I know what you are talking about and the rider really matters. For exaple it is really obvious that someone like Casey Stoner will do faster laps on Crutchlow's bike then Crutchlow himself. And by the way the T in CRT stands for teams so "CRT bikes" might sound a little bit dumb but it is not a very wrong term actually. It somehow means bikes that are in the claiming rule teams!!!
Cheers
I know what you are talking about and the rider really matters. For exaple it is really obvious that someone like Casey Stoner will do faster laps on Crutchlow's bike then Crutchlow himself. And by the way the T in CRT stands for teams so "CRT bikes" might sound a little bit dumb but it is not a very wrong term actually. It somehow means bikes that are in the claiming rule teams!!!
Cheers
Joined Feb 2009
3K Posts | 2+
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
i think you misunderstood him, it's not about the riders but the teams racing the bikes.
it is solely about being recognized as a non factory effort to gain the CRT advantages (more fuel and more engines), the rider does not matter when it comes to being judged if the team can be classified as a CRT.
there is nothing in the rule books on the technical side to determine what is a factory prototype and what is a CRT prototype, it has all to do with the money and the financing which determine whether you'll be judged as a factory and therefore denied the extra fuel and engines
if for example gresini could make a case that he bought bautistas rc213v and that he is funding that bike by himself without hondas help/without being dependant on honda even that could become a CRT bike
and hey, welcome to the board
edit : about the aprilia...as I understand it the difference between the aprilia and for example the honda is that aprilia sells the bikes to the teams so that the bikes become the teams property, honda on the other hand leases the bikes and at the end of the season the bikes need to be returned to honda. if there wasn't that much money and secret technology involved i guess if yamaha ,ducati and honda actually sold their bikes to the privateers that would be CRT too but that will never happen, its too risky to invest millions and millions into R&D and then have those secrets "stolen" for 20.000€ .
it is solely about being recognized as a non factory effort to gain the CRT advantages (more fuel and more engines), the rider does not matter when it comes to being judged if the team can be classified as a CRT.
there is nothing in the rule books on the technical side to determine what is a factory prototype and what is a CRT prototype, it has all to do with the money and the financing which determine whether you'll be judged as a factory and therefore denied the extra fuel and engines
if for example gresini could make a case that he bought bautistas rc213v and that he is funding that bike by himself without hondas help/without being dependant on honda even that could become a CRT bike
and hey, welcome to the board
edit : about the aprilia...as I understand it the difference between the aprilia and for example the honda is that aprilia sells the bikes to the teams so that the bikes become the teams property, honda on the other hand leases the bikes and at the end of the season the bikes need to be returned to honda. if there wasn't that much money and secret technology involved i guess if yamaha ,ducati and honda actually sold their bikes to the privateers that would be CRT too but that will never happen, its too risky to invest millions and millions into R&D and then have those secrets "stolen" for 20.000€ .
i think you misunderstood him, it's not about the riders but the teams racing the bikes.
it is solely about being recognized as a non factory effort to gain the CRT advantages (more fuel and more engines), the rider does not matter when it comes to being judged if the team can be classified as a CRT.
there is nothing in the rule books on the technical side to determine what is a factory prototype and what is a CRT prototype, it has all to do with the money and the financing which determine whether you'll be judged as a factory and therefore denied the extra fuel and engines
if for example gresini could make a case that he bought bautistas rc213v and that he is funding that bike by himself without hondas help/without being dependant on honda even that could become a CRT bike
and hey, welcome to the board
edit : about the aprilia...as I understand it the difference between the aprilia and for example the honda is that aprilia sells the bikes to the teams so that the bikes become the teams property, honda on the other hand leases the bikes and at the end of the season the bikes need to be returned to honda. if there wasn't that much money and secret technology involved i guess if yamaha ,ducati and honda actually sold their bikes to the privateers that would be CRT too but that will never happen, its too risky to invest millions and millions into R&D and then have those secrets "stolen" for 20.000€ .
Thank you for the warm welcome and fixing my mistake. Now it seems pretty clear how teams work with all the rules and regulations. Like every other place it's all about how much you are willing to pay to earn the maximum benefit.
Good Luck
Joined Apr 2011
900 Posts | 4+
somewhere else
Why don't they give the CRT entrants a one lap advantage. Make things interesting towards the end of the race to see who can lap them and claim victory.
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
The CRT rule is "any team that we, the Grand Prix Commission, decide is a CRT, is a CRT"
. If they want to be taken seriously, they have to have hard rules. You have no credibility whatsoever when you make statements that say,, the rules are whatever we say they are, and as a matter of fact, we can and will interpret them as we see fit, and even change them regardless of time.
. If they want to be taken seriously, they have to have hard rules. You have no credibility whatsoever when you make statements that say,, the rules are whatever we say they are, and as a matter of fact, we can and will interpret them as we see fit, and even change them regardless of time.
You should read the regulations on dangerous riding. Full of subjective statements, with Race Direction having sole and subjective discretion over every move on the track. Not saying it's right, just saying it's not uncommon.
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
Totally different than tech regs. One mans idea of dangerous riding, is another mans idea of greatness. Its an opinion. Allowing certain entities leeway on technical aspects to bolster the show, is not only wrong, it affects the competition side of sport. At some point, true sport fans get turned off when the show becomes more important than the competition.
If more casual sports fans watch because of the show, the loss of the true sports fans is irrelevant. MotoGP is only there to sell energy drinks.
Totally agree, Because it gets a little bit annoying when you see too much direct interfering in the sport. One side are the engine and fuel regulations and on the other side some other matters that could be managed more wisely with less interference. For example the problem that occured last year with the "Pedrosa, Simoncelli VS Stoner, Rossi" issue. Giving Marco that ride through was absoloutly unnecessary and it was just a dumb interference that destoryed the heat of the competition for the fans. In my opinion Marco's move was just a dumb move just like Rossi's move on stoner and even Pedrosa's move on Hayden back in 2006. It had happend before and dumb moves are something normal in this sport. so there was no need to interfere and it just made the adrenaline flow stop!!!
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
Why's it a gamble? Casual fans have been watching sports of all sorts for trivial reasons - popular figures and national success being the main determining factors. If I'm selling a TV sport, I'd go for show every time.
Joined Sep 2006
3K Posts | 4+
Leading
Joined Feb 2008
2K Posts | 0+
home
what happened to good ol' cigarettes lol.. and i'm surprised rockstar doesnt have more of a presence.. i was actually pretty surprised when they sponsored lorenzo.. spies was sponsored by rockstar back in the ama for years..
honestly its crazy how all the cigarettes got bashed out of the sports, and watching the uprising of the energy drinks.. pretty cool paradigm shift to witness.
Joined Oct 2006
3K Posts | 197+
Living the dream in Scotland
I said it at the time, Marco got shafted big time last year for having the balls to fight against Spencer, Jorge an that we prick on the Honda. Marco did nothing more dramatic than any of the above, and indeed Vale has done during the early days of their career. The only one who didn't do it more than once was the wee Repsol prick, and the Hayden 06 incident was the first and last time he actually pulled an overtake in motogp.
Could you imagine these guys in 500s against Schwantz, Doohan or Rainey? Watch how those guys raced, even ....... Criville could mix it when needed. The wee Repsol guy would not have got on a 500 in the day.
Joined Feb 2007
11K Posts | 2K+
Tennessee
Because the casual fan is fickle, and will leave you at the alter if something else comes along that is the new "in" thing. GP has a lot of casual fans that got caught up in Rossi mania, and will disappear as his career wanes. Finding the next character will not be easy. Not only does he have to be a side show character, he has to win, and win big for these fans to jump on board and continue with the sport. The problem is, he is not out there, and the sport is set up to be dominated by dull ole drab Casey for the next half decade if thats what he desires. I foresee a huge backslide for GP in the not so distant future. At that point, they will wish they had not alienated the fan of the sport, while appeasing the fan of the show.
