donnington race

MotoGP Forum

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Renjith @ Jul 28 2009, 09:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi,

My first post in this forum (though I have been reading this forum for last 2 years).

Lets analyse the choices Stoner had before the race started (Note: Rossi & Lorenzo crash is just hind sight)
Case 1:Stoner on Wet tyre
Scenario A : The rains gets heavier once the race starts
In this case, let us assume Casey is going to win the race as every one other than the factory ducati's have to change bikes. So Casey gets 25 points. There is a realistic chance that after the bike change, the yamaha's with the wet tyres will finish in top 5(as other riders will also swap the bikes). (So Casey gains around 9-12 points on Rossi). But for this to happen, the rain has to fall from the first few laps. The probability of which was not so great. So in summary, this option gave Stoner a points gain around 10 with a slim probability.

Scenario B : The rain doesnot happen
In this case, which has equal probabilty to happen compared to Case1, casey was at the risk of loosing 20-25 points to Rossi as the yamaha's were very fast in similar conditions during practice

Case 2: Stoner on dry tyre
Scenario A: The rain gets heavier
If Stoner started on the slicks same as others, he could have still finished top 3 and even if Rossi wins, the points difference would be less than 10 . But note that the probability of a win for Stoner is more in this case as he had good pace (may not be winning pace) in dry+slicks but was really fast in wet. So he will be definitley faster than most if every one is on wet tyres
Scenario B: The rain doesn't get happen
Judging by Stoners practice pace he would have finished top 3-4 in the race and will lose around 10 points.

So analysis is as follows
If the chance of rain getting heavier is 50-50 then stoner had 50% chance of gaining ~10 points on Rossi and 50% chance of loosing around 10 points to Rossi if he started the race on dry
If he started on wet tyres, and the chance of rain is again 50-50, he had 50% chance of gaining ~10 points on Rossi and 50% chance of loosing around 20 points to Rossi.

This makes me think that even though it was a gamble, it was a very bad gamble (like may be betting on dovi to win this years title) .

Now, since this is my first post, go easy on me guys
<
<


Cheers
Renjith

I think this is a decent assessment of the pre-race situation from the standpoint of a fan. If you had posted this before the race and the weather probabilities were about 50/50, I would have agreed.

Unfortunately for us, our assessment of the situation would be wrong. In fact, the people pushing at the front had a much higher probability of scoring a DNF so the 50/50 assessment doesn't really reflect the true probability. Furthmore, the also rans pushed as hard as they could without worrying about the championship points. The championship leaders were more likely to finish in the midpack while trying not to ride themselves out of contention.

Really, if the press want to gang .... somebody for stupidity, it's got to be Rossi. Both Lorenzo and Stoner were out of contention and he binned it trying to protect a relatively unimportant lead.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jul 28 2009, 05:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ducati didn't get lucky, Casey assessed the track conditions and he gambled that it would rain. In actuality, the gamble was an overly conservative race strategy that caused Ducati to finish at the back.
You may have your own definitions of what's conservative and not but starting close to the front, still very much in the points fight for the championship you always do the same as the others. That's the conservative choice in racing.
Consequently doing the opposite is the radical choice.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MdubSTYLIE @ Jul 28 2009, 09:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Whatever dude, I have never directed any of my banter at you personally, until maybe the gay-tard blast. Although you however on my first ever post, which was all questions just a normal post. The first response was you calling me an ..... and a dumb .... So I really never cared to get into an actual race conversation with you. I would rather just make your favorite rider my huckleberry. I need better bait? Well you bit and I am throwing you back, because you are way to small of a fish.

BTW You didn't even touch Vale picking up his own bike. Just face it, it's because you were thinking about me too when it happened. And you knew that after giving me three pages of .... about how cs is so amazing for picking his own bike up, you were going to get it back.


You still don't get it. This is not a personality clash forum or an insult trading forum. If you ever have anything valid to say about RACING - let me know. Better yet... I'll let you know.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Jul 28 2009, 07:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You still don't get it. This is not a personality clash forum or an insult trading forum. If you ever have anything valid to say about RACING - let me know. Better yet... I'll let you know.
since when ?
<
<
<
<
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 28 2009, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If Rossi would have broken his finger or some damage would have cause more harm, all of you would be saying, wow, what a genius choice by Ducati. Well, as lex put it, they didn't lose out all that much, and they didn't crash. As some of you riders might know, any crash is a high risk. You can crash at 140 mph and walk away, or crashe at 60 mph and have a broken wrist.
Nope. Sorry. The Ducati riders choice would not hbave been genius not even had the ones who crashed out broken every bone in their bodies. Simply because there were riders out there (riders who, I might add, you consider to be far less worthy than your hero Nicky who can do no wrong) who went out on slicks and stayed on slicks and you know what? They got PODIUM positions. Then there were other riders like Melandri who went out on slicks, changed to rain and you know what? He started 7th and finished 7th. Not bad, considering. Then there were the Ducati riders who went backwards so bloody fast it was painful to watch. So there. No way Ducati's choice would have been genius even had Rossi been unable to continue his race, let alone finish well ahead of your boy Nicky. Two weights and two measures Jumk. You accuse others of being mindless but frankly I have to ask myself...did those rose-tinted specs you wear to tone down the glare of the sun shining out of Nicky's ... come with a good dose of LSD?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Jul 28 2009, 01:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You still don't get it. This is not a personality clash forum or an insult trading forum. If you ever have anything valid to say about RACING - let me know. Better yet... I'll let you know.

I don't get it? Like I already stated you called me an ..... after my first ever post, a couple months before I started posting on a regular. So don't tell me about trading insults because of one blast I got of on you. Look through your post and tell me who insults who? And who just plays off being insulted. Yeah you let me know when I have something valid to say about racing. Better yet, don't our personalities just clash way to much for us to have a reasonable debate.

7722:spilt_milk.jpg]
 

Attachments

  • spilt_milk.jpg
    spilt_milk.jpg
    4.3 KB
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 28 2009, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Nope. Sorry. The Ducati riders choice would not hbave been genius not even had the ones who crashed out broken every bone in their bodies. Simply because there were riders out there (riders who, I might add, you consider to be far less worthy than your hero Nicky who can do no wrong) who went out on slicks and stayed on slicks and you know what? They got PODIUM positions. Then there were other riders like Melandri who went out on slicks, changed to rain and you know what? He started 7th and finished 7th. Not bad, considering. Then there were the Ducati riders who went backwards so bloody fast it was painful to watch. So there. No way Ducati's choice would have been genius even had Rossi been unable to continue his race, let alone finish well ahead of your boy Nicky. Two weights and two measures Jumk. You accuse others of being mindless but frankly I have to ask myself...did those rose-tinted specs you wear to tone down the glare of the sun shining out of Nicky's ... come with a good dose of LSD?
<
<
<
<
<
You tell him BG
<
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ninja10 @ Jul 28 2009, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I dont know weather anyone hear an interveiw some where on BBC, But if I recall I did hear that Stoner made the choice to use wetsand didnt want to listen to his team and Livio who were telling him to have slicks, Stoner being Stoner thought he knew best and made the mistake him self. The reason why Nicky had wets to is coz he didnt manage a decent set-up for dry adn thought he would just follow Stoner in his on a wimm prediction"

Must admit I wouldnt of liked to have been in the garage after the race. Plenty of toys being thrown out the pram.
<
<


But excellent race i thought plenty of overtaking, good to see Dovi with win, but equally good to see edwards on podium with a tyre he didnt really know anything about. and RDP what a man at the moment, rubber side down except for one race Ohins are the future
<
j/k

Would be good to see what RDP could do with some facotry support i.e Toni E bike.

Is a shame about Rossi and Jorge but ST happens.


I've been telling all you of that Stoner purposely went with the wet tires to avoid confrontation up front !! Seriously man, I think the guy's mental game is weaker than Gibernau and Biaggi's. No one else on the grid went with wet tires..... not even the crappier teams down the order, even they didn't take the 'gamble' and yet a team like Ducati who is still in the chase for the championship somehow decided to. It just doesn't make sense.... so in conclusion, Stoner is scared to battle up front and lose face again, so he took the easy way out. I'm not trying to bash the guy, but it's becoming more clear every race that something's wrong with him mentally.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MdubSTYLIE @ Jul 28 2009, 11:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't get it? Like I already stated you called me an ..... after my first ever post, a couple months before I started posting on a regular. So don't tell me about trading insults because of one blast I got of on you. Look through your post and tell me who insults who? And who just plays off being insulted. Yeah you let me know when I have something valid to say about racing. Better yet, don't our personalities just clash way to much for us to have a reasonable debate.

7722:spilt_milk.jpg]

That's because you are an ........ you ......
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SuperShinya56 @ Jul 28 2009, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That's because you are an ........ you ......
Coming from you, I will take that as a complimant. I did read your post above that one after all.
<
So thanks shins!
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MdubSTYLIE @ Jul 28 2009, 08:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Coming from you, I will take that as a complimant. I did read your post above that one after all.
<
So thanks shins!

i couldn't be arsed to waste my time commenting on that tripe ss56 was fantasizing about.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 28 2009, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Nope. Sorry. The Ducati riders choice would not hbave been genius not even had the ones who crashed out broken every bone in their bodies. Simply because there were riders out there (riders who, I might add, you consider to be far less worthy than your hero Nicky who can do no wrong) who went out on slicks and stayed on slicks and you know what? They got PODIUM positions. Then there were other riders like Melandri who went out on slicks, changed to rain and you know what? He started 7th and finished 7th. Not bad, considering. Then there were the Ducati riders who went backwards so bloody fast it was painful to watch. So there. No way Ducati's choice would have been genius even had Rossi been unable to continue his race, let alone finish well ahead of your boy Nicky. Two weights and two measures Jumk. You accuse others of being mindless but frankly I have to ask myself...did those rose-tinted specs you wear to tone down the glare of the sun shining out of Nicky's ... come with a good dose of LSD?

I don't get it??

If it would have poured down rain early in the race then <u>every</u> rider would have been forced to pit and change bikes while Stoner and Hayden cruised to 1-2.

Obviously we all know what happened in the race so it's easy to call them out. But use your imagination and think had it started pouring on lap 1-5 what would have been. that was the gamble that never payed off.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 28 2009, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Nope. Sorry. The Ducati riders choice would not hbave been genius not even had the ones who crashed out broken every bone in their bodies. Simply because there were riders out there (riders who, I might add, you consider to be far less worthy than your hero Nicky who can do no wrong) who went out on slicks and stayed on slicks and you know what? They got PODIUM positions. Then there were other riders like Melandri who went out on slicks, changed to rain and you know what? He started 7th and finished 7th. Not bad, considering. Then there were the Ducati riders who went backwards so bloody fast it was painful to watch. So there. No way Ducati's choice would have been genius even had Rossi been unable to continue his race, let alone finish well ahead of your boy Nicky. Two weights and two measures Jumk. You accuse others of being mindless but frankly I have to ask myself...did those rose-tinted specs you wear to tone down the glare of the sun shining out of Nicky's ... come with a good dose of LSD?
<
I love you too sweety.


The highlighted statement here nullifies any meaningful evaluation of their tire choice. You are basically saying that it was dumb of them to choose a safe tire despite the risk of losing life and limp as irrelevant (“it doesn’t matter if they would have broken every bone…”). The fact that some riders stayed up is circumstantial. Its called attrition. The podium picture should give you a clue as to the conditions on the track ad the attrition that developed. The issue is whether the tire choice was reasonable or not, something that has been lost in the discussion because since Rossi chose slicks, therefore choosing wets is wrong. What ever Rossi does must be right--1st rule of cult. This is not even a point of debate that of the three top points leaders, only one of them did not crash (fact, and directly related to tire choice), what does that tell you of their decision? You are fixated in that their lap times were slow, but make no mention of the atrocious conditions. If Ducati riders chose to use wets, not just as a strategy, but also as self-preservation, is that dumb? Well according to your logic it is, but only because Rossi and company chose slicks. Oh, and your stooping/fishing mention of Nicky is below you sweetheart. If anything, a gamble on a “long shot” is what people who have nothing to lose do. It made infinitely more sense for him to choose this unpopular gamble than anybody else actually.

Oh Lord, how I wish we could live in an alternate universe where we could see the reaction if the opposite had occurred. I have no doubt that if Stoner had chosen slicks and crashed out on a DNF (like Lorenzo) and Rossi had chosen wets for self preservation or strategy and finished the race in one piece, you and many supporters might be touting his genius, or perhaps erecting a monument to his willingness to gamble and go for broke (a virtue usually admired, that is except for Stoner & Co.). Hell the man crashed on slicks in the wet, you and others are still banging on how smart he is for doing so. Amazing really. So who can do no wrong? It seems Rossi. Only he can gamble on slicks (or was it not also a gamble?), crash, and it be spinned as a good thing.

The conditions were wet & cold before the race, with clouds threatening rain. The riders had to make a decision of tires. Most chose slicks, one team chose wets. Was it a gamble, yes. Was it dumb or stupid? This is the question for evaluation. The knee-jerk reaction seeing their results have cause many to say, wow, that was dumb. Well was it really? So you cannot see that this might be reasonable? (Apparently not).

I suppose you would have simply looked over to see what Rossi had on his rims and done the same, eh? Perhaps that’s what Lorenzo did, and look where it got him.

Again BG, the question is weather the choice was reasonable. Yes. Did it pay off? Well if you consider that the two-fold decision undoubtedly was: 1. Self-preservation (dumb for you it seems) & 2. Gamble to advance on points (worked for one of the two they are chasing). Then for me it was not all that unreasonable. Certainly not enough to say it was dumb and stupid or irrational.

Service with a smile. Always my dear.
<
 
I would compare a few points on Donington's race, I'll try to be impartial. In order with top first.


Rossi: (I root for him always).
Stupid Risk = Yes (Let Dovisiozo pass and get 20 juicy points moron).
Necessary Risk = No (See above).
High Risk = Yes (Tempting a fall too much always is).
Gambling = Yes (Other may call it 'Calculated Risk', still gambling).
Lucky = Yes (Well, the champ has it!).
Embarrassing = No (Opposite, fell and still bit 3 contenders).
Smart Move = No (But somehow he emerged above challengers)


Pedrosa:
Stupid Risk = No (Does not even know what it means).
Necessary Risk = Yes (Would not know how to though).
High Risk = No (As an educated lady, believes other Gentleman would let her pass).
Gambling = No (Prefers it safe, or maybe injury fright induced).
Lucky = No (ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz).
Embarrassing = Yes (Honda #1 rider in 9th).
Smart move = No (Needs everything perfect so it's never smart).


Stoner:
Stupid Risk = Yes (Even team said so).
Necessary Risk = Yes (Took it as a win all lose all).
High Risk = Yes (Wets wear out fast, 3 laps or so).
Gambling = Yes (As much as an alcoholic betting addict in Las Vegas).
Lucky = No (Where is rain when you need it Donington?).
Embarrassing = Yes (In a photo seems to be fighting, just a lap behind).
Smart move = No (He was actually praying the Gods for rain before start, and admitted it himself… "Uga, Aca, Uga, Uga, Uga, Aca… I want rain, I sacrifice a goat!)… (In your dreams mate, the GOAT finished 5th!).


Lorenzo:
Stupid Risk = Yes (Was too ambitious).
Necessary Risk = Yes (That's what makes a great rider).
High Risk = Yes (Slicks on semi-wet, of course High Risk).
Gambling = Yes (Really wanted to beat Rossi, guess what?).
Lucky = No (Pushed it over his luck).
Embarrassing = No (Do or die spirit).
Smart move = No (Could have also gone for the points).


The thing is to accept that 3/4 were stupid at its moment, but are the best 3 in the Championship, and the ones that make racing what it is. And one was playing it safe.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Jul 28 2009, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I would compare a few points on Donington's race, I'll try to be impartial. In order with top first.

...

The thing is to accept that 3/4 were stupid at its moment, but are the best 3 in the Championship, and the ones that make racing what it is.

Interesting. Both of us, and any reasonable person reading your post will agree this is hardly a scientific rubric you presented, right? You put equal weight on all. Had Rossi broken some bone and missed two rounds, would that risk be equal to looking embarrassed? So you basically decided what was important arbitrarily in your analysis and gave them all equal weight?

Stoner's team did not say it was "stupid" they said it was not their first choice and deferred the decision to their rider, since it would be him taking the greatest risk.

V, I am amazed that so many cannot evaluate the decision past the results.
 
I really can't comprehend the fact that Ducati would let BOTH their riders out on rains, when every other rider on the grid was on slicks. One rider (Hayden) could be an understandable gamble but why would they risk a championship contender getting last or second to last place. Yes, his physical condition is not so great but everyone was running a few seconds slower throughout the race then normal dry pace anyway which would help conserve his energy.

What about races when it's raining at the start and everyone is using rains? Are they gonna go out on slicks in case it suddenly dries up?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 28 2009, 03:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Interesting. Both of us, and any reasonable person reading your post will agree this is hardly a scientific rubric you presented, right? You put equal weight on all. Had Rossi broken some bone and missed two rounds, would that risk be equal to looking embarrassed? So you basically decided what was important arbitrarily in your analysis and gave them all equal weight?

Stoner's team did not say it was "stupid" they said it was not their first choice and deferred the decision to their rider, since it would be him taking the greatest risk.

V, I am amazed that so many cannot evaluate the decision past the results.

Yeah but I don't mind them being stupid once in a while… risking too much once in a while… even gambling over the limit once in a while… if any rider gets away with it like that, it becomes a higher satisfaction for him and fans. Problem and difference is: you have to learn to deal with embarrassment if you don't get away with it, because it will be embarrassing! And as in tabloids… that's what makes BIG news!

So for me, Stoner has to deal with embarrassment, and the worst would have been Pedrosa. But that sounds completely biased coming from me, sorry, can't help it.

Suppo: "We actually informed both riders that all the other guys were on slicks and that we thought it was the right choice but they were both adamant it was too dangerous and at the end of the day we have to trust their instinct in a tricky situation like that. If it had rained heavier we might be celebrating an amazing success now but we're not and we have to accept it. Anyway, let's think positive: the potential is there, the bike is working well and we know our riders have the capability to score top results when we come back."

Of course he is not going to say 'Stupid' choice! I am the one using the word 'Stupid' for the four top riders, each at its moment of critical tactical decision, but it's cool! In this race you can say the smart once were the podium finishers, and that must be why they podium!
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Jul 28 2009, 09:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>got anymore pics steve ? post em up in the last donny thread
<

Yeah, I'm on it now.

Got some up from Sunday first.
 

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions

Back
Top