Oscar Piastri doubles down on Belgian Grand Prix claim that computers are deciding the grid not driver performance.

"I think Piastri could have been one to two tenths faster if the power unit had behaved as we anticipated," said McLaren boss, Andrea Stella at Spa, after the Australian was unable to match his teammate's pace.

"You don't operate these power units in an open-loop way," the Italian explained, "whereby I would be able to have an offline simulation and say, 'oh, that's how the electrical power will be deployed, and it will always be identical to itself'. "There's a large component that happens with live calculations, and the power unit kind of forward thinks, forward calculates what it has to do based on some parameters. This is why it's not so easy to understand what kind of calculations have been made as the car was going.

"This is not only for the influence it has on the straights," he continued, "but also because it affects the braking points, because if you have an additional amount of energy harvesting before braking, then you are approaching the braking zone 10km/h slower and your braking point changes.

"This is quite difficult to master for the drivers," he admitted. "It's not only about getting the most out of the power unit, but also because the variations of the power unit affect your references as you approach a corner. The software definitely learns, but the variations are so small that they may happen from one lap to the other, even if you have learned from the previous laps."

"It sucks," said Piastri, "I can't really say it any other way than that.

"I certainly wouldn't have been the only person," he added. "I know George has had a lot issues with that this weekend, and maybe the last couple of weekends. And speaking to some others, it's a similar story. When you've got qualifying grids decided by computers behaving or misbehaving, it's a pretty crap way of going racing."

Asked in Hungary, if - as the rules dictate - he is driving his car unaided at all times, the Australian said: "To give you the full answer, I'd probably need half an hour.

"Even with the previous hybrid engines, there was a big element of learning, coding and AI, to some extent," he continued. "When I joined Formula 1, those engines were incredibly mature, but also the penalty of things being slightly wrong or slightly out of place was significantly less, because it was such a small percentage of the overall power you got.

"Whereas this year, it's basically half your power, so any small differences or anything that doesn't quite go right has a massive impact, especially at a track like Spa.

"To answer the question, no, we've got no control over where the deployment happens, more or less," he admitted. "You can push the boost button, but that's more for overtaking than in qualifying, especially.

"Like I said in Spa, when you've got those differences there that you have no control over, it can be frustrating.

"I'm sure it'll get better. I don't expect it to ever fully go away, but as the manufacturers understand it more and work out the regulation restrictions more, in terms of what the code can and can't do, hopefully things will become a bit better."

Asked if he sometimes feels like the passenger of an AI programme that is still being trained, he said: "Sometimes, yes. Again, at a track like Spa or a track like Silverstone, it's going to be worse. Here, I really don't expect there to be many problems at all with that kind of thing, because the straights are so much shorter, so even if there are differences, they should be a lot less.

"But the principle of driving a race car that loses effectively half of its power before the end of the straight is hard to get your head around sometimes," he admitted. "Even in Spa, a lot of the middle sector we were doing it just on the combustion engine, with no battery assistance at all, which is a weird feeling in itself, having some corners with a certain amount of power and others with full power.

"I think Spa was particularly frustrating, not just for me but for quite a lot of others, because those small differences in the code and what the engines did made quite a big difference in lap time. Especially at the front of the field, I think there were still only nine hundredths or something separating four positions, and there were definitely more than nine hundredths on the table for quite a few drivers from things they could not control."

Asked if the (eventual) 60/40 power split will resolve the situation, or whether further changes are needed to put the driver back in control, Piastri said: "Again, to explain it all, I need a lot of time, and probably someone who knows it better than me. But I think they're going to be a factor for as long as we have these engines, to an extent.

"The smaller you make the percentage of the electrical side, the smaller the effect will be, obviously," he explained. "But in terms of the power unit regulations we have, there are a lot of rules and restrictions, and a lot of things you need to get around.

"In some ways, having some more freedom would maybe solve that a little bit. There's obviously how that plays into safety, and then random closing speeds and stuff, so there's not a perfect answer.

"I think they will be a factor to some extent for as long as we have these engines, but it will get better. Just how much better, we'll have to wait and see."

Fernando Alonso, a veteran who has experienced various rules changes over the coursde of his career, when asked about giving total autonomy back to the driver, said: "I don't know. It depends.

"I think Formula 1 has always been a little bit like that. I don't think the drivers were deciding everything, even when we had traction control and some of the other aids. It was very specific to each team, developed by each team in a different way, with different philosophies. You were pressing the throttle at the exit of the corners, and some cars were much better than the others. It's not pure driver talent or input on some of the exits.

"It's the same with the starts," he continued. "I've been doing starts for 25 years, and we've had many different regulations. At the end of the day, there were always some cars and some teams starting better than the others, with both cars. It's not just that someone was doing something differently with the clutch, with a technique or with the throttle application. Both cars from that team were extremely good or extremely bad. I think the team is always bringing the performance to everything.

"But yes, I think with these current regulations and the battery deployment, there is something that has to be fixed and improved," he admitted. "I think that's well understood.

"We are in the first half of this set of regulations, in the first year, and there are already talks about 2030 or 2031 and the V8. Next year, there is already approval for the change to the combustion versus electrical part of the engine. There are things moving forward, and it's well understood by the sport, by the teams and by everyone. I'm optimistic for the future that it will get better and that it will be better understood what the rules and what the cars need to be."