Rider X speaks out about the ills in Motogp

My preference is for traction control, I love watching the bike spit and hiss as it powers out of corners. It is also the pinnacle of motorbike racing and everything should be the best. 800s are far more exciting than the 990s and given time should provide better racing. The other argument that TC reduces the importance of rider ability, if true, would result in more Ducati’s on the podium. It seems that the interest here is in slowing the Ducati rather than the passion of the sport itself.
Tom – your posts made complete sense to me…not difficult really

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SleepyCat @ Jul 16 2008, 10:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>My preference is for traction control, I love watching the bike spit and hiss as it powers out of corners. It is also the pinnacle of motorbike racing and everything should be the best. 800s are far more exciting than the 990s and given time should provide better racing. The other argument that TC reduces the importance of rider ability, if true, would result in more Ducati’s on the podium. It seems that the interest here is in slowing the Ducati rather than the passion of the sport itself.
Tom – your posts made complete sense to me…not difficult really
You wouldn't by sheer chance be a Ducati fan would ya? nah.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Doc 79 @ Jul 17 2008, 03:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You wouldn't by sheer chance be a Ducati fan would ya? nah.
I think we agree that the continuing development of technology in the sport presents problems.

As for the ducati/yamaha thing, the substance of your argument seems to be that since no-one can possibly out-ride valentino, then if he is being beaten it can only be explained by a technical advantage. I actually wouldn't call this an entirely unreasonable position, but it does require an element of faith rather than strict logic.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SleepyCat @ Jul 17 2008, 03:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>My preference is for traction control, I love watching the bike spit and hiss as it powers out of corners. It is also the pinnacle of motorbike racing and everything should be the best. 800s are far more exciting than the 990s and given time should provide better racing. The other argument that TC reduces the importance of rider ability, if true, would result in more Ducati's on the podium. It seems that the interest here is in slowing the Ducati rather than the passion of the sport itself.
Tom – your posts made complete sense to me…not difficult really

One mistake from the guy on the laptop and you'll be lucky to make the top 10.... if you look at the championship theres just one rider from the best 3 factories at the top and they have the best people in their team.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jul 16 2008, 11:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think we agree that the continuing development of technology in the sport presents problems.

As for the ducati/yamaha thing, the substance of your argument seems to be that since no-one can possibly out-ride valentino, then if he is being beaten it can only be explained by a technical advantage. I actually wouldn't call this an entirely unreasonable position, but it does require an element of faith rather than strict logic.
ah .... that dude...you know damn well that's not my contention.....shut yer yap and go bopper hunting somwhere else.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Doc 79 @ Jul 17 2008, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You wouldn't by sheer chance be a Ducati fan would ya? nah.

No way, watching a Ducati win is like watching a Ferrari win...I have always been a fan of the Yamaha, though I am guessing if Rossi was on a Ducati you might have a different view.

The Ducati wont always be winning just not sure if that will happen while Stoner is piloting. I hope he goes to Yamaha after next year with his 3 world championships....much like Rossi really

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SleepyCat @ Jul 16 2008, 10:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No way, watching a Ducati win is like watching a Ferrari win...I have always been a fan of the Yamaha, though I am guessing if Rossi was on a Ducati you might have a different view.

The Ducati wont always be winning just not sure if that will happen while Stoner is piloting. I hope he goes to Yamaha after next year with his 3 world championships....much like Rossi really
No, not at all.....I'm just sick of seeing boring racing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Doc 79 @ Jul 17 2008, 01:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, not at all.....I'm just sick of seeing boring racing.

Me too, though I felt the 990's were too much like WSB and lacked the enigma that is now Motogp. God forbid someone from WSB could win a race in Motogp as Baylis did at the end of 2006

Lets hope the other manufacturers/riders can soon catch up to the top 4.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Doc 79 @ Jul 17 2008, 04:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>ah .... that dude...you know damn well that's not my contention.....shut yer yap and go bopper hunting somwhere else.
I will apologise since I repeatedly say we should stop the rossi/stoner thing, and you make very reasonable points on the technical issues about which you are obviously more knowledgeable than I am. I was being doubly stupid since you do credit stoner.

I was only half being insulting; I actually don't think the argument that it requires a technical advantage to beat valentino is all that easily dismissed. The issue I see is whether he is prepared to push as hard in this current formula given all he has achieved and an apparent probably reasonable objection to trusting electronics too much. If he did switch to wsbk where there does seem to be more rider input at present even if the riders may not be as good it would just about be the end for motogp.

It is easy to give way to a stray impulse if you post on here too much; you do occasionally make provocative statements yourself .

Anyone who thinks the 800s are cool or fun to watch compared to the 990s has no business watching motorcycle racing. Please do us all a favour - make your self a cup of tea and settle down for an exciting night of listening to talk back radio in your nana slippers. This is as much excitment as you can handle, anything more will be too much for you.

Mean while, I think most people want to see more hard racing. And racing IS dangerous, the riders know that. They are the best riders in the world, they don't need electronics to save them.

Personally, I never want traction control on my bike. It will not save lives, people will still crash but think that thier bike will save them if they make a mistake. Who highsides on the road anyway?


Tom and Barry - I think I heard the kettle boil...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#36 Fan @ Jul 17 2008, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Anyone who thinks the 800s are cool or fun to watch compared to the 990s has no business watching motorcycle racing. Please do us all a favour - make your self a cup of tea and settle down for an exciting night of listening to talk back radio in your nana slippers. This is as much excitment as you can handle, anything more will be too much for you.

Mean while, I think most people want to see more hard racing. And racing IS dangerous, the riders know that. They are the best riders in the world, they don't need electronics to save them.

Personally, I never want traction control on my bike. It will not save lives, people will still crash but think that thier bike will save them if they make a mistake. Who highsides on the road anyway?


Tom and Barry - I think I heard the kettle boil...

for me I don't think the 990's were boring, they just reminded me of WSB. The 800's stand on their own like the 500's did. Motogp should always be about development not about control.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jul 17 2008, 02:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I will apologise since I repeatedly say we should stop the rossi/stoner thing, and you make very reasonable points on the technical issues about which you are obviously more knowledgeable than I am. I was being doubly stupid since you do credit stoner.

I was only half being insulting; I actually don't think the argument that it requires a technical advantage to beat valentino is all that easily dismissed. The issue I see is whether he is prepared to push as hard in this current formula given all he has achieved and an apparent probably reasonable objection to trusting electronics too much. If he did switch to wsbk where there does seem to be more rider input at present even if the riders may not be as good it would just about be the end for motogp.

It is easy to give way to a stray impulse if you post on here too much; you do occasionally make provocative statements yourself .

I don't see what the hell you are apologising for to be honest.
You were spot on in the first place.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#36 Fan @ Jul 17 2008, 02:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Anyone who thinks the 800s are cool or fun to watch compared to the 990s has no business watching motorcycle racing.

Why is there an influx of such stupid illogical posts?


"Anyone who likes 800's should stop enjoying them" .........

but if they liked 800's would they not be having the time of their lives ATM?


So do you sit there sooking at each race when it comes on ?

but you are such an ardent fan of motorcycle racing you put yourself throught the torture that the 800's are


Now on the kettle boiling ....... well I have one of these newfangled "electronically controlled" kettles that shuts off the throttle by itself!! ..... yep you heard me ..... its taken all the skill from boiling water I tell you! ........ just as I'm about to blow it on a boil "POP" and off it goes. But real coffee/tea drinkers hate it ...... cos its never as good!

but I will add ...... I usually have a cuppa before the race then one after .......... too busy not missing the action these days ..... thats 800's for you

double post

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Frizzle @ Jul 17 2008, 06:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't see what the hell you are apologising for to be honest.
You were spot on in the first place.
It is not necessarily an incorrect argument, just not a constructive one and I had previously decided not to use it as I actually agree all the rossi/stoner stuff is tedious and for schoolboys even though I still get annoyed at times. The doc79 has always been polite to me and has been making constructive posts on the technical debate.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 16 2008, 12:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yea it serves me right for trying to have a technical based discussion with people who have insufficient understanding, its no biggie.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 16 2008, 05:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I was jsut frustrated because you were struggling with concepts that I have no trouble with. I'm not cut out to be a teacher.

Do you have nothing. Did you notice how compete my post was and you couldn’t break it. You ...... up, on such a simple explanation from the report and the rider and still think you can weasel out. You have been totally busted and easily shown to be a shame. I put it out there and you painted yourself into a corner. Did you think I’d just ignore that you had nothing but a lame response after you totally stuck your foot in your mouth? Even then you don’t concede; but your such a fool that you don’t realize how ridiculous you look. You fool nobody with an ounce of intelligence here. You are shown to be a shame, a charlatan. You say you’re not a good teacher, haha, well you suck at being a student too. Sylvain says he turned the “Traction Control OFF” and you have been going in circles trying to fool us that “off” and “TC” is some illusive definition that only you, oh great one of technical knowledge, knows what is the real and true meaning. Haha. What a complete shame. Nothing you say can be taken as insightful if the most simple understanding of the language you debate as having some hidden meaning that only you, and your imaginary friends, knows.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#36 Fan @ Jul 17 2008, 04:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Anyone who thinks the 800s are cool or fun to watch compared to the 990s has no business watching motorcycle racing. Please do us all a favour - make your self a cup of tea and settle down for an exciting night of listening to talk back radio in your nana slippers. This is as much excitment as you can handle, anything more will be too much for you.


Maybe I should just go boil the kettle, get my blanket, sit in my chair and take valium then.

I just happen to be one of those people that enjoy the 800 formula, just as I enjoyed the 990 and the 500cc before that. Why?

Because I enjoy motorcycle racing and whether you (or others) like it or not, when mulitple bikes are on track having all started at the one time and all sharing the goal of being the first to complete the alloted laps, it is a race.

Some people may need to see a multi rider dice in order to be entertained, whilst others just want to watch the rider and bike work as one in synchronous movement towards the goal. Neither person is right, nor wrong as they both have different aspects that they find enjoyable about the sport.

Me, I am just as happy and sometimes even more enthralled watching Doohan/Rossi/Stoner/Pedrosa win walking away then I can be by a multi bike dice. Horses for courses really and to suggest that anyone who likes on over the other has issues or is unworthy of watching their sport, is (IMO) not fair.

As for the TC argument, I have no preferences at this stage as it has been around for years. What needs to be worked out is (and others have said or hinted) whether TC is to advanced or other factors are at play (and I suspect other factors) in terms of a combination of circumstances (ie. 800, Fuel, tyres etc)





Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Jul 17 2008, 09:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Maybe I should just go boil the kettle, get my blanket, sit in my chair and take valium then.

I just happen to be one of those people that enjoy the 800 formula, just as I enjoyed the 990 and the 500cc before that. Why?

Because I enjoy motorcycle racing and whether you (or others) like it or not, when mulitple bikes are on track having all started at the one time and all sharing the goal of being the first to complete the alloted laps, it is a race.

Some people may need to see a multi rider dice in order to be entertained, whilst others just want to watch the rider and bike work as one in synchronous movement towards the goal. Neither person is right, nor wrong as they both have different aspects that they find enjoyable about the sport.

Me, I am just as happy and sometimes even more enthralled watching Doohan/Rossi/Stoner/Pedrosa win walking away then I can be by a multi bike dice. Horses for courses really and to suggest that anyone who likes on over the other has issues or is unworthy of watching their sport, is (IMO) not fair.

As for the TC argument, I have no preferences at this stage as it has been around for years. What needs to be worked out is (and others have said or hinted) whether TC is to advanced or other factors are at play (and I suspect other factors) in terms of a combination of circumstances (ie. 800, Fuel, tyres etc)





Garry


Good post. I make no secret of my preference for the 500s. I grew up riding bikes at a time when 2 strokes were king for performance, so no surprises there. I enjoy watching bike racing, period.

I dont find 800s boring, some of the races can be, but hey, watching Doohan finish a week before everyone else wasnt always gripping was it? Anyhoo, what the new formulas have done is made the learning curve much steeper for the new guys. Riders are coming in from SBK and 250 and are fast from the word go, so maybe the bikes are easier to ride than before. It certainly looks like it. (Ive covered the 2 stroke crosser vs 4 stroke crosser stuff elsewhere, if youve ridden both you know the score.)

If electronics keep progressing, then in theory, we will see more close racing as the bikes become less of a handful to ride, and more folks can ride the bike to it's limits. Therefore, there will always be a debate as to if someone with a "faster" bike is actually a better rider than the others. As I have said before, it could be any number of things that Casey or his set up is doing that allow him to ride like he does. Or it could be that the guys a genius. We don't know do we?

One thing that does puzzle me though is, a lot of folks on here take it as read that all bikes from the same factory are the same. I have always understood that the "No 1 rider" will get a "better" package than the "No 2." Maybe not by much, but if you have found something that makes the bike faster, better handling, spin less whatever, which costs a fortune, do you give it to the guy fighting the championship or the midfield guy? Surely when a rider has achieved No 1 status on the team, he is allowed to at least try the new stuff first? I often wonder if Casey's bike is the same as the other Dukes. If he does have something the others don't, then it's because he at the pointy end of the championship, and deserves whatever it takes to win the title over the other Duke guys.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jul 17 2008, 09:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Good post. I make no secret of my preference for the 500s. I grew up riding bikes at a time when 2 strokes were king for performance, so no surprises there. I enjoy watching bike racing, period.

I dont find 800s boring, some of the races can be, but hey, watching Doohan finish a week before everyone else wasnt always gripping was it? Anyhoo, what the new formulas have done is made the learning curve much steeper for the new guys. Riders are coming in from SBK and 250 and are fast from the word go, so maybe the bikes are easier to ride than before. It certainly looks like it. (Ive covered the 2 stroke crosser vs 4 stroke crosser stuff elsewhere, if youve ridden both you know the score.)

If electronics keep progressing, then in theory, we will see more close racing as the bikes become less of a handful to ride, and more folks can ride the bike to it's limits. Therefore, there will always be a debate as to if someone with a "faster" bike is actually a better rider than the others. As I have said before, it could be any number of things that Casey or his set up is doing that allow him to ride like he does. Or it could be that the guys a genius. We don't know do we?

One thing that does puzzle me though is, a lot of folks on here take it as read that all bikes from the same factory are the same. I have always understood that the "No 1 rider" will get a "better" package than the "No 2." Maybe not by much, but if you have found something that makes the bike faster, better handling, spin less whatever, which costs a fortune, do you give it to the guy fighting the championship or the midfield guy? Surely when a rider has achieved No 1 status on the team, he is allowed to at least try the new stuff first? I often wonder if Casey's bike is the same as the other Dukes. If he does have something the others don't, then it's because he at the pointy end of the championship, and deserves whatever it takes to win the title over the other Duke guys.

Pete

+1 Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DRILL @ Jul 17 2008, 09:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>+1 Pete


Cheers Drill!

Pete