The bike is a piece of ..... That's clear but really, who cares? The bike was developed to fill grid spots. It was never intended to compete. It's being ridden by 4 guys who would never win a race on any bike.
What up bro. Ok, All 4 of those guys you mention won races when they were on bikes with fairy equal parity to their rivals at the time, fact. In your mind's eye, exchange the riders with the factory bikes (works M1/RCV) with the riders on the proddies, please tell me which do you think would end up winning a race? Marc, Pedro, Lorenzo, Rossi? You can put Marc (the current standard I suppose) on any of the proddies, the best he gets would be mid pack. After a few races of that most people would be saying, jeez that kid sucks. Now put Redding on the Repsol bike and he would be top 5, if not on the podium about every race (under the current parity of the grid). Then most of us would be saying, jeez that kid is good. Same goes for Nicky who would at least be matching VR (top 4). Here is the reality of the "championship" There are 4 bikes, and 2 now need to be ridden at high risk (Yamahas) to keep up with the Hondas. We have a 4 (2) bike championship. Why on earth do we assign so much accolade to a guy who is beating the other 3 on the better bike? For god sakes, even VR won a race and several podiums the minute he was gifted a 1/4 chance of doing so (return to M1). Those are awesome odds to succeed, 1/4. Even better if its 1/2 as it is for the Repsol bikes. I know Marc is a special talent, but when his rivals had similar machines, on any given races he was pushed around by Pol Esp and Iannone, now they can't come within the same area code. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Smith never won a solitary Moto2 race, now look at him, up there being relevant. Why? My answer, the parity of the machines is much more to do with the finishing order than we accept.
Often the case has been made, well, if you put them ALL on Repsol Hondas the finishing order would be the same as it is now. To which I say ......... Perhaps we haven't been paying attention to Moto2 enough, but on any race you'd be hard pressed to predict the winner. Why? Because the bikes are fairly equal. Yes there is still a parity gap in terms of teams and technical set up, and talent etc.; but as you can see, the parity also allows for riders to compete with eachother--no such reality exist in MotoGP. So sorry buddy, but saying these four riders on proddies "couldn't win on
any bike" (I'm assuming you are including the Repsol RCV in this scenario) is a bit devoid of what happened when these riders competed with others on equal footing.
All you need to know about the parity of the championship is too look at A.Espargaro's lap times. A beefed up prototype M1 with Q ties competing with CRTesk bikes. That won't stop spectators and journalists from singing the praises of his lap times. So why make the same illogical conclusion with the proddy riders?
