MotoGPMatters Race Review

MotoGP Forum

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
71
Location
NY
If it wasn't for this forum I would have never been introduced to MotoGPmatters.com ... and after a short time at this forum have learned the biased arguments. I found Kropotkin's recap of the race very inspiring and insightful, this guy is good in his observations!

This excerpt is something I wasn't even aware of after watching the race and checking out all the other post race reviews of the racers:

-From one questionable return to another. Many people wondered what Marco Melandri had to gain from coming back to ride a bike which was universally considered pretty awful. But at the tests here a month ago, the Hayate team found some solutions to the rear traction problems which have plagued the Kawasaki for years, and at both the IRTA test at Jerez and the practice sessions, Melandri looked entirely capable of finishing well inside the top ten.

And if it hadn't been for an overly optimistic entrance into Turn 1 at the beginning of the second lap, that might well have happened. After running off into the gravel, and losing 23 seconds on the leader Casey Stoner, Melandri rode a strong race, fighting his way back past three riders who had a 10 or more second advantage over him, to finish the race in 14th place, and score points. Most importantly, Melandri is cheerful about the whole affair, and comfortable on the bike. Marco Melandri is going to cause one or two upsets this year.



And some goood thoughts on the single tire rule... sounding like F1:

-And the single tire rule has had another major effect on racing, and one which its proponents probably didn't expect. Those who hoped that a single tire would make the racing closer have been disappointed, as the race was as processional as last year. But thinking logically about it, this is exactly what you would expect to happen. The argument for putting everyone on equal equipment is that rider skill will be become the sole determining factor in the outcome of the race, rather than the abilities of the engineers.

But what happens when everyone is on the same equipment is that it is easier for the best riders to beat lesser men, and the emphasis on rider skill means the gaps will grow larger, not smaller. After all, a less skillful rider cannot compensate by using the better equipment to his advantage.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Snurfer @ Apr 16 2009, 11:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And some goood thoughts on the single tire rule... sounding like F1:

-And the single tire rule has had another major effect on racing, and one which its proponents probably didn't expect. Those who hoped that a single tire would make the racing closer have been disappointed, as the race was as processional as last year. But thinking logically about it, this is exactly what you would expect to happen. The argument for putting everyone on equal equipment is that rider skill will be become the sole determining factor in the outcome of the race, rather than the abilities of the engineers.

But what happens when everyone is on the same equipment is that it is easier for the best riders to beat lesser men, and the emphasis on rider skill means the gaps will grow larger, not smaller. After all, a less skillful rider cannot compensate by using the better equipment to his advantage.


There was a select few on here that made the same observation last year, and they got labeled Rossi/Stoner/Pedrosa boppers.
 
Its really too bad Marco won't be getting anymore factory support especailly after bring the Kawi so far
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Traverser @ Apr 16 2009, 10:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>There was a select few on here that made the same observation last year...
Travi, why do you suppose it works for WSBK and not for MotoGP? Most people were willing to accept the single tire provider rule because many saw the disparity between Michelin, Bridgestone and Dunlop. Where some on certain rubber where doomed before the event even started. Now this guy is gonna say, well it wasn't a good idea? The question I would be asking is, are the tire choices so restricted and developed for a particular rider that the others are doomed with them? I've always wondered what is the difference between: A single-tire provider VS a spec tire. Most people think this is interchangeable. Its not.

It seems to work well in WSBK, why not in MotoGP? Thats the question Kripto should be asking.
 
IMO It's probably due to them trying to slow down the riders in the corners with a harder compound.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 17 2009, 05:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Travi, why do you suppose it works for WSBK and not for MotoGP? Most people were willing to accept the single tire provider rule because many saw the disparity between Michelin, Bridgestone and Dunlop. Where some on certain rubber where doomed before the event even started. Now this guy is gonna say, well it wasn't a good idea? The question I would be asking is, are the tire choices so restricted and developed for a particular rider that the others are doomed with them? I've always wondered what is the difference between: A single-tire provider VS a spec tire. Most people think this is interchangeable. Its not.

It seems to work well in WSBK, why not in MotoGP? Thats the question Kripto should be asking.

I think.........

WSBK is basically a 'road' bike (I know you'll all correct me if i'm wrong) and MOTOGP is about developement.

What I want to know is....who's going to be developing our new tyres now, with no competion at the top there will be very few improvements as far as I can see.

If it wasn't for motogp we wouldn't have duel compound, for instance! This rule is no good for the sport or us road users.
 

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions

Back
Top