race/qualifying tires?

I was thinking of the last quatar practice. Lorenzo was slower than Stoner on race tires, But Lorenzo was faster than Stoner on Quali tires. My question to you guys is who do we know is a faster rider, if the results are changing according to the track their racing in and tire on the bike?

Hayden on quali tires is super fast and will pole in front of Stoner most of the year if the Michelins keep inproving. Then only to loose to Stoner cause the race tires are just not as good as the bridgestones, and vice versa.

I hope you guys understand what im trying to ask here?
Does this mean that a rider who wins a grand pri, won because he had the better tires for the that specific track?

Sorry for my spelling.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (esco @ Mar 6 2008, 09:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I was thinking of the last quatar practice. Lorenzo was slower than Stoner on race tires, But Lorenzo was faster than Stoner on Quali tires. My question to you guys is who do we know is a faster rider, if the results are changing according to the track their racing in and tire on the bike?

Hayden on quali tires is super fast and will pole in front of Stoner most of the year if the Michelins keep inproving. Then only to loose to Stoner cause the race tires are just not as good as the bridgestones, and vice versa.

I hope you guys understand what im trying to ask here?
Does this mean that a rider who wins a grand pri, won because he had the better tires for the that specific track?

Sorry for my spelling.

Well, it's not a simple answere to that question. What about all the others on tires from the same supplier? They surly should be just as fast?

Qualifying is different than racing. It takes less of an effort to stay focused for one lap then to be on or nerar the edge for 25 laps.

I think there are tracks where the tire played an important role last year but at most tracks it looked like it didn't have such an impact, or maybe the difference where masked by better riders on the worst tire? who knows.

michelin makes better Qs than bridgestone. this is not a secret. a good rider can eek about a second or more out of their best time on a Q.

bridgestone (arguably) makes a better race tire. the big difference seems to be instant stickiness (no need to warm up for a lap) and the ability to last race distance.

that's about all you need to know for why a michelin rider with crappier race times will shoot to top of the board during Q.

everything else you brought into the question is irrelevant.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (drumfu @ Mar 6 2008, 06:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>michelin makes better Qs than bridgestone. this is not a secret. a good rider can eek about a second or more out of their best time on a Q.

bridgestone (arguably) makes a better race tire. the big difference seems to be instant stickiness (no need to warm up for a lap) and the ability to last race distance.

that's about all you need to know for why a michelin rider with crappier race times will shoot to top of the board during Q.

everything else you brought into the question is irrelevant.

I think that he was asking how can we determine who the best rider is. If a rider like Hayden can throw down some fast qulaifying laps but can't hold the race pace do we consider him just an average rider who is the best at qualifying? Or is he the best rider that gets shafted witht the race tires?

This question has been beaten to a pulp over the off season. Was it the tires blah blah blah blah. i'm tired of it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Mar 6 2008, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think that he was asking how can we determine who the best rider is. If a rider like Hayden can throw down some fast qulaifying laps but can't hold the race pace do we consider him just an average rider who is the best at qualifying? Or is he the best rider that gets shafted witht the race tires?

This question has been beaten to a pulp over the off season. Was it the tires blah blah blah blah. i'm tired of it.

Thats exactly what i meant to say. When comparing riders i was talking about the top guys on each tire maker. Stoner, Rossi, Pedrosa, Hayden, Melandri.

I was just curious to know if anyone else thought about that.

That's why I think they should ban qualifying tires. Riders should use a tire that will last an entire race for qualifying too. Last years, over and over, the Micelins qualified first only to be beaten buy thestones on race rubber. All that proved, and bridgestone admitted it, that Michelin had a better qualifying tire.

Also, IMHO they should look at say at the top 3 laps of each rider during qualifying rather than just one fast lap.

Or better yet, run two full races like they do in WSBK.. More entertainment for us.. LOL

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (crvlvr @ Mar 7 2008, 10:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That's why I think they should ban qualifying tires. Riders should use a tire that will last an entire race for qualifying too. Last years, over and over, the Micelins qualified first only to be beaten buy thestones on race rubber. All that proved, and bridgestone admitted it, that Michelin had a better qualifying tire.

Also the should look say at the top 3 laps of each rider during qualifying rather than just one fast lap.

Or better yet, run two full races like they do in WSBK.. More entertainment for us.. LOL


Actually, I think this would make the qualifying sessions quite boring. The excitement comes from everyone putting the sticky tyres on at the end of the session and pulling out a fast lap. Sometimes, riders who were slow throughout the session end up surprising everyone.

I wouldn't mind there being two races like WSBK though!

2 races is too damm confusing for the average race viewr. i.e people who just watch it occasionally or only when it comes to thier own home track. which is prob 90% of viewers

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pinky @ Mar 6 2008, 04:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>2 races is too damm confusing for the average race viewr. i.e people who just watch it occasionally or only when it comes to thier own home track. which is prob 90% of viewers

And why not two races? That way teams can make adjustments and come out firing for round two. Damn that would be sweet. Its really not that hard to follow. The average viewer will always be average no matter what the circumstance.

well who "wins" the round?

what if stoner wins round 1, then comes 8th is round 2

rossi crashes in race 1 and 1st in race 2

caparossi comes 2nd in race 1 and 2nd in race 2

overall caparossi gained most points, yet didnt win a race yet he wins the round.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pinky @ Mar 7 2008, 04:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>well who "wins" the round?

what if stoner wins round 1, then comes 8th is round 2

rossi crashes in race 1 and 1st in race 2

caparossi comes 2nd in race 1 and 2nd in race 2

overall caparossi gained most points, yet didnt win a race yet he wins the round.

So what? First of all "the round" is a meaningless consept for the points standings. It's used in WSBK and allthough some sum the numbers for each "round" it's mainly to decribe the two races at the same track little else. The real issue is that each race stand on it's own just like it allways has and the standigs table give you the the result so far in the seson. If you get confused by the "rounds" just ignore them.

As for q tires I would love to see them gone. Just like in 125/250 the qulifying session will be just as exciting as it has been with q-tires, but each rider will have more than two shots at the pole.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Mar 6 2008, 11:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And why not two races? That way teams can make adjustments and come out firing for round two. Damn that would be sweet. Its really not that hard to follow. The average viewer will always be average no matter what the circumstance.

Bigger budgets for the teams and we`re already short on the grid as it is...............nice in an ideal world though.