling revelation has cast a shadow over Ferrari’s internal operations, highlighting a deeper narrative of political infighting, favoritism, and systematic undermining.

The Public Narrative vs. The Reality

On the surface, Hamilton’s performance appeared to confirm the media’s growing narrative: a 40-year-old driver unable to adapt to Ferrari’s systems, with Charles Leclerc emerging as the clear team leader. With Hamilton sitting sixth in the championship, 42 points behind Leclerc and a staggering 175 points off the leader, Oscar Piastri, many saw the Hungarian GP result as further proof that Hamilton’s skills were in decline. However, the real story unfolding behind closed doors at Maranello is far from the narrative being spun for the public.

Tension Within Ferrari’s Garage

The atmosphere in Ferrari’s garage during the Hungarian Grand Prix weekend was tense, with the usual cohesion among team members noticeably absent. Radio communications, typically a lifeline between drivers and engineers, became infrequent and cautious. Technical instructions were delivered with hesitation, and team members maintained physical distance, breaking the well-oiled teamwork Ferrari is known for.

Sources close to the team described this behavior as a symptom of a larger problem, one that went far beyond the typical racing challenges. While other teams maintained a sense of unity, Ferrari’s mechanics and engineers were visibly divided, setting the stage for the sabotage that would unfold.

A Pattern of Systematic Sabotage

Hamilton’s issues at the Hungarian GP were not isolated. They began long before the qualifying session. Sources within Ferrari confirmed that the problems with Hamilton’s car were part of a coordinated effort, not a random series of mechanical failures or setup mistakes. Hamilton’s feedback was consistently ignored, and setup changes were made without his approval.

In particular, Hamilton noticed inconsistent balance throughout his car, with drastic changes from corner to corner. His car was far from “on rails,” a term that refers to a car with exceptional stability. These problems were exacerbated during the FP2 session when Hamilton’s data analysis showed improvements based on his requested setup changes, especially concerning rear stability under braking. Despite this, the setup changes were systematically reversed before FP3, without Hamilton’s consent.

The Confrontation

Upon discovering the unauthorized changes, Hamilton’s reaction was measured, yet devastating. “You ask for feedback, then ignore it when it threatens your plans,” Hamilton remarked in the engineering briefing, a comment that revealed the depth of the sabotage. He had been systematically denied the adjustments that could have helped him achieve the desired performance on the track.

His frustrations were made even clearer after qualifying in P12. Over the radio, Hamilton’s voice cracked with frustration as he said, “Every time. Every time,” a reference to the recurring setup sabotage. His race engineer, Ricardo Adami, fought to maintain Hamilton’s preferred car setup, but higher authorities within Ferrari’s technical or strategic management overruled his input.

Favoritism Towards Leclerc

While Hamilton’s struggles were compounded by this sabotage, Charles Leclerc’s weekend unfolded without similar interference. Leclerc’s car setup remained untouched between practice sessions, and his performance continued to shine. The stark contrast between the treatment of the two drivers became impossible to ignore when comparing their telemetry data. Leclerc’s car was stable and agile, and he took a surprise pole position, outqualifying Piastri by 0.026 seconds.

The true extent of Ferrari’s internal politics came to light when comparing Hamilton’s and Leclerc’s requests. Hamilton had requested a small brake migration adjustment, crucial for handling the Hungaroring’s track surface. Ferrari management denied this request, citing setup freeze regulations. Meanwhile, Leclerc’s request for tire blanket recalibration was approved without hesitation or concern for the rules. One mechanic, frustrated by the blatant favoritism, remarked, “The rules haven’t changed, only whose asking has changed.”

The Final Confrontation

The tension culminated in a chilling confrontation before the race. Hamilton, frustrated with the team’s undermining tactics, asked a simple yet cutting question that silenced the entire room: “Do you want two cars or just one?” The question was more than a challenge to Ferrari’s internal hierarchy; it was a plea for a team environment where both drivers were treated equally, regardless of their perceived status.

Hamilton’s words left an impact. In the subsequent debriefing, Ferrari’s internal division became evident as Leclerc and the team’s technical chief had separate meetings, while Hamilton was isolated with only junior data engineers. While the official explanation cited time-saving measures, it was clear that Hamilton had been deliberately excluded from strategic discussions and technical analysis. This cold isolation symbolized the growing fracture within Ferrari.

A Rebellion in the Ranks

Ricardo Adami, Hamilton’s race engineer, displayed signs of rebellion against Ferrari’s management. Rather than delivering his usual briefing report, Adami placed an unfiltered telemetry data set on Hamilton’s desk. This data, typically reserved for the team’s highest management, contained vital information about brake balance, tire wear, and rival drivers’ performance. The gesture was a powerful act of defiance, signaling that the internal war at Ferrari had reached a boiling point.

This rebellion was later confirmed by Lauron Maky, a former Ferrari technical director now working at Red Bull, who stated that “It’s not Lewis who’s learning Ferrari, it’s Ferrari who’s learning Lewis.” This statement reinforced the idea that Hamilton was not struggling to adapt to Ferrari’s system but rather forcing Ferrari to adapt to his needs and driving style. Hamilton’s influence was undeniable, even as he faced sabotage from within the team.

Hamilton’s Strategic Approach

Despite the sabotage and manipulation, Hamilton’s response was far from reactive. Instead of engaging in public drama, he chose a more calculated approach, leveraging raw data, engineer support, and strategic silence to apply pressure from within. His actions at Ferrari reflected his experience and cunning: what appeared to be weakness was actually a carefully orchestrated strategy of infiltration and manipulation.

The Aftermath

Hamilton’s P12 qualifying position was just the surface-level result of a much deeper conflict within Ferrari. As Hamilton and Leclerc’s relationship with the team continued to evolve, it became clear that Ferrari’s political game had only just begun. The internal war between the drivers and the team’s leadership would likely shape the rest of the season, with Hamilton’s quiet rebellion poised to change the course of the team’s future.

In the aftermath of the Hungarian Grand Prix, Hamilton’s words resonated deeply: “There’s a lot going on in the background that is not visible to the public.” As Ferrari’s internal politics continue to unfold, the world of Formula 1 will be watching closely to see if Hamilton’s calculated strategy can force Ferrari’s leadership to reckon with the damage they have caused.