lorenzo to leave ducati?

i think there are only 2 riders that could win on the ducati and that's stoner or marquez.

I have always thought marquez next to stoner as a good match for the duke

not sure why Lorenzo went to ducati but like I said when I heard be ready for melandri part 2 well maybe not that bad.

Jaz, I assume you mean titles?

There are some I would like to see ride it for interest (Miller as he has a dirt background for example) but I do lean towards it being a very specific machine in terms of championship material

Gaz said:

Except, every time Ducati have developed or teamed with someone to develop a product that seems to advantage their bikes and where the others cannot replicate it .......... rules change so no, I do not mean the fairing as that would be relatively cheap to manufacture.

Click to expand...

Yet biggest most important change in regulations in recent years was one that favoured Ducati & hurt Honda the most i.e. the introduction of the spec ECU & unified software developed & delivered by Magneti Marelli, a company with fairly strong ties to Ducati.

What I do mean is removal of tyre supplier made them have to change the design to suit spec tyres (as they became), wing removal means a redesign of not just fairing but other components to try to achieve wing like results with non wings or any manner of Ducati innovations that have been affected by rule changes over te years.

Click to expand...

They've adapted well to the spec tyres (since Gigi Dall'igna took over) - the bike's been pretty competitive over the last two or three years. They'll adapt to the new regulations as well (and they're not that far off anyway) just like Honda is being forced to adapt to new normal wrt to electronics. But both developments have helped reduced entry barriers for manufacturers like Aprilia & KTM who don't have resources to compete with the likes of Honda of software development or the pull to get a tyre supplier to deliver a customized product.

In the end, the sport risks effective spec engineering if one is not rewarded for innovation but instead punished

Click to expand...

The other extreme involves Honda spending a river of money to ensure that the Repsol riders arrive at a knife fight with a pair of guns (and Yamaha boys with crossbows).

The balance today, between the rider & the bike on one hand and performance & cost on the other, is pretty good. The bigger manufacturers are still on top, with a monetary edge that isn't going anywhere, but the gap to the rest fortunately isn't large enough for the others to consider the quitting the sport - if anything, given the right rider, a 2007 redux is well within the realm of possibility.

jazkat said:

i think there are only 2 riders that could win on the ducati and that's stoner or marquez.

Click to expand...

And Lorenzo's possibly the only rider than could win on the Suzuki. So basically every rider to win a title in the last 7 seven years is capable of winning on a non-Honda/Yamaha bike.

Also, given the number of riders learning on 600cc Moto2 bikes (instead of making the harder transition from 250cc like Lorenzo, Pedrosa, Dovizioso & Co.) and training dirt-track/flat-track in the off-season, I wouldn't be surprised if there are others with the similar potential.

Besides, regardless of its history, the Ducati's a pretty well rounded bike nowadays. Iannone was regular race leader & podium threat on it (crashes aside). And the GP15s & GP16s aren't doing too badly despite losing their winglets.

JKant said:

Yet biggest most important change in regulations in recent years was one that favoured Ducati & hurt Honda the most i.e. the introduction of the spec ECU & unified software developed & delivered by Magneti Marelli, a company with fairly strong ties to Ducati.

Click to expand...

........

Single biggest rule change in recent years was the Spec Tyre rule of single supplier which removed Bridgestone's capacity to work WITH Ducati to produce a tyre for the machine and instead now, Ducati had to use a tyre developed for others.

And FWIW, just because a company has strong ties does NOT make mean that they have an advantage, especially if/when rules are thrust upon the company (ie. DORNA say do this to MAgnetti Marelli and if THIS is outside of Ducati's experience than they lose as much as others)

JKant said:

They've adapted well to the spec tyres (since Gigi Dall'igna took over) - the bike's been pretty competitive over the last two or three years. They'll adapt to the new regulations as well (and they're not that far off anyway) just like Honda is being forced to adapt to new normal wrt to electronics. But both developments have helped reduced entry barriers for manufacturers like Aprilia & KTM who don't have resources to compete with the likes of Honda of software development or the pull to get a tyre supplier to deliver a customized product.

Click to expand...

Adapted well to tyres ............ seriously.

I guess that we have a vastly different opinion of well given that they are still struggling with front grip but hey, they aint no Yamaha so yeah I guess that all is good in some worlds.

As for new regs, well they have to adapt don't they ............. that or leave and really, with the investment so far that they have put into the sport, where they have led much development, their only choice is to stay as the write-off of investment would be massive (try explaining that to shareholders)

JKant said:

Yet biggest most important change in regulations in recent years was one that favoured Ducati & hurt Honda the most i.e. the introduction of the spec ECU & unified software developed & delivered by Magneti Marelli, a company with fairly strong ties to Ducati.


They've adapted well to the spec tyres (since Gigi Dall'igna took over) - the bike's been pretty competitive over the last two or three years. They'll adapt to the new regulations as well (and they're not that far off anyway) just like Honda is being forced to adapt to new normal wrt to electronics. But both developments have helped reduced entry barriers for manufacturers like Aprilia & KTM who don't have resources to compete with the likes of Honda of software development or the pull to get a tyre supplier to deliver a customized product.


The other extreme involves Honda spending a river of money to ensure that the Repsol riders arrive at a knife fight with a pair of guns (and Yamaha boys with crossbows).

The balance today, between the rider & the bike on one hand and performance & cost on the other, is pretty good. The bigger manufacturers are still on top, with a monetary edge that isn't going anywhere, but the gap to the rest fortunately isn't large enough for the others to consider the quitting the sport - if anything, given the right rider, a 2007 redux is well within the realm of possibility.

Click to expand...

Are you sure you are not a Dorna employee?

It is a breath-taking assumption to assume MM not only could but would win on a Ducati and Lorenzo on a Suzuki to justify whatever tiny point you are making this time when neither has sat on either bike, and yes they have won 6 of the last 7 titles.

As I have pointed out before, regardless of how you wish to paint it premier class bike racing is not a Honda monopoly but a duopoly, with the current count 18:17 in terms of riders' titles in Honda's favour, but 16:15 Yamaha's way prior to MM. So no, while Yamaha may make very good guns more cheaply than Honda and all credit to them for that,they have not historically brought a knife to a gunfight.

I think the control ECU is a good idea and quite likely has been helpful in promoting wider manufacturer involvement, but the control tyre as Gaz has said was greatly injurious to Ducati particularly when they had a frameless bike, far more injurious than any benefit they may have received from the control ECU, in fact at the time the decision was made to go to a control tyre they were considered rightly or wrongly to have an advantage with electronics to which the 2007 title you mention was attributed.

Gaz said:

........

Single biggest rule change in recent years was the Spec Tyre rule of single supplier which removed Bridgestone's capacity to work WITH Ducati to produce a tyre for the machine and instead now, Ducati had to use a tyre developed for others.

And FWIW, just because a company has strong ties does NOT make mean that they have an advantage, especially if/when rules are thrust upon the company (ie. DORNA say do this to MAgnetti Marelli and if THIS is outside of Ducati's experience than they lose as much as others)

Click to expand...

The single tyre rule change was announced 9 years ago. Barely 3 or 4 riders from that time are still on the grid. Not what I'd call 'recent' but I suppose that's a perspective thing. Maybe we can chalk that up to the difference in our ages.

Given that Ducati was badly trailing Honda & Yamaha on electronics development and had little hope of catching up, the introduction, or rather imposition of the unified software on the manufacturers gave it a huge leg up.

That they had already been using open ECU software developed by Magneti-Marelli, since switching to the Open Class in 2014, and that Magneti-Marelli further developed that into the current spec software with IP transfers from Ducati, was just icing on the cake.

Adapted well to tyres ............ seriously.

I guess that we have a vastly different opinion of well given that they are still struggling with front grip but hey, they aint no Yamaha so yeah I guess that all is good in some worlds.

Click to expand...

Everyone's struggling with something or the other, except for Yamaha (for now)... which was also struggling with tyre life & edge grip last season (and front-end feel for one rider this season).

Ducati still scored more points in 2016 than it did in 2006, and if not for the wipeouts at Argentina & COTA would have finished with their best ever podium haul (aside from 2007). Could quite realistically have contested for the title if they had someone like Stoner or Marquez racing in red.

As for new regs, well they have to adapt don't they ............. that or leave and really, with the investment so far that they have put into the sport, where they have led much development, their only choice is to stay as the write-off of investment would be massive (try explaining that to shareholders)

Click to expand...

Honda, based on whatever internal cost-benefit analysis they've done, are far more concerned about results than are with conserving money (relative to the other participants). The folks overseeing HRC are unlikely to be that annoyed with 3 titles in 4 years (unlike the Honda board which probably ignores the small corner of the $120 bn Honda universe involved with motorcycle racing). Its certainly a far better return on investment than Honda's foray into F1; I'd really like to know how much fun they're having with the shoe on the other foot - competing against entities with far bigger headstarts and deeper pockets.

And while the lower input costs have reduced entry barriers for smaller manufacturers, that will also inevitably result in lower participation costs for Honda over the medium to long term. With respect to the investment written-off, it could also be argued that the better advertising value generated through larger audiences would offset what's been lost through somewhat less dominant results on track.

JKant said:

The single tyre rule change was announced 9 years ago. Barely 3 or 4 riders from that time are still on the grid. Not what I'd call 'recent' but I suppose that's a perspective thing. Maybe we can chalked up to a difference in our ages.

Given that Ducati was badly trailing Honda & Yamaha on electronics development and had little hope of catching up, the introduction, or rather imposition of the unified software on the manufacturers gave it a huge leg up.

That they had already been using open ECU software developed by Magneti-Marelli, since switching to the Open Class in 2014, and that Magneti-Marelli further developed that into the current spec software with IP transfers from Ducati, was just icing on the cake.

Click to expand...

You make a rather large and unfounded assumption that Ducati's issues can be chalked up to the ECU, or rather lack of a standardized ECU. Ducati's biggest issue has been for the last decade plus been related to their chassis.

JPSLotus said:

You make a rather large and unfounded assumption that Ducati's issues can be chalked up to the ECU, or rather lack of a standardized ECU. Ducati's biggest issue has been for the last decade plus been related to their chassis.

Click to expand...

I said nothing of the sort. What I did say was that the spec ECU rule gave Ducati a huge leg up by leveling the playing field in an area where they had little hope of competing with Honda/Yamaha - which is very very different from saying that it 'fixed' the Ducati's issues. And this was in the context of an argument about whether Dorna's rule changes are designed to keep Ducati down.

Kant, Ducati already proved during the 800cc era they could build an engine that ran custom software that was expensive to develop and compete on pure power levels with HRC. Actually they exceeded Honda quite a bit there.

Again Ducati has always had a problem on the chassis side of things. And yes Dorna's rule changes have conveniently hurt Ducati rather than HRC or Yamaha.

michaelm said:

Are you sure you are not a Dorna employee?

Click to expand...

I don't know of any sport who's management is popular with the fanbase. Its a bit of a cliche really. I see it as somewhat similar to the government - everyone complains about it, particularly when things go wrong, but when things go right, more often than not, nobody really notices or if they do, its chalked up to an fortuitous alignment of the stars.

For my part, I have no qualms about blaming Dorna for everything that's wrong with the management of the sport. Its focus on profitability at the cost of revenue growth at business' current stage of maturity, for example, is a stupid stupid idea - contracting with subscription-based sports channels over FTA streams will have bad consequences over long-term, as will vigorously enforcing IP ownership over minor content, and in terms of advertising/out-reach their record is shoddy, to say the least.

But by the same token I have to credit them with things that they've gotten right. More importantly, distant history doesn't bother me as much as the current direction does. And I'm more than satisfied with the outcome of changes introduced over the last half decade (incl. spec tyres & electronics but also in terms of visual content, rider interactions, etc).

A view, I believe, is reinforced by the fact the even the old timers have to look back a quarter century to point out a better time to follow racing.

Who knows, maybe I'll be more cynical about Dorna (and probably life in general) after another decade or two.

It is a breath-taking assumption to assume MM not only could but would win on a Ducati and Lorenzo on a Suzuki to justify whatever tiny point you are making this time when neither has sat on either bike, and yes they have won 6 of the last 7 titles.

Click to expand...

Well seeing as I used the phrase 'could' and not 'would', are you sure you're not one making an assumption?

As I have pointed out before, regardless of how you wish to paint it premier class bike racing is not a Honda monopoly but a duopoly, with the current count 18:17 in terms of riders' titles in Honda's favour, but 16:15 Yamaha's way prior to MM. So no, while Yamaha may make very good guns more cheaply than Honda and all credit to them for that,they have not historically brought a knife to a gunfight.

Click to expand...

Of course, its not a Honda monopoly. Point is, HRC no doubt would blame its relative underperformance on restraints on it in terms of tyres & electronics in the current era (aside from the lack of a well suited rider, in the earlier years). What if those restraints came off?

Even if we assume that Yamaha can keep up, can the rest fight in the same weight class? Forget winning a race, can the likes of Aprilia & KTM spend what it takes to run within a second of the top Hondas/Yamahas, irrespective of the rider. Dorna would inevitably have to re-introduce a CRT/Open class formula just to retain a full grid, with generous handicaps (extra fuel, more tyres, wt limits) to keep them from getting lapped in the race.

I think the control ECU is a good idea and quite likely has been helpful in promoting wider manufacturer involvement, but the control tyre as Gaz has said was greatly injurious to Ducati particularly when they had a frameless bike, far more injurious than any benefit they may have received from the control ECU, in fact at the time the decision was made to go to a control tyre they were considered rightly or wrongly to have an advantage with electronics to which the 2007 title you mention was attributed.

Click to expand...

I'd argue the converse is true. The frameless chassis was designed around the Bridgestones, which became the spec tyres. Stoner considered the resultant package to be the absolute best bike on the grid and was convinced he'd have taken his second title on it in 2009(if not for his health).

On the other hand, Ducati were reportedly considering switching to Michelins in 2009. Would they have achieved similar results with the Michelins? Given Stoner's riding style and Michelin's less-than-impressive front, I strongly doubt it. And its anyone's guess how long it would have taken for Michelin to develop a competitive new front for the bike.

JPSLotus said:

Kant, Ducati already proved during the 800cc era they could build an engine that ran custom software that was expensive to develop and compete on pure power levels with HRC. Actually they exceeded Honda quite a bit there.

Again Ducati has always had a problem on the chassis side of things. And yes Dorna's rule changes have conveniently hurt Ducati rather than HRC or Yamaha.

Click to expand...

Well then they were either out of money or resources or motivation by 2014 when they switched to an open-ECU and started championing the spec-ECU/unified software proposal, in opposition to Honda which flat out swore to quit MotoGP if the ECU rule change went through. It went through.

Electronics & software isn't something that you just need to get right leaving the rest to the rider. As long as you can afford it, the development continues without pause (no season-freeze here), the payoff is substantial, but crucial point is that the marginal rate of return does not drop off as steeply as it does for other segments. If Ducati were the first to get the 800cc electronics dialed in - that's all they had - the first movers advantage, nothing more. Doesn't help them today.

Most of the riders have all contract to 2018, so where is he gonna go?LCR,aspar,pramac,avintia, EG? Doubt that.

michaelm said:

Are you sure you are not a Dorna employee?

It is a breath-taking assumption to assume MM not only could but would win on a Ducati and Lorenzo on a Suzuki to justify whatever tiny point you are making this time when neither has sat on either bike, and yes they have won 6 of the last 7 titles.

As I have pointed out before, regardless of how you wish to paint it premier class bike racing is not a Honda monopoly but a duopoly, with the current count 18:17 in terms of riders' titles in Honda's favour, but 16:15 Yamaha's way prior to MM. So no, while Yamaha may make very good guns more cheaply than Honda and all credit to them for that,they have not historically brought a knife to a gunfight.

I think the control ECU is a good idea and quite likely has been helpful in promoting wider manufacturer involvement, but the control tyre as Gaz has said was greatly injurious to Ducati particularly when they had a frameless bike, far more injurious than any benefit they may have received from the control ECU, in fact at the time the decision was made to go to a control tyre they were considered rightly or wrongly to have an advantage with electronics to which the 2007 title you mention was attributed.

Click to expand...

Serial offender on that.

JKant said:

The single tyre rule change was announced 9 years ago. Barely 3 or 4 riders from that time are still on the grid. Not what I'd call 'recent' but I suppose that's a perspective thing. Maybe we can chalk that up to the difference in our ages.

Given that Ducati was badly trailing Honda & Yamaha on electronics development and had little hope of catching up, the introduction, or rather imposition of the unified software on the manufacturers gave it a huge leg up.

That they had already been using open ECU software developed by Magneti-Marelli, since switching to the Open Class in 2014, and that Magneti-Marelli further developed that into the current spec software with IP transfers from Ducati, was just icing on the cake.

Click to expand...

You can use ages as the cause for perceptions where I will use years watching as you have already stated that you started around 10 - 12 years back, so for you, the tyres were old news but for many people the tyre changes are as fresh as the 'morning turd left in the dunny' as they say out here.

As for Ducati, once again they did work with Magnetti Marelli on software because they chose to go open as it was beneficial to them and allowed them to re-establish themselves but once again, that does not mean a leg up at all, nor does it mean experience that is recognisable - one year does not build sufficient experience when competitors have 10 times the budget

See you miss a very important point.

I once owned a Suzuki VStrom (2005 model). Now to use your analogy, I have a leg up as to how the 2017 Vstrom will perform, ride etc because I owned one in the past. Or perhaps, I rode a 2016 and then a 2017 so I know how the 2017 will ride .............. wrong. I may have an idea what to expect but it is very often true that from one year to teh next, .... happens, one iyeration to the next is diametrically opposite etc. Hell, look at tyres .......... oh wait, that is old news.

Thing is here that things change year on year and whilst your apologist self may not believe it, there is enough experience around to suggest that in many cases, the slightest change has the largest impact and as we know, nothing stays static.

JKant said:

Everyone's struggling with something or the other, except for Yamaha (for now)... which was also struggling with tyre life & edge grip last season (and front-end feel for one rider this season).

Ducati still scored more points in 2016 than it did in 2006, and if not for the wipeouts at Argentina & COTA would have finished with their best ever podium haul (aside from 2007). Could quite realistically have contested for the title if they had someone like Stoner or Marquez racing in red.

Click to expand...

So, correct me but where did Ducati finish again in the championship even though they got more points than 2006 (more races etc)?

FWIW, I used your lead and googled here but 2006 saw 17 races, 2016 saw 18 races

Manufacturers title saw 248 point in 2006 and 261 in 2017 which equals a 4th place so all up, I would call that near equal to 2006 (3rd both years on constructors (41 and 92 points behind second)

Struggling is all relative but just read releases etc and you will see that Ducati is struggling.

JKant said:

On the other hand, Ducati were reportedly considering switching to Michelins in 2009. Would they have achieved similar results with the Michelins? Given Stoner's riding style and Michelin's less-than-impressive front, I strongly doubt it. And its anyone's guess how long it would have taken for Michelin to develop a competitive new front for the bike.

Click to expand...

They wanted to switch due to Bridgestone being 'encouraged' by DORNA to take on Rossi as the focus of Bridgestonethen went from working with the smaller manufacturers to working with the largest player in the field (as no doubt, success for Bridgestone/Rossi was more beneficial).

As a result, Ducati looked elsewhere to find a tyre manufacturer to develop with in order to get the best from their bikes, but as we know, the spec tyre rule was implemented and .................. the rest is not suitable history

Gaz said:

You can use ages as the cause for perceptions where I will use years watching as you have already stated that you started around 10 - 12 years back, so for you, the tyres were old news but for many people the tyre changes are as fresh as the 'morning turd left in the dunny' as they say out here.

Click to expand...

Actually I started watching 5 years ago plus minus (starting riding 10-12 years ago). And to me 9 years is a long time... because it feels like a long time (nothing to do with racing).

When I said the spec ECU was the most important rule change in recent years, I was thinking maybe last 4-5 years. That you have a different perception of 'recent' doesn't make my statement '........'.

As for Ducati, once again they did work with Magnetti Marelli on software because they chose to go open as it was beneficial to them and allowed them to re-establish themselves but once again, that does not mean a leg up at all, nor does it mean experience that is recognisable - one year does not build sufficient experience when competitors have 10 times the budget

Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about 'experience'.

Point was pretty straightforward, the spec ECU imposed by Dorna was developed by Magneti-Marelli based the open ECU (fitted on the GP14) and developed further using proprietary data transferred by Ducati, unlike Yamaha & Honda which merely providing 'input'.

Net effect being that the entire grid was using ECUs & software that were, for all practical purposes, custom-designed for the GP15/GP16.

I once owned a Suzuki VStrom (2005 model). Now to use your analogy, I have a leg up as to how the 2017 Vstrom will perform, ride etc because I owned one in the past. Or perhaps, I rode a 2016 and then a 2017 so I know how the 2017 will ride .............. wrong.

Click to expand...

This is more akin you riding a 2016 Vstrom, and then providing tyres to Suzuki to 'assist' them in developing the 2017 model, the development of which happens to be led by your cousin.

So, correct me but where did Ducati finish again in the championship even though they got more points than 2006 (more races etc)?

FWIW, I used your lead and googled here but 2006 saw 17 races, 2016 saw 18 races

Manufacturers title saw 248 point in 2006 and 261 in 2017 which equals a 4th place so all up, I would call that near equal to 2006 (3rd both years on constructors (41 and 92 points behind second)

Click to expand...

Sure. Which brings back us to the original thing - Ducati running non-spec tyres and non-spec electronics were roughly as competitive in 2006 (their fifth year running the 990cc) as they were in 2016 (coincidently, also their fifth year running the 1000cc).

Struggling is all relative but just read releases etc and you will see that Ducati is struggling.

Click to expand...

Let me put it this way - take Stoner out of the equation and Ducati has always been struggling irrespective of what tyres were available to it.

Put Stoner back into the equation and you'll have a challenger for the title even on spec Michelins.

They wanted to switch due to Bridgestone being 'encouraged' by DORNA to take on Rossi as the focus of Bridgestone then went from working with the smaller manufacturers to working with the largest player in the field (as no doubt, success for Bridgestone/Rossi was more beneficial).

Click to expand...

Did Bridgestone really give Suzuki & Kawasaki as much of its focus as it gave Ducati?

What if Stoner had decided to quit in 2007 or had been forced to retire through injury - would Bridgestone still have resisted the Rossi demand knowing that they'd just lost their best tool for scoring regular wins & podiums?

Sure the power situation in the field has never been a balanced one. But Stoner & Ducati were far from the bottom of pile. Bridgestone wanted to focus on (the then champion) Stoner to use him to beat Michelin. Next year Rossi was back to winning ways and they switched focus, this time to beat Michelin on the very same bike (the Rossi-associated publicity was also a plus for the brand).

In any event, point is the Bridgestone-running frameless chassis GP9 was the best bike on the grid according to Stoner. Had the open tyre rules persisted, it would either have made no difference (if they continued on BrSt) or would have sunk Ducati's prospects, at least over the short term (if they switched to Michelin).

JKant said:

I don't know of any sport who's management is popular with the fanbase. Its a bit of a cliche really. I see it as somewhat similar to the government - everyone complains about it, particularly when things go wrong, but when things go right, more often than not, nobody really notices or if they do, its chalked up to an fortuitous alignment of the stars.

For my part, I have no qualms about blaming Dorna for everything that's wrong with the management of the sport. Its focus on profitability at the cost of revenue growth at business' current stage of maturity, for example, is a stupid stupid idea - contracting with subscription-based sports channels over FTA streams will have bad consequences over long-term, as will vigorously enforcing IP ownership over minor content, and in terms of advertising/out-reach their record is shoddy, to say the least.

But by the same token I have to credit them with things that they've gotten right. More importantly, distant history doesn't bother me as much as the current direction does. And I'm more than satisfied with the outcome of changes introduced over the last half decade (incl. spec tyres & electronics but also in terms of visual content, rider interactions, etc).

A view, I believe, is reinforced by the fact the even the old timers have to look back a quarter century to point out a better time to follow racing.

Who knows, maybe I'll be more cynical about Dorna (and probably life in general) after another decade or two.


Well seeing as I used the phrase 'could' and not 'would', are you sure you're not one making an assumption?


Of course, its not a Honda monopoly. Point is, HRC no doubt would blame its relative underperformance on restraints on it in terms of tyres & electronics in the current era (aside from the lack of a well suited rider, in the earlier years). What if those restraints came off?

Even if we assume that Yamaha can keep up, can the rest fight in the same weight class? Forget winning a race, can the likes of Aprilia & KTM spend what it takes to run within a second of the top Hondas/Yamahas, irrespective of the rider. Dorna would inevitably have to re-introduce a CRT/Open class formula just to retain a full grid, with generous handicaps (extra fuel, more tyres, wt limits) to keep them from getting lapped in the race.


I'd argue the converse is true. The frameless chassis was designed around the Bridgestones, which became the spec tyres. Stoner considered the resultant package to be the absolute best bike on the grid and was convinced he'd have taken his second title on it in 2009(if not for his health).

On the other hand, Ducati were reportedly considering switching to Michelins in 2009. Would they have achieved similar results with the Michelins? Given Stoner's riding style and Michelin's less-than-impressive front, I strongly doubt it. And its anyone's guess how long it would have taken for Michelin to develop a competitive new front for the bike.

Click to expand...

The problem with your posts in general is that you are attempting to re-construct history via google with fairly strong preconceptions, and arguing with people, admittedly of course not without bias themselves, who actually observed the events contemporaneously. For the remote events mostly what you seem to be able to find are Dorna press releases which hardly surprisingly don't rflect negatively on Dorna.

You are also arguing (in the case of other posters, not me, I am just a guy with a good memory who likes arguing) with people who have a profound technical knoweldge of the sport, even of how tyres work, but also mechanical matters (several engineers on here), race rules (Gaz has officiated) and race riding.

You bland assumption that it is only others who are biased and are "conspiracy theorists" is comical given you make huge assumptions/draw huge inferences yourself. That Dorna's whole approach for the last decade or so is justified because in your opinion MM could win on a Ducati and Lorenzo on a Suzuki even though neither has even sat on either bike is a prime example of tawdry sophistry.

Ducati didn't reportedly ask to switch to Michelins for 2009, they did ask to switch to Michelin, because unlike you trying to reconstruct history via googled fragments they predicted events and foresaw that the control tyre would disadvantage them; the lead up to it arguably already had as it is strongly rumoured the 2007 tyre which particulary suited their bike was taken away in 2008. Of course no-one knows how Ducati would have gone had they been able to go with Michelin, just as is the case with MM riding a Ducati or Jorge a Suzuki, but they were prepared to start again with a new tyre supplier rather than accede to a control tyre, which rather says something about your whole line of argument in regard to a control tyre, and is one of the major reasons I and others have a contrary view.

The 2009 frameless bike was not designed for the control tyre, it had been in devlopment well before then and was in fact tested by Stoner in mid 2008. The whole issue with the control tyre for Ducati was not where it started but that it was progressively developed for the majority of the field which were not frameless L90 bikes, and it was in later years not 2009 with the initial version of the control tyre that they started to attribute their problems to lack of a suitable tyre.

There was a year more recent than 25 years ago, 2006 actually, which had tremendous racing with 7 individual race winners (should have been 8 if KRJR could count) and wins by satellite riders not contingent on weather events or tyre malfunction. 2007 and 2008 also involved a bike which was not a Honda or Yamaha being competitive for the championship, and to reverse your own argument your own boy himself said at the time that he and Stoner would/could have won had they been riding the Honda.

As I have said, I think the control ECU was a good initiative, it was coming down to who could spend the most money on computer technicians. The control tyre I opposed from the start and continue to oppose for the many reasons which you choose to ignore.

JKant said:

Actually I started watching 5 years ago plus minus (starting riding 10-12 years ago). And to me 9 years is a long time... because it feels like a long time (nothing to do with racing).

When I said the spec ECU was the most important rule change in recent years, I was thinking maybe last 4-5 years. That you have a different perception of 'recent' doesn't make my statement '........'.


I didn't say anything about 'experience'.

Point was pretty straightforward, the spec ECU imposed by Dorna was developed by Magneti-Marelli based the open ECU (fitted on the GP14) and developed further using proprietary data transferred by Ducati, unlike Yamaha & Honda which merely providing 'input'.

Net effect being that the entire grid was using ECUs & software that were, for all practical purposes, custom-designed for the GP15/GP16.


This is more akin you riding a 2016 Vstrom, and then providing tyres to Suzuki to 'assist' them in developing the 2017 model, the development of which happens to be led by your cousin.


Sure. Which brings back us to the original thing - Ducati running non-spec tyres and non-spec electronics were roughly as competitive in 2006 (their fifth year running the 990cc) as they were in 2016 (coincidently, also their fifth year running the 1000cc).


Let me put it this way - take Stoner out of the equation and Ducati has always been struggling irrespective of what tyres were available to it.

Put Stoner back into the equation and you'll have a challenger for the title even on spec Michelins.


Did Bridgestone really give Suzuki & Kawasaki as much of its focus as it gave Ducati?

What if Stoner had decided to quit in 2007 or had been forced to retire through injury - would Bridgestone still have resisted the Rossi demand knowing that they'd just lost their best tool for scoring regular wins & podiums?

Sure the power situation in the field has never been a balanced one. But Stoner & Ducati were far from the bottom of pile. Bridgestone wanted to focus on (the then champion) Stoner to use him to beat Michelin. Next year Rossi was back to winning ways and they switched focus, this time to beat Michelin on the very same bike (the Rossi-associated publicity was also a plus for the brand).

In any event, point is the Bridgestone-running frameless chassis GP9 was the best bike on the grid according to Stoner. Had the open tyre rules persisted, it would either have made no difference (if they continued on BrSt) or would have sunk Ducati's prospects, at least over the short term (if they switched to Michelin).

Click to expand...

What did I say about reconstructing history by means of google?

Ducati won 4 races in 2006, with 3 of them being won by Loris Capirossi who was well in contention for the championship before crash and injury put him out for several races. Their other factory rider also had injury problems, and the 4th win was famously by their world superbike rider Troy Bayliss who replaced that rider (Sete Gibernau), and who despite unexceptional results when he had ridden for Ducati in motoGP previously managed to just turn up for the last race of the year and dominate that race, leading from the first lap to the finish. So yes their bike itself was rather more competitive in 2006 than it has been in recent years.

JKant said:

Actually I started watching 5 years ago plus minus (starting riding 10-12 years ago). And to me 9 years is a long time... because it feels like a long time (nothing to do with racing).

When I said the spec ECU was the most important rule change in recent years, I was thinking maybe last 4-5 years. That you have a different perception of 'recent' doesn't make my statement '........'.

Click to expand...

In which case you need to define recent when posting or making an argument/discussion as I remain steadfast that the ECU was not the biggest imposition that has cost Ducati, thus I remain with ........ in response.

If you now wish to have the goalposts moved so that they are within your definition of recent, well then I would still likely not go with Spec ECU but again go tyres.

JKant said:

I didn't say anything about 'experience'.

Point was pretty straightforward, the spec ECU imposed by Dorna was developed by Magneti-Marelli based the open ECU (fitted on the GP14) and developed further using proprietary data transferred by Ducati, unlike Yamaha & Honda which merely providing 'input'.

Net effect being that the entire grid was using ECUs & software that were, for all practical purposes, custom-designed for the GP15/GP16.

Click to expand...

Again ........ experience

Just because item A is present this year does not mean that item A remain untouched next year and as far as DORNA go, next week even.

This is more akin you riding a 2016 Vstrom, and then providing tyres to Suzuki to 'assist' them in developing the 2017 model, the development of which happens to be led by your cousin.

JKant said:

Sure. Which brings back us to the original thing - Ducati running non-spec tyres and non-spec electronics were roughly as competitive in 2006 (their fifth year running the 990cc) as they were in 2016 (coincidently, also their fifth year running the 1000cc).

Click to expand...

Except that they were twice as far behind their higher ranking competitors in the constructors title.

Now sure, third one year and third 10 years later could say lack of improvement or development, but now I suggest you revisit what has been removed from Ducati and assess again and you may see that what they achieved in 2016 was actually quite remarkable in many ways.

JKant said:

Let me put it this way - take Stoner out of the equation and Ducati has always been struggling irrespective of what tyres were available to it.

Put Stoner back into the equation and you'll have a challenger for the title even on spec Michelins.

Click to expand...

Disagree.
Capirossi did quite well on tyre 990cc/tyre combination and were it not for injury/crashes would have produced better in 2006 (IMO - and I say that as someone who does not like Capirossi over the Harada incident - google it as it was before your time).

And no again on the second point, he has quit and is off riding mountain bikes with Toby Price

JKant said:

Did Bridgestone really give Suzuki & Kawasaki as much of its focus as it gave Ducati?

Click to expand...

Hard to say as both of those factories did not hang around long after the rules changes and gfc

JKant said:

What if Stoner had decided to quit in 2007 or had been forced to retire through injury - would Bridgestone still have resisted the Rossi demand knowing that they'd just lost their best tool for scoring regular wins & podiums?

Click to expand...

Not the point ........... but I see moving goal posts.

As a fact, Stoner did not retire in 2007 so the rest is hypothetical so to play it a little - Bridgestone were strongly 'encouraged' to bring Rossi onboard because he wanted it (or as you put it, demanded) but they chose not to allow Pedrosa - why?

The answer is obvious.

JKant said:

Sure the power situation in the field has never been a balanced one. But Stoner & Ducati were far from the bottom of pile. Bridgestone wanted to focus on (the then champion) Stoner to use him to beat Michelin. Next year Rossi was back to winning ways and they switched focus, this time to beat Michelin on the very same bike (the Rossi-associated publicity was also a plus for the brand).

Click to expand...

The power in the paddock has been where it has been since 1999, never shifted elsewhere and it never will.