Thought it was time to move on from the 'Ducati should sack Hayden' shitfight below.
I know I am flogging a dead horse on this, but what is going on with Ducati.
Regardless of what you think of Hayden, he is a talented rider, and should have a very good technical understanding of the bikes, and what makes them fast. Maybe he's not the fastest, but should definitely be fast enough to deserve a MotoGP ride. Melandri was fast in 2007, useless in 2008 on the Ducati, and he is competative with the mid pack on the Kawasaki in 2009. Obviously Melandri can be fast (although probably is not in the Rossi, Lorenzo, Pedro, Stoner league)
lWhy is there such a massive difference between Hayden and Stoner, or Melandri and Stoner. Hayden is nowhere, and looks uncomfortable. With all the telemetary available to both riders, there is no way Ducati cannot get the second bike going as fast as the first. Essentially it is the same bike, with the same engine, same chassis balance, same weight distribution, same brakes, and same electronics. Stoner should be able to get off his bike, and on to Haydens, (or even Kallio's or Canepa's bikes) and go just as fast.
If it is the rider, Hayden (or MM before him) can see very accurately from the telemetry what Stoner is doing, where he is faster, and what he is doing differently. From video footage Hayden and Ducati can analyse frame by frame what Stoner is doing, whilst looking at the telemetry.
Is it just confidence, is it that Stoner pushes the bike past the limit that Hayden feels comfortable at, and the self preservation instict kicks in. Is it that Hayden and his engineers just can't get a good setup on the bike.
If he was 0.5 sec a lap down on Stoner, that is one thing, but to be 2.5 - 3.0 sec a lap down in race pace there is something major going on.
We know that Ducati went to extreme lengths to try to help MM in 2008, and adapt the bike to what he liked, but nothing seemed to work, or change. What can they do for Nicky Hayden.
How will Hayden compare with Kallio and Gibbers through 2009.
Secondly, how can Ducati / Stoner smash everyone at the preseason test at Jerez when Stoner was not 100% fit, and then come out and give themselves no chance of winning the race, and be struggling to match the pace of the Yam and Honda. I know the track is hotter, and the hard carcus tyres were not available, and other things have changed, but Stoner was nowhere near his pace at the pre season test. Why ???
He was really happy with the third, but if I was him I would be disappointed after the preseason test.
In the post race interview, he said he was loosing the front when he was pushing to keep up with Rossi, and again when he pushed to hold the gap to Lorenzo.
We are told that the factory Ducs and the Pramac bikes are identical spec, so all four bikes should have the same capacity to be fast. We know in the hands of Stoner the bike can be unbeatable. Kallio is going OK, but is still 1.5 sec a lap down on Stoner. Not really in the same league, and Kallio is a pretty decent peddler.
When they can nail the setup, on a track that suits the bike, Stoner is awsome, often unbeatable (Qatar for eg). When they mis the setup, he struggles, and the rest are nowhere (Jerez for eg).
It seems the power is there.
It seems the chassis balance is there when the bike is close to optimum setup
It seems they have a good team with the ability to get the bikes setup sorted, and,
They have two (four) very telented riders.
So why the massive difference.
Guess the same arguement could be said for Rossi vs Toseland, but at least there is always other M1's close to the pace. In the last 2 years, there has not been one race where another Ducaiti is anywhere near Stoner.
I know I am flogging a dead horse, but there has to be some definable reason for this, and it has to go further than blaming Hayden or Melandri. Surely Ducati have some idea what the difference is.
Maybe the engineering crew on Hayden's side of the pit don't have the goods.
In 2007 / 2008 there were a lot of people saying Stoner was no good, and was only competative because the Ducati was a much better bike than the Yamaha or Honda. Maybe that was never the case.
I am starting to think that the bikes are all pretty evenly matched on any given day, and the difference week to week is a combination of the riders ability, and getting the setup absolutely precisely correct. I am starting to think that the individual race engineers play a much bigger role in the success of the riders than ever before. Look at the Rossi JB relationship and the Doohan JB relationship before Rossi.
If I had the sollution for Hayden, I would be getting in contact with Ducaiti.
Any ideas
PS... please try to leave the Hayden hate mail for the other thread, or I'll get Smithers to unleash the hounds.
I know I am flogging a dead horse on this, but what is going on with Ducati.
Regardless of what you think of Hayden, he is a talented rider, and should have a very good technical understanding of the bikes, and what makes them fast. Maybe he's not the fastest, but should definitely be fast enough to deserve a MotoGP ride. Melandri was fast in 2007, useless in 2008 on the Ducati, and he is competative with the mid pack on the Kawasaki in 2009. Obviously Melandri can be fast (although probably is not in the Rossi, Lorenzo, Pedro, Stoner league)
lWhy is there such a massive difference between Hayden and Stoner, or Melandri and Stoner. Hayden is nowhere, and looks uncomfortable. With all the telemetary available to both riders, there is no way Ducati cannot get the second bike going as fast as the first. Essentially it is the same bike, with the same engine, same chassis balance, same weight distribution, same brakes, and same electronics. Stoner should be able to get off his bike, and on to Haydens, (or even Kallio's or Canepa's bikes) and go just as fast.
If it is the rider, Hayden (or MM before him) can see very accurately from the telemetry what Stoner is doing, where he is faster, and what he is doing differently. From video footage Hayden and Ducati can analyse frame by frame what Stoner is doing, whilst looking at the telemetry.
Is it just confidence, is it that Stoner pushes the bike past the limit that Hayden feels comfortable at, and the self preservation instict kicks in. Is it that Hayden and his engineers just can't get a good setup on the bike.
If he was 0.5 sec a lap down on Stoner, that is one thing, but to be 2.5 - 3.0 sec a lap down in race pace there is something major going on.
We know that Ducati went to extreme lengths to try to help MM in 2008, and adapt the bike to what he liked, but nothing seemed to work, or change. What can they do for Nicky Hayden.
How will Hayden compare with Kallio and Gibbers through 2009.
Secondly, how can Ducati / Stoner smash everyone at the preseason test at Jerez when Stoner was not 100% fit, and then come out and give themselves no chance of winning the race, and be struggling to match the pace of the Yam and Honda. I know the track is hotter, and the hard carcus tyres were not available, and other things have changed, but Stoner was nowhere near his pace at the pre season test. Why ???
He was really happy with the third, but if I was him I would be disappointed after the preseason test.
In the post race interview, he said he was loosing the front when he was pushing to keep up with Rossi, and again when he pushed to hold the gap to Lorenzo.
We are told that the factory Ducs and the Pramac bikes are identical spec, so all four bikes should have the same capacity to be fast. We know in the hands of Stoner the bike can be unbeatable. Kallio is going OK, but is still 1.5 sec a lap down on Stoner. Not really in the same league, and Kallio is a pretty decent peddler.
When they can nail the setup, on a track that suits the bike, Stoner is awsome, often unbeatable (Qatar for eg). When they mis the setup, he struggles, and the rest are nowhere (Jerez for eg).
It seems the power is there.
It seems the chassis balance is there when the bike is close to optimum setup
It seems they have a good team with the ability to get the bikes setup sorted, and,
They have two (four) very telented riders.
So why the massive difference.
Guess the same arguement could be said for Rossi vs Toseland, but at least there is always other M1's close to the pace. In the last 2 years, there has not been one race where another Ducaiti is anywhere near Stoner.
I know I am flogging a dead horse, but there has to be some definable reason for this, and it has to go further than blaming Hayden or Melandri. Surely Ducati have some idea what the difference is.
Maybe the engineering crew on Hayden's side of the pit don't have the goods.
In 2007 / 2008 there were a lot of people saying Stoner was no good, and was only competative because the Ducati was a much better bike than the Yamaha or Honda. Maybe that was never the case.
I am starting to think that the bikes are all pretty evenly matched on any given day, and the difference week to week is a combination of the riders ability, and getting the setup absolutely precisely correct. I am starting to think that the individual race engineers play a much bigger role in the success of the riders than ever before. Look at the Rossi JB relationship and the Doohan JB relationship before Rossi.
If I had the sollution for Hayden, I would be getting in contact with Ducaiti.
Any ideas
PS... please try to leave the Hayden hate mail for the other thread, or I'll get Smithers to unleash the hounds.
