Help Support MotoGP Forum:
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Its a little known fact that his doctorate is in witchcraft. So when u think about it, he's pretty good.
Agree with your first point, but I can still hope, and only to give us some sort of reference. Dani may not have the minerals to take a championship, but Redding should be riding a Penny Farthing (his feet would probably still touch the ground) and Crutchlow would drop a trike given half a chance. So Dani is our only likely comparison.
To answer your second point, and this is pure conjecture on my part, there are 2 reasons.
1. If a tool has a wider optimum operating range, said tool has a lower potential performance overall. Marc was riding a more forgiving machine because it was not as refined, and given the level of competition it flattered his riding style.
2. If a tool is refined to a point of higher overall performance, the operating range of the tool is narrower, requiring more finesse in order to extract maximum performance.
So in conclusion, Marc was flattered by an ultimately slower but more forgiving machine. Now the bar has been raised by Yamaha and Ducati, the latest iteration of the machine may well have a higher potential, but his lack of finesse means he cannot wield the tool as well as a rider that is more sensitive to its limitations.
They may have tried to develop a machine that seems more tailored to his style, but to create a machine that panders to a flawed style can only result in a machine that is more difficult to ride.
Whether or not HRC have not provided the tool needed to do the job isn't something I can answer without another rider providing additional feedback as to it performance limitations.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Mick, Rat, valid points regarding Dani difficult to use as reference, though if I may, he has come runner up 4 times. But I'm still scratching my head how Kropo used Cal & Alvaro as some reference to Marquez as support to unequivocally declare the RCV's untimely "decline".
We have 3 examples of turd. One turd is smeared everywhere (Cal), another turd is smeared everywhere but theres splashback, hitting the surrounding parties (Alvaro). The third turd gets covered in glitter, and the glitter runs out but no one believes its just a turd. Last year the turd sparkled! For sure its more glitter than turd (Marc).
I'm covered in dandruff here...
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2015
- Messages
- 6,290
- Location
- NJ
Which is probably why HRC has Casey signed as a test rider. They know MM can't develop a bike for ...., and whether he will be able to do so down the road has yet to be seen. But for the moment, MM has no idea how to do so. So you've essentially got to rely on Dani and Casey to develop the RCV, and the problem with Casey is he isn't out there riding it all the time. So now you're really down to Dani for feedback since MM wants the bike to fit his style.
I'm always reminded of this Bruce Lee quote...
Sure you'd like a bike to fit your riding preferences, but the greats know how to adapt to the bike when necessary. If Stoner would have had the fortune Rossi had with being the preferred winner, what he would have accomplished over the long haul would have been immense because of his ability to adapt to the traits of a motorcycle.
MM right now doesn't have this adaptability...and frankly I think you either have it or you don't. It's not something that is learned, it's down to that talent thing which isn't exactly quantifiable.
For as long as MM can get away with late braking and the sliding of the rear to get the entry angle for the corner set without having to lose as much speed as everyone else, that's when he is going to shine. If Michelin decides to start bringing back the Saturday Night Specials and tailoring their tires for Rossi next year, MM more than anyone is going to be in deep .....
Arrabbiata1
Blue Smoker
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 6,925
- Location
- Out of Nowhere
I don't think Marc has the requisite experience to adequately describe a preference feel wise. Obviously he can explain how a bike is behaving, but as to what is correct or not, he rides in such a way that by any normal standards, he is almost always mid-crash. Casey has ridden a number of different machines and had a level of adaptiveness that hasn't been seen since. And with that comes an understanding of machine behaviour. Rossi and Edwards come to mind as other riders that have honed the ability to do so, but it only comes with experience I believe. All three have/had the experience needed to understand how to provide the type of feedback needed to develop and set up a bike. Marc does not. And what you are left with when we look at Colin or Vale is a machine that is there or there abouts, and the final part is being able to adapt. Admittedly this is where Stoner had a bit extra.
I'm not sure I agree that this can't be a learn't skill, but when you have won at the highest level for two years straight out of the box, I'm not sure he has the attitude or approach required to modify his style. In his mind why should he, he's proven his way is the quickest and his talent will always win out (completely incorrect but hey, he hasn't had much in the way to tell him he is wrong YET).
I genuinely don't believe the SNS will make a return, but it would seem that extravagant riding styles aren't going to be catered for, and this is where Marc will fall foul. If we look back to Toni Elias, his method of riding was severely hampered when the single tyre rule came into force, and if history is to be believed, orthodox riding styles will be the ones that make the most profit by Michelins
That ...... just won't quit floating.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Well if HRC were relying on Pedro and Casey for development cues, I can see the confusion. But Marc is already on record saying Casey can't develope ..... So they better start looking at the unsinkable unflushable sea worthy yacht captain for answers (preferably uncheated answers).
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2007
- Messages
- 11,377
- Location
- Pomona NY
Just looking for clarification. Is there any reason to suppose that next year's Michelins will favor any one particular bike or rider?
None whatsoever.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Michelin have just made a sweet deal, were handed the contract by Dorna because in a way Dorna have forced Bridgestone out, perhaps mutually. Michelin will be developing their tire based on rider feedback. (So far, agree?) If you had the clipboard, listening to the riders tell u what they liked and didn't like, one of which had the most storied relationship with you, which would u listen too?
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
See my response to Kesh.
And allow me to add, when Bridgestone changed their tire in 08, how would u described the contrasting tire fortunes between Stoner and Rossi. Keep in mind this was Japanese rubber, with all the particulars of their culture. Now imagine Michelin....and the French culture coming back in to GP.
Last edited:
Arrabbiata1
Blue Smoker
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 6,925
- Location
- Out of Nowhere
Well if we forget feedback for second and just look to the tests for indications, it would seem that the rear tyre has a decent level of grip, and the front tyre is a steaming pile of ......
Which would suggest that either the front tyre is too soft in construction and giving up at turn in (which is where the BStone excels), or the rear tyre is pushing the front.
I in no way ripped off any journalists forming this opinion, except all of them (I haven't seen footage yet...).
In anycase, the tyre package as it stands requires a huge amount of work to get it up to a race-able standard, and until Michelin does have a decent baseline I doubt we'll see it develop into a tyre that favours any one rider or team. More likely one manufacturer will inadvertently build a machine that favours the tyre characteristics.
Currently all they need to do is create a tyre set that is faster than BStone and the job is done.
With regard to my earlier comment about unorthodox riding styles being punished, I base this view purely on the fact that if a large quantity of the field start crashing it won't cast Michelin in a favourable light. They will make a set of incredibly conservative tyres to begin with that cater for the majority, and as a result the riders that have left-field styles will find that they can't exploit the tyre the way they used to on the BStones.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 5,583
- Location
- Thailand
Hmmmm, that sounds good but is not based on any facts at all. The Yamaha's ease-of-use and apparently better performance overall should immediately raise flags with your analysis.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 5,583
- Location
- Thailand
If thats the case then Jorge better get a butterhammer bucket to catch his tears!!!!
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Rat, Actually the rear tire has been criticized for lack of grip, spinning and such, and has been blamed (at least for Marc's plight) as hammering his style, etc. It's all very complicated but if he's not winning then there must be a complicated and often convoluted explanation.
Regarding the question that Kesh poses (and Arrabi 's amusing response) let's remember a few things:
1. Michelin had a wonderful relationship with Rossi because much to Dorna's delight he was winning.
2. When Bridgestone made a better tire, the FIRST ONE switched by coup, his name was Rossi.
3. 2008 the tire development miraculously favored Rossi coupled with jettisoned Michelin.
4. Michelin made a narrow focused tire (SNS) which was great until the tire limits were imposed, then the tire war favored the manufacturer who had the more conservative tire (or one that performed for a wider condition).
5. Bridgestone made a conservative tire (I prefer the word "versatile"), it got them to be the single tire supplier then it's got them booted from GP, why? See #6.
6. The pivot point above was that there existed a tire war after Bstones came good (short lived tire war); no tire war, and SNS have had no competition, and given their experience, would have no incentives now to engineer a tire where most could use, as long as the favorite guy uses it successfully.
7. The biggest reason a single tire supplier was ever introduced was because the wrong guy was winning. (Agree? Disagree? )
Regarding the question that Kesh poses (and Arrabi 's amusing response) let's remember a few things:
1. Michelin had a wonderful relationship with Rossi because much to Dorna's delight he was winning.
2. When Bridgestone made a better tire, the FIRST ONE switched by coup, his name was Rossi.
3. 2008 the tire development miraculously favored Rossi coupled with jettisoned Michelin.
4. Michelin made a narrow focused tire (SNS) which was great until the tire limits were imposed, then the tire war favored the manufacturer who had the more conservative tire (or one that performed for a wider condition).
5. Bridgestone made a conservative tire (I prefer the word "versatile"), it got them to be the single tire supplier then it's got them booted from GP, why? See #6.
6. The pivot point above was that there existed a tire war after Bstones came good (short lived tire war); no tire war, and SNS have had no competition, and given their experience, would have no incentives now to engineer a tire where most could use, as long as the favorite guy uses it successfully.
7. The biggest reason a single tire supplier was ever introduced was because the wrong guy was winning. (Agree? Disagree? )
Last edited:
Similar threads
