This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

2017 Qatar MotoGP most competitive yet

Joined Sep 2016
372 Posts | 92+
Kroposphere
2017 Qatar MotoGP most competitive yet

2017 Qatar MotoGP top 6, top 10 and top 15 closer than at any previous race at the Losail International Circuit.

In what is hopefully a sign of things to come, the 2017 Qatar season opener was the most competitive MotoGP race held at the Losail International Circuit.

The time difference covering the top 6, top 10 and top 15 was smaller than at any of the previous races since the circuit made its debut on the calendar in 2004.

The 1.928s gap covering the podium places was the third closest at the track, a fraction behind 2010 (1.865s) and 2006 (1.494s).

But in terms of scoring a world championship point, this year's 29.430s difference comfortably beat the previous best of 33.625s, set during the final year of Bridgestone tyres in 2015 - and this time featured five different brands of bike, instead of four.


The time difference would have been less had Petrucci, Iannone, Bautista, Zarco and Crutchlow not failed to finish, all them being well within the top 15. Although, in relative terms, every year sees some such contenders fail to finish.

Nonetheless, compared to last season, the top 15 time difference was almost halved.

One factor is likely to be that the current crop of satellite machines are better suited to the Michelin tyres and standard ECU. That would be expected given that many of last year's satellite bikes were designed during the Bridgestone era, while electronic progress takes time to trickle down from the factory.

The seven Qatar races in which the top 15 (or entire field, if less than 15 finished) were covered by less than one-minute can be seen below. Note that the 2017 race distance was shortened by two laps, due to the delayed start.

First to last (18th) in this year's race was covered by 47.131s...

1. 2017
Top 3: 1.928s
Top 6: 7.661s
Top 10: 15.069s
Top 15: 29.430s

2. 2015
Top 3: 2.250s
Top 6: 10.755s
Top 10: 17.435s
Top 15: 33.625s

3. 2011
Top 3: 5.051s
Top 6: 10.468s
Top 10: 28.920s
Top 13*: 37.957s
*13 finishers.

4. 2010
Top 3: 1.865s
Top 6: 9.322s
Top 10: 21.100s
Top 13*: 40.780s
* 13 finishers

5. 2007
Top 3: 8.530s
Top 6: 18.647s
Top 10: 28.456s
Top 15: 51.639s

6. 2016
Top 3: 2.287s
Top 6: 15.423s
Top 10: 24.435s
Top 15: 54.953s

7. 2008
Top 3: 10.6
Top 6: 14.040s
Top 10: 38.354s
Top 15: 58.930s
 
Using time gaps as an indicator of competitiveness has always been misleading. The track conditions in Losail were not ideal compared to past years, or perhaps more pertinently the 2016 race. You saw a number of riders forced to run tire compound choices that were not their preferred choice, thus having the effect of making them not nearly as competitive as might have been. In addition, it was a shortened race which has an impact on time gaps versus what the normal race distance at Losail is.
 
Using time gaps as an indicator of competitiveness has always been misleading.


This.

Have always found that when people use time gaps to illustrate (or attempt to illustrate) competitiveness that it is an interesting folly unless they include a fuller review and story.

I say this as a gap at the end of the day simply does not tell a full story.

What is the history of the gap specified?

On what lap was the gap attained and for how many laps did it remain?

What is the +/- ration of the gap (the fluctuations across the race distance?

How many overtakes occurred in the race, in the top 10, in the top 5?

Let us look at latter race lap times, did any of the leading riders slow due to a larger gap to the field (controlling the race as it were) which then has allowed riders in the latter end to get closer?

There are way way to many variables involved so say that more riders within X seconds makes it a competitive race.

I am sure that we have all seen races that we have felt are processional due to constant gaps, no real to/fro, no positional changes and yet we have all been surprised that at the end, the top 10 may have been 15 or so seconds apart.
 

Recent Discussions