donnington race

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The California Kid @ Jul 29 2009, 09:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Wayne Rainey Said it himself "anything can happen in Racing" so choosing wet tires wasnt that stupid it was a gamble that didnt pay off. Nicky didn't lose out as much as Stoner did, it seems Stoners championship hopes are sliping away race by race.


That and his grip on reality. Still boggles the mind to think he chose the wets instead of the slicks, he took the easy way out I'm telling you. He knew he couldn't take another demoralizing defeat, so he chose to 'gamble'. Not so much a gamble to me, more like a white flag.

Nicky only followed suit because he was told to do so, that way Stoner wouldn't look so bad. Good ol' Nicky boy, you can always count on the fella to blindly follow orders.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SuperShinya56 @ Jul 29 2009, 10:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That and his grip on reality. Still boggles the mind to think he chose the wets instead of the slicks, he took the easy way out I'm telling you. He knew he couldn't take another demoralizing defeat, so he chose to 'gamble'. Not so much a gamble to me, more like a white flag.

Nicky only followed suit because he was told to do so, that way Stoner wouldn't look so bad. Good ol' Nicky boy, you can always count on the fella to blindly follow orders.
If this is true Nicky is better off following orders Blindly, at this point he has to secure his ride for next year rather than pass toseland in points for 12th

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeff in ohio @ Jul 28 2009, 05:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>just for clarity....


Rossi finishing because a miracle lower spec clutch lever not snapping off? I think not....it's engineered not to....
Hi Jeff, thanks for the clarity. Ok, so 'levers never snap off'? Ohhh-kaay. (BTW, did you happen to see the 125 race at Donny? It seems one of those levers that never snaps didn't get the memo. And that one wasn't even involved in a crash, just a simple fairing bashing was enough to break a lever, let alone a visit to the tarmac).

Yes, I know they are designed to move on a hinge (its not 'new' motogp technology, any Joe can get one actually). But they often do in fact snap when impact is beyond the hinge pivot point or damage is done to the hinge/pivot itself.) Notwithstanding, it could have been any number of reasons why the bike could have been damaged for it not to continue. One of which was the very real possibility of re-entering the track causing injury to Dovi.

(But yeah, thanks for the explanation, I think migs had already attempted it btw).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jul 29 2009, 04:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If Ducati were reckless gamblers, what did they put at risk? The race proved that they didn't put 25 pts at risk b/c it was the midpackers who were able to push without worrying about the championship.

For FU sake, the race proved absolutely nothing in regards to the actual risk and in every race the win is 25 points, nothing more nothing less. And don't tell me Ducati don't need them, they need them more than they did before the last race and even more after this. They needed 25 points regardless of what happened to the Yamaha riders.
Actual risk is something one assess BEFORE the race. You may or may not adjust your risk assessment for the next race (in similar condition) but even then it's defiantly not about a total turnaround, but about adjustment.

If anything the race proved that the old rules still rule: Go with the same as your closest competitors. 13 of 15 on slicks completed the race, and they all were way in front of the two on rain tires.
Two fallers are only sightly higher than what I assume are the average for a dry race in the top class for the moment, and well within the limits of normal variation for a dry race. That should tell you all you need to know about the risk.

So, all in all that's pretty overwhelming proof that slicks were the right tire.
That said, I'll agree that the front runners of the championship in a race like this does have a little higher risk of going out although I consider that to be quite minor and even as they now did, it's far from given that they will go out, allways. We've had plenty of other freak races this year that shows that front runners can stay in front and win.

PS! destroying those wets put both stoner and hayden at a quite high risk of going out too. To ride those tires at the end of the race must have been like riding on slicks on asphalt partly covered with pea sized rolling stones. BTDT.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MdubSTYLIE @ Jul 28 2009, 02:55 PM) <{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]

Don't know why you felt the need to post a photo of yourself.
I liked it better when I didn't know what you looked like.
I pictured you as much younger. Seriously . . . anytime you
want to have a reasonable debate - I'm around.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 29 2009, 01:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi Jeff, thanks for the clarity. Ok, so 'levers never snap off'? Ohhh-kaay. (BTW, did you happen to see the 125 race at Donny? It seems one of those levers that never snaps didn't get the memo. And that one wasn't even involved in a crash, just a simple fairing bashing was enough to break a lever, let alone a visit to the tarmac).

Yes, I know they are designed to move on a hinge (its not 'new' motogp technology, any Joe can get one actually). But they often do in fact snap when impact is beyond the hinge pivot point or damage is done to the hinge/pivot itself.) Notwithstanding, it could have been any number of reasons why the bike could have been damaged for it not to continue. One of which was the very real possibility of re-entering the track causing injury to Dovi.

(But yeah, thanks for the explanation, I think migs had already attempted it btw).


are you always so long-winded and abrasive?

one of the reasons I browse more than post here becasue you guys go on an on FOR PAGES about things that are not worth arguing/speculating about.....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeff in ohio @ Jul 29 2009, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>are you always so long-winded and abrasive?

one of the reasons I browse more than post here becasue you guys go on an on FOR PAGES about things that are not worth arguing/speculating about.....

What? . . . you got something better to do?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jul 29 2009, 11:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>For FU sake

Getting a little frustrated that your explanations 'don't hold water'?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Actual risk is something one assess BEFORE the race.

No, really?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>If anything the race proved that the old rules still rule: Go with the same as your closest competitors. 13 of 15 on slicks completed the race, and they all were way in front of the two on rain tires.

Do you understand the concept of a gamble? No.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Two fallers

Actually, three. But maybe one of them was just my imagination.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>So, all in all that's pretty overwhelming proof that slicks were the right tire.

You don't exactly have the credibility of stating anything has "overwhelming proof" (as the latest exchanges should remind you). Perhaps you intend to backpedal from this later...too.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>That said, I'll agree that the front runners of the championship in a race like this does have a little higher risk of going out although I consider that to be quite minor and even as they now did, it's far from given that they will go out, allways.

Being on slicks on on a slippery changing condition is always a risk, you still haven't given anybody any "overwhelming proof" it was a good idea. The top four regulars didn't podium, that others with slick 'finished' the race is hardly "proof" that it was a stupid gamble.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>PS! destroying those wets put both stoner and hayden at a quite high risk of going out too. To ride those tires at the end of the race must have been like riding on slicks on asphalt partly covered with pea sized rolling stones.

I guess this would explain why the Ducatis were actually having faster lap times near the end of the race than the slicks, right?

EDIT: Adding

You've written a lot, but still have failed miserably in show why it was not a reasonable decision to use wets, in conditions that were constantly changing. If fact Babel, I rewatched the race last night. I know you are fond of using the ‘commentator's takes and reports as authority’. So explain why the commentators would say the following: After lap one, they said, it is raining allot harder in the paddock, perhaps the Ducatis’ gamble will pay off. Was it really so far fetched? Then they reported that other teams were warming up their rain bikes. (Why would they do that if the conditions were so dry?) Again, it was a reasonable gamble. Oh but there is more. After Lorenzo crashed, they said the gamble on slicks had not paid off for him. (Why would they say that? Perhaps riding on slick was also a gamble too?) When Rossi crashed, they asked a similar question, the idea being that being on slicks and wets were both gambles. Again Babel, I'm saying both were reasonable gambles. In addition, there is evidence as the events transpired of yielding positive and negative consequences for either decision, but this is hardly tantamount to calling the choice of wets dumb or stupid or wrong. I think it’s a knee-jerk reaction to think going out on wets in this particular condition because most everybody choice one choice over the other lacks in-depth evaluation. Even when teams have chosen hard or softs or vis versa, the results have yielded start differences, sometime not, but you don’t get people accusing one choice as ........, right? Dude, why can't you just admit it was a reasonable gamble, a choice that was not so far fetched? You don't alway have to tow the anti-stoner line.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeff in ohio @ Jul 29 2009, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>are you always so long-winded and abrasive?

one of the reasons I browse more than post here becasue you guys go on an on FOR PAGES about things that are not worth arguing/speculating about.....
yes he is and thats why we love him

we sure do talk ..... for pages and pages, thats why we love powerslide

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeff in ohio @ Jul 29 2009, 12:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>are you always so long-winded and abrasive?

one of the reasons I browse more than post here becasue you guys go on an on FOR PAGES about things that are not worth arguing/speculating about.....

Haha, Jeff, that was one of my shorter posts.

So I didn't sugar coat my reply, ok. Sorry. Now what about my reply do you disagree with? (which is why I suspect you took issue with it).

You decided to chime in as if to school me of your revelation, on something that had already been covered no less, you made a statement to refute levers having the ability to break, I rebutted it with an actual example in the same event no less, and now I'm the abrasive one?

Grow some skin man.

Oh, in case anybody missed it, this was my reply to Jeff of which he thought was "long winded and abrasive":

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 29 2009, 10:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi Jeff, thanks for the clarity. Ok, so 'levers never snap off'? Ohhh-kaay. (BTW, did you happen to see the 125 race at Donny? It seems one of those levers that never snaps didn't get the memo. And that one wasn't even involved in a crash, just a simple fairing bashing was enough to break a lever, let alone a visit to the tarmac).

Yes, I know they are designed to move on a hinge (its not 'new' motogp technology, any Joe can get one actually). But they often do in fact snap when impact is beyond the hinge pivot point or damage is done to the hinge/pivot itself.) Notwithstanding, it could have been any number of reasons why the bike could have been damaged for it not to continue. One of which was the very real possibility of re-entering the track causing injury to Dovi.

(But yeah, thanks for the explanation, I think migs had already attempted it btw).


Wow, dude, if this is abrasive and long winded, how do you live in this world?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeff in ohio @ Jul 29 2009, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>are you always so long-winded and abrasive?

one of the reasons I browse more than post here becasue you guys go on an on FOR PAGES about things that are not worth arguing/speculating about.....

Yes, he is.

I thought the point of the internet was to discuss meaningless drivel for the purpose of getting a mental workout from time to time. My brain will turn into mush if I think about work all day long. All business process engineering starts like this: assume all of your employees have mush for brains. All internet threads start like this: assume I am a genius and everyone thinks the same way I do.

The internet is more fun.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jeff in ohio @ Jul 29 2009, 09:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>are you always so long-winded and abrasive?

Aye that he is. Long winded and abrasive. Not to mention he's got a blind spot about 69 feet wide.
See Jumk? Jeff's already got your number.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Jul 29 2009, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Don't know why you felt the need to post a photo of yourself.
I liked it better when I didn't know what you looked like.
I pictured you as much younger. Seriously . . . anytime you
want to have a reasonable debate - I'm around.
No, no, no thats my pops.
This is me last year at Indy meeting Toe. Sorry I don't have a pic of my face. Well time for my nap. Me get twired.
7727:moto_baby.jpg]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 29 2009, 02:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Haha, Jeff, that was one of my shorter posts.

Wow, dude, if this is abrasive and long winded, how do you live in this world?

Dude he is from Ohio. The place were they call OSU a university, yeah right more like a trade school. It was probably your use of big words like hinge and technology that confused him. Anything longer than a run-on sentence is to long for a buckeye.

J/k I don't now that your a product of the Ohio education system. For your sake I hope not.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 29 2009, 02:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Aye that he is. Long winded and abrasive. Not to mention he's got a blind spot about 69 feet wide.
See Jumk? Jeff's already got your number.
Are we having a fight?




<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 27 2009, 11:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Bring it on Jumk...

Who said this?

Getting a bit hot in the kitchen my dear?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 29 2009, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Aye that he is. Long winded and abrasive. Not to mention he's got a blind spot about 69 feet wide.
See Jumk? Jeff's already got your number.

Suddle...nice.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 29 2009, 08:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I guess this would explain why the Ducatis were actually having faster lap times near the end of the race than the slicks, right?
Jumkie both ducati's were still 2 seconds slower compare to front runner's till the end but that besides the point to be honest with you, i was at the track side and i can see the reason why they went for wet tyres.There was very light drizzle from the start of the race till the end.

But i still think stoner should have on dry tyre's like rest of the field but as far as Haydan concern it was worth a shot for him to start the race on wets because with all due respect there wasn't much to loose for him.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (inam @ Jul 30 2009, 03:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But i still think stoner should have on dry tyre's like rest of the field

Inam - nothing personal just using that comment to ask questions/try to make points


Why should he have been on the same tyres?

If people say that it is because the others managed to race on slicks - that is fine in hindsight but what if he fell as did the two Championship contenders in front of him.

One aspect that makes motorcycle racing (and particularly damp/wet racing) so alluring is that risks are taken, some work some don't. If one is always a sheep and following those around them, then the advantage that could be gained is gone, as effectively one is not prepared to gamble on achieving an advantage.

To follow those around means choosing a hard slick when they do, a soft when they do and so on, which to me defeats the purpose of trying to gain an advantage.

If people/teams were sheep and followed the leads of those around them, can one imagine bike development and where we would be at - a virtual one make series. this is why people take different tangents and make decisions, some work and some don't - but unless they try they will never know and we the public wonder - what if.

The problem as I see it is that people are judging on hindsight - which as we know, is a marvellous thing (christ, I would be a millionaire if only I invested my money at the right time).







Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Jul 30 2009, 03:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Inam - nothing personal just using that comment to ask questions/try to make points

Why should he have been on the same tyres?

Garry
Garry, Because he is still fighting for the championship and in case if it started raining hard he could have come into pits to change his bike like any other rider.Lap times of 1.31seconds shows that there was enough grip for the slicks at the start of the race.

Riding in chaning conditons is still Stoner one of strong point Gaz which he clearly showed two years ago in donington and this year in mugello and i think he missed the big opportunity to reduce the gap between him and Rossi.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (inam @ Jul 30 2009, 04:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Garry, Because he is still fighting for the championship and in case if it started raining hard he could have come into pits to change his bike like any other rider.Lap times of 1.31seconds shows that there was enough grip for the slicks at the start of the race.

Riding in chaning conditons is still Stoner one of strong point Gaz which he clearly showed two years ago in donington and this year in mugello and i think he missed the big opportunity to reduce the gap between him and Rossi.


So should he always start on the same tyres as VR/JL/DP?

Does that mean that if they choose a hard/soft combination than he should also because he is fighting for the championship?

What if VR chooses soft/soft and JL choses soft/hard while DP chooses hard/hard - what should CS choose?

See the folly to say that one should always blindly follow the choices of others - it is not guaranteed to work or give any advantage and that is what CS wanted -an advantage and to feel safe whilst getting that advantage. Fact is that he did not get the advantage (although did not lose much either in the end) but felt safe - ah well, next time.




Garry