Qatar round 1 2010. RACE

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Apr 14 2010, 02:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>We are talking about Moto GP,not some club race down at Bubba's RunWhat you Brung ,where Jr is running his tricked out GS 500 against Billy Bobs new R1.Someone tried to give you an out on the goofy 2 second comment 'A bike with an advantage in top speed can often beat a bike capable of 2 seconds a lap better time with equal rider material' You should have taken it.Instead you try to justify said goofy comment by saying ' You can easily be slowed down m ore than two seconds a lap by a bad rider with a fast bike.Again, we are talking Moto GP.
If we are talking motoGP exclusivly forget what I said about 2 seconds. In this setting that's plain wrong, agreed. We revert back to your claim that power is low down on the list, right? That still doesn't add up. I just tried to exemplify how wrong that can be but forget that, we stay with motoGP and it's still plain wrong. Light nimble twins lost against heavy, clumsy, powerful V4's.
With equal lap times but different power delivery the one with the best top speed is usually the most desirable, thats the general rule. Awful brakes or terrible drive out of the turns might kill the advantage but as a rule of thumb it will give the faster one the advantage.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 14 2010, 08:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If we are talking motoGP exclusivly forget what I said about 2 seconds. In this setting that's plain wrong, agreed. We revert back to your claim that power is low down on the list, right? That still doesn't add up. I just tried to exemplify how wrong that can be but forget that, we stay with motoGP and it's still plain wrong. Light nimble twins lost against heavy, clumsy, powerful V4's.
With equal lap times but different power delivery the one with the best top speed is usually the most desirable, thats the general rule.Awful brakes or terrible drive out of the turns might kill the advantage but as a rule of thumb it will give the faster one the advantage.
Commence backpedaling. I see you've learned to put some qualifiers in your once iron clad statements: "usually/general rule/rule of thumb"

Babs, let me remind you the iron clad statement you said:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 12 2010, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Sorry Povol. I totally disagree. Power (usable) and top speed (usually generated from usable power) <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%is ALWAYS THE single most important factor in a RACE, and is therefore always very high on the list.

Yup, you said "ALWAYS THE single most important factor in a RACE..."

Of course we were talking MotoGP, obvious. You're Twins vs V4 is your attempt to muck the debate, its not working. Stick to what we all saw at Qatar 10--the "slowest" bike won. So much for your theory.

Would you like to continue your backpedaling or simply concede that you are wrong?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Apr 14 2010, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I'm impressed by Dovi as in his days on the 250s he always seemed like an "also-ran" and he's turning out be a real
contender.

Did you actually watch Dovi in 250? He was rookie of the year followed by multiple race winner and runner up twice in a row, only beaten by Lorenzo who we know is special.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 14 2010, 08:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Did you actually watch Dovi in 250? He was rookie of the year followed by multiple race winner and runner up twice in a row, only beaten by Lorenzo who we know is special.
Not to mention he was on a well documented underdeveloped bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 14 2010, 11:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If we are talking motoGP exclusivly forget what I said about 2 seconds. In this setting that's plain wrong, agreed. We revert back to your claim that power is low down on the list, right? That still doesn't add up. I just tried to exemplify how wrong that can be but forget that, we stay with motoGP and it's still plain wrong. Light nimble twins lost against heavy, clumsy, powerful V4's.
With equal lap times but different power delivery the one with the best top speed is usually the most desirable, thats the general rule. Awful brakes or terrible drive out of the turns might kill the advantage but as a rule of thumb it will give the faster one the advantage.
No kidding, if you have the best handling bike AND superior top speed, or even equal handling to the competition, that pretty much makes you unbeatable. Thats not what is happening here though. You have a bike that has superior handling vs a bike that has superior top speed. The bike with superior handling and good usable power won out and will win out a huge majority of the time. The RC211v was a perfect example. It had great power where it needed it, but was not the fastest bike,the Ducati was, it just didnt handle like the Honda.Hell , even Nicky won on it

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Apr 14 2010, 05:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It had great power where it needed it, but was not the fastest bike,the Ducati was, it just didnt handle like the Honda.Hell , even Nicky won on it

Thats a good point, especially as Nicky's bike was a Yamaha clone with some of the standard RCV's speed sacrificed for superior corner entry.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 14 2010, 05:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Commence backpedaling. I see you've learned to put some qualifiers in your once iron clad statements: "usually/general rule/rule of thumb"

Babs, let me remind you the iron clad statement you said:


Yup, you said "ALWAYS THE single most important factor in a RACE..."

Of course we were talking MotoGP, obvious. You're Twins vs V4 is your attempt to muck the debate, its not working. Stick to what we all saw at Qatar 10--the "slowest" bike won. So much for your theory.

Would you like to continue your backpedaling or simply concede that you are wrong?

Sure J, if you want to be a pedantic ... go ahead, I counterd Povols statement and I stand by that. I just did a futile attempt with my last post to get the discussion on topic again by soften the expression. 2sec, .2sec 5 sec is NOT the issue and Power IS always the no one factor. Of course it's not the current focus if you already have "enough" but it always there. I know this could get a bit complex for you but being the most important factor does NOT rule out the possibility of a bike so bad that no power can save it. Aprilia Cube has been mentioned and would be a good example.
And it's nice with all these examples of better riders outperform others but what does that has to do with the bike? Prove that it is possible to win on a bike with out being on top in the speed trap? Well I certainly don't disagree.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Apr 14 2010, 06:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No kidding, if you have the best handling bike AND superior top speed, or even equal handling to the competition, that pretty much makes you unbeatable. Thats not what is happening here though. You have a bike that has superior handling vs a bike that has superior top speed. The bike with superior handling and good usable power won out and will win out a huge majority of the time. The RC211v was a perfect example. It had great power where it needed it, but was not the fastest bike,the Ducati was, it just didn't handle like the Honda.Hell , even Nicky won on it

Why are you distorting what I write. This is just more ..........
I talked about two bikes, doing the same lap time. If one of those at the same time are substantially faster on the straight the other must be better handling, right?

Is there ANYTHING that still is unclear?
I don't mind your comment on the 2 vs 4 cyl 2-strokers.

What Babel is saying is basically correct, imo, he's just not saying exactly what he means.

In MotoGP, usable power is more than what Yamaha have on tap according to the top speed figures at Qatar. Yes, the Yamaha is very strong off of the bottom, but I don't think that has much to do with the nature of the tuning they have chosen. The Yam is strong off the bottom b/c it clearly lacks revs on top which means they can run more aggressive fuel mapping off of the bottom.

I think Babel's argument is basically correct. Being fast out of slow corners is a wonderful attribute, but it isn't terribly useful if you're getting blocked by the Honda or the Ducati in front of you. Yamaha don't have to worry about getting blocked simply b/c Yamaha have most of the best riders in the paddock. It's not easy to get in front of Rossi or Lorenzo no matter how much power you have.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 13 2010, 03:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Michelin
Melandri was one of the first to switch to Bridgestones

This discussion reminds me of certain debates, whether it is better to have it very thick or very long
Problem was solved centuries ago with that famous proverb from the middle ages, saying that neither very thick nor very long really matters, what matters is to have it hard.

Which means, for us, on any track, achieving a very competitive lap time. That your fast lap is obtained by a formidable top speed down the straights, or exceptional corner handling, or a balance of the two, well...












Hard that keeps, of course

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 14 2010, 04:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Did you actually watch Dovi in 250? He was rookie of the year followed by multiple race winner and runner up twice in a row, only beaten by Lorenzo who we know is special.
Agree, it was a tall order holding off the dominance of the faster disc valve apriia's on a bike that purportedly hadn't seen so much in the way of development as a rear hugger since Kato rode it.

Rog mentioned that watching Sunday's race Dovi seemed weak on the brakes. To me that was always his main strength - he was a masterful late braker, and I recall him out braking Jorge on countless occasions. I'm sorry to say it appears Rog may well be right and the tables have turned.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Apr 14 2010, 10:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>This discussion reminds me of certain debates, whether it is better to have it very thick or very long
Problem was solved centuries ago with that famous proverb from the middle ages, saying that neither very thick nor very long really matters, what matters is to have it hard.

Which means, for us, on any track, achieving a very competitive lap time. That your fast lap is obtained by a formidable top speed down the straights, or exceptional corner handling, or a balance of the two, well...












Hard that keeps, of course
Come out of the closet already.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 14 2010, 01:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Why are you distorting what I write. This is just more ..........
I talked about two bikes, doing the same lap time. If one of those at the same time are substantially faster on the straight the other must be better handling, right?

Is there ANYTHING that still is unclear?
I don't mind your comment on the 2 vs 4 cyl 2-strokers.
Theoretically, they tie if they are running the same lap times. When was the last time you saw 2 bikes run exact lap times, lap after lap, . Its not going to happen for numerous different reasons,with the main one being the bike that is better handling is going to be easier on the tires and is going to pull away, like Rossi and Lorenzo both did the other night when they set their fastest lap times of the race with 2-3 laps remaining.The superior handling bike saved tires and pulled the faster bikes by 3 to 4 tenths a lap, regardless of their top speed.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Apr 14 2010, 10:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Melandri was one of the first to switch to Bridgestones

I think you know my theories about what happened to the 2007 Bridgestone tire.

Basically, Melandri cannot ride any bike that is designed to work with the 2008 Bridgestone b/c the rearward weight bias is very high. In 2008, the Ducati was designed to work with the new tire. Melandri couldn't ride it. The 2010 Honda is designed to work with the 2008 Bridgestone and Melandri is at the back again. The 2009 Hayate was clearly not designed with a massive rearward weight bias b/c Melandri could ride it.

Other riders also struggle with this problem. Hayden cannot ride bikes with a rearward weight bias. Ducati eventually built him a Honda clone in 2009 so he wouldn't backmark and proliferate the myth that the bike is unrideable. Nicky's 2009 Ducati doesn't get the most out of the tires.

Pedrosa can't ride the 2008 spec Bridgestone either. The 2009 Honda was designed to work with Michelins b/c it was basically a minor tweak of the 2008 chassis, but Pedrosa's diminutive size probably allowed him to run at the front with B-stones. The 2010 Honda is built like the Ducati. Pedrosa cannot ride it.

Toseland also couldn't ride the 2008 Bridgestone.

You've got to wonder why B-stone would change the tires after Casey mopped the floor with the competition in 2007.

Gotta love your theories. They are sometimes so far-fetched, you just might get something right every now and then.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 14 2010, 08:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Come out of the closet already.

Noblesse oblige

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wander @ Apr 14 2010, 03:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Gotta love your theories. They are sometimes so far-fetched, you just might get something right every now and then.
Or as we say here in the south , if you throw enough .... against the wall , some of it will stick.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 14 2010, 11:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You've got to wonder why B-stone would change the tires after Casey mopped the floor with the competition in 2007.
No need to wonder. Its not that big of a secret. Its just that nobody is willing to talk about it. Its like a family secret, everybody is willing to stay silent because it will make everybody look bad. If the truth was to come out, it would be denied. If anybody doesn't believe for one minute that the current Bstone is designed for and around Rossi's need, they are completely ignorant or utterly in denial. Its just another form of the 'Saturday night special' except worse for the rivals. Spec, yeah, its a Rossi-spec tire. Dorna eliminated the tire war, in that they also eliminated the possibility of losing control over who gets tires developed to rival the golden goose. Dorna used the threat of being banished from the series all together to get what they wanted out of Bstone. Who here who blamed the Michelins for Rossi's loss of the title would have elected him to stay with them, be patient, and develop a superior tire? Well that's what Ducati did when they went with Bstone. Once they had developed a superior tire with the maker, they were forced to hand it over to the golden child. Even worse, then the tire rival was denied access to work with Ducati to develop again a superior Michelin. Dorna isn't as dumb as we think. Period.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Apr 14 2010, 07:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Or as we say here in the south , if you throw enough .... against the wall , some of it will stick.

Precicely!

Really, it kinda reminds me about that .... with prophecies of Nostradamus. You can interpret any .... the way you want if you just look at it in a specific way... The senseless gibberish written by a crazy old man become correct prophecies of future catastrophes.. Same way you can find things that happened in Moto GP and claim that this must have caused that which must have resulted in this and blah blah blah.


Even I could come up with some "kind of convincing" conclusions about the current form of some riders by just connecting a couple of things to each other (which may, or more propably, may not really be connected).

For example, Pedrosa is going slow and Dovizioso is now going fast. This "must" mean that Honda has given up on Pedrosa and have built a bike that is perfect for Dovi.

or

Stoner crashes at Qatar. Dorna must have been unhappy about him winning at Qatar all the time and given him bad tyres.

or

Aoyama is going faster than Simoncelli. This must mean that the Japanese manufacturer is giving him secret extra support to have a Japanese finally do well on a Honda again.

or

Melandri is going slow. This must mean that he's distracted by the change of Pramac Ducati team's colours, soup-green is likely to make his eyes hurt too much to ride fast.

etc. etc.

You know I'm right!