Repsol Fires Warning Shot At MSMA

https://www.boxrepsol.com/en/motogp-en/are-technological-advances-affecting-the-spectacle-in-motogp/

This is pretty juicy. Repsol supports the control tire regulations and the unified ECU, while expressly condemning aerodynamic appendages and ride height devices, citing rider health and safety. Repsol is a biased source of editorial commentary, particularly since their main contender is against many of the newer technologies, and he is out for the 2022 season with an arm injury. However, Repsol's bias is immaterial because their perceptions, correct or incorrect, determine whether they will continue spending in MotoGP. They have provided a list of grievances against the MSMA, and against Dorna for the expanded calendar.

This is the juiciest bit, and a red pill for some fans:

That is what Michelin did for several seasons in the European races on certain occasions, working against the clock in its Clermont-Ferrand factory (France) to send out a new batch of special race tires for Valentino Rossi on Saturday night in a fast road service.

Click to expand...

Rossi is obviously one of the greats, but his talents were augmented by preferential treatment from Michelin, and when it disappeared, he reacted with incredible bile, publicly condemning Michelin for choosing Honda's development path in 2007 when overnight specials were outlawed. It doesn't cast a pall over Rossi's incredible talents, but these carefully orchestrated race wins by an ebullient maestro were machinations of Michelins marketing department. On equal equipment, Rossi's championships would have looked like 2008 and beyond--gritty battles with a sprinkle of extra-legal chicanery.

Anyway, back on topic. One of the sports biggest sponsors is questioning their ROI.

"However, no consideration has been given to the rear axle, whose use of a manual device to reduce the height of the bike is also usual. MotoGP Technical Director, Corrado Cecchinelli, will be responsible for determining what is considered as a front ride height device."

Am I reading this wrong or does it appear there may be a way to still have a front ride height device?

I for one is against the aero & ride height crap. So much so I'm think about canceling my motogp subscription. The races have become boring to watch. I have no problem with Repsol sounding the alarm.

I knew it, when the journos started sounding the alarm after years of being delighted about "the closest and most exciting years of MotoGP", it all sounded fishy, almost as if they were fed a narrative from sources inside the paddock. Unlike this forum, which has remained consistent in protests against aero devices for years, the media didn't find fault with winglets until Jerez this year. Between this and the whistleblower report about tire pressures, it's starting to look like some factories are starting to put on the pressure against the Italian manufacturers. It's no coincidence that Honda and KTM (also rumored to be against aero) are looking like the worst bikes in the paddock. Regardless of actual opinion on aero, I bet none of these calls to action would've happened if Honda/KTM were performing better.

PRS717 said:

"However, no consideration has been given to the rear axle, whose use of a manual device to reduce the height of the bike is also usual. MotoGP Technical Director, Corrado Cecchinelli, will be responsible for determining what is considered as a front ride height device."

Am I reading this wrong or does it appear there may be a way to still have a front ride height device?

Click to expand...

Hard to say. If Cecchinelli is writing the definition in a rulebook somewhere, and he gets it wrong, yeah they could come back. This could also mean he gets to make a judgment on each team's suspension setup.

Both are perilous, but the latter is a bit unprofessional and authoritarian for my taste. If it gets the job done, I might look the other way, but it would set a terrible precedent.

MichaelBolton said:

I knew it, when the journos started sounding the alarm after years of being delighted about "the closest and most exciting years of MotoGP", it all sounded fishy, almost as if they were fed a narrative from sources inside the paddock. Unlike this forum, which has remained consistent in protests against aero devices for years, the media didn't find fault with winglets until Jerez this year. Between this and the whistleblower report about tire pressures, it's starting to look like some factories are starting to put on the pressure against the Italian manufacturers. It's no coincidence that Honda and KTM (also rumored to be against aero) are looking like the worst bikes in the paddock. Regardless of actual opinion on aero, I bet none of these calls to action would've happened if Honda/KTM were performing better.

Click to expand...

Definitely coordinated. Difficult to determine the degree of centralization, and the number of independent actors following a trend. I suspect the journalists were seeding a narrative for Dorna. Repsol and HRC are probably acting in their own interest.

It's a sad situation. As you say, most stalwart fans have been against aero and active suspension because (imo) most fans saw the damage they caused in Formula 1. I feel badly for the talented engineers, who merely want to exercise their brains, but discretion is the better part of valor. They must learn to wield the power they possess, and stop drifting from series to series until they're eventually banned for being parasites.

MotoGP is a sport. The riders are the technology. The MSMA are there to make humans faster. The rider complains about too much power at this throttle percentage, too little power in that gear, too much chassis flex at this circuit, improper weight balance with that set of tire compounds, etc. The MSMA are supposed to prototype a million little parts to fix all of those complaints so we can discover the threshold of human performance. Instead, the MSMA realizes that riders can only transfer so much weight fore and aft, and they can only create so much drag in the braking zones so let's fix all of humanity's limitations. That's the beginning of the end, and it leads to spec everything because the rider is not the limiting factor.

The other issue is that commercial rights companies like Dorna want to play both sides of the fence. They leave the backdoor open for the technocrats, hoping they will cover the sport in technological glory, inevitably, the technocrats merely succeed in allowing their employers to exert control over the competition. The riders become window-mannequins, and the commercial revenues falter. Then Dorna acts shocked and tries to create public backlash. They are always courting and divorcing various factions, and it's leading to an unstable, tragic sport.

You guys remember this? https://www.cycleworld.com/sport-rider/motogp-nakamoto-reveals-hidden-downside-winglets/

Honda does know how to do aero, seems they are simply not interested in it on motorcycles. Will they do what they did back in WSBK with the RC51 then middle finger the series?

mylexicon said:

On equal equipment, Rossi's championships would have looked like 2008 and beyond--gritty battles with a sprinkle of extra-legal chicanery.

Click to expand...

Well said. I think I might put that on a T-shirt.

I remember a former poster here always reacting to the line from MotoGP commentary that Rossi would 'find something' on Sundays.

Yeah, that 'Something' was SNS!

Ezpeleta: We're Pushing To Talk To The Teams About Aero

Ezpeleta has made a few rare public comments at the Marca Sport Weekend roundtable. Dorna is pushing to conference with the teams regarding aero, but concedes that changes will be difficult because the rules cannot change until 2027, unless all parties agree to safety modifications.

He also finally says the quiet part out loud--that Dorna is looking to reduce performance in 2027. I suspect banning aero and ride height on safety grounds will be difficult to achieve because the aero is holding back top speeds.

It's a mess, but maybe they will fix it......5 years from now. Anyway, I guess that gives us a few years to speculate about how Dorna and the MSMA plan to rearrange the series.

They slow GP bikes they're going to have to slow down WSBK bikes too, wouldn't they be running the same lap times at some tracks.

Paul55 said:

They slow GP bikes they're going to have to slow down WSBK bikes too, wouldn't they be running the same lap times at some tracks.

Click to expand...

Yes, and I think that's what they are planning to do, but we'll have to see.

For all intents and purposes, MotoGP and WSBK are the same thing. Sure, there are significant conceptual differences to the hardcore fans and engineers, but for commercial purposes, the series are indistinguishable. For MotoGP and WSBK to survive as racing concepts, this cannot continue.

If you try to solve the rubiks cube of motorcycle racing, the easiest solution is for 1000cc superbikes to become MotoGP. Not sure how it happens. Maybe the 1000cc production bikes simply stop racing in WSBK. Maybe the 1000s get special race-only homolgation bikes to compete in a new GP formula in 2027. We'll find out more in the next 2-3 years.

The first clues about realignment will be the successors to the 600cc Supersport bikes.

mylexicon said:

https://www.boxrepsol.com/en/motogp-en/are-technological-advances-affecting-the-spectacle-in-motogp/

This is pretty juicy. Repsol supports the control tire regulations and the unified ECU, while expressly condemning aerodynamic appendages and ride height devices, citing rider health and safety. Repsol is a biased source of editorial commentary, particularly since their main contender is against many of the newer technologies, and he is out for the 2022 season with an arm injury. However, Repsol's bias is immaterial because their perceptions, correct or incorrect, determine whether they will continue spending in MotoGP. They have provided a list of grievances against the MSMA, and against Dorna for the expanded calendar.

This is the juiciest bit, and a red pill for some fans:


Rossi is obviously one of the greats, but his talents were augmented by preferential treatment from Michelin, and when it disappeared, he reacted with incredible bile, publicly condemning Michelin for choosing Honda's development path in 2007 when overnight specials were outlawed. It doesn't cast a pall over Rossi's incredible talents, but these carefully orchestrated race wins by an ebullient maestro were machinations of Michelins marketing department. On equal equipment, Rossi's championships would have looked like 2008 and beyond--gritty battles with a sprinkle of extra-legal chicanery.

Anyway, back on topic. One of the sports biggest sponsors is questioning their ROI.

Click to expand...

A little disingenuous of Repsol to suggest it was only Rossi to benefit from SNS tyres, though their efficacy cannot be underestimated.

Estoril 2006, Elias was handed a Pedrosa cast off SNS on Sunday morning which he used to great effect.

Tamada won in Motegi using the Bridgestone equivalent, though theirs were only available during the fly away races which is obviously a disadvantage.

ratdeal said:

A little disingenuous of Repsol to suggest it was only Rossi to benefit from SNS tyres, though their efficacy cannot be underestimated.

Estoril 2006, Elias was handed a Pedrosa cast off SNS on Sunday morning which he used to great effect.

Tamada won in Motegi using the Bridgestone equivalent, though theirs were only available during the fly away races which is obviously a disadvantage.

Click to expand...

It's a self-serving cheap shot, but I believe it's also a vital clue that reveals the hidden inner workings of the sport.

You have to transport yourself back to 2002-2003. Besides winning the constructors championship in 2000 by 7 points, Yamaha had accomplished virtually nothing in the premier class since Rainey, and for the vaunted 4-stroke reboot of grand prix racing, they showed up with a 942cc carbureted inline-4 to compete against Honda's RC211V. Obviously, the situation was terrible for MotoGP as an entertainment product, since Yamaha vs. Honda had been the show for at least 25 years.

So action item #1 for the GPC is to give Honda a challenge. I've suspected for a long time that the challenge was for Burgess, HRC's most successful crew chief, and Rossi, HRC's most successful rider, to move over to Yamaha. Despite press reports that the Rossi/HRC split was acrimonious, I believe HRC let him go. I believe that Michelin agreed to support Rossi and Burgess by producing tires to their specification, particularly overnight specials just for Vale.

The reason this nugget of information matters so much is because Rossi and Burgess eventually left Yamaha for Ducati. Prior to their move, Ducati had agreed to give up its carbon-fiber monocoque for an aluminum twin spar. Who benefitted most from that decision to reduce technological innovation? Yamaha. Unlike Honda and Ducati, Yamaha do not have easy access to facilities and technical partners in Europe to prototype carbon-fiber components. The move by Rossi Burgess looked like another orchestrated attempt to improve the competitiveness of MotoGP heading into the 1000cc formula, and to compensate Ducati for ditching some technical pet projects (poor Preziosi).

As we all know, the Ducati project was a failure for Jerry Burgess and Rossi, but why? The project was similar to their undertaking at Yamaha so why did it turn out so poorly? Was it the lack of SNS? If so, how much of Rossi's legend is actually attributable to Michelin?

Besides the tax problems Rossi was reported to have at the outset of the 800cc formula, perhaps the SNS allegations reveal why Rossi was so desperate to win on Bridgestone tires. If he never won a title on Bridgestones. Perhaps Rossi's history of preferential treatment from Michelin explains why Rossi believed he could simply demand to have Bridgestone tires, and the GPC would agree.

A lot to contemplate.

Wow, that’s a lot more gamesmanship than certainly I have ever thought went on. But I am nowhere near the sport’s inner workings, just a weekend connaisseur of what I can see with the flattened out lenses on TV.

For both Marquez and Quartararo to say that they can’t overtake due to aero is a formidable indictment of the status quo.

I wonder where we go from here.

MotoGP Popularity Declines Sharply, While F1 Surges

Between April and May alone, MotoGP.com lost almost a fifth, 23.44%, while Formula1.com grew by more than 18%. Other signs of interest are also revealed: those who visit the official F1 website spend, on average, more time on the website and see more pages. In the case of MotoGP.com, from April to May there were two million less visits.

Click to expand...

Looks like we're going nowhere good. Without Vale or Marquez the MotoGP ship is sinking fast.

Regarding my theories, take them with a grain of salt. I'm confident in the big picture, regarding the sport's management and general give-and-take of backroom deals, but some of the puzzle pieces could be a little off.

mylexicon said:

MotoGP Popularity Declines Sharply, While F1 Surges



Looks like we're going nowhere good. Without Vale or Marquez the MotoGP ship is sinking fast.

Regarding my theories, take them with a grain of salt. I'm confident in the big picture, regarding the sport's management and general give-and-take of backroom deals, but some of the puzzle pieces could be a little off.

Click to expand...

There will be more Vale’s and Marquez’s. They are already here.

The marketing is the question.

The MotoGP web site is one of the worst web sites on the internet. It is difficult to use and the content is terrible. There are no interviews with any real insight into any situation. The announcers for the races are terrible.

I get more info here or on Crash than I do from the official website. And I’m a paying subscriber! Every year IvthreTen to cancel, then get sucked back in ´cause I want to see how Fabs and Pecco are doing……

There is nothing good about the presentation of MotoGP. I keep saying it, but the entire organization needs an overhaul. It starts with getting rid of that old guy. They need a young, modern, tech literate and savvy CEO to lead them out of this morass.

Bern1 said:

There will be more Vale’s and Marquez’s. They are already here.

The marketing is the question.

The MotoGP web site is one of the worst web sites on the internet. It is difficult to use and the content is terrible. There are no interviews with any real insight into any situation. The announcers for the races are terrible.

I get more info here or on Crash than I do from the official website. And I’m a paying subscriber! Every year IvthreTen to cancel, then get sucked back in ´cause I want to see how Fabs and Pecco are doing……

There is nothing good about the presentation of MotoGP. I keep saying it, but the entire organization needs an overhaul. It starts with getting rid of that old guy. They need a young, modern, tech literate and savvy CEO to lead them out of this morass.

Click to expand...

The way I see it: The website has been difficult all along while the numbers of viewers and interests were high. While a good website would be nice, it ultimately and largely depends on good racing.

At the moment, the racing is quite good but only the hard-core followers will appreciate. We need to see a distinct pattern of the pecking order. For the last 3-4 yrs this has not been very clear because of the up and down performances across the grid. When teams fall off their performance perch, it has been like falling off a precipice. Look at Morbidelli's performance this year compared to last year. Look at Mir's performances and he was a recent champion. Peco was absolutely on it towards the end of last season. Now, we don't really know what's happening with him... as soon as there's hope, he's nowhere again. This isn't at all the usual order of things. There are no wheel to wheel rivalries playing out as in the past because of the inconsistent performances. If you ask me, it's this inconsistency that is hurting the sport in attracting the casual viewers who do not know all the riders, their histories etc.

mylexicon said:

As we all know, the Ducati project was a failure for Jerry Burgess and Rossi, but why? The project was similar to their undertaking at Yamaha so why did it turn out so poorly? Was it the lack of SNS? If so, how much of Rossi's legend is actually attributable to Michelin?

Click to expand...

For Rossi, yes. Remember that the original GP11 was a trellis frame (I believe they ditched the carbon frame concept after the GP9) and based on the GP10 that Stoner used effectively to win 3 of the final 6 races. Now, we know Stoner was an enigma but Ducati needed bespoke tyres at that time. Recall when Rossi got Bridgestones and they ultimately went to a control tyre, Ducati tried to move to Michelin.

The control tyre handicapped Ducati for nearly a decade imo.

mylexicon said:

MotoGP Popularity Declines Sharply, While F1 Surges

Looks like we're going nowhere good. Without Vale or Marquez the MotoGP ship is sinking fast.

Regarding my theories, take them with a grain of salt. I'm confident in the big picture, regarding the sport's management and general give-and-take of backroom deals, but some of the puzzle pieces could be a little off.

Click to expand...

How much of that is due to Rossi retiring though? F1's surge in popularity is due to a large number of casual fans, mostly in the USA. I agree casual fans are better than no fans, but time will tell whether they stick around.

misfit said:

This isn't at all the usual order of things. There are no wheel to wheel rivalries playing out as in the past because of the inconsistent performances. If you ask me, it's this inconsistency that is hurting the sport in attracting the casual viewers who do not know all the riders, their histories etc.

Click to expand...

That's actually a very good point. Traditionally, sports soar in popularity when there is an intense rivalry (i.e. drama). Look in the late 80's, Prost & Senna were on the lips of even the most casual F1 fan. Same with Rossi and Lorenzo & Marquez in 2015. Liberty media had a wet dream last year with the drama in F1.

Had he not been injured, Marc would have breezed to the 2020 and 2021 titles purely on the fact that he has (had?) metronomical consistency. There are no two hard rivals at present. The unpredictability is good for hardened race fans but not others.

#22 said:

For Rossi, yes. Remember that the original GP11 was a trellis frame (I believe they ditched the carbon frame concept after the GP9) and based on the GP10 that Stoner used effectively to win 3 of the final 6 races. Now, we know Stoner was an enigma but Ducati needed bespoke tyres at that time. Recall when Rossi got Bridgestones and they ultimately went to a control tyre, Ducati tried to move to Michelin.

The control tyre handicapped Ducati for nearly a decade imo.

Click to expand...

I don't recall the changes Ducati made in 2011 prior to introducing the aluminum frame in late season. However, I'm relatively certain the GP10 was a carbon frame because I remember Casey's gamesmanship after Rossi knocked him off at Jerez. Casey claimed the carbon fiber frame is not Ducati's problem, and he followed that claim with one of his more famous remarks, claiming that if he had remained with Ducati, the revised carbon fiber GP10 was good enough that he could have won every race in 2011.

Obviously, Casey was giving Rossi the wind up, but he was using the carbon frame as his weapon of choice. If Ducati had already abandoned the carbon frame prior to Casey's departure, it wouldn't have been an effective way to taunt Valentino.