Contrast Start of 09: MotoGP vs WSBK

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Jan 27 2009, 11:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As long as motogp remains the series that pushes machine development to the limit I will be there. 10 guys on the grid? I don't care. The machine is king in this series. True it takes a special talent, the best talent, to be able to setup and ride them. But the series is all about the machine to me. Sure there is always WSBK but then there is always WWF also. Motogp isn't going anywhere and it is testimony to how great it is when it survives modern sales BS type management and clueless fan meddling. There are many guys on this site that hate MotoGp they just won't admit it.

There are several tiers of racing. Motogp is king.

I must admit I feel there are two levels of the 'Premier class of racing', dependednt on whether you think, as gsfan said, that the series that pushes the technological boundaries is the best, or the one that provides the most exciting on-track action.
A few years ago when I was trying to forge a professional racing career many people asked me if I wanted to reach F1. My response of 'No, I want to do the Indycar/CART series in America' often shocked them as they believed that F1 was the premier class of motor racing. Which in a technical sense it is. However I love RACING, wheel to wheel action and at the time the CART series offered much more exciting racing than the boring F1.
For me yes, Motogp is the premier motorcycle racing class. But WSB is at the moment far more exciting for a spectator!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#22 @ Jan 28 2009, 10:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I must admit I feel there are two levels of the 'Premier class of racing', dependednt on whether you think, as gsfan said, that the series that pushes the technological boundaries is the best, or the one that provides the most exciting on-track action.
A few years ago when I was trying to forge a professional racing career many people asked me if I wanted to reach F1. My response of 'No, I want to do the Indycar/CART series in America' often shocked them as they believed that F1 was the premier class of motor racing. Which in a technical sense it is. However I love RACING, wheel to wheel action and at the time the CART series offered much more exciting racing than the boring F1.
For me yes, Motogp is the premier motorcycle racing class. But WSB is at the moment far more exciting for a spectator!

You forgot to mention the other level of the 'premier class of racing' and that is the series which has the best riders in the world. F1 and motogp are those series' regardless of how boring they might be. In fact, look at the riders reckognized as the sports best ever and they often were part of or even responsible for the most boring racing going. Doohan, Ago and Schumacher are the strongest examples of that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 28 2009, 11:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You forgot to mention the other level of the 'premier class of racing' and that is the series which has the best riders in the world. F1 and motogp are those series' regardless of how boring they might be. In fact, look at the riders reckognized as the sports best ever and they often were part of or even responsible for the most boring racing going. Doohan, Ago and Schumacher are the strongest examples of that.

I agree with you in part, but I cannot comment on the Doohan era because I wasn't watching bikes at the time. However I have never rated Schumacher. Part of his reason for his F1 Dominance from about 2001-2004 was because the Ferarri was so dominant over the rest. I'm not saying he was useless, but not as good as the results show. And before you start laying into me I say this because he nearly always folded when pushed hard:

Adelaide 1994
Jerez 1997
Austria 1998
Suzuka 1998
Spa 2000
And then of course onec Renault and Alonso got their act together he lost again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#22 @ Jan 28 2009, 11:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I agree with you in part, but I cannot comment on the Doohan era because I wasn't watching bikes at the time. However I have never rated Schumacher. Part of his reason for his F1 Dominance from about 2001-2004 was because the Ferarri was so dominant over the rest. I'm not saying he was useless, but not as good as the results show. And before you start laying into me I say this because he nearly always folded when pushed hard:

Adelaide 1994
Jerez 1997
Austria 1998
Suzuka 1998
Spa 2000
And then of course onec Renault and Alonso got their act together he lost again.

Well the standard counter argument for "folded when pushed" critisism is that he did all that was realistically possible, and made mistakes only because the equipment wasn't up to scratch. Look at the reaction to Rossi's 2006 season of folding. In this case there is some support for MS as it is clear to see where Ferrari were before him. But as with all motorsport (and particularly F1) there are many people and many factors that will dictate overall performance, not just one man. My view on these situations is that even if the performance is not 100% representative of the performance of the driver alone, he was still able to get himself in a position to exploit all those other factors to his advantage. That is part of being a racer at this level and it's not easy, for being able to do all of that more times than any other i consider Schuey to be the best ever.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Jan 27 2009, 11:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As long as motogp remains the series that pushes machine development to the limit I will be there. 10 guys on the grid? I don't care. The machine is king in this series. True it takes a special talent, the best talent, to be able to setup and ride them. But the series is all about the machine to me. Sure there is always WSBK but then there is always WWF also. Motogp isn't going anywhere and it is testimony to how great it is when it survives modern sales BS type management and clueless fan meddling. There are many guys on this site that hate MotoGp they just won't admit it.

There are several tiers of racing. Motogp is king.
I agree with you. I follow both wsbk and motogp, but care much more about who wins in motogp, for many reasons which we have discussed previously, including the technical aspects you mention. It has to be sustainable though, and I think the sport is more highly geared now and hence more vulnerable to economic change-winds than it has been in the past. I don't mind close racing, particularly if my rider wins, but I am not opposed to a rider or manufacturer excelling by dint of skill or ingenuity within the rules.

2006 and the preceding years I would definately say that motoGP was the premier class. Now I'm not so sure. Personally I think prototype bikes (definately the 800) are slowly losing their appeal. MotoGP, with skyrocketing costs and a series managed by a bunch of clowns whose sole interest, (seems to be) to make money, and looking at a future post Rossi, is looking on shaky ground. The switch from 125's and 250's to some "600" series is also a cause for concern.
I'll watch both, but I'm pretty sure who'll have the closer racing. One may have the prestige, but that can only keep you going for so long.
To people who say that there have been small grids and motoGP has survived they are right, but the sport has changed so much in the past 10-15 years, I'm not sure that people are going to get as enthused as they once were about a few manufacturers and a small field. Remember, there was only one premier form of racing, (grand prix) until 20 years ago. WSBK has slowly emerged from the shadows of the premier class, (with a few setbacks) to stand on its own 2 feet as a viable alternative to grands prix.
One thing is for sure, if WSBK has strong fields with a lot of riders and manufacturers, at a relatively cheap cost, it will only go from strength to strength.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 28 2009, 06:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well the standard counter argument for "folded when pushed" critisism is that he did all that was realistically possible, and made mistakes only because the equipment wasn't up to scratch. Look at the reaction to Rossi's 2006 season of folding. In this case there is some support for MS as it is clear to see where Ferrari were before him. But as with all motorsport (and particularly F1) there are many people and many factors that will dictate overall performance, not just one man. My view on these situations is that even if the performance is not 100% representative of the performance of the driver alone, he was still able to get himself in a position to exploit all those other factors to his advantage. That is part of being a racer at this level and it's not easy, for being able to do all of that more times than any other i consider Schuey to be the best ever.

Perfect..

Here is how it was for me last year watching both MotoGP and WSBK:

MotoGP - The build up is exciting, talking about the racers and the bikes on the forum, the drama between riders and teams, finally practice times and then qualifiers, we have our grid and surprise people on the front two rows, we speculate as to who will win and finish, we hope for a close race. I sit down to watch the race and it is over in two laps when all the riders are spread out, all the build up, and no climax. I have racing blue balls. I take a nap.

WSBK - I read a little bit about qualifiers, and know what the grid is. I sit to finally watch the race, and I am on the edge of my seat watching flag to flag action. To top this off, I get to watch another race right after the first one, that's right TWO races per weekend.


We can defend MotoGP all we want because it has the best riders and best bikes (which I completely agree), but if there is no race action it is not the best "racing". Here is to hoping both series have great flag to flag action, but there is only one at the moment I am counting on delivering.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bootsakah @ Jan 28 2009, 03:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>We can defend MotoGP all we want because it has the best riders and best bikes (which I completely agree), but if there is no race action it is not the best "racing". Here is to hoping both series have great flag to flag action, but there is only one at the moment I am counting on delivering.

My vote for post of the month..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bootsakah @ Jan 28 2009, 04:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Here is how it was for me last year watching both MotoGP and WSBK:

MotoGP - The build up is exciting, talking about the racers and the bikes on the forum, the drama between riders and teams, finally practice times and then qualifiers, we have our grid and surprise people on the front two rows, we speculate as to who will win and finish, we hope for a close race. I sit down to watch the race and it is over in two laps when all the riders are spread out, all the build up, and no climax. I have racing blue balls. I take a nap.

WSBK - I read a little bit about qualifiers, and know what the grid is. I sit to finally watch the race, and I am on the edge of my seat watching flag to flag action. To top this off, I get to watch another race right after the first one, that's right TWO races per weekend.


We can defend MotoGP all we want because it has the best riders and best bikes (which I completely agree), but if there is no race action it is not the best "racing". Here is to hoping both series have great flag to flag action, but there is only one at the moment I am counting on delivering.

Where's all this stunning, fantastic nail biting racing actually going on. WSBK, last time I watched it was Bayliss run away on both races. Nothing really spectacular there.

Yeah, as an overall WSBK probably has been better than MotoGP last year, even if the best race were MotoGP Laguna. But it's not that epic. It's been better and closer before and I wonder why everyone are so set on hyping it to the sky.
A year ago it was by the majority doomed because of the new 1200 twins. When they went with spec tires years ago they allmost went under with popularity plumetning. They've raised again and again in the last decade and that's a good sign but I have a hard time seing what has been so fantastic the recent years that make the racing so much better than MotoGP.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 29 2009, 08:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Where's all this stunning, fantastic nail biting racing actually going on. WSBK, last time I watched it was Bayliss run away on both races. Nothing really spectacular there.

Yeah, as an overall WSBK probably has been better than MotoGP last year, even if the best race were MotoGP Laguna. But it's not that epic. It's been better and closer before and I wonder why everyone are so set on hyping it to the sky.
A year ago it was by the majority doomed because of the new 1200 twins. When they went with spec tires years ago they allmost went under with popularity plumetning. They've raised again and again in the last decade and that's a good sign but I have a hard time seing what has been so fantastic the recent years that make the racing so much better than MotoGP.
Bayliss was pretty dominant the whole season and his championship was only delayed by several dnfs; I guess the way he rides has always made him prone to these. However as you say he seemed to win as he liked in the last round, and even as a bayliss fan it would seem to me that the wsbk rules provided a significant incentive for him and ducati not to perform in this fashion at every round.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jan 29 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Bayliss was pretty dominant the whole season and his championship was only delayed by several dnfs; I guess the way he rides has always made him prone to these. However as you say he seemed to win as he liked in the last round, and even as a bayliss fan it would seem to me that the wsbk rules provided a significant incentive for him and ducati not to perform in this fashion at every round.

By luck or ice cold planing Ducati managed to stay just below the magical limit for weight adjustment and to me it looks like they have the edge on the rest of the bikes and that the weight should be raised.
The reason were probably luck as there were several huge crashes and take outs that caused the results to tip below the limit.
I can't imagine that Ducati walked over to Max and told him to take a hit at Long Island, and him saying "Sure, no problem, watch me in trun one a few laps into the race"

I got $5 that days the first SBK race will be way more entertaining than the first GP race.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 29 2009, 09:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Where's all this stunning, fantastic nail biting racing actually going on. WSBK, last time I watched it was Bayliss run away on both races. Nothing really spectacular there.

Yeah, as an overall WSBK probably has been better than MotoGP last year, even if the best race were MotoGP Laguna. But it's not that epic. It's been better and closer before and I wonder why everyone are so set on hyping it to the sky.
A year ago it was by the majority doomed because of the new 1200 twins. When they went with spec tires years ago they allmost went under with popularity plumetning. They've raised again and again in the last decade and that's a good sign but I have a hard time seing what has been so fantastic the recent years that make the racing so much better than MotoGP.

Perhaps my use of "edge of my seat" and your use of "nail biting" are overdoing it, but that doesn't disguise the fact that the racing action as a whole has been loads better in WSBK. The hype is because a lot of us on here are fans of "Racing" and WSBK is poised to deliver this in 2009. I want as much as anyone for MotoGP to be equally as entertaining come race day. It is still the pinnacle of moto racing in my mind, but due to a number of factors has lost it's appeal as of late. I can almost guarantee you that there would be hardly any talk about budget cuts, teams leaving, "saving MotoGP", etc if it was good racing in the first place.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bootsakah @ Jan 29 2009, 03:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'> I can almost guarantee you that there would be hardly any talk about budget cuts, teams leaving, "saving MotoGP", etc if it was good racing in the first place.

the winner...

I am not saying for a second that the racing in Motogp has been great. At times it has been spectacular. We could argue forever about the benefits of the major rule changes that have been made since 2001 but they are done. It will be exciting this year. This is the third year of development and the 800cc bikes will be closer than ever. However, there will never be 30 machines on the Motogp grid it is just too specialized. And are there actually 30 great riders around to pilot them? There are less than 10 great riders in the series now. Maybe less than 5.

[quote name='Bootsakah' date='Jan 29 2009, 04:33 PM' post='172911']

I would also agree that the racing should be closer in WSBK.
The number of bikes and the fact that it is <u>World </u>SBK ensure lots of close racing and of course the new factories make it very interesting to watch, but I still don't see when the racing there became so fantastic. It's been lot's of runaways in SBK too and some races are still (it was terrible the lest few years, but getting better) pure tire management contest. Even though I find some excitment in watching the likes of Biaggi comming through the field at the end of a race it doesn't feel right when all the riders are holding back to conserve tires. It's amusing when the commentators are talking about the "racing" when anyone in a leading pack of 5-10 bikes could have been a second faster a lap just by pushing a bit harder, but thereby destoying the tires. That's my impression of the recent years of racing in SBK. Add to that the lack of wight regulation on the Ducatis and I don't find anything to make such a big hype about. The one thing that make WSBK reallly interesting this year are all the new bikes, and the huge shuffle of riders.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 30 2009, 09:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I would also agree that the racing should be closer in WSBK.
The number of bikes and the fact that it is <u>World </u>SBK ensure lots of close racing and of course the new factories make it very interesting to watch, but I still don't see when the racing there became so fantastic. It's been lot's of runaways in SBK too and some races are still (it was terrible the lest few years, but getting better) pure tire management contest. Even though I find some excitment in watching the likes of Biaggi comming through the field at the end of a race it doesn't feel right when all the riders are holding back to conserve tires. It's amusing when the commentators are talking about the "racing" when anyone in a leading pack of 5-10 bikes could have been a second faster a lap just by pushing a bit harder, but thereby destoying the tires. That's my impression of the recent years of racing in SBK. Add to that the lack of wight regulation on the Ducatis and I don't find anything to make such a big hype about. The one thing that make WSBK reallly interesting this year are all the new bikes, and the huge shuffle of riders.
I still think if you put rossi, probably stoner and possibly some of the other elite motogp riders on a top factory wsbk there would be little close racing for the lead. Up until now once in a decade(or more ) riders like rossi have not sought to make a career in wsbk. If dorna et al wittingly or unwittingly continue to destroy motogp and the elite motogp riders (or valentino alone) go to wsbk then of course it will become the premier class. It is possible that spies might be the first of the new breed to aspire to wsbk rather than motogp; it may transpire that despite criticism his mother is actually a rather good manager.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jan 30 2009, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It is possible that spies might be the first of the new breed to aspire to wsbk rather than motogp;

Except that just like everyone else, Spies is in superbike because he couldn't get a gp ride. He is pretty open about wanting to get to GP as soon as possible.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 30 2009, 01:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Except that just like everyone else, Spies is in superbike because he couldn't get a gp ride. He is pretty open about wanting to get to GP as soon as possible.
Sure his strategy (a sound one) is to position himself for the next yamaha factory ride, but he has hedged his bets nicely and probably also exhibited sound fiscal judgement. I think he rather than suzuki may have decided a suzuki motogp ride was not a good idea.