Brno 2016

birdman · Aug 23, 2016

Arrabbiata1 said:
Interesting to note that the official line from Goubet echoes Vudu's main point that the soft tyre available is designed for full wet conditions. Obviously, he would say that. But it's worth noting that Dovi - who exited the race prematurely in my opinion - has no qualms about Michelin's statement because you would expect that to happen to the tyre given the lack of water. His grievance however lies with the allocation.

There was nothing in between the extra soft wet compound deployed at Sachsenring and the hard option - extremes which make tyre choice very difficult given the range of variables which are omitted. His annoyance at Michelin concerns the lack of specifications to choose from in the rain which is highly dangerous. In fact, he doesn't believe they have the situation under control. Because the soft compound provided was so extreme, although he was riding at 70 - 80% he still lost a large piece of the tyre which as he says is highly dangerous.

So Dovi's insistence is that although there was not enough water on the track surface to safely use the tyre, Michelin were negligent in limiting their provision of soft wets to the extra- soft compound.

Vudu Gaubets damage control would be plausible if the majority of the field had actually started on the hard front. Then he could say to the soft gamblers 'see we told you so'. Obviously Michelin had no idea the tires were going to delaminate, even in conditions they were not made for. Laughably they need puddles of water? As has been repeated many times, if Michelin knew from the design characteristics of the soft tires actually delaminate when overheated they would have mandated using the hard. If they knew what vudu knows yet still allowed the majority of riders to go out on them, well its basic negligence.

The fact is the majority started on the soft. Now either that majority are whimps, high roller gamblers, or most likely thought with Michelins approval they were actually taking the safe option. Using the soft tires that gave the most feel in the conditions of a wet track at 14 degrees. The theory that keeps getting repeated by Vudu Gaubet is it might have been flag to flag, which means the soft wet would have been ok. I don't understand this theory at all. What point can the rider actually switch to a slick. If the track had actually dried sufficiently for a slick, doesn't that mean riders would have been riding into the pits on the rims after grenading the soft wets?

Surely flag to flag would have mandated the hard wet, the soft wet in a flag to flag is so far outside its recommended operating range its actually dangerous. Michelin knew this, but still the majority went for the soft front?

And in hindsight the hard wets were the right tires for the race. Yet according to big brave Cal the hard wet was diabolical in the early laps and naturally he saved many near crashes. He also says if it happened to start raining again he would have been ....... If it had of dried completely, he would have again been ....... And then Baz, also on the hard, failed to get past Marquez nursing the unsuitable soft, due to finding the hard almost unrideable at the start. Vudu Goubet might need to acknowledge neither tire was particularly suited, this was a case of choose you poison.

moto vudu · Aug 23, 2016

#22 said:
In the same way that the Michelin soft front was a defective tyre rather than a good tyre that was overheated.

birdman said:
Vudu Gaubets damage control would be plausible if the majority of the field had actually started on the hard front. Then he could say to the soft gamblers 'see we told you so'. Obviously Michelin had no idea the tires were going to delaminate, even in conditions they were not made for. Laughably they need puddles of water? As has been repeated many times, if Michelin knew from the design characteristics of the soft tires actually delaminate when overheated they would have mandated using the hard. If they knew what vudu knows yet still allowed the majority of riders to go out on them, well its basic negligence.

The fact is the majority started on the soft. Now either that majority are whimps, high roller gamblers, or most likely thought with Michelins approval they were actually taking the safe option. Using the soft tires that gave the most feel in the conditions of a wet track at 14 degrees. The theory that keeps getting repeated by Vudu Gaubet is it might have been flag to flag, which means the soft wet would have been ok. I don't understand this theory at all. What point can the rider actually switch to a slick. If the track had actually dried sufficiently for a slick, doesn't that mean riders would have been riding into the pits on the rims after grenading the soft wets?

Surely flag to flag would have mandated the hard wet, the soft wet in a flag to flag is so far outside its recommended operating range its actually dangerous. Michelin knew this, but still the majority went for the soft front?

And in hindsight the hard wets were the right tires for the race. Yet according to big brave Cal the hard wet was diabolical in the early laps and naturally he saved many near crashes. He also says if it happened to start raining again he would have been ....... If it had of dried completely, he would have again been ....... And then Baz, also on the hard, failed to get past Marquez nursing the unsuitable soft, due to finding the hard almost unrideable at the start. Vudu Goubet might need to acknowledge neither tire was particularly suited, this was a case of choose you poison.

Mick D · Aug 23, 2016

FFS - the softs were not suitable for the entire race AND Michelin has some QC issues... 400+ posts by ....... on both sides of this 'argument'.

birdman · Aug 23, 2016

moto vudu said:

Mad Cal braveheart Crutchlow:

“I believed with the track conditions the hard front would be OK. I was more concerned for the rear and the rear was the worst part because it was really difficult on the first five laps at the first left-hand corner, going in and out.

“It was quite dangerous and I nearly crashed a couple of times. I could see that Vale was struggling as well in exactly the same area,” he added.

Crutchlow said his only real concern was over whether it would begin to rain again during the race as he mulled the prospect of a flag-to-flag bike swap race.

I believe it was Dr Vudu that claimed "perfect tire for the conditions" wasn't quite so perfect tire afterall. Apparently the hard wet doesn't work very well, when its wet. Conundrum.

moto vudu · Aug 23, 2016

You're posting that Cal almost crashed a couple times as proof of what? Cal said in Parc Ferme he almost crashed because he accidentally hit 6th gear instead of 5th. When is Cal on a bike and not almost crashing?

michaelm · Aug 23, 2016

moto vudu said:
You're posting that Cal almost crashed a couple times as proof of what? Cal said in Parc Ferme he almost crashed because he accidentally hit 6th gear instead of 5th. When is Cal on a bike and not almost crashing?

Yes, if he has found a tyre which only almost makes him crash he probably should use it exclusively.

birdman · Aug 23, 2016

moto vudu said:
You're posting that Cal almost crashed a couple times as proof of what? Cal said in Parc Ferme he almost crashed because he accidentally hit 6th gear instead of 5th. When is Cal on a bike and not almost crashing?

Proof that some forms of bait are irresistible, even to the rare vudu fish.

Yes I had a bit of a laugh about cal nearly crashing. I figured the braveheart thing would be a hint we take anything Cal says with a grain of salt.

No not what Cal says as proof. The fact almost all the riders lined up on the wrong tire is the proof. Either they all went mad and only Cal is sane, or maybe the hard wet isnt very good, at least in the wet. Maybe not the perfect tire. I mean if even Marquez, usually the first guy to use slicks, still went for the soft, it means something doesnt it. That Michelin had no friggin clue what was about to happen.

BTW i especially liked the Marquez tire management theory. Are you saying Marquez can ride a tire right up the the point of delamination but never tip it over the edge? Thats talent my friend. Almost as much as Cal.

#22 · Aug 23, 2016

moto vudu said:

Bait? Seemingly just a post that you had no answer to.

JPSLotus · Aug 23, 2016

Mick D said:
FFS - the softs were not suitable for the entire race AND Michelin has some QC issues... 400+ posts by ....... on both sides of this 'argument'.

Nice contribution Mick. You should try posting more instead of calling people ........

birdman · Aug 23, 2016

JPSLotus said:
Nice contribution Mick. You should try posting more instead of calling people ........

Mick does realise he added to the 400 ........ posts on the subject doesn't he? Yes its an endurance and quality issue no .... shirllock thank God for post 563 setting the record straight.

michaelm · Aug 23, 2016

#22 said:
Bait? Seemingly just a post that you had no answer to.

As opposed to your many posts which do not address arguments which don't suit you, the fundamental issue of sudden delamination without any previous signs of a problem being an unacceptable way for a wet tyre to fail, particularly when conditions are still sufficiently wet to exclude the use of a slick chief among them, as well as you classifying the previous issues with another Michelin tyre, their soft dry tyre option, as being completely different even though that issue also did not apply to all competitors, in fact applying to only one particular marque/bike.

You bear as much or more responsibility as anyone, even me, for the length of this thread, so perhaps you could consider refraining from whinging about same.

Iamapony · Aug 23, 2016

birdman said:
............. I don't understand this theory at all. What point can the rider actually switch to a slick. If the track had actually dried sufficiently for a slick, doesn't that mean riders would have been riding into the pits on the rims after grenading the soft wets?.......

Good post. I don't mean to hack it up, but to be fair: Marcy Marc did say he (and team) chose the soft wets thinking it would be a flagger and he might win another one like the other one by getting a lead on the softie and getting on slicks early.

Mick D said:
FFS - the softs were not suitable for the entire race AND Michelin has some QC issues... 400+ posts by ....... on both sides of this 'argument'.

Well, that is being diplomatic. You seem to have sided with ....... on both sides, making you the [strike]chump[/strike] champ of ....... in this thread, I think.

For some other antidotal nonsense: I do remember when Michelin had problems with their multi compound Pilots coming apart. And they were horrendous on track days. My experience with Michelin performance motorcycle tires has been unfavorable, so I do not use them - AT ALL.

#22 · Aug 23, 2016

michaelm said:
As opposed to your many posts which do not address arguments which don't suit you, the fundamental issue of sudden delamination without any previous signs of a problem being an unacceptable way for a wet tyre to fail, particularly when conditions are still sufficiently wet to exclude the use of a slick chief among them, as well as you classifying the previous issues with another Michelin tyre, their soft dry tyre option, as being completely different even though that issue also did not apply to all competitors, in fact applying to only one particular marque/bike.

You bear as much or more responsibility as anyone, even me, for the length of this thread, so perhaps you could consider refraining from whinging about same.

Touchy aren't you? Firstly, my post was not addressed at you and secondly if I have many posts where I, as you say, do not address arguments that don't suit me, you shouldn't find it hard to point a number of them out.

Your post makes so little sense to me in relation to my very few posts on this thread that I wonder if it was meant for another poster.

michaelm · Aug 23, 2016

#22 said:
Touchy aren't you? Firstly, my post was not addressed at you and secondly if I have many posts where I, as you say, do not address arguments that don't suit me, you shouldn't find it hard to point a number of them out.

Your post makes so little sense to me in relation to my very few posts on this thread that I wonder if it was meant for another poster.

Sorry, profuse apologies, I am posting on an iPhone at work between cases and thought I was replying to a post from Moto Vudu.

I agree with most of your posts on this thread, which have obviously not been numerous, as I mostly do with your posts in general, and you as opposed to him are entitled to make the point you did, not having made scores of posts in which you have refused to address inconvenient arguments from others as he has on this thread.

birdman · Aug 23, 2016

Iamapony said:
Good post. I don't mean to hack it up, but to be fair: Marcy Marc did say he (and team) chose the soft wets thinking it would be a flagger and he might win another one like the other one by getting a lead on the softie and getting on slicks early.

Well, that is being diplomatic. You seem to have sided with ....... on both sides, making you the [strike]chump[/strike] champ of ....... in this thread, I think.

For some other antidotal nonsense: I do remember when Michelin had problems with their multi compound Pilots coming apart. And they were horrendous on track days. My experience with Michelin performance motorcycle tires has been unfavorable, so I do not use them - AT ALL.

Yes I understand what Marquez was saying. I'm not questioning his tactics. I don't understand Frenchie Goubet. Well actually I do I'm just calling ......... On the one hand Goubet is saying the soft wets are made for full on rain. That makes sense, I watched the moto2 race in conditions that would be perfect for the soft wets. I also understand Vudus point that the soft wets were designed for, again full on rain conditions. Don't use the tire outside its design intention. No problem there, so the soft is not designed to cope with a drying track.

But then both Goubet and vudu say teams used the soft in view of a possible flag to flag. Well to me flag to flag implies a drying track. So why on earth would they use a tire made specifically for full rain on a drying track? Its going to fail. Edit for example consider Dovi. Its a flag to flag, the track starts to dry, not enough rain, the soft wet fails. So he comes in to pit as per Goubet prediction. But the track is still too wet for a slick. But its not wet enough for the soft wet. Only one option then, the hard wet. So Dovi would do a few more laps on the hard wet, then the track dries further, then he has to pit yet again for the slick. So Goubets flag to flag scenario prediction the soft wet would have been acceptable is bogus.

Obviously a slip up from Frenchie in his damage control explanantion. For sure Michelin haven't adequately tested the tire to determine how they degrade, which is unacceptable even if this was club meet let alone motogp, the pinnacle of racing. Michelin had no idea, now post race want to blame the teams for choosing a tire which should have been strongly advised as unsuitable on anything other than a full wet track or simply withdrawn from the allocation. I'm sure if the teams knew what could happen they including Marquez wouldn't have taken the risk on the soft.

By the way Ive learnt a lot about tires in these 400 odd '........' posts.

Arrabbiata1 · Aug 23, 2016

pyeman said:
Could i do better?,in terms of riding?, no of course not,in terms of humility?, definitely,i ride an R1 in my spare time for fun,i'm not a professional racer,i think you are missing my point entirely,once he'd got his first podium he started acting like jack the ....... lad,gesticulating wildly at riders who he considers inferior if they got in front of him on track,he suddenly thought he was Mister ....... big time 'cos he'd got a 3rd place,he's a cocky .... who thinks he's a lot better than he really is, remember he could do everybody else's jobs a lot better than they could do his,now he's had a win he'll be even worse,people say it's Brit humour,well i'm British and i don't think it is,he sit's between 2 world champions at a press conference and gobs off about 'playing around with them',.... Off Cuntslow.you've had 1 win and i'll bet my left bollock you never get another.

- And this years nomination for the 'longest sentence in a post' award goes to...

Mick D · Aug 24, 2016

JPSLotus said:
Nice contribution Mick. You should try posting more instead of calling people ........

Did you send that from the corner after John left?

Arrabbiata1 · Aug 24, 2016

birdman said:
Yes I understand what Marquez was saying. I'm not questioning his tactics. I don't understand Frenchie Goubet. Well actually I do I'm just calling ......... On the one hand Goubet is saying the soft wets are made for full on rain. That makes sense, I watched the moto2 race in conditions that would be perfect for the soft wets. I also understand Vudus point that the soft wets were designed for, again full on rain conditions. Don't use the tire outside its design intention. No problem there, so the soft is not designed to cope with a drying track.

But then both Goubet and vudu say teams used the soft in view of a possible flag to flag. Well to me flag to flag implies a drying track. So why on earth would they use a tire made specifically for full rain on a drying track? Its going to fail. Edit for example consider Dovi. Its a flag to flag, the track starts to dry, not enough rain, the soft wet fails. So he comes in to pit as per Goubet prediction. But the track is still too wet for a slick. But its not wet enough for the soft wet. Only one option then, the hard wet. So Dovi would do a few more laps on the hard wet, then the track dries further, then he has to pit yet again for the slick. So Goubets flag to flag scenario prediction the soft wet would have been acceptable is bogus.

Obviously a slip up from Frenchie in his damage control explanantion. For sure Michelin haven't adequately tested the tire to determine how they degrade, which is unacceptable even if this was club meet let alone motogp, the pinnacle of racing. Michelin had no idea, now post race want to blame the teams for choosing a tire which should have been strongly advised as unsuitable on anything other than a full wet track or simply withdrawn from the allocation. I'm sure if the teams knew what could happen they including Marquez wouldn't have taken the risk on the soft.

By the way Ive learnt a lot about tires in these 400 odd '........' posts.

Far from being ........ - I think that both sides are making very potent points and it makes for a fascinating debate...particularly when the spectre of last October continues to haunt these pages. Saying that, it was a flippant tongue in cheek comment - lost in translation. I think Mick is very misunderstood, for the love of God does no one understand the subtle nuances of Canuck humour? Whimps!

Birdman, Goubert also emphasised that most riders went with what they knew, which is why so many opted for the extra-soft front. Valentino and Lorenzo both confirming this. These tyres are designed for pouring rain, it's impossible to argue against that and the conditions were conducive to their use with the prospect of further rain a possibility - although the forecast suggested otherwise (which incidentally was highly accurate for the entire weekend.) Nonetheless, rumours circulated that within 30 minutes it was going to rain again. In the alternative scenario of a drying track, the strategy with the soft-soft selection was to pound out early fast laps and pull a sufficient gap before pitting for either a pair of slicks or depending on the conditions, an intermediate. The flag to flag never happened and riders on the soft - soft combination were screwed. Many were reluctant to hamper their early pace with the hard front or the hard - hard. Crutchlow said that to him, one hard tyre meant both hard tyres. In fact Michelin had reservations about his choice. 'I chose the tyres on the grid and there was a little hesitation from Michelin'. Perhaps they follow the 'Crashy Crutchlow' thread at Clermont Ferrand?

lil red rocket pilot · Aug 24, 2016

pyeman said:
Could i do better?,in terms of riding?, no of course not,in terms of humility?, definitely,i ride an R1 in my spare time for fun,i'm not a professional racer,i think you are missing my point entirely,once he'd got his first podium he started acting like jack the ....... lad,gesticulating wildly at riders who he considers inferior if they got in front of him on track,he suddenly thought he was Mister ....... big time 'cos he'd got a 3rd place,he's a cocky .... who thinks he's a lot better than he really is, remember he could do everybody else's jobs a lot better than they could do his,now he's had a win he'll be even worse,people say it's Brit humour,well i'm British and i don't think it is,he sit's between 2 world champions at a press conference and gobs off about 'playing around with them',.... Off Cuntslow.you've had 1 win and i'll bet my left bollock you never get another.

Oh dear, another one that does not get our humor:giggle:
bless ya.

michaelm · Aug 24, 2016

Arrabbiata1 said:
Far from being ........ - I think that both sides are making very potent points and it makes for a fascinating debate...particularly when the spectre of last October continues to haunt these pages. Saying that, it was a flippant tongue in cheek comment - lost in translation. I think Mick is very misunderstood, for the love of God does no one understand the subtle nuances of Canuck humour? Whimps!

Birdman, Goubert also emphasised that most riders went with what they knew, which is why so many opted for the extra-soft front. Valentino and Lorenzo both confirming this. These tyres are designed for pouring rain, it's impossible to argue against that and the conditions were conducive to their use with the prospect of further rain a possibility - although the forecast suggested otherwise (which incidentally was highly accurate for the entire weekend.) Nonetheless, rumours circulated that within 30 minutes it was going to rain again. In the alternative scenario of a drying track, the strategy with the soft-soft selection was to pound out early fast laps and pull a sufficient gap before pitting for either a pair of slicks or depending on the conditions, an intermediate. The flag to flag never happened and riders on the soft - soft combination were screwed. Many were reluctant to hamper their early pace with the hard front or the hard - hard. Crutchlow said that to him, one hard tyre meant both hard tyres. In fact Michelin had reservations about his choice. 'I chose the tyres on the grid and there was a little hesitation from Michelin'. Perhaps they follow the 'Crashy Crutchlow' thread at Clermont Ferrand?

Sure, all true, and and no complaint could have been made about the soft wets wearing out more than the hard wets, or being better preserved for riders who rode to promote tyre preservation, having taken the odds by making that tyre choice.

However, as Birdman said, knowing how to ride at just below the level at which delamination will occur is a rather cleverer trick, particularly given the delamination was an unprecedented phenomenon.

Search

Search

Brno 2016

birdman

moto vudu

Mick D

birdman

moto vudu

michaelm

birdman

#22

JPSLotus

birdman

michaelm

Iamapony

#22

michaelm

birdman

Arrabbiata1

Mick D

Arrabbiata1

lil red rocket pilot

michaelm

Similar threads

Recent Discussions