Now that Ducati has burned up all their tests

There are many ways to mark position on a track to include the use of a gyro. Go take a look at the F1 teams that were caught cheating by using TC that simply used air box pressure to let the car know how fast it was going. The faster you go the more pressure you will have, mix that with a sim and track data during practice and you have just created another way of using TC. The same can be done with a gyro.

BarryMachine said:

But then again those arguments were:



I argued against the feasibility of using a gyro to map position on a track .............. I'd still be amazed to see a valid working system

Sorry Mick I'm not such a fence sitter that I will sit by and agree with something I have to date learned was flawed for such use, and in any case far superseded by GPS devices. God knows why whomsoever suggested it could be done in the first place anyway, and why they thought it was useful. Nonetheless it is, and was, a nonsense and I felt compelled to say so rather than go along with the masses for the sake of being "social". In the end that was all just a witch hunt, I thnk had I taken the opposite view, I would have been opposed for the sake of it

and



Backing in is initiated with the back brake and downshifting ........ I beg to differ, these are not the critical initiators. is all I will say ......... and I believe Stoners "cracking the throttle before the corner" is because he is of the school where such things are the norm as well. I also believe now it is an alien concept to many outside Aussie flat track riding. Ditto on the fence sit here ....... And suffice to to say that given Stoners demonstration of the technique I feel somewhat big headed in the knowledge, and long ago learned use of that technique. ( though possibly at a somewhat lessened level of prowess to Stoner

) So for now I will say "go ahead skid away guys , but I feel good in doing it, and knowing of, another way"

Click to expand...

BarryMachine said:

Then where are they? Are we to read the "RET" in result records as crashes? ....... cos if thats the case, there seem to be more "RET"'s in the tables for the 990's ........ or are they all just breakdowns?

Click to expand...

Ohhh... nice reply conveniently missing the parry to your "Stoner never said that" post!

michaelm said:

Barry has not been convinced by an opinion or argument different than his own in the history of the forum to my knowledge.

Click to expand...

Aey, he's like a farking ........ steam train on rails...

povol said:

...the pinnacle of motorsport in the US is who is going faster.

Click to expand...

Uhhmmm, duh NASCAR is the pinnacle of motorsports in the minds of the 99%...

Kropotkin said:

No.



The 1000s are being brought back because the 800cc formula was too expensive and provided terrible racing.



The 800s did not improve safety one bit, there were more crashes due to the higher corner speeds.

Click to expand...

Kropo, give it up mate... I've seen too many pulsing veins from rational people trying to debate with Barry.

Kropotkin said:

NASCAR. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Click to expand...

Indy used to draw crowds that Nascar could only dream about, they gutted performance and the crowd dwindled. Nascar gutted performance at Talladega and Daytona, the crowd dwindled at those tracks, but remained steady for years at tracks where performance advanced. DMG gutted performance and the crowd disappeared. Nascar is now in decline because of its attempt to manufacture close championships. The racing by nature would always be close since it is a spec series and requires full course cautions, but. Nascar crossed a line with the the purist when they started trying to manufacture close championships with ' The Chase" and they are paying for it with lower attendance and viewership Trying to create false competition will cost them dearly when the next TV contract is negotiated. If race fans in Europe are more about being entertained by quirky personalities in chicken suits thats fine, its not what works in the US. If we are not important to GP, thats fine also, we have unlimited .... to attend and spend our money on. I will always watch any bike race that is on TV, but without hope of eye witnessing some sort of speed or track record, there is no reason for me to be there. I can save a thousand dollars and spend 1 hour of my life instead of 3 days. Cheap and simple baby.

povol said:

Indy used to draw crowds that Nascar could only dream about, they gutted performance and the crowd dwindled. Nascar gutted performance at Talladega and Daytona, the crowd dwindled at those tracks, but remained steady for years at tracks where performance advanced. DMG gutted performance and the crowd disappeared. Nascar is now in decline because of its attempt to manufacture close championships. The racing by nature would always be close since it is a spec series and requires full course cautions, but. Nascar crossed a line with the the purist when they started trying to manufacture close championships with ' The Chase" and they are paying for it with lower attendance and viewership Trying to create false competition will cost them dearly when the next TV contract is negotiated. If race fans in Europe are more about being entertained by quirky personalities in chicken suits thats fine, its not what works in the US. If we are not important to GP, thats fine also, we have unlimited .... to attend and spend our money on. I will always watch any bike race that is on TV, but without hope of eye witnessing some sort of speed or track record, there is no reason for me to be there. I can save a thousand dollars and spend 1 hour of my life instead of 3 days. Cheap and simple baby.

Click to expand...

I think there's a fine line to tread. The bikes have to be perceived as being fast, but they don't necessarily have to be the pinnacle. Look at F1, they have dumbed the cars down immensely, but the series is as popular as ever. To me, (and I have a very limited understanding of car racing, as cars suck ...) IRL failed for precisely the reasons you state: they tried to dumb down the racing. But then open wheel racing in the US is much more of a purist's sport than other car racing. NASCAR is a better example, and probably shows that when you do manipulate performance, you have to do so very carefully. I suspect (and I have no proof of this) that the problem was not so much the manipulation of performance, as the perceived manipulation of the racing itself. Full course yellows to bunch the field up annoy even the casual fan, and that has probably done more to drive audiences away than any tweaks to the car. I don't think Dorna or IRTA are proposing that, and if they did, I would be the first to complain.

BarryMachine said:

That fence is getting taller ...... this discussion started because of how the 1000's were going to make it safer ( according to some ) remember, ...... at least I have you back on the fence ATM

...... Sometimes folk forget to say the logical opposite to test their logic, and when they do it puts new perspective on the issue/problem/design/whatever. Sorry "blackbox" engineering ideology ........ works wonders. If you aren't sure of the logic ( or if its questionable ), throw the opposite logic at it and see how it runs/operates/fares. At least you should find out what it won't do.

Click to expand...

The massive highsides are mainly gone which is a benefit. It is only my opinion, but the best riders in the world come off these bikes too much. Jorge if he can't get within half a second of stoner should be able to work this out without crashing; he didn't seem to do much wrong in the warm-up accident. Leaving out rossi with his obvious ignorance of the theory and practice of backing it in, why did stoner crash the ducati so much last year? Great rider , apparently a winning bike.

Great discussion gentlemen.

Kropotkin said:

I think there's a fine line to tread. The bikes have to be perceived as being fast, but they don't necessarily have to be the pinnacle. Look at F1, they have dumbed the cars down immensely, but the series is as popular as ever. To me, (and I have a very limited understanding of car racing, as cars suck ...) IRL failed for precisely the reasons you state: they tried to dumb down the racing. But then open wheel racing in the US is much more of a purist's sport than other car racing. NASCAR is a better example, and probably shows that when you do manipulate performance, you have to do so very carefully. I suspect (and I have no proof of this) that the problem was not so much the manipulation of performance, as the perceived manipulation of the racing itself. Full course yellows to bunch the field up annoy even the casual fan, and that has probably done more to drive audiences away than any tweaks to the car. I don't think Dorna or IRTA are proposing that, and if they did, I would be the first to complain.

Click to expand...

I would have to disagree, lap times dont lie, and every race fan i know looks at lap times and compares. Maybe its just the crowd i run with, but i dont think so.. F1, as dumbed down as they are, are still light years ahead in performance than any other road racing seriies on the planet. If Gp can get WSBK to follow in the footsteps of AMA and BSB, then they can dumb down their own performance. If that doesnt happen and WSBK surpasses them in performance, i can imagine they {WSBK} would scream from the mountain tops that they are the pinnacle of bike racing. One quick glance at lap times would clear up any confusion to most race fans. It is a fine line , and you had better be damn careful how you walk it

I agree. MotoGP must necessarily be the pinnacle of bike technology for it to maintain its status. This means making WSBK closer to Superstock spec (which would ba a great move, IMO).



People want to jump from WSS to Moto2 because Moto2 is seen as an easier and more direct route to MotoGP. And going to MotoGP is...the pinnacle. Best riders, best bikes.

Kropo, my humble opinion is perception is not enough. MotoGP is the pinnacle because it is (at present). The only way it can stay that way is if it remains such. But we mentioned a while back that Wsbk would have to be dumbed down for the sake of MotoGP (in a sense). If that happens, which I think it will, that's too bad because the Wsbk machines can lap at close to a GP bike at a fraction of the cost.

All this talk of the pinnacle has made me wonder exactly how you define the pinnacle. After all, if you want to see the bikes at the true cutting edge of technology, you go watch TTXGP.

The other thing is the comparison between MGP, SBK and CRT. I would be willing to bet all the lunch money I ever had that if you slap some carbon brakes and BStones on a top SBK, the difference in lap time would be NILL!



Spies himself said that the BStones are WAY harder to find the edge, and thats why only a few riders are at the top.

He said the tires are the main difference and that the limits were much lower, and easier to find in SBK.



Oh, one more thing, Ducati better watch what they wish for testing wise because if the limits come up I doubt they have more resources than Honda.

Kropotkin said:

All this talk of the pinnacle has made me wonder exactly how you define the pinnacle. After all, if you want to see the bikes at the true cutting edge of technology, you go watch TTXGP.

Click to expand...

When they get to where they can surpass and sustain current combustion engine performance, then it will be the pinnacle. Will still suck though, i have never heard an electric engine that would make my .... get hard

BHarvey said:

The other thing is the comparison between MGP, SBK and CRT. I would be willing to bet all the lunch money I ever had that if you slap some carbon brakes and BStones on a top SBK, the difference in lap time would be NILL!



Spies himself said that the BStones are WAY harder to find the edge, and thats why only a few riders are at the top.

He said the tires are the main difference and that the limits were much lower, and easier to find in SBK.



Oh, one more thing, Ducati better watch what they wish for testing wise because if the limits come up I doubt they have more resources than Honda.

Click to expand...

I have said this for awhile, which makes you ask. What the .... are they doing with all that ....... money. Im guessing its like any other venture that includes tons of other peoples money. You spend what you need to get the job done, then piss away the rest on frivolous ........ to assure you get the same or more the next year.

This is a good discussion, bar baz the great.......





IMO Motogp needs to bring back the variables and the relative performance over a race weekend. At PI last weekend Stoner nearly lapped quickest for the weekend on the Friday Morning! As did a lot of the others-this is predictable and boring-relative lap time comparisons to other series matter little-unless your a die-hard purist/engineer type.



The Control tyre has brought in a lack of variables, and in most cases performance tends to stagnate over the race weekend, making practice and qualifying fairly similar and the race horribly predictable, I would hate to be bookmaker trying to make cash on this sport at present!



What F1 has done by limiting engineers influence, is remove the ultimate predictability, and Pirelli have done a wonderful job of providing rubber for this series, and WSBK. One thing that the tyre war gave us was an air of unpredictability, and the possibility of a satellite rider finding a great hoop and setting, running with the leaders and winning on occasion, (Tony Elias 06 Estoril) the greater the tyre selection, the more variables across the race weekend with setting and the potential for proper competition increases. At present it is almost possible to predict the placings in FP, QP and the race on the thursday-a truly sad state of affairs......as I've stated many times IMO removing Bridgestone from the equation will be a good start in restoring the series to its former glory, for we all like to blame the 800's which is fair enough,but remember since Bridgestone's ascendancy the racing has really suffered.

Kropotkin said:

All this talk of the pinnacle has made me wonder exactly how you define the pinnacle. After all, if you want to see the bikes at the true cutting edge of technology, you go watch TTXGP.

Click to expand...

Well Kropo, I consider this a fun discussion for the sake of discussing only.



NHRA drag bikes accelerate to amazing speed from stand still in short time too. I think its pretty clear what is considered the pinnacle of roadracing, do we really need to get into that part of the discussion? Currently it is MotoGP. But if Wsbk, a very similar and rival series, got to a point where it lapped faster, attracted the best talent, and attracted the big money sponsorship, they would become the pinnacle in my opinion. MotoGP retains its title because at this point and historically, the best 4-6 riders on best machines are lapping fastest. GP has tradition on its side too. But I don't think its a status that is unchangeable. In reality, it may never get to a point where Wsbk trumps GP in performance and riders, but that may be by design; because the real possibility exists that a CRT bike would lap considerably slower than Wsbk in its current state. If this were to remain, the "perceptions' could very much shift. But I doubt it will get to this point. However, you argue as if the "pinnacle" of roadracing has only one place for all time, and I don't think that is a position that makes sense 'logically'. At one time people considered Indianapolis "The Greatest Spectacle in Racing.", and that was true for some time, not now. Again, this is a discussion for fun because we may never know as I'm sure the powers that be are aligned with MotoGP. In the States we had a bit of a mutiny when DMG took over, and had there been somebody with enough clout and money, (for some moments seemed a real possibility) a rival series could have developed. Had this attracted the disgruntled factories (and all their marketing dollars) and the top riders who want to compete and make some kind of a living from it, then the AMA/DMG could have been relegated to a less sister series and the situation may have morphed further beyond that. It didn't happen, so you can argue all day long it was because of "perception", but in the realm of fun hypothetical discussion as is this one, logic takes a back seat. Fortunes ebb and flow. I just finished watching the DVD "The history of Roadracing". Its very interesting, and one of the themes is perceptions can be affected. The undisputed "pinnacle" of roadracing was actually "road" racing. When the advent of closed short circuits were introduced, it took a few years but that became the "pinnacle" of the sport while some "road" races remain and ebbed in popularity.

Kropotkin said:

All this talk of the pinnacle has made me wonder exactly how you define the pinnacle. After all, if you want to see the bikes at the true cutting edge of technology, you go watch TTXGP.

Click to expand...

That's a good question. I enjoy your contributions.



A conventional engine configuration (internal combustion) does not mean the technology is not advanced. There are continuous refinements and developments, as you're aware. That's without even considering MotoGP electronics.



TTXGP is the 'newest' technology, but it's not the pinnacle.



By pinnacle, I consider the most advanced means of getting around a track as fast as possible to be the definition one that would resonate amongst fans. The lap times of TTXGP count against it, when you utilize this definition. Of course, you can try to impugn the utility of this definition.



EDIT: By the way Krop, I paid for a calendar that I never received early this year. Could you please shoot me a PM?

RCV600RR said:

EDIT: By the way Krop, I paid for a calendar that I never received early this year. Could you please shoot me a PM?

Click to expand...

Done. Sorry about the mixup, we'll get it sorted.

The greatest motorsports in the world right now is....................................................................American Supercross. Last week at the Monster Energy cup they gave away 1 million dollars to the rider who could win all three heat races. Theres not a sport in the world right now outside of a pay per view event that can afford to do that.

Its not hard to see why. Much like GP they currently have a cast of characters that are hall of famers. The championship is up for grabs almost every year going into the last race. I compared their points system to GP last year. While a GP rider would have wrapped things up a few races before, SX keeps it close by rewarding consistency. Its not a perfect system but it breeds a great championship.

The bikes are by far the meanest gnarlyest beasts on the planet. Pure HP. Only the baddest dudes can ride these things to their potential, much like the 500's and 990's. No pansy ... corner speed midgets get a free pass in this series.

Merchandising is key. You go to a race you can buy a hat glove tampon, or whatever of any rider. You can buy AMA SX gear as well. GP, you can buy VR gear and some leftover has been ........ from the other riders.

Riders are accessible. You dont have to buy some $500 pass to maybe catch a glimpse of them. You pay a little extra, get a pit pass and you meet whoever you want

The show itself is amazing. You are entertained the whole time you are there. The monster ho's are quite possibly the finest girls Ive ever seen. EVERY YEAR

AMA doesnt .... with the formula and they cater to the fan. Quite the opposite to almost all the roadracing series

http://moto-racing.speedtv.com/article/motogp-noyes-notebook-what-is-a-crt-pt-iii/P3

Misano

Fastest Lap MotoGP: 1.33.906 (Lorenzo, Yamaha M1)

Fastest Lap SBK: 1.36.344 (Biaggi, Aprilia RVS4)

Difference 2.438seconds



Assen

Fastest Lap MotoGP: 1,35.240 (Spies, Yamaha M1)

Fastest Lap SBK: 1.36.476 (Rea, Honda CBR1000RR)

Difference 1.236



Brno

Fastest lap MotoGP: 1'57.191 (Stoner, Honda)

Fastest lap SBK: 2.00.058 (Biaggi, Aprilia RSV4)

Difference 2.867



PI

Fastest lap MotoGP: 1.30.629 (Stoner, Honda)

Fastest lap SBK: 1.32.012 (Biaggi, Aprilia RSV4)

Difference 1.383 seconds

hawkdriver said:

http://moto-racing.speedtv.com/article/motogp-noyes-notebook-what-is-a-crt-pt-iii/P3

Misano

Fastest Lap MotoGP: 1.33.906 (Lorenzo, Yamaha M1)

Fastest Lap SBK: 1.36.344 (Biaggi, Aprilia RVS4)

Difference 2.438seconds



Assen

Fastest Lap MotoGP: 1,35.240 (Spies, Yamaha M1)

Fastest Lap SBK: 1.36.476 (Rea, Honda CBR1000RR)

Difference 1.236



Brno

Fastest lap MotoGP: 1'57.191 (Stoner, Honda)

Fastest lap SBK: 2.00.058 (Biaggi, Aprilia RSV4)

Difference 2.867



PI

Fastest lap MotoGP: 1.30.629 (Stoner, Honda)

Fastest lap SBK: 1.32.012 (Biaggi, Aprilia RSV4)

Difference 1.383 seconds

Click to expand...

I wonder what tires and carbon brakes would do to those times.