2012 Jerez Test Thread

[cliche guevara]

Agree ,,just pointing out how someone like Noyes can make comments that are half truths to bolster his opinion. I also thought it was kind of funny him talking about the Kalex chassis being a corner speed monster, what does that make Suter, a corner speed mega monster. It has clearly out performed the Kalex head to head.

i too think that marquez suter package was probably the best bike last year but then again they concentrated on 1 rider where as everything kalex were able to do got to every rider.if i was a team owner in moto2 i'd choose the brand that is loyal to all customers albeit a bit slower over the potentially faster chassis every time.

 

[beefsupreme]

To me, most definitely. As i have stated at least a 100 times. I dont watch GP for spec, fender banging racing.Its all about performance.

And you've been told 101 times, Moto2 is more entertaining and less expensive, and therefore a success. Bonneville Salt Flats have some really interesting rocket cars and DIY prototypes you might want to check out.

True, but I think Dennis is missing an important point. Aprilia have no particular incentives to spend a bunch of money on development. As long as they are clear of the other CRTs, they can rake in cash from leases. If they wanted to be complete jerks they could even cut engine supply from all teams but ART, just to monopolize the revenue stream.

If they start leasing instead of selling the bikes, Dorna would stop classifying them as CRT.

 

[povol]

And you've been told 101 times, Moto2 is more entertaining and less expensive, and therefore a success. Bonneville Salt Flats have some really interesting rocket cars and DIY prototypes you might want to check out.







If they start leasing instead of selling the bikes, Dorna would stop classifying them as CRT.

If it was truly more entertaining? Explain this



http://www.powerslid...showtopic=14615



People sure have a funny way of showing what entertains them. Those cricket noises are no one giving a .... about Moto 2. Whether you realize it or not, your a much bigger fan of Moto GP, thats why your here, and not there. Moto 2 is a nice little sideshow leading up to Moto GP, and in my opinion could not stand alone as a series. You could plug Daytona Sport bikes into the time slot and get the same affect. You will find no better racing in the world than that series, but no one goes to see them either.The machines simply do not inspire.

 

[beefsupreme]

The machines simply do not inspire.

I don't watch MotoGP for the machines, I watch for the riders. I'd switch to watching SBK if I thought that series had the world's best riders, but it doesn't. I don't really have an interest in the ins and outs of the lower classes (so I don't spend time in those topics), but I tune into the Moto2 races more than I did for 250.

 

[povol]

I don't watch MotoGP for the machines, I watch for the riders. I'd switch to watching SBK if I thought that series had the world's best riders, but it doesn't. I don't really have an interest in the ins and outs of the lower classes (so I don't spend time in those topics), but I tune into the Moto2 races more than I did for 250.

The best riders are in GP for a reason. Ask any one of them why, and they will tell you its the last hurdle to clear in a career of bike racing. Their skills have surpassed Moto 2, Superbike , and they are one of of only a handful of riders on the planet who can master the next step. What your advocating is bringing these guys down a couple of notches so the not so elite can play at their level. Pandora's box of technology has been opened, you cant just stuff it back in and hope no one noticed what came out.. What you need to ask yourself, is why dont you have interest in the lower classes, and why you spend so much time debating GP. I personally believe the machine means more than you give it credit for.

 

[beefsupreme]

The best riders are in GP for a reason.

I can think of million$ of reasons. And why does GP pay better than SBK? Because it has the best riders and that attracts a bigger audience than SBK. An insignificant number of fans care about the angle of Ducati's engine, or how the top speed compares between the series.



Every time there is a change, the pocket-protector fans moan and complain, yet they keep watching...

 

[stiefel]

but I tune into the Moto2 races more than I did for 250.

I honestly don't, I miss the 250 like hell.



There is a trade a natural trade-off between close racing and technology (I perhaps rather racing technological purity), I think most of us could agree on that. Your preference lays at some point that is on one side of that trade-off. That's fine, many other feel the same way. But try to accept that this is not universally applicable to all fans of the sport. There are many, myself included, who feel that it is very important to keep gp racing the technological pinnacle. That does not mean we oppose close racing or are oblivious to existing limitations to technological freedom, or to the adverse effects this sometimes creates. Our tipping point just lies somewhere else.



Funny thing is, from what I gather by reading teh interwebs, the motogp fan community is becoming increasingly divided along at least three cross-cutting (yes, indeed, take notice Jumkie) cleaveges. The old Stoner-Rossi thing, the CRT-prototype thing and the more general close racing-technology thing. And all groups appear to be fairly evenly matched in size. No wonder Ezy's has no more hair on his head.

 

[beefsupreme]

The old Stoner-Rossi thing, the CRT-prototype thing and the more general close racing-technology thing. And all groups appear to be fairly evenly matched in size.

If we get close racing from the CRTs, that would be icing but not the cake. We have a series that's bleeding factories -- "technological purity" is a red herring.



If the groups were even in size, the faction that really cared about MORE spending and technology would stop watching and audience numbers would reflect that, but that doesn't seem to be happening (forum squabbling notwithstanding).

 

[Mick D]

The problem with the admittedly higher tech prototype smoker 250s (which I loved) is they have little if any relevance to causal fans or the current motorcycle market. A high tech 4 stroker 250 would have been perfect for Moto3...

 

[povol]

I honestly don't, I miss the 250 like hell.



There is a trade a natural trade-off between close racing and technology (I perhaps rather racing technological purity), I think most of us could agree on that. Your preference lays at some point that is on one side of that trade-off. That's fine, many other feel the same way. But try to accept that this is not universally applicable to all fans of the sport. There are many, myself included, who feel that it is very important to keep gp racing the technological pinnacle. That does not mean we oppose close racing or are oblivious to existing limitations to technological freedom, or to the adverse effects this sometimes creates. Our tipping point just lies somewhere else.



Funny thing is, from what I gather by reading teh interwebs, the motogp fan community is becoming increasingly divided along at least three cross-cutting (yes, indeed, take notice Jumkie) cleaveges. The old Stoner-Rossi thing, the CRT-prototype thing and the more general close racing-technology thing. And all groups appear to be fairly evenly matched in size. No wonder Ezy's has no more hair on his head.

I saw one Moto 2 race last year, when i attended Indy. They are not shown here on Sunday's like the GP races, and i dont care enough to watch on Tuesday, or whenever the .... they are on. I also dont care enough to pay Moto GP .com.. I will get up at 4 in the morning to watch a GP race though.

 

[Mick D]

I saw one Moto 2 race last year, when i attended Indy. They are not shown here on Sunday's like the GP races, and i dont care enough to watch on Tuesday, or whenever the .... they are on. I also dont care enough to pay Moto GP .com.. I will get up at 4 in the morning to watch a GP race though.

Pov, is your ONLY choice for viewing MGP speedTV?

 

[povol]

If we get close racing from the CRTs, that would be icing but not the cake. We have a series that's bleeding factories -- "technological purity" is a red herring.



If the groups were even in size, the faction that really cared about MORE spending and technology would stop watching and audience numbers would reflect that, but that doesn't seem to be happening (forum squabbling notwithstanding).

Could you not reverse that and say that if the whiners who really cared about close racing and dumbed down technology would stop watching, the audience numbers would reflect that as well.. Im telling you, its just a narrative. Moto GP is losing viewrs and is going to lose millions of viewers when a certain retirement takes place. The US will be a little different

It will happen by default especially here in the states. We have to go out of our way to be Moto GP fan. We have to get up at 4am sometimes to watch certain races. We have to start our Sunday ride early enough to be 70 miles down the road where we can eat breakfast and watch Speed TV. at 8am. We have to cut our Sunday rides short if the race is at 3pm. That enthusiasm will not exist with glorified superbikes, we watch them when it doesnt interfere with the daily plan.

 

[povol]

Pov, is your ONLY choice for viewing MGP speedTV?

Without paying Motogp.com, yes, its our only choice

 

[beefsupreme]

Could you not reverse that and say that if the whiners who really cared about close racing and dumbed down technology would stop watching, the audience numbers would reflect that as well.

I don't know too many of those people -- audience levels have stayed pretty good during the boring and expensive 800 era. The reason they stayed good (as I've said) is they're tuning in to watch rider skill, not max speed.



That said, when you no longer have Suzuki or Kawasaki, you have to do something, and Dorna's doing it.



Greece can still go south, and if it does, GP will change very, very suddenly.

 

[Mick D]

Without paying Motogp.com, yes, its our only choice

Speed's gotta be the worst coverage I've seen anywhere... feel for ya. Speed cannot be helping in an effort to grow the sport in NA. I can watch live curling and nordic biathlon in equatorial SE Asia, but you cannot get full world championship racing coverage live. And the freakin' commercials!

 

[Jumkie]

Funny thing is, from what I gather by reading teh interwebs, the motogp fan community is becoming increasingly divided along at least three cross-cutting (yes, indeed, take notice Jumkie) cleaveges. The old Stoner-Rossi thing, the CRT-prototype thing and the more general close racing-technology thing. And all groups appear to be fairly evenly matched in size. No wonder Ezy's has no more hair on his head.

Its NOT three separate issues, but rather derivatives of the same Rossi vs Stoner ......... Stoner has engaged in a bit of the fun and games, but despite that, he remains an admirable and phenomenal talent that is human like the rest of us. This is not to be confused with the crap the neobops spew and the arguments that ensue. The neobops, who engage and perceive it all through their new boner shades, have turned it all into a Stoner conspiracy. The neobops perceive everything through those lenses. They took the factual description of processional racing as an attack on Stoner, then perceived the CRTs part of some conspiracy to slow him down, not to mention they jumped on boarding calling it as bad because, well Casey said it was bad. Then they erroneously called it "production" racing. Which is a derivative of this idea that the series was perfect when it was self described "prototype” not realizing its just an arbitrary rules driven series where the CRTs are simply a consequence of rules (as ambiguous as they may be). You may recall that there has been outcry by spectators and riders alike to get rid of technology aids, so was that a call to 'dumb down' the series? Yet today, any attempt to limit cost through limiting technology is some attempt at slowing down Stoner, again, just another derivative of the same ......... Casey mentions he had chatter problems in Sepang and the neobops come out saying there is a tire conspiracy against Stoner. Notice they haven't cried about it lately? Why? Answer, because Casey didn't complain about chatter at Jerez. So what happened to the tire conspiracy? I guess it evaporated just like the weight change conspiracy. I wonder what will be the next Stoner related conspiracy? I'm sure Mental and his cohort will present us with one soon. ...., even when Stoner is toping the sheets and winning races, there is no lack of some ........ they will present.



Now a few of these neobops lining up with Mental's ........ take that he has supposedly championed some sort of quest for GP marketing, which in reality was derived from his attempt to continue his forum career of blaming everything on Rossi (I guess the others missed that part which wasn't lost on me). Lets forget that the world went through an economic meld down that Dorna (as much as they are blame worthy for many aspects) can't possibly be held responsible for everything. The price to compete was simply out of control (when leasing a 2nd tier bike reaches 3 million, we have a problem, how this was Rossi fault is beyond me) and in fact Dorna did do something about this problem by reducing the MSMA's influence.

 

[Jumkie]

The best riders are in GP for a reason. Ask any one of them why, and they will tell you its the last hurdle to clear in a career of bike racing. Their skills have surpassed Moto 2, Superbike , and they are one of of only a handful of riders on the planet who can master the next step. What your advocating is bringing these guys down a couple of notches so the not so elite can play at their level. Pandora's box of technology has been opened, you cant just stuff it back in and hope no one noticed what came out.. What you need to ask yourself, is why dont you have interest in the lower classes, and why you spend so much time debating GP. I personally believe the machine means more than you give it credit for.

I saw one Moto 2 race last year, when i attended Indy. They are not shown here on Sunday's like the GP races, and i dont care enough to watch on Tuesday, or whenever the .... they are on.

Where you're incorrect is how you've framed your personal lack of interest in the lower classes & Sbk as proof that the technology in MotoGP is the reason people watch and debate it, that is how you account for its popularity. People debate MotoGP because its the top class and has historically been so (not because people are aware of the technology), but its starting to get serious competition from that other series, Wsbk. You say that this is where the best riders are, but don't see that's because there wasn't another place to go until recently. Now Wsbk is catching up, which is still a relatively young series compared to GP. You base much of your opinions on the last decade of GP. But at one time there was a list of riders that nobody had ever heard of in MotoGP. Why? Not all riders were interested in competing on a 80cc or 125s, 350cc, etc (lower classes). You think that because today, the perception is that one must 'graduate' from the lower classes to MotoGP, that its always been that way? But in reality, what has kept many riders away from the top class has been the fact that it is cost prohibitive. You want to say they got here simply on their own riding ability, that is why they are the best, but that is simply not true. Wsbk is absorbing many of these riders today because it doesn't cost million and millions to lease a bike and the few top factory rides are all but four seats (two of which are always reserved for a Spanish rider). There are plenty of talented riders in Wsbk who given equal equipment, could easily compete in MotoGP. One example, Marco Melandri left this series prematurely, a man who came runner up in the series at one time. I could even make the case that Cal Crutchlow, who was an average among the better riders in Wsbk is showing signs of being competitive among the top riders in MotoGP, which if you follow the logic, would mean that Wsbk does house some of "the best riders in the world" too. Again, just because Wsbk isn't as popular, you don't take interest in the lower classes, and are too cheap to buy a pass (though you still tune in on TV maintaining Dorna's bargaining position, again, maybe another one of your toothless boycotts) doesn't mean others are not interested, and it certainly doesn't mean that MotoGP is the best in everything.

 

[povol]

Where you're incorrect is how you've framed your personal lack of interest in the lower classes & Sbk as proof that the technology in MotoGP is the reason people watch and debate it, that is how you account for its popularity. People debate MotoGP because its the top class and has historically been so (not because people are aware of the technology), but its starting to get serious competition from that other series, Wsbk. You say that this is where the best riders are, but don't see that's because there wasn't another place to go until recently. Now Wsbk is catching up, which is still a relatively young series compared to GP. You base much of your opinions on the last decade of GP. But at one time there was a list of riders that nobody had ever heard of in MotoGP. Why? Not all riders were interested in competing on a 80cc or 125s, 350cc, etc (lower classes). You think that because today, the perception is that one must 'graduate' from the lower classes to MotoGP, that its always been that way? But in reality, what has kept many riders away from the top class has been the fact that it is cost prohibitive. You want to say they got here simply on their own riding ability, that is why they are the best, but that is simply not true. Wsbk is absorbing many of these riders today because it doesn't cost million and millions to lease a bike and the few top factory rides are all but four seats (two of which are always reserved for a Spanish rider). There are plenty of talented riders in Wsbk who given equal equipment, could easily compete in MotoGP. One example, Marco Melandri left this series prematurely, a man who came runner up in the series at one time. I could even make the case that Cal Crutchlow, who was an average among the better riders in Wsbk is showing signs of being competitive among the top riders in MotoGP, which if you follow the logic, would mean that Wsbk does house some of "the best riders in the world" too. Again, just because Wsbk isn't as popular, you don't take interest in the lower classes, and are too cheap to buy a pass (though you still tune in on TV maintaining Dorna's bargaining position, again, maybe another one of your toothless boycotts) doesn't mean others are not interested, and it certainly doesn't mean that MotoGP is the best in everything.

You do know what a handful is. 5 riders, 6 in your family tree.

I have always said that after the top 5-6 riders in GP , you could exchange 7-20 with riders from other series with virtually the same results. The top 5-6 riders in the world are in GP at present time

 

[beefsupreme]

I have always said that after the top 5-6 riders in GP, you could exchange 7-20 with riders from other series with virtually the same results.

Look at it the other way too: Checa's last full MotoGP season had him at 14th in the standings. Four years later he's SBK champ -- there's simply no comparison between the series.



I know there's Hayden as an obvious counterexample, and Spies is doing pretty well, but we know Edwards isn't going anywhere but down, and Bayliss was mostly a disaster in GP.

 

[Jumkie]

Look at it the other way too: Checa's last full MotoGP season had him at 14th in the standings. Four years later he's SBK champ -- there's simply no comparison between the series.



I know there's Hayden as an obvious counterexample, and Spies is doing pretty well, but we know Edwards isn't going anywhere but down, and Bayliss was mostly a disaster in GP.

The message in your post which I think you're missing is 'parity'. Checa on Haslam's bike wouldn't be beating Haslam, much less winning races. Same goes with GP. Did Stoner suddenly become a guy who looked like he could win 10 plus races on a Ducati? No. But he sure can on a Honda. Apart from the four top bikes in GP, the rest are not going to win races, period. In Wsbk, Checa's Ducati and Biaggi's Aprillia could make Abraham a race winner in Sbk.