Interview with Ezpeleta (head of DORNA)

Good stuff. Ezpeleta is no ....., he talks sense.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teomolca @ Jul 16 2008, 04:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And with a control ECU?

Right now that would go against Stoner and Ducati, and the manufacturers wont accept it anyway. If I could I would impose control ECU, but I cannot do it without the consent of everyone.

Do you agree with Rossi that we need to take a step back in electronics and tyres to improve the show?

Of course I agree and see the problem exists, because I'm not an ....., but the real problem is how to make this step back. It's not feasable to go to Ducati and tell them to give away their advantage.

hmmmm......interesting.

Thanks for the Translation Teo, made interesting reading.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teomolca @ Jul 16 2008, 10:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's been 29 races on a row withour overtaking in the last lap fighting for vistory in MotoGP ...

And dont we KNOW it Come on Laguna, lets break this .... record

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Teomolca @ Jul 16 2008, 10:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>link(Spanish)

Translation:

It's been 29 races on a row withour overtaking in the last lap fighting for vistory in MotoGP ...

I know, but we cannot do anything about that. Ducati built a bike according to the rules, equal for everyone. You cannot discuss that someone built a great bike. Furthermore there's 4 riders with a bike like that and only 1 wins and the other 3 are at the back. Something must be due to the rider, so we're not going to punish him (Stoner) for being so good.

Nobody is saying anything about sanctioning Stoner, or Ducati. Rossi was spot on when he said it's impossible to catch the rider that has got right the setup and then the fight is for 2nd place.

Yes, it is like that and nothing can be done because the 5 manufacturers all agreed on the rules they made. Now there's someone doing it better, but in other seasons it was someone else.

Last year you had a problem with the tyres difference in performance and you solved can't you do the same now?

Last year it was different because one part (Michelin) was forced to give away a historical advantage, that is they built their tyres during the night previous to the race. They could do it cause their factory was in Europe and their rival's in Japan. They gave it away in exchange to a limit on the number of tyres built. Halfway in the championship it was proved this didn't work and we saw we had to fix it because we were heading towards a single tyre. Now there is no solution like that despite the results so far are similar. The manufacturers came last year asking for a solution but now they don't complain. I wish they would take the first step.

With less electronics?

I can't take it out

And whith a control ECU?

Right now that would go against Stoner and Ducati, and the manufacturers wont accept it anyway. If I could I would impose control ECU, but I cannot do it without the consent of everyone. With the tyres I could impose a single tyre because I don't have a pact with the tyre manufacturers, but I cannot tell to the (bike) manufacturers that all they researched is not allowed anymore. Ducati wouldn't want, neither the others. Manufacturers use racing to research. If this developments make racing less fun to watch than before we will have to live with no overtaking in the last lap. I agree that it would be better to have overtaking in the last lap, and in the one before and in every lap! I would be glad, but the situation is what it is in agreed with the manufacturers which are the ones that pay the huge cost of racing and research.

You make the future look gloom ...

If I can, what I will do is try to convince the manufacturers that it would be better to have a control ECU. It's obvious this would be a solution, but I have to convince them. There's currently an desirable (whatever this means) level of electronics but I'm not in favour of going any further and I think we've passed the acceptable level. The problem is we're will we get to if they keep on researching. The races are less fun but the championship is very interesting.

Riders still fall despite TC ...

And how many more would have fallen without it, nowadays they lose the front.

Do you agree with Rossi that we need to take a step back in electronics and tyres to improve the show?

Of course I agree and see the problem exists, because I'm not an ....., but the real problem is how to make this step back. It's not feasable to go to Ducati and tell them to give away their advantage. Calm down. We have to be calm, be reasonable and consistent. Obviously single ECU would be ideal, because it would protect the show, there would be no research and would keep costs down. We need to see if the manufacturers are interested in it. but right now it cannot be done, nor the next year cause the bikes are already built. I have to do it step by step. It's like when we went from 990 to 800cc, it was decided after Kato's accident in 2003 and we had to wait until last year. Going from 500cc to MotoGP took 5 years of discussions. After the bull has missed you it's much easier (Spanish expression meaning it easy to take decision when you seen the results beforehand)

= between the manufacturers and DORNA, we have managed to regulate and engineer ourselves into a deep hole that we now cant get out of...

that is until it starts to hurt the £'s and $'s that keep rolling in....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigAl @ Jul 16 2008, 07:16 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>= between the manufacturers and DORNA, we have managed to regulate and engineer ourselves into a deep hole that we now cant get out of...

that is until it starts to hurt the £'s and $'s that keep rolling in....


Precisely.

Sounds like he has been reading this forum .

This is the first time I have actually seen someone in authority directly say the change to the 800cc formula was because of the katoh incident, which of course may be because I have missed it in the past.

One thing I do glean from this is no mention of FIM, and that he seems to still think he could devise good rules if only the manufacturers would let him, which I see as one of the problems; I am not sure how experience/training in accountancy or business management qualifies you to devise racing formulae, not that such people seem to think that specialist knowledge is important in many endeavours these days.

There is no doubt his position is not easy, and even his detractors on this forum including me have acknowledged that the manufacturers have the ultimate power, and if they were allowed to proceed unfettered we would have a totally engineering dominated formula even quicker.

The problem with the formula seems to be more than whether ducati have an advantage or not (it didn't seem to be perceived as much of a problem when they appeared to have a disadvantage earlier in the year ) but as others have argued whether the formula allows close racing even between evenly matched bikes. I think this is due to both tc and the improvement in the tyre technology; together as others have said this seems to allow most of the bikes to go at close to maximum pace the whole race without concern for conserving tyres etc (unless you are on a suzuki), and if the bike is already going as fast as it possibly can you can't over-ride it for one corner to reverse a passing manouevre etc. So even when valentino found a better set-up and carved through the field from back in the grid he passed people successively without much changing back and forth for each position he gained.

I guess this argument leads inevitably to reducing or substantially reducing tc which I have previously agreed with but also to a control less high tech than current tyre with which I haven't agreed.

how bout, dust off those slow boring 990s...see what happens to "the show" then.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigAl @ Jul 16 2008, 12:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>= between the manufacturers and DORNA, we have managed to regulate and engineer ourselves into a deep hole that we now cant get out of...

that is until it starts to hurt the £'s and $'s that keep rolling in....


I agree, you have said it much more succinctly than I did.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jul 16 2008, 02:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>how bout, dust off those slow boring 990s...see what happens to "the show" then.
Nah, dust off the 1980's pre big bang, pre reed valve, and pre 'greener' fuel 500cc missiles. To quote Chistian Sarron, "the 4 strokes are nice bikes...for girls"

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Jul 16 2008, 07:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Nah, dust off the 1980's pre big bang, pre reed valve, and pre 'greener' fuel 500cc missiles. To quote Chistian Sarron, "the 4 strokes are nice bikes...for girls"

as much as i like the old 2 strokes....they're out dated...990 is a perfect bike....and as far as Sarron is concerned, if the 990s were for girls, what would the 800s be for?

damn. didn't know that the decision to go to the 800's was based largely on kato's death.

says alot, but if everyone could see before hand that the 800's were going to make the bikes even faster (due to being lighter and more agile in the turns), one would think they would've come up with something else.

just not sure what though.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (djm @ Jul 16 2008, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>damn. didn't know that the decision to go to the 800's was based largely on kato's death.

Yeah the 990cc idea was doomed fairly early on. The bikes were too much, mainly due to the fact that they had to be as quick as the 500's right away. As it was Rossi wasn't emidiately confident that his RCV would beat the NSR's.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (djm @ Jul 16 2008, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>damn. didn't know that the decision to go to the 800's was based largely on kato's death.

says alot, but if everyone could see before hand that the 800's were going to make the bikes even faster (due to being lighter and more agile in the turns), one would think they would've come up with something else.

just not sure what though.
Political ........ suit decision is all. Kato's death just gave them the final push to get the rules changed. Top speed was the issue at the time. The 990's were becoming far to fast on a straight to keep the rider alive in the amount of run off space the tracks have at the end of each straight. The 800's are much slower in a straight line then the 990's were capable of (remember they were largely detuned to keep them on the track). The flip side was that the 990's were slower in the corners.....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Doc 79 @ Jul 16 2008, 09:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Political ........ suit decision is all. Kato's death just gave them the final push to get the rules changed. Top speed was the issue at the time. The 990's were becoming far to fast on a straight to keep the rider alive in the amount of run off space the tracks have at the end of each straight. The 800's are much slower in a straight line then the 990's were capable of (remember they were largely detuned to keep them on the track). The flip side was that the 990's were slower in the corners.....


definitely. while i do understand that the straight away speed is/was a concern, it was widely known that the 800's were going to be even faster through the turns = faster lap times = more wrecks.

i guess they figured with the addition of more electronics keeping the bikes from losing the rear end as much, more riders were likely to lose the front ends resulting in more low sides than anything. and you have to give it to them, that IS precisely what we are seeing. down side is, we are also seeing less actual racing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (djm @ Jul 16 2008, 10:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>down side is, we are also seeing less actual racing.
Exactly right unfortunately.

let me add, that even now, based off lap times, you would expect to see some damn close racing. and to be honest, there is! just not that top 3 or 4. those guys run away, and the battle is for 4th and back.

it's the same .... in AMA. "the ben and matt show". difference there is they have almost the exact same bike. maybe (and a big maybe) if lorenzo wasn't a rookie this year, and had some more experience, you might see more battles between him and rossi. also, if marco could have come to terms with the duc, you might have seen the same thing.

its all just speculation though. because no matter what, the best riders rise to the top. another example is tommy hayden. he is on the same bike as ben and matt, and was taking 3rd place mostly, but nowhere near ben and matt most of the time. one could argue that with more time he could have, but it sure didn't take ben near as long as it has tommy. some riders are just more talented than others.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (djm @ Jul 16 2008, 10:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>let me add, that even now, based off lap times, you would expect to see some damn close racing. and to be honest, there is! just not that top 3 or 4. those guys run away, and the battle is for 4th and back.
True man. And the sad part is, as much as any of us love a particular rider or what not, NO ONE REALLY, REALLY wants to watch the race for 5th place. We watch racing to see and be part of victory.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (djm @ Jul 16 2008, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>let me add, that even now, based off lap times, you would expect to see some damn close racing. and to be honest, there is! just not that top 3 or 4. those guys run away, and the battle is for 4th and back.

Can anyone identify what it is about the leaders that stops them from battling hard, when it goes on with riders just a few thenths slower?