Hodgson lands Ducati GP ride

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (baldylocks @ Apr 7 2007, 11:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>granted - but it's easy for you sitting at home scratching your balls and picking your nose while watching the race

Have you been spying on me?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (baldylocks @ Apr 7 2007, 11:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>again - it's easy for you sitting at home with your pc and your Racers Almanac but try recalling facts of the top of your massive head and see how many istakes YOU make.

Yes i appreciate that it is harder to do live and on t.v but it shouldn't be that much harder, he does it for a living after all. Also, i know i have said that i will look things up when i don't know them and i will, but i do actually know/remember stuff and i have never "googled" parts of his commentary to check they are correct yet i still notice the errors


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (baldylocks @ Apr 7 2007, 11:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>again, I think your missing the point - there will be no 999's to race - allow the 1300's to race OR Ducati can't race - it's as simple as that

For a company who claims to have its herritage built on racing it seems to be a pretty pathetic idea to start building a bike which isn't elligable for the racing series they depend on so much. I hope they don't get the rules changed just to teach them a lesson about being ......... I wouldn't miss them that much and it'd be better in the long run for the series then continuing to cater for their every move.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Apr 7 2007, 03:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^^Ducati is a great brand, but the comparison with Ferrari is utter nonsense.
Ferrari is an icon because they made their reputation for being winners. Ferrari won by building better race machines than everyone else while staying within the parameters of the rules, by outworking their competition.
In what singe way is this different from Ducati when we look at SBK?
Let me answere that for you: "Ducati made a reputation for being winners. With their very distinctive V-twin desmo valve engine and the 916 with the trellis frame they won by building better race machines than everyone else while staying within the parameters of the rules, by outworking their competetition." Like it or not, that is the <u>general </u>impression (outside US?) of Ducati's achivements during the last 15 - 20 years. I don't think that make them <u>equal </u>to Ferrari but to me it's sure is enough for a comparison of apples an oranges as comparing cars and bikes must be, especially with the absense of any other motorcycle factory even close.

I agree the twin had a certain advantage for a few years there, one that Honda also explored, but they were within the rules. I'm sure anyone would love to have an advantage when going racing and it's Ducati's job to get as much as they can, it's the ruling body of the racing organisation to make rules that even things out. So any advantage given the twins was their responsebility. It's also their resposibility now to decide what is goning to happen. I'm sure Ducati can live with less than 1200cc, but equaly certain they can't go on with 1000cc.

The efficiency of cylinders creating more power is a mathematical fact. Power delivery can be improved in many ways, without changing that fact. A big bang four is not by far anything like a twin but has much of the power delivery advantages so the arguments about Ducati’s advantages there seem thin. Recent electronic engine control makes it even more so. I don't know the AMA rules, but have some idea about the WSBK rules. In WSBK it's just too expensive and Ducati don't have a good enough market for a 1000cc street bike, that's two obvious and valid reasons too pull out if no changes come around.
For AMA I can't see any whining what so ever. They brought a case wanting changes to be competitive and AMA wouldn’t bend. Ducati pulled out. That is not whining, it's taking the consequences of the reality of the rules. For AMA having Ducati or not is not a big deal, fine, Ducati is gone. None in the US care and certainly none in Europe care. So the only ones who care is Ducati, but they found the rules to hard to compete within and let's face it, with their history their not in it for a fifth spot. Considering their racing experience, and the money they spend to be in racing, I find it hard to believe that AMA rules are <u>so fair</u> for anything but fours.
Also, I don't know enough about AMA SB but from what I've heard from others the field is awfully thin. I don't know what Hodgesons 5th translates to, but if the field is thin then it's not that much of a deal, is it?

Babelfish! You still have not justified your justification of comparing Ducati with Ferrari. The only comparisons are that they are both Italian and their typical color is red. Ferrari continuously adapts to changing rules and adapts new technology when their designe become outdated. Ducati clings to the v-twin instead of following the Japanese technique of improving their technology and reliability so they dont have to spend tons of money to make their bikes competitive. Ferrari always adapts to new rules, DUCATI LOBBY'S TO ENACT RULES CHANGES TO BENEFIT THEM. That's a big different in the two approaches.

No bias in WSBK, you say? Let's see, Italian motorcycle company (Ducati), Italian owned organization and governing body (Flamini brothers), and an italian tire manufacturer (Pirelli) who happened to get the spec tire contract. Yes I can see how that's completely fair (note the sarcasm). Unfortunately for Ducati the AMA does not happen to be an Italian company. Consequently they could not influence the rules to favor them. Ducati finished in fith place. This is not an indication of foul play or that their bikes were not competitive, on the contrary it shows how level the playing field really is. They had competitive bikes, they had riders who just could not get it done. No evidence of anti V-twin bias here mate. Read this excerpt from Kropotkins article concerning the demise of Ilmor:
Probably the epitome of the role of usable power in motorcycle racing is the Ducati superbikes. Ducati's current 999 WSBK bike is probably 20 horsepower down on the four cylinder machines, but is still capable of running with the more powerful bikes, because the 90 degree V-twin layout produces its power in such a smooth fashion that the Ducatis can get on the gas much earlier in the corners, getting better drive out of the turns and a head start on the competition down the straights, leaving the four cylinders playing catch up. This really is a case of less is more.



You also contradict yourself by first saying you know nothing about the AMA's racing, or rules. You then state that obviously the rules are slanted towards fours and the talent pool is thin. These statements label you as uninformed at the very least, and willfully ignorant at worst. The internet contains a wealth of knowledge, try to use it for something other than .....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Apr 8 2007, 06:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Babelfish! You still have not justified your justification of comparing Ducati with Ferrari. The only comparisons are that they are both Italian and their typical color is red. Ferrari continuously adapts to changing rules and adapts new technology when their designe become outdated. Ducati clings to the v-twin instead of following the Japanese technique of improving their technology and reliability so they dont have to spend tons of money to make their bikes competitive. Ferrari always adapts to new rules, DUCATI LOBBY'S TO ENACT RULES CHANGES TO BENEFIT THEM. That's a big different in the two approaches.
Are you just kidding, because you sound naive beyond grasp to me.
Anyone who have the possibility would want to change the rules to their own benefit with that amout of money at play.
The main difference is that Ferrari doesn't have a thing or buildt their name on one particular engine configuration. Anything between 8 and 16 seems ok for them while ducati has the V-twin almost as a brand.
Ferrari can race with their road cars in different type of races and they are not buildt to follow one particular race series, but the rules allow them on certain terms, typicaly air restrictors, weight, or displacement or any combination just like Ducati are allowed to race their bikes in SBK and Ducati adopts just like Ferrari does.
Improve thir technology! Is that an attempt of being sarcastic? You can't possibly mean that adding sylinders have anyting with technological advance? I danger of insulting Americans here, maybe that is an issue in America with stoneage technology still powering most of the bikes build there, but for the rest of the world cylinders are something you add or take away as a matter of configuration, not technology. For Ducati to build a four cylinder is not a problem, as you allready know, but to leave the most important particularity of the brand is. They are going to sell this bike and all the others and swap their V-twin to a four would be a huge comercial problem. Remember, SBK is more than anything a dispaly of roadbikes, not to be confused with motoGP/F1.
Btw, other similarities between Ferrari and Ducati would be:
- Very small company compared to the others
- Build their reputation on racing
- Have special (and accrofing to many, beautiful,) design.
- They talk to the same kind of people, allthough ferrari owners have deeper pockets.
But thats really a side step. You may agree or not, but I bet 3 out of 4 Italians would see the similarities. Speak up Italians!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>No bias in WSBK, you say? Let's see, Italian motorcycle company (Ducati), Italian owned organization and governing body (Flamini brothers), and an italian tire manufacturer (Pirelli) who happened to get the spec tire contract. Yes I can see how that's completely fair (note the sarcasm).

I didn't say there were no bias in WSBK, I do say, and I thnk most agree, that Ducati are at no advantage now (but twins had some years ago), if anything I would say they have a small disadvantage, and it is clear for anyone with open eyes that they have a disadvantage in regards to cost.
For the rest, I doubt Ducati (that were using michelin before) had any influence regarding the Pirelli deal. That it might have something to do with being Italians or the ones willing to pay under the table or what ever is not the issue here, is it?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Unfortunately for Ducati the AMA does not happen to be an Italian company. Consequently they could not influence the rules to favor them. Ducati finished in fith place. This is not an indication of foul play or that their bikes were not competitive, on the contrary it shows how level the playing field really is. They had competitive bikes, they had riders who just could not get it done. No evidence of anti V-twin bias here mate. Read this excerpt from Kropotkins article concerning the demise of Ilmor:
Probably the epitome of the role of usable power in motorcycle racing is the Ducati superbikes. Ducati's current 999 WSBK bike is probably 20 horsepower down on the four cylinder machines, but is still capable of running with the more powerful bikes, because the 90 degree V-twin layout produces its power in such a smooth fashion that the Ducatis can get on the gas much earlier in the corners, getting better drive out of the turns and a head start on the competition down the straights, leaving the four cylinders playing catch up. This really is a case of less is more.
I agree, no particular anti V-twin, but just like you, a slight anti Ducati after the years with 750 fours and 1000 twins, but most of all they simply doesn't care. Ducati may come and go on AMA's terms and AMA Rules. In a way that's fair enough and for now Ducati is out.
That article is about World SBK not AMA SB and the differences/advantage brought up there is <u>very</u> debatable and the article is by no means any proof competitiveness in AMA. AFAIK there are differences in rules, besides, considering the cost of their current WSBK engines there is no way they would go into any national series with a serious effort with those costs.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>You also contradict yourself by first saying you know nothing about the AMA's racing, or rules. You then state that obviously the rules are slanted towards fours and the talent pool is thin.
Last time I read something about the AMA it was a big fight regarding back markers and that AMA refused to enforce a 107% rule. In that discussion it was talked about how few that was really competitive. I don't know if that is still the situation, I just don't by "a fifth is clear evidence that the bike is as competitive as any". I also noted that AMA Superbikes usually can't run as wildcards in WSBK races without heavy modifications, I assume this still is the case, without knowing the details about the differences, and in particular the differences for twin engines. That is not a slant, just uncertainty around the facts. As Ducati pulls out I assume they evaluate that they can't be competitive or the cost get to high. For a company that bases their commercial success on racing results, that is a quite serious decision. But of course, this isn't about money, but about whining, or?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>These statements label you as uninformed at the very least, and willfully ignorant at worst. The internet contains a wealth of knowledge, try to use it for something other than .....

Jeez, uniformed or ignorant, well that’s right, I am rather ignorant about AMA racing, and I intend to stay that way. And I'm not going to Google my way through the finer details in their regulations. Just tell me WSBK and AMA rules are the same and I'm fine, or are you using articles about one series as evidence of how competitive a different engine are in the other series? Now that would be neither uniformed or ignorant but somthing else.
Uniformed, sure, I'm so uniformed that I would love to see both twins and fours in SBK continue in SBK, I don't mind tipples, 5 or 6 cylinders either, that's how uniformed I am. How about you?

[quote name='baldylocks' date='Apr 7 2007, 11:26 PM' post='59313']
except, it's nothing like that - it's not about you getting a head start because you can't win without one - it's about you not taking on me when you've got a hole in your lung and the only way you can plug it is with a $1,000,00 note - ok, crap analagy but you see where i'm coming from.

It's costing ducati a fortune to keep their bikes competitive - they aren't going to make 1000CC twins for the road any longer (because they are under powered compared to the 1L fours) and therefore -they've no choice but to withdraw or request rule change.
here here - Whit' is 24 carat pure entertainment
granted - but it's easy for you sitting at home scratching your balls and picking your nose while watching the race - these guys have to talk about the race in real time - live and in front of millions of people. it doesn't stop me shouting at the tv when they get it wrong tho
again - it's easy for you sitting at home with your pc and your Racers Almanac but try recalling facts of the top of your massive head and see how many istakes YOU make.
Well you'd love me then - NOT

Well said mate, I think picking up on silly wee mistakes from commentators is sad. Murray Walker was amazing as a commentator but crap with it. When you are sitting in the commentary box, its not as you rightly say like sitting at home and hitting google to pick up on anything that is said that may be wrong.

Maybe you should write to Eurosport Tom, and tell them how much more informative and knowledgeable you would be than a "....... ....." like Whitham. I'm sure your CV will make his look pathetic, and the forum will be filled with praise for you accurate and impressive "knowledge"

I know it's taken me a wee while to respond properly, but I've been busy playing all weekend, using my encyclopedic musical knowledge to make money.

Pete

I know its quite pedantic to pick out all the mistakes a commentator makes and i understand that it is far harder for them being on tv and such like. All commentators make mistakes i know, but like you mentioned murray walker was great anywayu. Other commentators will make mistakes will make errors but be exciting, funny, knowledgable elswhere or generally entertaining. Unfortunately for me i find non of these things in the Jamie. As a result of this his stand out feature when i hear him is the mistakes, as they are easily noticable. So i didn't intend to step on you guys nerves by questioning your man nor do i think i can do better, but i feel he is a the weaker member of one of the weaker commentary teams on the motorsport i watch.

man u guy's are givin jumkie a run for the $ with the length of them posts!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (frosty58 @ Apr 9 2007, 09:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>man u guy's are givin jumkie a run for the $ with the length of them posts!

Well, someone got to do the job while he is away, and after all, it's only if you add our postes together they get as long, but not nearly at the same frequency. I think that is one place where Jumkie is unbeatabele