
‘We have a car that is better than we've ever had before' – James Vowles, Williams Team Principal
The British team has found the going tough over the last few years, finishing dead last in the standings four times between 2018 and 2022, collecting just 39 points over the duration.
Under the ownership of US-based Dorilton Capital, and with former Mercedes Motorsport Strategy Director James Vowles at the helm since 2023, Williams has made rapid strides. The constructor eclipsed its 2024 points tally within four races of the 2025 season and looks set to challenge for fifth in the standings for the first time since 2017.
Taking over from the Williams family, who nurtured the team for 43 years, is no easy task, but Vowles has managed to instil confidence into the struggling outfit in his role as Team Principal.
In an exclusive chat with Sportstar on the sidelines of the Saudi Arabian Grand Prix, Vowles spoke at length about the team's progress, his data-driven approach, preparing the garage for the soon-to-arrive regulations, the future of the sport, and more.
Five races into 2025, Williams has gotten off to a fast start compared to the last four seasons. How's the mood in the garage?
Highly positive. I think we always have to remember where we've come from. It is a privilege and a pleasure to be racing with a car that can score points every weekend — and it is — with two world-class drivers. You'd be surprised how much that carries you through the tireless and sleepless nights.
You've spoken about the continuous improvement you looked to bring when you took on this role in 2023. Two years on, do you think you're on the right track?
Yeah, I think the direction of travel is a good one. This car isn't what we've put our focus on. We've just been fixing some foundational issues, putting in system software, infrastructure, culture, technology, people — and it's nice to see that the car is moving up and corresponds to that. We have a car that is better than we've ever had before. I think the real test is breaking away from the midfield, closer to the front.
Track stars: Vowles with the two Williams drivers — Carlos Sainz (left) and Alex Albon (right). | Photo Credit: Getty Images
You touched upon your two drivers, Alex Albon and Carlos Sainz. Both of them are very experienced in the top tier of racing. What is it like working with them?
It's a breath of fresh air. First of all, there's no politics. Neither one wants anything more than for the team to be successful, which means that every meeting we have is about the greater good. How do we make it better next year? What's our direction of travel? What can I do to help? It's great to see that dedication they're putting into the team.
Over the last decade or so, Williams has given so many drivers their first shot at F1. Was it a genuine choice to go with two experienced drivers?
It was very much a case of me wanting experienced drivers by my side. I love investing in young drivers — they absolutely have a future with Williams. But we also have to acknowledge that last year, our attrition was high, and it meant we couldn't move forward in the field. For a few years, we've got to take stock and start developing this team into championship material.
Does the tag of being F1's fourth most successful team weigh heavily on you? Is there added pressure?
I don't think anything will put more pressure on me than I put on myself. That's probably the right way to describe it. The reason I'm here is because of our history. It's an incredible history. I want this team to be successful with all my heart. I'll make it my career goal to do so. That's more pressure than our legacy.
Right from your time with Mercedes, you've been very data-driven. Does it help that both your drivers are of the same ilk?
There's a reason why I've surrounded myself with individuals who are built the same way I am. That goes for our drivers, our senior management and our leaders. Data has to be at the heart of what you're doing. Because if you have someone going in a different direction, you can deviate from what is good.
This is a slightly different year for development, considering the new regulations coming in next season. Will teams focus on circuit-specific development?
You're going to find an interesting debate taking place up and down the pit lane. And that debate probably is between now and June. Do we do more, do we do less? There'll be some teams like Ferrari who came out and said, 'No! We have to fix this.' Red Bull also said that not long ago. But for teams like ourselves, our future isn't racing for 8th, 9th or 7th. Our future is racing for championships. You'll see we're making sacrifices for the next few years to bring ourselves to where we need to be.
Cut to the chase: Sainz and Albon battle it out at the Saudi Arabian GP. | Photo Credit: Getty Images
When the cost cap rule was brought in, you explained how Williams was behind the leaders in capital expenditure, leaving you short on machinery and software. Two years on, are you better placed?
Yes, I was able to get us USD 20 million more, but by the time we finished the meeting, I think it was all spent. The rules are changing in 2026. You can spend whatever you want on capital expenditure, but you have to pay for the depreciation in your annual operating cap.
The 20 million allowed us to do the short-term bits that were needed, and the remainder will be done in conjunction with those rules.
An interesting topic came up in the press conferences in Saudi Arabia, about the V8 and V10 engines being brought back. What is your take on it? Is that the direction F1 should take?
Let's race with the rules that we've spent three years and hundreds of millions of dollars developing. After we've been racing for some time, let's take an honest step back. Are we doing the right thing for the sport, for the world?
I love the sound of the old V10s and V8s, but we also have to be honest with ourselves. I think what we are asking for is, let's make sure we have a tone to the engine — a sound that has emotion to it.
Both drivers have mentioned a fundamental issue affecting performance, which is a characteristic of the Williams car in itself. How difficult is it to handle an issue related to the structure?
The important thing is an open, honest discussion about what the real problems are, to make sure that we are not taking them into future cars. It's a problem that has been here for many years.
Though we've made improvements between 2023–24 and 2024–25, it's nowhere near the level of the top three teams. We need a bigger change to improve it considerably — and that's what Carlos and Alex are bringing to the party.
F1 requires fast cars to win championships. But how important is the team behind it? How much does the backroom staff influence a team?
Everything is about people and culture. People create your systems, processes and communications. The fast car is just an output from a thousand people working well together. I am not the reason why this team will be successful. My job is just to bring the right people together. If you don't have a set of people pointing the right way, the team will not win a world championship. Every single person matters.
Related Topics
Williams /
Formula One
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The Hindu
36 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Trump's Tariff Threat Tests India-US Relations
Published : Aug 16, 2025 19:25 IST - 6 MINS READ There is a distinct souring of sentiment in the narrative across India's 24-hour news channels. A news anchor opens her piece with a sarcastic diatribe on how, if only Trump were president of the USA in the past, so much could have been avoided through history; the First World War, the Second World War, all of it. The screen behind her displays an image of the US president with the text 'Earth is spinning better, thank Trump!'. The title of this video op-ed piece is 'Why Trump Should Never Win the Nobel Peace Prize'. It is a marked departure from the rapturous reception a second Trump term got only nine months back. A statement released then by India's External Affairs Ministry described how the two leaders had reaffirmed their commitment to a mutually beneficial and trusted partnership and agreed to remain in touch and meet soon. Social media and news coverage were awash with praise both for this sweeping victory and the warm and cordial relations between Mr Trump and Mr Modi. President Trump's decision and threat to now impose a 50 per cent tariff by the end of August because of India's purchase of Russian oil has escalated a stand-off over trade and led to a spiral of news flow; the US will regret treating India this way, warns one piece; US-India relations are at their worst, bemoans another. The social media clarion has sounded—it is time to ditch American products and companies like McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Amazon; although how exactly that will be done remains unclear. All this unfolding while a fresh deadline to this hefty tariff clocks down. So much has changed in nine months. India has for now been steely in its response; but both choices present hard outcomes. Global commodity data shows India imported about 1.8 million barrels per day of Russian crude in the first half of the year, which is about 37 per cent of its total imports. Since 2023, India has been the biggest market for Russian crude, and between the two largest buyers of Russian crude, India and China, it is India that is clearly more dependent. According to data and analytics company Kpler, India imported 89 million tonnes (seaborne crude) last year, which was more than China's import. Switching crude oil varieties and buyers is neither going to be easy nor practical for India's refineries, aside from the fact that it also threatens to ratchet up prices. Also Read | America's melting ice cube and other tariff fairy tales On the flip side, the collateral damage of a 50 per cent tariff slap will be large. There are a number of export-oriented industries that are already feeling jittery; textiles, for one, the gems and jewellery sector, another, where the US makes up 30 per cent of its exports. Many export-oriented industries are in fact also labour-intensive industries, and a hit to their fortunes will have a massive knock-on effect on jobs. The list of vulnerable companies includes the big gun, Reliance Industries, which signed a 10-year contract to buy nearly 5,00,000 barrels a day of crude from Russia's state-owned Rosneft, making it the biggest-ever energy agreement between the two nations. Reliance has been exporting its refined products to both Europe and North America. A breakdown in ties with Western countries will mean significant changes in its business and perhaps its profitability in the months to come. India's domestic advantage with a large consumer market has been pointed to, but whichever way you cut it, a tariff hike of this quantum will see economic damage and dented investor sentiment for the country. There are counter-arguments to the possibility of a grim reset in Indo-US ties. One, that this will be yet another flip-flop by the US President, where a resolution of some sort will be cobbled together before the end of August, which is the deadline set by him. Two, that the two countries are now intertwined across too human and financial capital strands; Indian tech firms have long been present in America's industry through its services and its engineers. Money now flows both ways through venture capital and significant equity market exposure. Ripping all that apart will take more than tariff sabre-rattling. All or some of this may prove to be true. But there are also two clear questions here that need to be reckoned with. India was used to being the 'pick me' candidate when it came to China, where there was tactical and strategic advantage in building strong relations with India to offset China's growing strength in the region. Many nations, the US included, are having a rethink about that approach. China is no longer taboo, and India is no longer the counterfoil to China's regional dominance. Worse yet is the distinct turn in relations between the US and India's other neighbour, Pakistan. What started with a rather embarrassing display of cornering credit, President Trump claimed he was the one to put a stop to an imminent war between India and Pakistan—a claim that has been consistently repeated while speaking on the subject. While Indian diplomatic channels frantically tried to belie that take, Pakistan not only concurred with the US President's statement, it went on to nominate Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Relations between the US and Pakistan have been on the upswing since then, ranging from private lunches with Pakistan's top military brass and talks about potentially boosting trade and commercial ties. It has left the Indian government with egg on its face and a disgruntled domestic mood. India and Pakistan, to America's mind are now firmly re-hyphenated. Also Read | Modi's foreign policy in shreds as non-alignment becomes multi-alignment How did it all turn sour so quickly when the singular narrative so far has been Prime Minister Modi's outstanding personal equation with Trump—from walking out hand in hand to address a rally in Houston, Texas a few years ago, to what is now being termed the lowest point in Indo-US ties in many decades; the 'great friendship' has not yielded any joy on economic ties. Perhaps the first lesson then is when policies—foreign, national, or economic—are built around personalities rather than nations, egos tend to get in the way. Especially when there is a domestic fan base that has been cheering the 'strongman' approach to cater to. There is also a view that this could be the moment India dives into structural reforms. In other words, this will be the catalyst for the great reset. As we wait on that outcome to emerge, it gives rise to the second question: Was that not the plan with the 'Make in India' campaign launched a decade ago? What has gone so sorely wrong ten years into its launch, where is the performance audit on the promised nation-building initiatives, the manufacturing thrust, more jobs for more people? This present round of tariff threats and ultimatums could go in any direction. Frankly, it does not even matter. The economic ground is shifting beneath the feet of both leaders. Time to see who has feet of clay. Mitali Mukherjee is the Director of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. She is a political economy journalist with more than two decades of experience in TV, print and digital journalism. Mitali has co-founded two start-ups that focussed on civil society and financial literacy and her key areas of interest are gender and climate change.


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Australia coach Schmidt hails 'great bunch of young men'
Australia coach Joe Schmidt said on Saturday he hoped a phenomenal 38-22 Rugby Championship comeback win over South Africa in Johannesburg showed his team are on the road toward earning respect. HT Image The Wallabies, who had not beaten South Africa at Ellis Park since 1963, recovered from trailing 22-0 to beat the reigning World champions and Championship title-holders. Following a torrid last few years, the victory continues Australia's resurgence after being well beaten in the first Test against the British and Irish Lions, losing the second by just three points and then winning the dead rubber 22-12. "This has got to rank very highly in terms of wins and for me personally, since usually you get absolutely swamped here in the last quarter," said Schmidt. "The players had to hang in there and I am really proud of the way they did that." "You have got to earn respect every time you (play), you have to be really competitive in every game. "We are still building our strength in depth and our game shape, but this is a great bunch of young men who have shown the ability to roll their sleeves up and earn that support. "They deserve it and I hope there was really good support for them back in Australia." "When the Springboks get their game going, when they are accurate, they are very hard to stop. In the first 40 minutes there was just wave after wave coming. "But Fraser McReight stole the ball a few times, and the determination the team showed was very pleasing. "This is a really tight group, they get on very well together. We have had a chance to gel and a real collective resilience was in evidence tonight." "We were not always on the front foot." "There were some fantastic diving tackles where we just got a boot or half a jersey. We needed a little bit of luck as well," added Schmidt. Springboks coach Rassie Erasmus called the performance "really awful", blaming poor game management after a brilliant opening quarter. "When you are 22-0 up, you tend to take chances, but you still need to build an innings or you can end up losing by nearly 20 points like tonight. "There were so many breaks when Grant Williams, Manie Libbok or Edwill van der Merwe almost got away, but sometimes you have to realise that you are not quite going to get it. "Their kick-to-ruck ratio was much better than ours -- we only kicked nine times in the second half. It's definitely not wrong to say we overplayed. "But they did not just tactically outsmart us, but physically too. The longer the game went on, the stronger the Wallabies were. "It was a bad loss and at some stage our heads and shoulders were down. It was sad that there was no fightback so we gave them a bonus point and did not get one ourselves." str-dl/pb


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Yes, It Pays to Share a Home With Family. But Plan for Some Challenges, Too.
Whether it is college graduates taking over the basement because they can't afford to buy or rent, or grandparents seeking the security of family as they age in place, multigenerational households in the U.S. have skyrocketed. According to the Pew Research Center, between 1971 and 2021, the last year for which these statistics are available, the number of people living in multigenerational households quadrupled. The trend is driven by financial issues, the need for caregiving for both children and older adults, and delays in new household formation by young adults. Yes, It Pays to Share a Home With Family. But Plan for Some Challenges, Too. But despite the benefits of communal living, there are challenges as well. Twenty-three percent of adults in multigenerational households say it is stressful all or most of the time, and 40% admit it is stressful some of the time, according to Pew. That is why flexible floor plans that enhance privacy, a healthy respect for boundaries and candid discussions upfront among family members are key to the success of any multigenerational arrangement. Darlene Gibson, 56, and her husband, Jim Gibson, 58, have been sharing their 2,600-square-foot home in Goodyear, Ariz., with Jim's mom, Cheryl, since they purchased it for $422,490 in 2021. Before moving in, Cheryl, 79, was living on her own in rural Virginia, where she was isolated and dependent on others to get around. Today, the family is living together in a style of home that is becoming more popular as multigenerational living becomes more common. Miami-based Lennar has sold its Next Gen home design since 2011, according to Alan Jones, the company's division president in Tempe, Ariz. These models include an attached private suite with a separate entrance, kitchen, living room, bedroom, bathroom and laundry facilities. 'We call it two homes in one,' Jones said. 'A person can live in this space completely independent from the other family.' Jones said that Next Gen homes make up 25% of the company's sales in the Phoenix market and that while prices vary by market and model, the price of a typical 3,000-square-foot Next Gen home is approximately $15,000 more than a similarly sized home without the multigenerational features. But Lennar isn't the only builder offering floor plans designed for multigenerational living. Many homes sold by Fort Washington, Pa.-based Toll Brothers can be customized for multigenerational living as well. In addition, many existing homes are suitable for multiple generations. According to nationally, about 3.8% of homes listed between Jan. 1 and June 21 advertised an additional dwelling unit, in-law suite or casita in the listing description, and homes featuring one of these additional dwelling units had median listing prices 20.6% higher than the market median. (News Corp, owner of The Wall Street Journal, also operates Cheryl Gibson now has the equivalent of her own apartment, where she bakes and gets together with friends. She's lost weight because she's active in the community, using the clubhouse for bingo and craft night. When she needs to go to a doctor's appointment, Darlene and Jim are there to support her. But the arrangement only works, Darlene said, because of mutual respect. Except for emergencies, no one enters the other party's living quarters without knocking first and being invited inside. The arrangement also gives the couple peace of mind, knowing they are just a few steps away in case Cheryl has a health issue or needs assistance. If you're planning to share your home with relatives of different generations, here are some things to consider. Agree on all financial and legal details up front. Hillery Dorner, a real-estate attorney with Dorner Law & Title Services in Concord, Mass., suggests that the parties outline everyone's expectations, responsibilities and financial obligations in a written cohabitation agreement. The agreement should include an exit strategy to lay out what happens if one of the parties dies, gets divorced, needs to move to assisted living or just wants to leave the shared home. If title to the property is held by all parties jointly, that exit strategy should include a method of valuing the home in case one party wants to buy the other out, according to Zachary D. Schorr, a real-estate attorney in Los Angeles. Plan to revisit the agreement every year or so to update it to reflect changing finances and needs. Decide whose names go on the deed. If you need your parents' help to qualify for a mortgage, it is likely the lender will require them to be on the deed and mortgage. Decide whether you want to own the property as joint tenants with right of survivorship, where the surviving party automatically owns the entirety of the property if the other owner dies, or tenants in common, where a deceased owner's share goes to his or her heirs, which could possibly leaving the survivor as a co-owner with strangers. Schorr said that holding title in the name of a trust is a good option as well, assuming the lender will allow it. 'With a trust, there would be a mechanism for who gets what if someone dies or wants out,' he said. Create an emergency fund. Donna Butts, senior fellow at Generations United, a nonprofit that advocates for intergenerational programs and multigenerational living, suggests that families create an emergency fund, to which everyone contributes, to cover unexpected repairs. That fund could also be used to modify the home to allow older adults to age in place or to childproof the home for young children. 'Updating a home for one generation can positively impact multiple generations,' she said. 'That front-loading washer makes it easier not just for older adults but for children who want to help. Accessibility enhances everyone's ability to enjoy the home they share.'