Professional races, minimal passing. Parity? or Aero?

As an geezer who never followed F1 cars, who grew up racing bikes in ye olde ancient days of pre-fuel injection, having a somewhat superficial understanding of a lot of the contemporary tech developments, I wonder: how do some folks determine with such certainty that it's aero, and not a relative parity between the factories that results in the kind of racing we are presently witnessing?

School me.

It's not really a matter of schooling or superior information. It's a matter of drawing inferences and gaming the situation.

In F1 it was easy to determine the problem with aero because the engineers could see significantly less force applied to the suspension when the following car was in the aero wash of the leading car. Case closed. The science is less conclusive in MotoGP.

Regarding the parity of the machines, it has existed often because teammates have the same bike, in theory. Okay, that's not always the case, but you could argue the equipment is more or less on par, and sometimes there is parity between the factory equipment and the satellite bikes. Over the years, there have also been instances where various brands have had similar characteristics and performance. Lack of overtaking has never been associated with the past, despite many instances of rider-bike parity.

Lack of overtaking is most likely a modern phenomenon, caused by the era of automation and electronically-controlled augmentation. Risk-taking was once the sole purview of the rider. He decided when to brake later, open the throttle earlier, or lean the bike and extra degree or two. Most of that territory has been captured by the engineers for their corporate overlords such that the riders are at 10/10ths the entire race. It sounds glamorous but the reality is quite unglamorous.

But let's suppose my inferences are drawn incorrectly, or that the nexus between bike-rider parity and lack of overtaking cannot be established or known in anyway. So parity and new technology appear to be equally responsible for lack of overtaking. Suppose the governing body decides to address the lack of overtaking by introducing new technical regulations that they believe will alter parity between the teams. Where does that lead? Another Ago era? Another Rossi 2002-2003? Doohan in the late-90s? It's more likely, in my opinion, that rolling back the influence of electronics, automated rider aids, aero downforce, etc. with robust manufacturer participation will lead to another golden age of competition similar to the mid-80s through the early 90s, when Japan was booming and the manufacturers were throwing money at GP racing.

For sure all those roll-backs would reveal which riders are the most talented and adaptable. I've noticed over the last 10 or so years that, the big discussions on the various boards are mostly dominated by talk about the machines, click bait drama and behind the scenes machinations, and not nearly as much about the riders as in days of olde. None of the current riders seem to capture the hearts of the fans the way Rossi, Hayden or Stoner did. As great as Marquez is I never get the feeling that fans are as invested in him as they were with other riders. With fewer rider aids, with riders relying more purely on skill, Fabio would IMHO - be insanely dominant. It would be the beginning of a whole new era - where people actually like the French.

Keshav said:

For sure all those roll-backs would reveal which riders are the most talented and adaptable. I've noticed over the last 10 or so years that, the big discussions on the various boards are mostly dominated by talk about the machines, click bait drama and behind the scenes machinations, and not nearly as much about the riders as in days of olde. None of the current riders seem to capture the hearts of the fans the way Rossi, Hayden or Stoner did. As great as Marquez is I never get the feeling that fans are as invested in him as they were with other riders. With fewer rider aids, with riders relying more purely on skill, Fabio would IMHO - be insanely dominant. It would be the beginning of a whole new era - where people actually like the French.

Click to expand...

Well I for one think Fabio is the real deal. Just look at where other Yamahas finish.

Marquez is special. He never looks at the camera when it drills him in the booth. Good for him. He does acknowledge fans on the bike.

You don't have to be likable, smile or anything of that sort to race, win or be fast.

Rossi was able to capitalize on his success and charm. Good for him.

Kenny Roberts? Forget about the charm.

It seems that in any era, the best are still going to rise to the top in some way. It may be that today, the gaps of any sort may be really small.

Another thing, when the teams had different tire suppliers it was a different deal. One more "equalizing" factor in today's scene.

Young Kenny Roberts was not like the grim old geezer we now know. Sure - he didn’t wink at the camera and act like a 12 year-old boy and do silly stunts with giant props to titillate the punters and the hoi polloi. But character-wise he the right guy at the right time, exuding a Born-in-the-50s, California-style Gary Cooper all-American charm that was the perfect antidote to all the Euro-guys who for decades thought they were so superior to the “Ugly Americans”.

Keshav said:

For sure all those roll-backs would reveal which riders are the most talented and adaptable. I've noticed over the last 10 or so years that, the big discussions on the various boards are mostly dominated by talk about the machines, click bait drama and behind the scenes machinations, and not nearly as much about the riders as in days of olde. None of the current riders seem to capture the hearts of the fans the way Rossi, Hayden or Stoner did. As great as Marquez is I never get the feeling that fans are as invested in him as they were with other riders. With fewer rider aids, with riders relying more purely on skill, Fabio would IMHO - be insanely dominant. It would be the beginning of a whole new era - where people actually like the French.

Click to expand...

Dunno if I have been watching as long as you.
Since the mid 80s here anyway.
Yes the tyres are better now so the lean angles are higher.
Regardless, nobody has ever been able to do what Marquez can with the front of a motorcycle.
The ability to push into a corner that far past the front tyres ability to grip and still come out the other side has been possessed by no other.
His ability to push combined with that self belief and will to win puts him above Fabio still imo.

We will see if he can still do it with the added aero ..... or not. It is going to be harder and the body has been hammered doing so already.
It has been awesome to watch anyway.

No argument from me re: Marquez being uber special. I generally don’t try to do side-by-side comparisons with riders of different generations. As you said, tires, electronics, technology etc. are vastly different than in the ‘70s and ‘80s. A thing that nobody much mentions is that present day medical science is like something out of sci fi book compare to the ‘80s when nobody really worked out with a trainer, and some riders still smoked between practice sessions.

Whether Kenny Roberts or Freddie Spencer would be able to pull off those dramatic saves, is not a thing that keeps me up late at night.
Bottom line, is that Rossi, Lorenzo, Stoner, Fabio and Marquez are all of them, standing on the shoulders of giants.

Yes for sure things change from generation to generation and the qualities necessary to win change as well, rendering inter generational comparisons pointless. As has been pointed out many times.

Looks like MM still has it, whatever “it” is. I admire MM of course but he has never been my favorite rider. Personally I prefer to watch people who go fast and win without a lot of mind games, huge saves and a lot of crashing.

So in my world, Lawson, Stoner, Lorenzo and now Quartararo carry that torch. They also play the mind games but a little more subtly. Fabio needs to up the ante in that department. Mentally, he can stand some improvement. Hopefully that will come.

I know Michael M will be thinking "cod psychology" but what you said about the falls says a lot about MM. A fantastic amount of hubris on his part, acting like he could continue to just sustain injury upon injury. At some level, he just doesn't seem to be in touch with reality. There is a coldness about him that allows him to be ruthless with other riders, that is ultimately, proving to be detrimental to his own wellbeing.

Keshav said:

I know Michael M will be thinking "cod psychology" but what you said about the falls says a lot about MM. A fantastic amount of hubris on his part, acting like he could continue to just sustain injury upon injury. At some level, he just doesn't seem to be in touch with reality. There is a coldness about him that allows him to be ruthless with other riders, that is ultimately, proving to be detrimental to his own wellbeing.

Click to expand...

I don't get into the psychology at all.
Coldness? A shed load warmer than VR.
Doesn't use his fan base negatively and doesn't get into PR crap.
Let's his riding do the talking. I much prefer that to mouthing off as others have done.
He has 8 titles, his strategy, risky as it is, has worked, but yes the body has taken a hammering.
I have just enjoyed watching him perform jaw dropping .... that nobody else can.
Hopefully a few more seasons and some more action but yes he needs to pull it back a bit. No youngster anymore.

In my view what has happened is that we don't have parity, Gigi has managed to make the Ducati into the best bike, but they don't have the best riders, namely Fabio and MM in particular but probably also other non-Ducati riders, and those riders they do have are managed horribly as has pretty much always been the case with Ducati since they have raced in the premier class, and the riders they do have are pretty much set against each other to the detriment of the chances of an individual Ducati rider winning the riders' title. If you let a marque get an advantage which I think Ducati got partly because Gigi is very likely a genius but also because of the concessions they got years ago, then freeze development this is the result. Similar to Mercedes in F1 for years imo not that I follow F1 much any more.

As far as aero goes I am unsure as to what effect it has in regard to motogp bikes, although it really ruined F1 imo after the formula Cosworth days when I was actually fan of that sport, but there seems to be precious little left for the manufacturers to develop which I would imagine must make GP bike racing hard to sell to the Japanese corporate guys.

michaelm said:

In my view what has happened is that we don't have parity, Gigi has managed to make the Ducati into the best bike, but they don't have the best riders, namely Fabio and MM in particular but probably also other non-Ducati riders, and those riders they do have are managed horribly as has pretty much always been the case with Ducati since they have raced in the premier class, and the riders they do have are pretty much set against each other to the detriment of the chances of an individual Ducati rider winning the riders' title. If you let a marque get an advantage which I think Ducati got partly because Gigi is very likely a genius but also because of the concessions they got years ago, then freeze development this is the result. Similar to Mercedes in F1 for years imo not that I follow F1 much any more.

As far as aero goes I am unsure as to what effect it has in regard to motogp bikes, although it really ruined F1 imo after the formula Cosworth days when I was actually fan of that sport, but there seems to be precious little left for the manufacturers to develop which I would imagine must make GP bike racing hard to sell to the Japanese corporate guys.

Click to expand...

Agree. It has to be said tho, that there has been a big shift over the last say, 5 years, with KTM and Aprilia having both dramatically raised the bar in a relatively short period of time. Ducati has been banging away for what seems like forever to get to where they are. Suzuki of course doing what they always do, ie: come to play and leave with their tail between their legs after a few season. Yamaha - seems like every few years they just lose interest and just stop trying. And Honda, has (as I predicted many times) completely lost the thread as a result of letting their engineers lose themselves in an orgy of flashy, masturbatory whiz-bang engineering feats that apparently offer little or no real advantage to the Honda riders. It's like, whatever cool .... we make, we'll let the crazy talented Spanish kid ride around the idiosyncrasies and design deficiencies to make us all look like geniuses. It's like a Shogun warlord who sends his samurai out to battle in the flashiest gusoku shita (shirt/gown) with the Shogun crest, perfect hairdo, with artisinal armor - and a dull crooked sword.

Ha ha! Kesh, you are a poet!

warthog1 said:

Dunno if I have been watching as long as you.
Since the mid 80s here anyway.
Yes the tyres are better now so the lean angles are higher.
Regardless, nobody has ever been able to do what Marquez can with the front of a motorcycle.
The ability to push into a corner that far past the front tyres ability to grip and still come out the other side has been possessed by no other.
His ability to push combined with that self belief and will to win puts him above Fabio still imo.

We will see if he can still do it with the added aero ..... or not. It is going to be harder and the body has been hammered doing so already.
It has been awesome to watch anyway.

Click to expand...

Stoner had the ability, and he would complain quite publicly if the front tire could not keep up with his ability to push it. Marquez is more creative and pragmatic, imo, so he developed ways to ride around the tires by letting the tail hang out or altering setup etc. so he could fight the bike on his knee, or pour on the power early or whatever to improve the handling.

The great catastrophe of course is that we never got to see the two compete against each other in MotoGP. It would have been epic. The exacting old curmudgeon, who wants more corner entry speed and fewer electronics, while lobbying to move the walls onto the racing surface so he can gaze upon the smoldering skeletal remains of his opponents as he rides to victory vs. the tail-happy mercenary who would never send a wall to do a rider’s job. What a spectacle it would have been!

Keshav said:

Suzuki of course doing what they always do, ie: come to play and leave with their tail between their legs after a few season. Yamaha - seems like every few years they just lose interest and just stop trying. And Honda, has (as I predicted many times) completely lost the thread as a result of letting their engineers lose themselves in an orgy of flashy, masturbatory whiz-bang engineering feats that apparently offer little or no real advantage to the Honda riders. It's like, whatever cool .... we make, we'll let the crazy talented Spanish kid ride around the idiosyncrasies and design deficiencies……

Click to expand...

That’s definitely part of it, but I think the Japanese are struggling with the zeitgeist of the regulations and the depressed state of their economy.

In the old days, if the bike needed improvement, the Japanese manufacturers, particularly Honda would just clean-sheet a component. The engine’s center of mass is too high. Okay, let’s start with a clean sheet. Change the V-angle, bore, stroke, rod design, the engine placement and rotation in the chassis, redesign the clutch, transmission and crankcase, change the firing order, valve train, and the cylinder head design, etc.

The factories can’t do that anymore. Everything is frozen, homologated, cost-capped, restricted or whatever, with an emphasis on reliability. However, the manufacturers can exhaust incredible resources for aero and ride height development because that makes sense to Italians, I guess.

How do the Japanese function in this developmental paradigm? I don’t know if they have the ability to fix the problems with their bike using unrelated components. It’s not in their DNA. However, it is in Ducati’s DNA because they start with concepts and performance objectives that represent their brand, and they develop around the associated deficiencies. Ducati starts with a 90-degree desmo engine, producing more power and revs than anyone else, housed in a trellis frame (previously). Once they establish their DNA concept, they figure out how to get the hot mess around a race track.

The current rulebook sort of mimics the way Ducati do things. It probably doesn’t make any sense to the Japanese. Start with a bad idea and then use more bad ideas to fix it?

mylexicon said:

The factories can’t do that anymore. Everything is frozen, homologated, cost-capped, restricted or whatever, with an emphasis on reliability. However, the manufacturers can exhaust incredible resources for aero and ride height development because that makes sense to Italians, I guess.

Click to expand...

I think this is the main thing. It;s like people who argue that F1 is superior to Indycar because it is a spec series, when the irony is that F1 is now a spec series too. ECU's are supplied by McLaren, Wheels are spec, as are many suspension and transmission components and there are only 4 engine suppliers.

The concession system has been a great success, but that has been driven by the fact that as you stated above, almost everything is frozen. Look at 2015 when Honda made the power delivery more aggressive by fitting a lighter flywheel. The issue was then they had control ECU's and they couldn't tame the aggressive power delivery and it hampered them all season. How long would that have taken Honda to fix in an unhomologatedworld? I bet 2-3 races max.

The downside of that is the powerhouses are miles ahead of the rest, like we saw from the beginning of the MotoGP era to probably 2015. Remember 2010-2012 when it was only Repsol Honda riders and Factory Yamaha riders fighting for podiums?

As Lex said, all manufacturers focus on the engine in preseason prior to sealing, and can then work on the chassis as much as they like all season long. It was stated somewhere that when the max engine rules were introduced, it actually cost manufacturers more because they were sending ALL their engines back to Japan/Europe in between races to check their health on the dyno.

Homologations, cost caps etc are all a friend of close racing, but an enemy of innovation. You have to pick your poison. Do you want to see more passing/racing or more innovation?

mylexicon said:

Stoner had the ability, and he would complain quite publicly if the front tire could not keep up with his ability to push it. Marquez is more creative and pragmatic, imo, so he developed ways to ride around the tires by letting the tail hang out or altering setup etc. so he could fight the bike on his knee, or pour on the power early or whatever to improve the handling.

The great catastrophe of course is that we never got to see the two compete against each other in MotoGP. It would have been epic. The exacting old curmudgeon, who wants more corner entry speed and fewer electronics, while lobbying to move the walls onto the racing surface so he can gaze upon the smoldering skeletal remains of his opponents as he rides to victory vs. the tail-happy mercenary who would never send a wall to do a rider’s job. What a spectacle it would have been!

Click to expand...

I am Australian and yes Stoner was awesome.
Despite that, I've seen Marquez repeatedly do stuff Stoner did not with the front end of a motorcycle.
Marquez was too strong and too hungry and would have had the best of Stoner too.
Yes it would have been good to watch at times but the end result is predictable in Marc's favour imo.

warthog1 said:

I am Australian and yes Stoner was awesome.
Despite that, I've seen Marquez repeatedly do stuff Stoner did not with the front end of a motorcycle.
Marquez was too strong and too hungry and would have had the best of Stoner too.
Yes it would have been good to watch at times but the end result is predictable in Marc's favour imo.

Click to expand...

I wonder. So much of what informs our assessment of Stoner is based on his races on the earlier iterations of the Ducati, which as has been noted ad infinitude, did not turn. All the talk about how well MM manages to ride around the problems with the bike, is pretty deja vu, in that, that was exactly what everybody said about Stoner. We all assumed that switching from the Duc to the Honda was the equivalent of putting on magic dancing slippers, but seeing how other Honda riders have in the interim, struggled to be fully competitive, I’m not so sure. The two factors that would be decisive, are 1. Stoner tended to stay on the bike. Far less crashing. Fewer DNFs. And 2. Marquez, has proved to be more physically robust. Given equal machinery at the same age, I think they would have been very evenly matched.

Keshav said:

I wonder. So much of what informs our assessment of Stoner is based on his races on the earlier iterations of the Ducati, which as has been noted ad infinitude, did not turn. All the talk about how well MM manages to ride around the problems with the bike, is pretty deja vu, in that, that was exactly what everybody said about Stoner. We all assumed that switching from the Duc to the Honda was the equivalent of putting on magic dancing slippers, but seeing how other Honda riders have in the interim, struggled to be fully competitive, I’m not so sure. The two factors that would be decisive, are 1. Stoner tended to stay on the bike. Far less crashing. Fewer DNFs. And 2. Marquez, has proved to be more physically robust. Given equal machinery at the same age, I think they would have been very evenly matched.

Click to expand...

Marquez is off the bike way less than anybody else attempting to push the bike so far past the limit of the front tyre.
Nobody else can do that from what I've seen.
Most of what he holds with the front turned in and a huge black line coming off the front is a crash for anybody else.

Perhaps he can't so much anymore with a hammered body and the aero loading the front tyre now has.
It was good to watch anyway.

I see him as mentally stronger than Casey also.
Wore all that garbage from VR and just destroyed him on track.
That was good to watch too.

However that is just my thoughts. I am no expert.
Yes it would have been great to watch them race! 8)

A friend shared this MotoGP video with me yesterday, and it's very applicable to this discussion thread.

This is an excellent tech talk, describing how MotoGP motorcycles have changed over the last few years, which has then changed how the riders are riding their machines too. Rear ride height devices, the change to new Michelin tires, the affects of the aero on front braking, and how all these things work together for the rider. Not very long, under ten minutes. I highly recommend: