One tire rule a done deal?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Aug 18 2008, 08:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What do you think of this?

Personally, I think it is a great idea; however I'm unconvinced it will do anything to reduce the cost of tires. I'm worried it will lead to tire manufacturers exploiting loopholes to gain a competitive advantage.

If not single tire, I think DORNA should make an RFP for motogp tire designs. They should let all the manufacturers design a myriad of compounds. The manufacturers will be paid for their selections then the formulas and design specs will be given to all the manufacturers involved.

In theory all the manufacturers will build exactly the same tires. The only competitive advantage any of them would have would be superior manufacturing facilities (the only thing consumers care about anyway).

Instead of investing millions in irrelevant technology, the tire manufacturers would be investing millions in trying to secure the best RIDERS. Large companies would easily buy the best riders and protect their brand and brand identity, while small companies could gamble on upstart riders and help them build their careers. In theory, everyone gets nearly identical equipment.

The theory of racing viewership says that whenever the results of a contest are nearly guaranteed people stop watching. Riders are the only input within racing that is constantly evolving. Prototyping leads to long periods of dominance by a manufacturer. Prototyping also leads to enormous expense. The prototyping benefit is unlimited performance and innovation. Now that unlimited performance is no longer sustainable, DORNA needs to focus on the riders again. Riders age and get injured. They struggle with new technology and they learn to adapt. The dominance of a rider is assured for a short period of time, then the sport passes them by. Obviously Rossi throws a monkey wrench into the equation, but even he will eventually succumb to boredom or age.

DORNA needs to do everything in their power to put the focus back on the riders!

Designing to meet a published standard is easy and not as expensive as what they do now. The standard would be cast in stone for the year. Designing prototype tires differently for every machine on the grid and redesigning all through the year is expensive. The factory would know what tire constructions were available to develop the bike with in advance and the tire company would have a strict guideline to work to. As far as cheating goes there is always going to be attempts but the cost penalty to the brand advertizing to get caught would be significant. And in the end the tire cost could be controlled/dictated by Dorna so the manufacturers could get a return on their R&D in addition to selling the tires. Dorna could publish the results of preseason tire testing to see how well each brand was meeting the standard so there would be no Brno surprises.

Rossi is the one who threw the monkey wrench into the present situation. The overall changes brought on by his switching brands may turn out to be his greatest legacy.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Aug 19 2008, 08:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>DORNA needs to do everything in their power to put the focus back on the riders!
huh? IMHO, This is a competition about EQUIPMENT. As a rider, it helps me decide on which product i should spend my next $. Personally I do not care about the riders. For all I care, robots could be riding the bikes, like they do camels. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...bot_jockey.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Aug 16 2008, 11:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Is this really necessary?

Yes. Because if you recall, even though other teams and riders wanted Bstones, they were not allowed by either Dorna or Bstone. (Except one person of course). So you can say it is necessary, because Dorna should have done this last year, but they did NOT once they got what they really wanted, and a level playing field was never their concern. Now its so funny how this has played out. MotoGP is a joke when it comes to making the sport an equitable competition (which they have shown that the business end trumps any concern). The last two races has precipitated a real difference in tire performance between brand. Though it wasn't always the case in such sharp contrast, it still should have been a spec tire rule, at very least to take out this factor. Everybody (including me) have been concerned with the electronic, but the tires here seem to control the outcomes as much as anything else. But lets ask babel, since he is our resident tire expert.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Aug 16 2008, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>note, i mean this in a friendly way and if we were talking about this over a beer i would be smiling so dont let the words upset you
True.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Aug 16 2008, 04:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>2 bad races and it's all hell breaking loose. No one gave a .... when Bridgestone sucked for 5 years. One tire rule is an insult to motogp.
Here is the difference. Those team usually "chose" to run Bstones. Now when teams are denied this to "keep the tire war" between them, then it is a problem. BTW, they did this because Michelin acted like Dorna, in that they only favored "certain" teams and riders with their best stuff, so this forced other teams and riders to try their luck with Bstones. Now you see, it was always a problem when you have a governing body and a supplier playing favorites. (Like Roger said, its not the riders fault, even if said rider threatens to leave the sport), this all falls on the governing body to make things equitable. They have NOT. So the only real solution is (and was then) a SPEC/CONTROL TIRE. (Assuming of course that Dorna will set up a fool proof system that will guarantee all the teams get this "same" tire.

King Kenny Roberts has been advocating a spec tire for years. Nobody listened to him, but as usual, he knew what was ruing the sport. Now at BRNO we had a situation where if you were on a Michelin, you were pretty much running on two cylinders. Is this equitable? No. Does Dorna care; I think they might, AFTER Rossi wins the title this year.

Please, this is no dig at Rossi (though his CRAZY fans will think it is). He got what he pushed for, and now he seems the genius for it (as if his fans needed any more encouragement). But I am convinced he did what he had to do to win, which is what everybody should be doing. That is his role as a competitor, the role of the governing body is of course, to make sure everybody has the same voice regardless of stature. This is where they miserably have failed.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 19 2008, 06:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Here is the difference. Those team usually "chose" to run Bstones. Now when teams are denied this to "keep the tire war" between them, then it is a problem. BTW, they did this because Michelin acted like Dorna, in that they only favored "certain" teams and riders with their best stuff, so this forced other teams and riders to try their luck with Bstones. Now you see, it was always a problem when you have a governing body and a supplier playing favorites. (Like Roger said, its not the riders fault, even if said rider threatens to leave the sport), this all falls on the governing body to make things equitable. They have NOT. So the only real solution is (and was then) a SPEC/CONTROL TIRE. (Assuming of course that Dorna will set up a fool proof system that will guarantee all the teams get this "same" tire.

King Kenny Roberts has been advocating a spec tire for years. Nobody listened to him, but as usual, he knew what was ruing the sport. Now at BRNO we had a situation where if you were on a Michelin, you were pretty much running on two cylinders. Is this equitable? No. Does Dorna care; I think they might, AFTER Rossi wins the title this year.

Please, this is no dig at Rossi (though his CRAZY fans will think it is). He got what he pushed for, and now he seems the genius for it (as if his fans needed any more encouragement). But I am convinced he did what he had to do to win, which is what everybody should be doing. That is his role as a competitor, the role of the governing body is of course, to make sure everybody has the same voice regardless of stature. This is where they miserably have failed.
spot on mate

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 19 2008, 07:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Please, this is no dig at Rossi (though his CRAZY fans will think it is). He got what he pushed for, and now he seems the genius for it (as if his fans needed any more encouragement). But I am convinced he did what he had to do to win, which is what everybody should be doing. That is his role as a competitor, the role of the governing body is of course, to make sure everybody has the same voice regardless of stature. This is where they miserably have failed.

Why should I disagree in that? That's CRAZY. It's the exact thing I've been saying all along. Nice to see you comming around.

One tire rule is a done deal.

I have recently come to the conclusion that the control tire was put to a vote during last year's technical tire meetings. Because Bridgestone supplied a majority of the manufacturers (3 of 5) and a majority of the riders (10 of 19), the vote probably ended 3 to 1 and the control tire was struck down.

Obviously this was the vote that caused Ezy to give Bridgestone to Rossi and to manipulate the numbers of compounds available after observing the Stonerfest at Qatar; Rossi moving backwards provided him with more motivation. It was the only thing he could do and I'm sure he was operating under the assumption that the riders would remain divided and DORNA would have to continue to subsidize Michelin's operations in MotoGP.

Ezy had no way of knowing that so many riders would be badly injured this season, including a fair amount of Bridgestone runners. Furthermore, at the beginning of 2008 he had no idea that rider's commission would approach him with demands for a control tire in the name of safety.

The vote this season should end 2-2 with DORNA casting the tiebreaking vote (assuming the control tire is Bridgestone).

Control tire for 2009. Michelin's giant budget subsidy will be given to Bridgestone to help them take on a 100% increase in riders.

What the hell are we going to talk about then.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (crvlvr @ Aug 19 2008, 09:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>huh? IMHO, This is a competition about EQUIPMENT. As a rider, it helps me decide on which product i should spend my next $. Personally I do not care about the riders. For all I care, robots could be riding the bikes, like they do camels. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...bot_jockey.html

It used to be about equipment. When they slowed the bikes down, it ceased to be about equipment and performance capabilities. Now it's about safety and spectacle.

When people realize motogp isn't unlimited prototype racing---that's just a load of marketing fluff--they will be able to embrace a more realistic set of rules that can hold the sport together (financially speaking) while safety technologies develop.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 19 2008, 09:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Please, this is no dig at Rossi (though his CRAZY fans will think it is). He got what he pushed for, and now he seems the genius for it (as if his fans needed any more encouragement). But I am convinced he did what he had to do to win, which is what everybody should be doing. That is his role as a competitor, the role of the governing body is of course, to make sure everybody has the same voice regardless of stature. This is where they miserably have failed.

Jumk, quit throwing peanuts to the bopper gallery.

Rossi has had numerous chances to ride with Bridgestone. As a matter of fact he could easily have wiggled out of his Yamaha contract and pursued a ride with any Bridgestone team in the paddock. Ducati, Suzuki, and Kawasaki were all looking for riders.

We know DORNA wanted a control tire. The voting structure of GP suggests that the other 3 powers didn't. All Rossi had to do was sway the riders' vote. Bridgestone supplied 10 riders in 2007, 9 weren't supplied by Bridgestone. Rossi needed to rally the non-Bridgestone runners and then pick up a swing vote or two and the control tire would have passed.

In true Rossi form, after his defeat he went out and brokered a deal for himself by getting Ezy to exploit the absence of a tire manufacturers operating pact. Rossi leads from the back, he always has and he always will. Rossi always goes on and on about the good of the sport in his press conferences, but Rossi showed his true colors. He couldn't care less about the sport as long as he is winning.

Rossi has recently proved that he is just another dispensable rider, albeit, the most talented dispensable rider ever.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 19 2008, 10:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Here is the difference. Those team usually "chose" to run Bstones. Now when teams are denied this to "keep the tire war" between them, then it is a problem. Dorna really has no say on who can ride on which tire. In other words, if a tire manufacturer and team agree on a relationship, Dorna can do nothing about it. In Rossi's case, Rossi asked and Bridgestone said "No". they claimed it was about production capacity at the tire plant. In reality Bridgestones realized that since Rossi had won some many time, if he continued to win on Bridgestones, he would be given credit, not the tires. There is no reliable evidence that Dorna had anything to do with Bridgestone change of heart. Other riders wanted Stones (Hayden, Pedrosa) wanted stones too, but their TEAMS said no, not Dorna.

I liked Rossi's comment when Suzi Perry asked him about his move to Bridgestone after the Brno race and he said something like "I made good choice."

Lin Jarvis' recent comments on Pedrosa's move to Bridgestone and a one tyre championship:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>On the day of the announcement of Dani Pedrosa´s sensational Bridgestone switch, Jarvis stated, `As a company we maybe do not have a fixed opinion on it. There are opinions of engineers, opinions of sports management, different opinions. Personally I am quite inclined towards monobrand, for the sport, for the championship and for the equality of the competition, but it is not so simple. In principle we all believe in free competition in the championship and when things are equal the Michelin riders can be up there.´
http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2008/Jarvis+...kend+for+Yamaha