Estoril 2011 Race

Austin said:

The riders are asking for it to be released as soon as possible, but it sounds like it won't come out until next season. The spec tire has lowered the costs to teams and brought the racing closer together and has brought some consistency to the series. Arrab and I were discussing this, there are no longer Michelin circuits and Bridegstone circuits where depending on what tire you were on, you were subject to having no chance at a podium regardless of your form. Which is a good thing. But you can't tell me that development has continued on in anywhere near the same speed as it did during the tire war era. It's bittersweet. You have to like the level(ish) playing field it's produced, but I miss the war. Nostalgia more than anything, I'm sure.

Click to expand...

Thanks Austin, it seems a bit silly to bring a great new tyre to the test, only to say, 'Sorry you won't see these again until your on a different motorcycle next season!'



IMO the costs have not been lowered for the teams, for now they have to build a bike around a very specific tyre, then adjust it at all circuits. No doubt it has brought Electronics more to the fore as well, which is expensive. Since the Spec tyre was introduced in 2009, I feel the quality of racing has diminished, If it wasn't for Rossi not showing any 'Etiquette' at PI and Motegi (both for 3rd place) and Stoners efforts with Rossi again at Germany, and possibly Rossi again at Sepang for the win, then 2010 was amongst the worst processional racing of the 800 era, 2009 wasn't much better, bar two or three rounds.



I do agree that it has brought consistency, but not the consistency that we want to see. I do also miss the war, although it really only raged for one season- 2007, I also miss the true qualifiers, and I miss development. There is something to be argued for Bespoke tyre development in this, the only prototype motorcycle series. With the Spec tyre and the increased regs, its hard to determine what Motogp actually is anymore, one things for sure its not a prototype series, and its certainly not the best riders on the fastest possible bikes, with the best possible rubber. And its funny that many journos and commentators are constantly chatting about other regs and their ridiculousness, yet one of the most important issues, if not the most important- rubber and 'Bridgestone' is not really mentioned much, look at Jerez 2011 for example, Bridgestones tyre supply is so poor that it should be considered to be endangering the riders, in this case with no intermediate Wet option???



It is a real shame that Michelin had so many corporate problems, for I feel that with such a rich history of success in the sport, the company and its techs had a real passion and feel for the sport. I can't help but feel with Bridgestone that Motogp was just another corporate takeover which they threw bucket loads of money at to secure, only to now leave it flailing with inferior grip and two years without a new compound.......

Nino said:

Consistently pushing too card is careless.

Click to expand...

You continue to find new talents in stoner, now adding an ability to be judiciously careless to his abilty to be simultaneously careless and too careful.



Either he is only careless when not in traffic, or only overtakes when he is confident he has bike control both of which present rather a semantic dilemma, or the front-end losses were not related to over-riding which is after all what he and to a lesser extent other ducati riders have said.

Talpa said:

Thanks Austin, it seems a bit silly to bring a great new tyre to the test, only to say, 'Sorry you won't see these again until your on a different motorcycle next season!'



IMO the costs have not been lowered for the teams, for now they have to build a bike around a very specific tyre, then adjust it at all circuits. No doubt it has brought Electronics more to the fore as well, which is expensive. Since the Spec tyre was introduced in 2009, I feel the quality of racing has diminished, If it wasn't for Rossi not showing any 'Etiquette' at PI and Motegi (both for 3rd place) and Stoners efforts with Rossi again at Germany, and possibly Rossi again at Sepang for the win, then 2010 was amongst the worst processional racing of the 800 era, 2009 wasn't much better, bar two or three rounds.



I do agree that it has brought consistency, but not the consistency that we want to see. I do also miss the war, although it really only raged for one season- 2007, I also miss the true qualifiers, and I miss development. There is something to be argued for Bespoke tyre development in this, the only prototype motorcycle series. With the Spec tyre and the increased regs, its hard to determine what Motogp actually is anymore, one things for sure its not a prototype series, and its certainly not the best riders on the fastest possible bikes, with the best possible rubber. And its funny that many journos and commentators are constantly chatting about other regs and their ridiculousness, yet one of the most important issues, if not the most important- rubber and 'Bridgestone' is not really mentioned much, look at Jerez 2011 for example, Bridgestones tyre supply is so poor that it should be considered to be endangering the riders, in this case with no intermediate Wet option???



It is a real shame that Michelin had so many corporate problems, for I feel that with such a rich history of success in the sport, the company and its techs had a real passion and feel for the sport. I can't help but feel with Bridgestone that Motogp was just another corporate takeover which they threw bucket loads of money at to secure, only to now leave it flailing with inferior grip and two years without a new compound.......

Click to expand...

Agree+10



I was against the spec tire from the get go. It is inevitable that progress will slow to a crawl without competition. With CRT and rev limiting coming for next year to go with a spec tire, this isnt even near a prototype series. Its more of a WSBK+ series

Tom said:

Well i'm suprised so many people seem uninspired by this weekends race, i thought it was superb and tense. For Dani to sit behind Jorge (with his record) even with the uncertainty of his shoulder and then pass cleanly and pull away with such class in the closing stages was like something you'd expect from Rossi in the 990 days. Brilliant. Now the Repsol Honda battle will become very interesting with Stoner having to come back and assert some authority, especially heading a track where both of the Spaniards have gone well in the past, great stuff. Spies had another disappointing weekend, but i still think he can recover to 5th if he gets on with it. Ducati (or Rossi) looks closer again so hopefully with a decent test they will be more in the mix from now on, i'm not convinced he can get into the title fight just yet but you can't count him out, especially not if they push on with development all season long. Simoncelli's crash was hardly surprisng given what he used to be like before his world championship year but i find it a bit frustrating, he is so good to watch and fast enough to be a factor so once he's out there is just one less thing to be excited about, i hope he can get some results that reflect his speed soon.

Click to expand...

+1 Spot on Tom

povol said:

Agree+10



I was against the spec tire from the get go. It is inevitable that progress will slow to a crawl without competition. With CRT and rev limiting coming for next year to go with a spec tire, this isnt even near a prototype series. Its more of a WSBK+ series

Click to expand...

Pov, you may remember that a number of regular (and sadly now, not so regular) posters had a great debate at the time regarding the single tyre supplier and you may recall that it was one of the few topics that seemed to unit all sides (with a few exceptions).



Sadly as it now turns out, the debate has come true and the expected results or stagnation in development appears to have now had the effect (not fully predicted) on the racing (along with other aspects).



Personally, my view has not changed, competition is needed and is good for the ongoing development of tyres and whilst some may point to WSBK as a success, the fact remains that MotoGP is the pinnacle and as such should be open slather.













Gaz

Gaz said:

Pov, you may remember that a number of regular (and sadly now, not so regular) posters had a great debate at the time regarding the single tyre supplier and you may recall that it was one of the few topics that seemed to unit all sides (with a few exceptions).



Sadly as it now turns out, the debate has come true and the expected results or stagnation in development appears to have now had the effect (not fully predicted) on the racing (along with other aspects).



Personally, my view has not changed, competition is needed and is good for the ongoing development of tyres and whilst some may point to WSBK as a success, the fact remains that MotoGP is the pinnacle and as such should be open slather.



Gaz

Click to expand...

I love it when you talk dirty.

Talpa said:

Thanks Austin, it seems a bit silly to bring a great new tyre to the test, only to say, 'Sorry you won't see these again until your on a different motorcycle next season!'

Click to expand...

I can understand your point, but at the same time they've already invested, what I'm assuming to be, a considerable amount of money producing the allotment of tires for this season. Another one of the downfalls of the spec tire. Bridgestone can do what they like, they wanted feedback on their 1000 tire, and it was overwhelmingly positive. Super, job done. They can ask for it for this season all they want, but Bridgestone don't have to give it to them. What are they going to do? Go to Michelin?

Talpa said:

IMO the costs have not been lowered for the teams, for now they have to build a bike around a very specific tyre, then adjust it at all circuits

Click to expand...

Good point, however this is precisely what made Ducati so good with the Bridgestones in 2006, 2007, and early 2008. They developed their bike around the Bridgestones and they were successful. All the while Suzuki were set in their ways and Repsol Honda and Yamaha were sitting on their hands waiting for Michelin to deliver a taylor-made tire. Once the Saturday Night Specials were outlawed, the writing was on the wall as to which philosophy was going to win out. I guess it's a roundabout way of saying that if you want your motorcycle to work, you're going to have to pay a considerable amount of money for it to do so. The question is, is designing your motorcycle around tires cheaper than paying Michelin the millions for the coveted Saturday Night Specials? My gut says the Michelin route was probably cheaper, but I've no clue.

Talpa said:

It is a real shame that Michelin had so many corporate problems, for I feel that with such a rich history of success in the sport, the company and its techs had a real passion and feel for the sport. I can't help but feel with Bridgestone that Motogp was just another corporate takeover which they threw bucket loads of money at to secure, only to now leave it flailing with inferior grip and two years without a new compound.......

Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think there's any doubt that the financial strength of Bridgestone is what brought them to the fore. Well, that and the tire allocation limits. But the combination of those factors handed success to Bridgeston, in my opinion.

Gaz said:

Sadly as it now turns out, the debate has come true and the expected results or stagnation in development appears to have now had the effect (not fully predicted) on the racing (along with other aspects).

Click to expand...

Bridgestone pleased to see lap records fall



Granted, that story is two years old -- anyone have more recent statistics (for race laps of course, not qualifying)? Seems to me it would be hard to argue that there hasn't been development without at least providing some statistics to back it up.



I don't think you can lay processional racing at the feet of the control tire so much as the reduced capacity, fuel limits, and most important the increasingly sophistication electronics. I don't have any proof for that, but I'm biased in that I like to see motorcycle racing be a contest between men and machines, not tires. I love that the control tire means we no longer have Michelin or Bridgestone tracks, and more importantly, that we don't have "A" rubber and "B" rubber -- the factory riders and the satellite riders get equal tires now.

Beef Supreme said:

Bridgestone pleased to see lap records fall



Granted, that story is two years old -- anyone have more recent statistics (for race laps of course, not qualifying)? Seems to me it would be hard to argue that there hasn't been development without at least providing some statistics to back it up.



I don't think you can lay processional racing at the feet of the control tire so much as the reduced capacity, fuel limits, and most important the increasingly sophistication electronics. I don't have any proof for that, but I'm biased in that I like to see motorcycle racing be a contest between men and machines, not tires. I love that the control tire means we no longer have Michelin or Bridgestone tracks, and more importantly, that we don't have "A" rubber and "B" rubber -- the factory riders and the satellite riders get equal tires now.

Click to expand...

.....Or do they? Is Lex about?



That is a 'supreme beef' you have to make with the detractors of the 'stones.



I don't think you need proof connected with the factors that you list - they have demonstrably contrived to reduce the spectacle - that much is axiomatic and does not warrant any further debate.

edit: mistake

Beef Supreme said:

Is that sarcasm? Not that I mind, I just can't tell.

Click to expand...

No, not at all...perhaps someone should develop a 'sarcasm' emoticon though. Actually, cancel that thought - there's a member on here who quite literally lost his sanity through the overuse of these. Now he cowers in the corner of his retirement home under the direction of the little yellow smiley men bouncing round his head. Stick around - he'll likely be on in due course.



Apologies, you raise a valid point. I just feel that the factors which have combined around the much maligned 800cc class to deliver such processional racing are self evident and speak for themselves. The drop from 990 was one of the biggest mistakes to blight the history of this Championship.

Beef Supreme said:

Bridgestone pleased to see lap records fall



Granted, that story is two years old -- anyone have more recent statistics (for race laps of course, not qualifying)? Seems to me it would be hard to argue that there hasn't been development without at least providing some statistics to back it up.



I don't think you can lay processional racing at the feet of the control tire so much as the reduced capacity, fuel limits, and most important the increasingly sophistication electronics. I don't have any proof for that, but I'm biased in that I like to see motorcycle racing be a contest between men and machines, not tires. I love that the control tire means we no longer have Michelin or Bridgestone tracks, and more importantly, that we don't have "A" rubber and "B" rubber -- the factory riders and the satellite riders get equal tires now.

Click to expand...

If no-one else has said it - let me be the first: Welcome to PS. We need all the reasonable mature members we can get.

And no... I'm not being sarcastic.

Cheers,

K

Beef Supreme said:

Bridgestone pleased to see lap records fall



Granted, that story is two years old -- anyone have more recent statistics (for race laps of course, not qualifying)? Seems to me it would be hard to argue that there hasn't been development without at least providing some statistics to back it up.



I don't think you can lay processional racing at the feet of the control tire so much as the reduced capacity, fuel limits, and most important the increasingly sophistication electronics. I don't have any proof for that, but I'm biased in that I like to see motorcycle racing be a contest between men and machines, not tires. I love that the control tire means we no longer have Michelin or Bridgestone tracks, and more importantly, that we don't have "A" rubber and "B" rubber -- the factory riders and the satellite riders get equal tires now.

Click to expand...

+1 exactly my opinion regarding tyre wars



having a rubber that the riders think is easy to use and gives them confidence to push it is a whole other thing however i must say



and welcome to the board of course

Thanks for the welcome. I'll try to keep my sarcasm paranoia in check.

Beef Supreme said:

Bridgestone pleased to see lap records fall



Granted, that story is two years old -- anyone have more recent statistics (for race laps of course, not qualifying)? Seems to me it would be hard to argue that there hasn't been development without at least providing some statistics to back it up.



I don't think you can lay processional racing at the feet of the control tire so much as the reduced capacity, fuel limits, and most important the increasingly sophistication electronics. I don't have any proof for that, but I'm biased in that I like to see motorcycle racing be a contest between men and machines, not tires. I love that the control tire means we no longer have Michelin or Bridgestone tracks, and more importantly, that we don't have "A" rubber and "B" rubber -- the factory riders and the satellite riders get equal tires now.

Click to expand...

I agree with you whole heartedly. We will never stop riders within a team getting different equipment and that is really their prerogative. However there is no visual difference between a 'A' and a 'B' spec tyre and therefore the fans can never know who is being given preferential treatment and to what extent it is manipulating the results.



My view of the direction of the control tyre is that it should be the tool to control speed. Not fuel limits, not bore size, not capacity, not number of cylinders etc. What brings close racing and I believe was the reason behind the success of the 990 era was that the bikes had more potential than the tyre. This did a few things: it made spending lots more money obsolete because if the tyre could not deliver the performance to the track the performance is useless. More riders could push the bike to the limit of the tyres which put them there abouts on the time sheets and lastly the performance of the machines would exhaust the tyre by the end of the race which allowed the riders to use different strategies of go hard early and try to hang on or save some and mow them down in the last laps. Rossi was a master of this strategy and I believe it is why (amongst other things) that he was so successful in this era.

Mental Anarchist said:

More riders could push the bike to the limit of the tyres which put them there abouts on the time sheets and lastly the performance of the machines would exhaust the tyre by the end of the race which allowed the riders to use different strategies of go hard early and try to hang on or save some and mow them down in the last laps. Rossi was a master of this strategy and I believe it is why (amongst other things) that he was so successful in this era.

Click to expand...

Sadly, I still find myself watching rider X sitting two or three seconds behind a group and thinking to myself: "that's very clever, saving the tires and he'll have a go any minute now." You'd think after four-plus years of this, I'd get my head around the idea that this strategy no longer works.

Mental Anarchist said:

My view of the direction of the control tyre is that it should be the tool to control speed. Not fuel limits, not bore size, not capacity, not number of cylinders etc.

Click to expand...

Battlax all-season radials? I understand the appeal of the solution -- it's simple and it's cheap -- but I think overdoing it would be like putting high heels on Olympic sprinters. Also, the challenge is to keep the bikes within the limits of the runoff areas, but not make them slower than SBK bikes -- a fine line.

Beef Supreme said:

Battlax all-season radials? I understand the appeal of the solution -- it's simple and it's cheap -- but I think overdoing it would be like putting high heels on Olympic sprinters. Also, the challenge is to keep the bikes within the limits of the runoff areas, but not make them slower than SBK bikes -- a fine line.

Click to expand...

The SBK point is where the trouble comes in. Because if you look at what's happening in Formula 1, many people are heralding the decline in performance of the Pirellis as making for much better racing. It's very difficult to draw comparisons, but tire management has been very important with their new boots and would be something I, for one, would like to see a return to in MotoGP. But, like you said, it can't be done without falling behind World Superbike. It would be quite bold of me to say that there isn't room for both, but if they continue on being so similar, it's very difficult for me to imagine both succeeding.

Austin said:

Sadly, I still find myself watching rider X sitting two or three seconds behind a group and thinking to myself: "that's very clever, saving the tires and he'll have a go any minute now." You'd think after

four-plus years of this, I'd get my head

around the idea that this strategy no

longer works.

Click to expand...

your not alone.......



IMO the problem is with the spec tyre, not so much a sole supplier, but a limited supply. And the extrodinary compounds which don't go off (unless it's a wet at a drying track-that is!)



Having rubber that had to be managed throughout the race was probably keeping speeds down more than this current spec from bs, certainly in the last ten laps.



I can understand the argument of some here, but what has actually happened since the inception of the spec tyre has been directly opposed to the theory. Giving a very select few the advantage, and hindering other greats therefore removing the potential for battles.



Maybe a couple of variations from bs in the selection options might help things, after two years I don't think it's too much to ask as they've done nothing. And it's a small price to pay for having your cake and eating It too.......

Talpa said:

I can understand the argument of some here, but what has actually happened since the inception of the spec tyre has been directly opposed to the theory. Giving a very select few the advantage, and hindering other greats therefore removing the potential for battles.

Click to expand...

How can a select few have an advantage when everyone's on the same tires? Granted, some riders may take to the Bridgestones better than others, but then that would be true of a control motorcycle as well. The advantage lies in the rider and the team's ability to exploit available equipment.



I'm probably in the minority, but I'd rather not see any passes for the last 1/3 of a race than see positions determined by which tire company made the best gamble on durability. As it is, there's passing, though not as much as there was with the 990s, that's for sure.