Bridgestone investigate Dani Pedrosa tyre issue

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 2 2009, 12:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well I'll tell you what floats my boat, the current 800's. They are the consummate GP machines and I have to laugh when I hear about the good 'ol days of peaky hard to ride dangerous 2 strokes and then immediately the next comment about too bad the 800's are so peaky and dangerous. Sorry but I take offense when someone postulates that a GP machine is supposed to be a dragster derivative. I don't think so. You can have your production based WSBK championship and the racing is good and all but this is thoroughbred racing not production based. The current 800 is a different machine to the 990 and in a GP environment they are the better machine. My first evidence is lap times. Next evidence is in their technical sophistication. More evidence in there difficult nature to setup and get perfect. Even more evidence in the minutia of mankind able to build them, control them and guide them to victory. No 990 could stand with the current 800cc machine. They would have evolved into a 270hp nightmare IMO and no track could contain their top speed. The rubber would not support that powerful a platform. Electronics would have been as important as they are to the 800 so that is a moot difference. I am happiest with balance and with the 800's that is what you have and that is why they are so bloody quick (no not fast). With the 990's you have what? A big-... engine...big deal. The short history of the 990 brought a ton of boring racing BTW if you remember. I'm sure a lot of people will slag this post but that is what I think.

Not at all, rather I commend you for airing your opinion in such a cogent fashion. In response -

1/ I loved the 500cc class. Yeah, they destroyed promising careers, - they broke young riders, and decimated grids, but in the hands of the masters, Doohan, Rainey, Freddie, Steady Eddie, Gardner, Schwantz, Vale et al. -note, in the hands not out of the hands (as is arguably the case today) they were a joy to behold. Casey rues the fact that he never got to ride one in anger, that he missed what JB refers to as the 'golden age'. They were peaky as hell, and that was the challenge. the rider tamed their fury with precision and a deft application of the wrist, as opposed to the artificial supposedly 'benign' hand of technological progress. And I'd rather see a change of jetting than a change of mapping; or the clever application of a cartridge gear ratio than the cold logic of a GPS modeled map. The point I make is that the 800's are peaky because blanket electronics have been cast over them from day 1, masking their delivery- of which unlike the 500, there are erratic 'gaps' throughout. The 500's were a ..... to ride, but you could learn to tame the beast, and exploit the powerband - if you were worthy, you had a 'hand; in what the bike did. The 800's do not have this definitive powerband, no matter how hard it was to tap...and it was the Gods of the 500's that could divine this power. Only the elite could push these vicious beast to the limits that it took to consistently be up front, when a new rider came in it took time to get to the fore, and even Rossi was caught out at first by their unpredictable nature when he moved up in 2000. Lorenzo by contrast, made the jump into the top class and immediately got thee pole positions, a win and three podiums from his first three races, (yeah, and the mother of all highsides in succession for his enthusiasm), but these achievements could never have happened in the 80's and 90's. The introduction of electronics have instituted this to a certain extent.

2/ Clearly the 800's require a totally different set of skills to the 990's. Precision redresses the lack of torque, and pays huge dividends. It does not make for interesting racing, rather a series of sequential time trials

3/ You are happy with the balance and with the 800's we have? I would say that the balance has been lost...tragic, since it we were verging upon it in '06 - witness the most memorable season in recent history.

4/ I extol the virtues of excess power purely for its romantic appeal. It's the heart not the head speaking. In actual fact a cap on revs, and the the reduction in the amount of electronics would not only make for closer racing but substantially lower costs...isn't that what Dorna desperately craves right now?

5/ The history of the 990's imparted a great deal of dull racing, but that was largely due to a marriage between one of the greatest riders in history and one of the greatest race bikes in history. By '06 we had more of a level playing field...'if it aint broke....(you know the rest)

6/ Why would I slag off a well thought out post...nice one GS.

If it 'floats your boat' then at least you can derive enjoyment out of something that is to me, a sinking ship.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 2 2009, 12:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I have to laugh when I hear about the good 'ol days of peaky hard to ride dangerous 2 strokes and then immediately the next comment about too bad the 800's are so peaky and dangerous.
With regard to th 800's -mentioned peaky for sure...never once used the word dangerous. I don't think the drop to 800cc has contributed anything towards the safety of the sport -as was the intention- rather I think the introduction of electronics unquestionably have. Take away the electronics, and the 800's would certainly become a liability -which makes a mockery of the rationale behind the capacity cap.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 1 2009, 07:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Only the elite could push these vicious beast to the limits that it took to consistently be up front, when a new rider came in it took time to get to the fore, and even Rossi was caught out at first by their unpredictable nature when he moved up in 2000. Lorenzo by contrast, made the jump into the top class and immediately got thee pole positions, a win and three podiums from his first three races, (yeah, and the mother of all highsides in succession for his enthusiasm), but these achievements could never have happened in the 80's and 90's.
You say that, but ignore history. Biaggi stepped in, took pole, and won his first race on a 500. He was on the podium for the next 3 races after that and starting from the top 4 for each. He finished second in the championship, too, so he didn't have the (injury-assisted) fade that Lorenzo had, either. Go back a bit further, and Kenny Roberts took pole a first time out as well (and second in the race), and followed that with 3 straight victories and another couple of second-place finishes. He started in the top-3 his first 4 races. He won the championship too.

No, it's not normal for riders to step in and immediately be fast, but it's not unprecedented. Time will tell where Lorenzo ranks amoug other riders to have similar immediate success.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 2 2009, 01:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Only the elite could push these vicious beast to the limits that it took to consistently be up front, when a new rider came in it took time to get to the fore, and even Rossi was caught out at first by their unpredictable nature when he moved up in 2000. Lorenzo by contrast, made the jump into the top class and immediately got thee pole positions, a win and three podiums from his first three races, (yeah, and the mother of all highsides in succession for his enthusiasm), but these achievements could never have happened in the 80's and 90's. The introduction of electronics have instituted this to a certain extent.

Do the research and you will actually find that rookies teneded to better before motogp became a 4 stroke class.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 2 2009, 09:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Do the research and you will actually find that rookies teneded to better before motogp became a 4 stroke class.
No, you do the research, as you're clearly so good at doing Mr Google, then come back and present your findings to me. Start by illustrating precisely when it was that a rookie moved into the 500 class and immediately claimed thee pole positions, a win and three podiums within his first three races, then go on to qualify the rest of your statement.

What I said was qualitative. You may find quantitatively, the figures support your assertion, but it won't demonstrate that they moved up and immediately mastered the old 500cc machines, because they didn't. Also there are other factors to consider, such as availibility of competitive machinery. I'm actually mystified as to why I'm bothering responding to this- it's a given that the move to 4 strokes made GP bikes more amenable as opposed to the ferocious characteristics and fearsome reputation of their two stroke predecessors.

If what Jorge immediately achieved last year as a rookie has happened, it was by no means commonplace. I can tell you without looking, that amongst the greats, Agostini, Hailwood, Lawson, Doohan, Schwantz and Rainey certainly never managed it. Possibly Freddie in '02 because his impact was so immediate, -or maybe Kenny in '78 for the same reason. I doubt it.

I certainly wouldn't expect even the most knowledgable members of this forum to be able to answer this off the top of their heads, but the information should be fairly easy to obtain.

It's fortunate that in you Tom, we have our resident forum expert so willing to share and impart such a voluminous <strike>wikapedic</strike>, sorry, encyclopedic knowledge.....oh, you didn't - you just instructed me to go off and do my homework - I assume you already have then, or you don't need to?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ May 2 2009, 02:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You say that, but ignore history. Biaggi stepped in, took pole, and won his first race on a 500. He was on the podium for the next 3 races after that and starting from the top 4 for each. He finished second in the championship, too, so he didn't have the (injury-assisted) fade that Lorenzo had, either. Go back a bit further, and Kenny Roberts took pole a first time out as well (and second in the race), and followed that with 3 straight victories and another couple of second-place finishes. He started in the top-3 his first 4 races. He won the championship too.
No, I said that to the best of my knowledge. Biaggi moved up in 98 I think, and I think he did win his first race didn't he. I can't remember him being on pole position, and I'm very impressed that you knew all this off the top of your head. As I said in my reply from Tom, off the top of my head, I wouldn't be surprised if Senior had done it...again I'm impressed that you were able to summon these statistics in such detail. It wasn't three straight poles though was it? - but that's just nitpicking I suppose.

Anyway, good reply.

The point I made was that it wasn't common for rookies to throw a leg over a 500cc GP bike and be so instantly fast - which you also concede, but yes, you're right, wasn't totally without precedent either.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ May 2 2009, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think we all just wish there were less rules and more battles.

I wish there were more ....s.

( . ) ( . )

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 2 2009, 08:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, you do the research, as you're clearly so good at doing Mr Google, then come back and present your findings to me. Start by illustrating precisely when it was that a rookie moved into the 500 class and immediately claimed thee pole positions, a win and three podiums within his first three races, then go on to qualify the rest of your statement.
I don't have a vested interest in this topic A, but didn't Matt just do this one post prior to Tom's?

Well as it happens i looked into it about a year ago when someone tried to claim that motogp was too easy since being 4 stroke. As you rightly pointed out the difficulty in controlling the bikes is not the only factor here, equipment parity level of competition have to be considered. As well as the increased proffessionalism and far superior preperation of riders ariving in motogp nowdays, and larger amount of testing. As you said there are few riders whop 'mastered' the 500's particularly quickly, but you would be hard pushed to claim Lorenzo or any other motogp rookie since 02 had 'mastered' the 800 by the start of the season. You pointed out that other riders have had an impact similar to Lorenzo's and go on to say it was not commonplace. But we haven't exactly seen many Lorenzo's recently either

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 2 2009, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well as it happens i looked into it about a year ago when someone tried to claim that motogp was too easy since being 4 stroke. As you rightly pointed out the difficulty in controlling the bikes is not the only factor here, equipment parity level of competition have to be considered. As well as the increased proffessionalism and far superior preperation of riders ariving in motogp nowdays, and larger amount of testing. As you said there are few riders whop 'mastered' the 500's particularly quickly, but you would be hard pushed to claim Lorenzo or any other motogp rookie since 02 had 'mastered' the 800 by the start of the season. You pointed out that other riders have had an impact similar to Lorenzo's and go on to say it was not commonplace. But we haven't exactly seen many Lorenzo's recently either
No we haven't seen many Lorenzo's, and I've no wish to play down his remarkable start to the '08 season. Fair point, there is a strong case that this was not evidence that Jorge had mastered the 800, and it transpired that his early exuberance came back to bite him on the arse. I still maintain though, that he would not have managed to do what he did in those first three races on a 500cc two stroke, and that electronic aids have made the transition to the class easier to manage.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mick D @ May 2 2009, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't have a vested interest in this topic A, but didn't Matt just do this one post prior to Tom's?
Yes, I read it backwards - so I saw Tom's before Matt's

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 2 2009, 03:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I still maintain though, that he would not have managed to do what he did in those first three races on a 500cc two stroke, and that electronic aids have made the transition to the class easier to manage.

I disagree, i think its made it safer.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 2 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I disagree, i think its made it safer.
Don't safer and easier go hand in hand, I have never riden a 2 stroke street machine but when it comes to dirt bikes the newer 4 strokes are babies compared to the old 500cc machines that had an idle that was akin to the devils heart beat.
If you still don't think that electronic nanies make racing easier just look at the cars that are comming with launch control, only the best drivers in the word can match the launch controls of the GTR and the new one comming in the vette.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 2 2009, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I disagree, i think its made it safer.
Safer as well - granted.

Valentino would disagree with you - he's gone on record to say innumerable on occasions that it's also made it easier. Loris has also said so, add to that, Sete, upon his return; Who's opinion should I listen to I wonder. Three world class riders, (with, in the case of Loris, 19 years experience of Grand Prix racing to summon) - and eleven world championships between them, who during that time have collectively competitively raced, tested and developed prototype 125cc, 250cc and 550cc two stroke Grand Prix racing motorcyles; 990cc four stroke Moto GP racing motorcycles, and the current generation of 800cc four stroke racing motorcycles.....OR, an upper middle class self proclaimed engineer who lives with his parents in the leafy stockbroker belt outside Greater London, contributes to various motor sport forums, but doesn't even own a bike license far less even ridden so much as a C90 before.

That's a hard one.

Before I get chastised by certain people, I will add that this is a forum, and you are entitled to your views which you are at similar liberty to air.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ May 2 2009, 01:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think we all just wish there were less rules and more battles.
+1

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 1 2009, 08:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I loved the 500cc class...

The thing that is hard is that time marches on and it is easy to get stuck in an era. It is natural to get biased. However, the change has happened. And it hasn't been a great transition but we are racing 800's now and it is starting finally to get freaking good. I think that the 800 class has to be seen for what it is, as separate and distinct rather than comparing it to another era. Let the old stuff be great in its own regard for its own time as it certainly was. I think otherwise you diminish both and you will never get a chance to "get onboard" until the class finally blossoms which is a shame. But then I usually think that the trip is better than the destination.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 1 2009, 03:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well I'll tell you what floats my boat, the current 800's. They are the consummate GP machines and I have to laugh when I hear about the good 'ol days of peaky hard to ride dangerous 2 strokes and then immediately the next comment about too bad the 800's are so peaky and dangerous. Sorry but I take offense when someone postulates that a GP machine is supposed to be a dragster derivative. I don't think so. You can have your production based WSBK championship and the racing is good and all but this is thoroughbred racing not production based. The current 800 is a different machine to the 990 and in a GP environment they are the better machine. My first evidence is lap times. Next evidence is in their technical sophistication. More evidence in their difficult nature to setup and get perfect. Even more evidence in the minutia of mankind able to build them, control them and guide them to victory. No 990 could stand with the current 800cc machine. They would have evolved into a 270hp nightmare IMO and no track could contain their top speed. The rubber would not support that powerful a platform. Electronics would have been as important as they are to the 800 so that is a moot difference. I am happiest with balance and with the 800's that is what you have and that is why they are so bloody quick (no not fast). With the 990's you have what? A big-... engine...big deal. The short history of the 990 brought a ton of boring racing BTW if you remember. I'm sure a lot of people will slag this post but that is what I think.

How can you advocate a formula that was created intentionally to stifle progress? The 800s were designed specifically to reduce performance. In response, the manufacturers took the new developments that were waiting to be thoughtfully and efficiently introduced, and slapped them on the bikes overnight. The sophistication you see in the 800 era was already on the way.

The spending war that has resulted from the unnecessary instability has cost Motogp some of its bike manufacturers, tire manufacturers, and privateers. We haven't gained anything. Fans who support the changes have agreed to sacrifice many of the sports important participants in order to fast forward the sport's development cycle.

Fans who indifferently gloss over the collateral damage caused by this formula change are guilty of drinking the Jonestown juice provided by Dorna's marketing people. The 800cc formula is a monument gifted to us by the engineering demagogues to remind us of their never-ending stupidity. The 800cc formula was crafted by a gaggle of beady-eyed technocrats each hoping the new rules would allow them to exploit their design philosophies at the expense of their competitors. Despicable.

In the end, we will measure the success of this class based upon its ability to return the sport to where it was in the PAST. Just in time to ruin it again by using the same formula modification procedures as were used in 2007.

What happens if I advocate 600cc bikes with 18L? Will I have captured the moral authority? Can I type vainglorious paragraphs about how my ideas have expedited our arrival in the future? Do I get a prized for being the first one to get bored with the status quo?

When should we institute the changes to 600cc, you ask? Tomorrow.

Do I win the progressive prize for wasting most in the shortest amount of time? That is the modern definition of legislative progress, right?

The odd dichotomy of the Lex Files... sometimes brilliantly intriguing, sometimes clearly delusional!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 2 2009, 06:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Safer as well - granted.

Valentino would disagree with you - he's gone on record to say innumerable on occasions that it's also made it easier. Loris has also said so, add to that, Sete, upon his return; Who's opinion should I listen to I wonder. Three world class riders, (with, in the case of Loris, 19 years experience of Grand Prix racing to summon) - and eleven world championships between them, who during that time have collectively competitively raced, tested and developed prototype 125cc, 250cc and 550cc two stroke Grand Prix racing motorcyles; 990cc four stroke Moto GP racing motorcycles, and the current generation of 800cc four stroke racing motorcycles.....OR, an upper middle class self proclaimed engineer who lives with his parents in the leafy stockbroker belt outside Greater London, contributes to various motor sport forums, but doesn't even own a bike license far less even ridden so much as a C90 before.

That's a hard one.

Before I get chastised by certain people, I will add that this is a forum, and you are entitled to your views which you are at similar liberty to air.

Couldn't agree more Arrab, experience should win every time, however then we have the 'Tom Factor no one on the face of this earth knows better then this <strike>boy</strike> man, in fact he knows so much about everything, he might actually be god!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ May 2 2009, 06:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Safer as well - granted.

Valentino would disagree with you - he's gone on record to say innumerable on occasions that it's also made it easier. Loris has also said so, add to that, Sete, upon his return; Who's opinion should I listen to I wonder. Three world class riders, (with, in the case of Loris, 19 years experience of Grand Prix racing to summon) - and eleven world championships between them, who during that time have collectively competitively raced, tested and developed prototype 125cc, 250cc and 550cc two stroke Grand Prix racing motorcyles; 990cc four stroke Moto GP racing motorcycles, and the current generation of 800cc four stroke racing motorcycles.....OR, an upper middle class self proclaimed engineer who lives with his parents in the leafy stockbroker belt outside Greater London, contributes to various motor sport forums, but doesn't even own a bike license far less even ridden so much as a C90 before.

That's a hard one.

Before I get chastised by certain people, I will add that this is a forum, and you are entitled to your views which you are at similar liberty to air.

They may well be easier to ride, but they are harder to master. Rossi himself said last years title was his hardest earned, and he was beaten the season before that.

Also most of your assumptions about me are unsurprisingly wrong. You'd probably be better off not getting to invested in them