michaelm

I agree. I consider it fairly likely that was the brief from uncle Carmelo which Michelin was happy to take up but Bridgestone was not.

I don't know what motivates the Japanese firms but some pretense at least of research and development seems to be necessary to sell motor sport participation to their corporate bosses; even Honda with a racing tradition going back to their founder seemed to need to justify their gp bike racing effort to some extent as research into fuel economy. I agree as well that Michelin are probably happy to just be the premier class tyre supplier, and probably don't care overly that a minute percentage of diehard and/or educated bike racing fans consider their race tyres to be substandard.

Segfault

I removed Michelin from my shopping list after they ruined an F1 race in the US. (First their crappy tire couldn't withstand the speed and then, after they were offered 2-3 ways to race safely they pulled out instead.)

imunderandoverit

Rossi has showed that he can still race and Im pretty sure he would have won in Barcelona. He cut 0.250 sec the lap before he crashed. I think he did the same thing like in Assen 2016. He pushed too hard, having sandbaged. Tyre wasnt warmed up enough and he crashed.

Mir would have been leading if a1 ring part 1 never got red flagged. I think that we will have a Suzuki champ for the first time in the MotoGP era.

misfit

Well, Rossi fell, and this as well as the difficulty with making the tyres last the full race distance are both reasons why it's seriously wild speculation to think he would have won. I'd have been happy to see that but I do have to see it first to believe it. I think it far more likely that his tyres would have given up the ghost and he'd have been swallowed by the Suzukis.

misfit

I don't wonder about it.

It's the very same thing with F1 Michelin tyres. The tyres operate through a narrow window for both setup, race conditions and the rider.

Little Walter

Yes. I like Science Fiction and all kinds of speculation, but I'm not much for conspiracies, as fun as they may be. Michelin has shown itself to be less than wonderful without benefit of SNSs. Look at how unprepared they were over the course of the first two seasons as sole supplier, as compared to Bridgestone.

michaelm

In most human endeavours given a choice between a conspiracy and a stuff-up it is indeed usually a stuff-up. I strongly suspect Bridgestone are just better at making race tyres, and specifically in gp bike racing they mostly weren't in a position to provide SNS tyres as you say and just had to make tyres that worked in a variety of conditions. They never really mastered qualifying tyres which Michelin were good at making, not of much moment now they are no longer used of course.

Those of us who follow F1, or formerly did anyway, like misfit and I, do remember Bernie at one stage pretty much mandating tyres which wore out to 'improve the racing', and I also recall Uncle Carmelo, back then an ardent student of Bernie's methods, thinking this was a good idea. I have no way of knowing what the deal is currently, but iirc part of the control tyre thing was providing them free, and I can't imagine Michelin are flush with funds like most other enterprises in a Covid-19 world and hence may not be massively spending on gp bike racing tyre development.

misfit

I follow F1 as avidly as MotoGP and I'd be darned if the F1 Michelin rubber hasn't made its way into MotoGP. Dovi's technically expressed frustrations with the rubber is like Deja Vu.

michaelm

Sure, I still do as well, mainly for Daniel Ricciardo though. Although I would no doubt be happy were I a Hamilton fan, I consider Mercedes to have had too much technical advantage in recent years. I am sure their dominance is not entirely unrelated to Lewis, but for me it stretches the bounds of credulity that whoever is the second Mercedes driver fairly immediately becomes the second best driver in the field.

misfit

I'm an avid watcher out of momentum, I guess, as well as the overall story that F1 has been over the years. A snapshot isn't particularly convincing in the interest of competition on any single race weekend.

Since my interest in MotoGP grew, I come to MotoGP for the racing and the personalities in the riders which are for me anyway, and of course relatively speaking, quite open. Press conferences are still interesting while in F1, I can't recall the last press conference I've watched and really don't miss them. F1 news is enough.

Some may say that the tyres are the same for everyone as the way to defuse the problem of the tyres. It is true that the riders need to find a way to make the tyres work optimally with their machinery. However, it doesn't seem to be predictable and like a lottery, tyre performance seems to be playing in the hands of particular riding styles. Again, we could say the same of the bikes characteristics as well. But then, how can a rider who is on the backfoot adapt when whatever he is trying to adapt to changes from weekend to weekend the way things currently are. Yes, you'll have Marquez who is able to ride around problems way more than the average rider, but without him, we see what's happening from weekend to weekend.

The unpredictability is entertaining, but it could well be impacting the reputation of riders who are suffering more, MV being an example. FQ's slump has saved his rep somewhat but not enough IMO. Right now, MV is simply labelled as inconsistent, but is he really with most of the grid being inconsistent as well?