Ferrari began the 2026 Singapore Grand Prix with two cars on the front two rows and two different ways to finish the race. Charles Leclerc started second on soft tyres; Lewis Hamilton started third on mediums. The starting split alone does not explain their final gap. In team principal Fred Vasseur’s account, it preserved one-stop and two-stop options. The decisive separation came later, when a Virtual Safety Car offered both cars a second stop but only Leclerc completed it.
The official classification records Max Verstappen winning the 62-lap race in 1:42:00.785. Leclerc finished second, 7.335 seconds behind, while Hamilton was sixth. Explaining that gap requires following when Ferrari’s two options stopped being interchangeable.
Splitting the start preserved two routes
Leclerc’s soft tyre gave him immediate attack potential. He challenged Verstappen into Turn 1, but the Red Bull retained the lead. Hamilton’s medium was designed for a longer first stint.
Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur later said the team had little reliable tyre information and split the cars to keep both one-stop and two-stop strategies available. That matters because hindsight can make any split look like indecision. Before the race developed, it gave Ferrari coverage rather than committing both drivers to the same tyre-life problem.
The medium side did not work as well as expected. Hamilton stopped on Lap 19 and switched to soft tyres. Kimi Antonelli stopped on Lap 24, then Leclerc came in on Lap 25. The FIA account records Leclerc rejoining just ahead of Hamilton. After different first stints, the Ferraris were back together and still running in their original order.
The second VSC created the real fork
The race’s second Virtual Safety Car followed Lance Stroll’s stop on track. Leclerc used the neutralised period for a second stop and returned on fresh tyres. According to the official Formula 1 team report, Ferrari called both cars in, but Hamilton missed the pit entry. Hamilton said he then chose to stay out and defend the track position he still held.
That distinction is important. Hamilton was not simply left on a one-stop plan while Leclerc received the preferred strategy. The published account describes a call that could not be completed, followed by a decision to continue rather than wait another lap to stop.
The choice bought Hamilton track position immediately, but it left him protecting an older set of tyres. Leclerc returned roughly ten seconds behind, then passed his team mate on Lap 46 with fresher rubber. Hamilton’s degradation increased late in the race; Antonelli, Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri also moved ahead before the finish.
P2 and P6 were not decided at the same moment
Leclerc’s second place came from converting the later VSC into tyre life for the closing stint. Hamilton’s sixth came after retaining track position through that same window and then losing it as the tyres faded. Neither statement proves what would have happened under a different stop sequence: the official reports do not supply Ferrari’s private simulations, traffic projections or a guaranteed alternative finishing position.
Verstappen remained beyond Ferrari’s strategic contest. He led after the start, made his own stop on Lap 33 without losing first place and won by more than seven seconds. Ferrari’s choices explain the divergence between its cars, not the whole race result.
Singapore’s useful distinction is between opening coverage and later execution. In Vasseur’s account, Ferrari split the starting tyres to preserve two routes. At the second Virtual Safety Car, Leclerc stopped for fresh tyres while Hamilton missed the entry and then kept track position. That fork, followed by Hamilton’s tyre degradation, explains the P2/P6 divergence more directly than the starting compounds alone.