Gran Premio Motul de la República Argentina 2017

The trouble is ....... numerous.

"I was told that this was an extra tire, which would only really have been allowed on safety grounds normally anyway. There were basically five riders who wanted the new front: Rossi, Marquez, Pedrosa, Crutchlow, and Iannone. The talk I have heard is that there was a lot of pressure from both Rossi's and Marquez' side to try to get the tire." - David Emmett

Click to expand...

While I am not sure about Pedrosa on that list, the others make sense. Unfortunately, what MM and CC said do not exactly match that statement. Marquez said that it was agreed with Michelin and the Safety Commission that there would be three tires per wheel per race. Thus, this #70 tire should have been one of the three. And we have heard that some rider at the safety meeting thought the tire was for one guy, and not for safety reasons.

The field is quite use to having useless throw-away front and rear rubber virtually every weekend. How often are three different compounds used in a race? Not too often. From other reporting, there appears to be more here than a simple testing of some new tire. Will Michelin now bring the extra #70 to Austin as the third front, or try to get it tested as a fourth tire, again. We have all the way till next Thursday to speculate. Whoop!

michaelm said:

......
He and HRC, including the Honda principal who made a quite public request that both tyres remain available, were basically told to .... off.

Click to expand...

And he still had five wins. It is easy to imagine that he would have repeated his domination without the tyre b.s..

Iamapony said:

While I am not sure about Pedrosa on that list, the others make sense.

Click to expand...

Well, Pedrosa raced (and crashed) on the hard front at Argentina. His smooth style doesn't result in as much tyre degradation as Marquez & Crutchlow's more aggressive techniques and retaining heat is always an issue for him. But he's still on a Honda and he still needs a stiff front for stability on corner entry thus forcing him to employ a harder tyre.

Now if there were a stiffer medium available last week, there's a good chance that would have been his preferred choice.

Unfortunately, what MM and CC said do not exactly match that statement. Marquez said that it was agreed with Michelin and the Safety Commission that there would be three tires per wheel per race. Thus, this #70 tire should have been one of the three. And we have heard that some rider at the safety meeting thought the tire was for one guy, and not for safety reasons.

Click to expand...

I think that was specifically about the plan for that particular weekend rather than their general tyre preferences.

The tyre wasn't an option for Sunday for any rider. And with most of Saturday expected to be wet, there'd be a very limited window to test the soft.

So... I suppose that could be seen as a distraction for the riders - not exactly a safety issue but close enough perhaps. :unsure:

Will Michelin now bring the extra #70 to Austin as the third front, or try to get it tested as a fourth tire, again. We have all the way till next Thursday to speculate. Whoop!

Click to expand...

Goubert seems to think it unlikely. But yeah should make for good conversation.

"Not likely to see it in Texas because Texas is even more demanding than here" - Goubert

I love DornaGP.
Riders are gagged from saying too much (Ref: don't diss the sport clause), while suppliers are free to dissemble as they wish. Meanwhile, journos go along to get along.

JPSLotus said:

22-

I had a wild conspiracy theory that I mentioned to a friend, that if the points battle is neck and neck between Vinales and Rossi down the stretch, I could see Vinales pulling over ala Petrucci to give him that 10th title. Or at least sandbagging so it doesn't look obvious. Then again, even if he made it look obvious, he would look golden in the eyes of Dorna and the boppers because: divine right.

Click to expand...

No way in hell does any rider give away a title .

The fact that this blew up tells you all you need to know about how even the riders are over this Rossi centric way of conducting business. It's a festering boil that has been oozing for years and has finally erupted. With a few good squeezes , all the ugly .... will come out for everyone to see.

What about the contradictory statement by Goubert in Qatar:

MotoGP: Michelin front tire controversy in Argentina | Sport Rider

Quote:
"We decided to bring back the #70 after several riders in addition to Valentino Rossi complained about the front tire after the Qatar GP," Michelin's chief of staff Nicola Goubert stated in defense of the company’s decision to bring the additional front tire. But this statement contradicts what he said at a midnight meeting on Sunday at Qatar, when he said that only Rossi and Iannone had complained about the #6 front tire...

(MotoGP: The back story of Valentino Rossi?s crisis | Sport Rider Rossi'spreseason "villain" hails from Clermont Ferrand: Michelin’s new front tire for 2017. Rossi’s repeated complaints of his lack of confidence in the front end put Michelin in the hot seat. "No one but Rossi has complained about this tire," proclaimed Michelin's chief of staff Nicolas Goubert at one of those strange midnight meetings that works with the Qatar GP schedule. "Well, no one except Iannone, who started complaining here; before, he did not have problems with the front tire.”)

...In Termas, this morphed into a group of 7 or 8 riders, among whom included Marc Marquez, Aleix Espargaró, Cal Crutchlow, Dani Pedrosa and others, who complained about that tire. -quote.
.
.
.
And as 'michaelm' says...Julian Ryder is onto it as well:


The late withdrawal of the fourth, stiffer front tyre following the Safety Commission meeting last night raised a few eyebrows. Cal Crutchlow wasn’t happy that a “rat” was leaking things said in the privacy of the Commission. Marc Marquez managed to be diplomatic in the extreme by pointing out that the tyre would probably have helped him but you cannot just change the rules and overcrowd the race schedule. The unspoken suggestion was, of course, that this was the tyre that Valentino Rossi very much wanted to use, although he did not attend the meeting. Was this really a matter of safety or a technical rule? A rat told me that one rider demanded very loudly of Loris Capirossi why he was bringing a special tyre for his friends: “You never do that for me when I have a sh*t weekend!”

https://www.superbikeplanet.com/ryder-notes-karel-abraham-pay-rider-lawyer-fighter-fast/

Exactly Almoto, some are missing the point that Michelin aren't able to have a consistent story about this reason or reasons for this tyre. Every time they've said something it's either contradicted a previous statement they made or it's been debunked by a rider. Given the comment to Loris Capirosi some if not all the riders feel that the tyre was brought in for the same reason some here feel the tyre was bought in. Those riders have much better knowledge of the goes on in the paddock than anyone on either side of the argument and even with the gag order that was placed on teams and riders they have been able to put enough information out in the media that fans and journos alike are having an easier time than ever connecting the dots.

It is entirely possible that Valentino is correct and the tyre concerned will be better for a number of riders, Valentino knows a thing or two about such things, apart from anything else Yamaha bikes developed at his direction have proved good for other riders including Lorenzo and recently Vinales for example.

As I have always said, I am happy for Rossi to have whatever tyre he wants anyway, my problem has always been with other riders not being able to to be supplied with "their" tyre. The faithful can cry "conspiracy theory" all they like, but it doesn't take much in the way of drawing "reasonable inferences" to see this episode as further evidence that some riders are higher on the priority list than others as far as supply of a supposed control tyre is concerned. It has certainly done nothing to disabuse me of my long held and frequently expressed belief that Dorna since 2008 have not been above manipulating the tyre supply to premier class GP bike racing for their own ends.

Mat Oxley's take on the weekends event.
Notably in his*opinion* the Honda riders suffered more for not having the *Rossi* tyre.
It actually goes to show how easy it is to make wildly different assumptions on the back of a journalist's opinion.

Honda's failed Great Escape | Motor Sport Magazine

michaelm said:

As I have always said, I am happy for Rossi to have whatever tyre he wants anyway, my problem has always been with other riders not being able to to be supplied with "their" tyre. The faithful can cry "conspiracy theory" all they like, but it doesn't take much in the way of drawing "reasonable inferences" to see this episode as further evidence that some riders are higher on the priority list than others as far as supply of a supposed control tyre is concerned.

Click to expand...

Indeed. A purely rhetorical question – If Karel Abraham, Andrea Iannone, Aleix Espargaro and Cal Crutchlow had requested renewed evaluation and possible re-introduction of the #70 construction – would it have happened?

Daniboy said:

Mat Oxley's take on the weekends event.
Notably in his*opinion* the Honda riders suffered more for not having the *Rossi* tyre.
It actually goes to show how easy it is to make wildly different assumptions on the back of a journalist's opinion.

Honda's failed Great Escape | Motor Sport Magazine

Click to expand...

Oxley >> This journo trying hard to say that #70 front is better for every one, but failed horribly.

It is no surprise that Honda riders wanted the tyre more than anyone, because the RC213V was originally conceived to take advantage of Bridgestone’s ultra-high-performing slick during braking and corner entry. The bike still retains its original character and therefore needs a stiff-construction front. If the general strike hadn’t happened and riders had been able to use the stiffer tyre Sunday’s result might have been different.

Click to expand...

mich brought the stiffer tyre with soft compound. absolutely not a race option, especially for hondas.

Daniboy said:

Mat Oxley's take on the weekends event.
Notably in his*opinion* the Honda riders suffered more for not having the *Rossi* tyre.

Click to expand...

And that may indeed be the case. But the questions this has raised centre around Michelin's intentions in respect of the reintroduction of the #46 so sorry, I mean the #70 carcass and their odd lack of transparency.

Daniboy said:

It actually goes to show how easy it is to make wildly different assumptions on the back of a journalist's opinion.
]

Click to expand...

I do agree, although the Sports rider article was very particular in differentiating the established facts from the speculation on both sides.

Who was it who famously suggested that if a news source offended you or disagreed with your opinion, then that is the one you should subscribe to?

As usual this involves a frantic click frenzy to reinforce where affinities lie.

Arrabbiata1 said:

And that may indeed be the case. But the questions this has raised centre around Michelin's intentions in respect of the reintroduction of the #46 so sorry, I mean the #70 carcass and their odd lack of transparency.



I do agree, although the Sports rider article was very particular in differentiating the established facts from the speculation on both sides.

Who was it who famously suggested that if a news source offended you or disagreed with your opinion, then that is the one you should subscribe to?

As usual this involves a frantic click frenzy to reinforce where affinities lie.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Valentino may well be correct, he has a history of 2 decades (absent the odd 2 years or so) of good judgement in regard to such things, and what suits him is not unknown to also suit others.

The question rather is whether he has undue influence, whether or not he is right or wrong, in particular circumstances such as the one in question.

As I have already posted from the point of view of my particular bias, I can cite 2 instances of a reigning world champion making similar requests, on the first occasion before a control tyre rule was supposedly operational, and in the second case despite being absolutely correct in his assessment of the tyres concerned, and being rebuffed with fairly extreme prejudice.

Both Stoner & Rossi asked for stiffer compounds because it helped them go faster. Any benefit to the rest of the field was purely incidental.

Rossi's (& Iannone's) feedback in winter testing was passed over by Michelin because it was a minority view, and the only softer compound ended up being available to the field at Qatar.

Its only after Losail, where they got adverse feedback from two other factories, that Michelin began to examine alternative development paths. And at this point it is just examination - the rest of the season may still end up run on the current tyres.

JKant said:

Rossi's (& Iannone's) feedback in winter testing was passed over by Michelin because it was a minority view, and the only softer compound ended up being available to the field at Qatar.

Click to expand...

You mean the #70 was overwhelmingly rejected during testing due to chatter problems.

JKant said:

Its only after Losail, where they got adverse feedback from two other factories, that Michelin began to examine alternative development paths. And at this point it is just examination - the rest of the season may still end up run on the current tyres.

Click to expand...

So you are able to say with 100% certainty that Valentino Rossi did not request the reintroduction of the stiffer construction tyre?

As I understand it, the ‘other factories’ were discussing harder compound as opposed to carcass. Could you provide a link that suggests otherwise? Thanks.

If say Reading, Crutchlow, Iannone and Espargaro requested re-evaluation of the #70 construction at Argentina, in your opinion, would Michelin have obliged given the appreciable expense and logistical difficulties?

How do you know that at this point it is just examination? How have you established that the stiffer carcass isn't already earmarked for COTA under the guise of a different compound? Are you privy to Michelin's operational strategy? Personally, I think it unlikely - but you know as much as I do. You post is pure supposition.

Simply stating something online does not make it true..

JKant said:

Both Stoner & Rossi asked for stiffer compounds because it helped them go faster. Any benefit to the rest of the field was purely incidental.

Rossi's (& Iannone's) feedback in winter testing was passed over by Michelin because it was a minority view, and the only softer compound ended up being available to the field at Qatar.

Its only after Losail, where they got adverse feedback from two other factories, that Michelin began to examine alternative development paths. And at this point it is just examination - the rest of the season may still end up run on the current tyres.

Click to expand...

Stoner in 2012 asked for the retention of a stiffer carcass tyre available hitherto in that season and when his bike was designed which was removed as a result of an unprecedented rider vote mid-season. Undoubtedly that tyre suited him, but he, and HRC for that matter, had no problem with the new tyre which suited other riders or had better cold tyre performance for other riders being added, he merely correctly predicted after evaluating the tyre that it would prove insufficiently durable in race conditions. Your boy, after suffering a delamination of said tyre presumably not as a result of poor judgement about how hard he could ride the tyre in the track conditions by your narrative, acknowledged Stoner had been correct. He also admitted at one stage iirc that he had mainly voted to deprive Stoner of "his" tyre rather than because he thought the new tyre would particularly help him.

Why exactly was the vote necessary, particularly given you have told us on this very thread that the new "control" tyre supplier in Michelin, not notably more solvent than Bridgestone as far as I am aware, have no problem bringing extra tyres to Argentina, rather a long way from Clermont-Ferrand, not even intended for serious use if they feel so inclined, and apparently often bring a considerable array of redundant tyres to race week-ends?

Given Goubert's reluctance in stating one way or another whether #70 would be available at COTA would indicate IMO that Michelin has every intention of bringing this particular carcass into GP at some point this season. My guess is that it will be at COTA...just a matter of which compound will be put over the carcass. I can't find the tire selection sheet from last year's COTA race, but that would give a good idea of compound would go over #70.

moto vudu said:

Click to expand...

Everyone vaguely literate, which come to think of it may not include you, knows about all this. The problem which I have specifically raised is the assumption that only other people are biased, an assumption I don't make but which you constantly do, resorting to calls of bias or conspiracy theory whenever you can't argue your position, which is most of the time.

A prime example is your constant plaintive cry, when I bring up Sepang 2015 and events surrounding, that I always bring it up. I always bring it up precisely because those events are what formed my current view of your boy, and are also not explicable by what passes for arguments in your case, and in addition are what make your complaints about "conspiracy theories" in regard to your boy both hypocritical and ludicrous.