Rider X speaks out about the ills in Motogp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jul 17 2008, 09:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>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


IMO I honestly believe that all bikes within a team have started the year totally identical to the others.

I also firmly believe that due to individual preferences, no bikes will remain the same between riders within a team, but that is not an issue that can of should be sheeted back onto the factory. It is no more than riders preference and therefore riders fault (or credit).

But, there is always the talk of numbers 1 and 2 riders and what level of equipment they get (as you suggest) and I would recognise that it does happen. But not so sure that it would always be the case that the #1 would get the 'equipment' before the #2 as there may be occasions whereby the risk of a failed part causing championship issues would weigh more heavily to the #2 being the 'guinea pig'.

However I am not so sure that the 'defined #1/#2' exist so readily any more as often in the past the skill set between the two was far greater than it is today (IMO). Today I see the #2 rider as more a 'learning' type of position such as Toseland/Lorenzo etc rather than a subservient type of position (yes, CE did fill more that role in Fiat Yamaha and likely West was expected to a Kawasaki).







Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Jul 17 2008, 10:05 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>IMO I honestly believe that all bikes within a team have started the year totally identical to the others.

I also firmly believe that due to individual preferences, no bikes will remain the same between riders within a team, but that is not an issue that can of should be sheeted back onto the factory. It is no more than riders preference and therefore riders fault (or credit).

But, there is always the talk of numbers 1 and 2 riders and what level of equipment they get (as you suggest) and I would recognise that it does happen. But not so sure that it would always be the case that the #1 would get the 'equipment' before the #2 as there may be occasions whereby the risk of a failed part causing championship issues would weigh more heavily to the #2 being the 'guinea pig'.

However I am not so sure that the 'defined #1/#2' exist so readily any more as often in the past the skill set between the two was far greater than it is today (IMO). Today I see the #2 rider as more a 'learning' type of position such as Toseland/Lorenzo etc rather than a subservient type of position (yes, CE did fill more that role in Fiat Yamaha and likely West was expected to a Kawasaki).







Garry

Good point Garry, the preference for teams now certainly appears to be a kind of tradesman and apprentice set up. Begs the question though, why did Ducati, with the world champion, hire Melandri, a proven race winner? Back up for development? Aiming for 2 high finishers in the championship? Passport? Your guess is as good as mine on this. It's a tricky one. Schwantz always liked to have a team mate whose ... he could kick, and Doohan and Criville were knocking each other off. (Hmmmm.....Repsol Honda, is there a pattern emerging here?)

I would still say, that if a factory discovers something that will give them the edge, that the No 1 guy would get it over the No 2, but as you say, the team structures appear to be changing.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jul 17 2008, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Good point Garry, the preference for teams now certainly appears to be a kind of tradesman and apprentice set up. Begs the question though, why did Ducati, with the world champion, hire Melandri, a proven race winner? Back up for development? Aiming for 2 high finishers in the championship? Passport? Your guess is as good as mine on this. It's a tricky one. Schwantz always liked to have a team mate whose ... he could kick, and Doohan and Criville were knocking each other off. (Hmmmm.....Repsol Honda, is there a pattern emerging here?)

I would still say, that if a factory discovers something that will give them the edge, that the No 1 guy would get it over the No 2, but as you say, the team structures appear to be changing.

Pete
I am not sure ducati can even supply a number two bike to stoner that is as good as his number one bike, let alone to other ducati riders.

My understanding was that ducati signed melandri before they signed stoner and before the 800s had even raced, although it has recently been said by some that the contract was not ironclad.

I've never been a +1 kind of poster, but I am please to see some reasoned posts after we have seen so many threads become slanging matches.

I too, have enjoyed many races where the winner streaks away from the start, something which I have seen much of over the last 20 odd years of watching them.

I don't think that Marco would have inferior equipment to Casey. The italians are a proud race and Ducati would love nothing more than to see an Italian win the WC on their bike. Ducati signed Marco at this time last year, so they have been courting him for far longer. They probably looked at their postion with Casey and thought, now we have the bike in a winning position, with a great rider like Marco we can wipe the floor with the Japanese.
Ducati have said that they have put in a huge effort to make Marco competative, and I think that they would have. The last thing they need is for the public to think that the win is all down to Stoner.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Jul 17 2008, 08:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>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.



Standard. It is clear that you have decided you will disagree with my, regardless of what i have put forward because this, like many of your posts has very little to do with what has actually been said. It would seem you haven't actually read the topic, and dove right in with another of your replies. At least this isn't a long one so you didn't waste too m uch time, but when you sit at your keyboard picking holes in things that people never said, you should consider actually having an input of your own.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 17 2008, 11:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well the post is actually about Rider X and his comments. Or it should have been. Only someone we won't mention by name took off at a tangent, being obtuse about what 'no traction control' would imply. Hmmm...


She shoots, She scores!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 16 2008, 03:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Okay since you are clearly struggling i'll make it simple for you. Two statements of opinion that you should be able to recognize the difference between.

1) Prototype racing should be completely unregulated

2) The rule makers must be careful not to over regulate the series (my actual point)

I am fully aware of the amount of regulations in place, and i'm NOT saying I would like to have an un-regulated class (statement 1). My refference to superbike was that they have contantly evolving rules to counteract any advantage engineered by a team, and it has a negative impact on the series.
LOL. I'm not going to quote your first post again, just go on from here. Ok so the series must not be over regulated. And that's all you are saying.
During 3 days you've been able to express one clear opinion. Let's forget that it doesn't incluse any bounderies what so ever. What is overregulated tom?
Again, almost every performance part are regulated, wouldn't it actually be the only logic step to regulate the electronics as well?

PS! I refuse to go into the discussion involving Superbike or regulations to counteract one team. To me this is about 27 races without a last lap fight for the win. During those races there has been a fair mix of bikes winning allthough Ducati has the most thanks to stoner. The point is how we can give the riders back the control of the pace.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 17 2008, 11:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well the post is actually about Rider X and his comments. Or it should have been. Only someone we won't mention by name took off at a tangent, being obtuse about what 'no traction control' would imply. Hmmm...

Thats pretty funny seeing as it was actually you who brought up Sylvains race in germany.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jul 17 2008, 12:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>LOL. I'm not going to quote your first post again, just go on from here. Ok so the series must not be over regulated. And that's all you are saying.
During 3 days you've been able to express one clear opinion. Let's forget that it doesn't incluse any bounderies what so ever. What is overregulated tom?
Again, almost every performance part are regulated, wouldn't it actually be the only logic step to regulate the electronics as well?

I don't know exactly what is and isn't over-regulated, that is a discussion that would take a lot more time and speculation. However it is my opinion that this should be a concern.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 17 2008, 05:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well the post is actually about Rider X and his comments. Or it should have been. Only someone we won't mention by name took off at a tangent, being obtuse about what 'no traction control' would imply. Hmmm...
I hope you don't mean me?

i agree with sarto that it is nice to finally get some decent discussion going on instead of backhanded remarks, and straight up rudeness.

i always felt motogp needed to be in a class of its own. when the decision was made to go from 800's to 990's, i was very dissapointed. not just becuase i loved the 500's, but i felt that 990 wasn't much different than a 1000 cc bike you could buy off the show room floor.

don't get me wrong. "I" know they are different. but for your average fan, or maybe someone new coming in, the 990 didn't seem all that special compared to AMA, BSB, WSBK, etc. just a perception thing i guess.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 17 2008, 02:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well the post is actually about Rider X and his comments. Or it should have been. Only someone we won't mention by name took off at a tangent, being obtuse about what 'no traction control' would imply. Hmmm...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ Jul 17 2008, 05:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Don't you try to drag me down with you Tomkie.

Hey, you wanna fight?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (djm @ Jul 17 2008, 04:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i agree with sarto that it is nice to finally get some decent discussion going on instead of backhanded remarks, and straight up rudeness.

i always felt motogp needed to be in a class of its own. when the decision was made to go from 800's to 990's, i was very dissapointed. not just becuase i loved the 500's, but i felt that 990 wasn't much different than a 1000 cc bike you could buy off the show room floor.

don't get me wrong. "I" know they are different. but for your average fan, or maybe someone new coming in, the 990 didn't seem all that special compared to AMA, BSB, WSBK, etc. just a perception thing i guess.


Yep. Ive said that myself in another thread.

Pete

Seems like a lot of drama over a simple post. If I have it right Tom was suggesting that even though x said x rider turned off his TC does this mean all aspects of his TC were not functioning or just some aspects of it? We will never know, but a fair post none the less.

Okay I have a question. If you could put Vermin on any bike next year where would it be:
1. Stay with Suzuki
2. Honda
3. Yamaha
4. Ducati (that would be interesting)
5. Out of Motogp
6. Something else

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SleepyCat @ Jul 17 2008, 03:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'><u>Seems like a lot of drama over a simple post</u>. If I have it right Tom was suggesting that even though x said x rider turned off his TC does this mean all aspects of his TC were not functioning or just some aspects of it? We will never know, but a fair post none the less.

Okay I have a question. If you could put Vermin on any bike next year where would it be:
1. Stay with Suzuki
2. Honda
3. Yamaha
4. Ducati (that would be interesting)
5. Out of Motogp
6. Something else

Seems like a heavy statement coming from a noob Thats what this place is about, discussion.

Also, on your poll, I think that it would be a good poll topic.

Yamaha and honda would seem to agree that ducati's advantage is engine power; I have heard no call from them for control ecus, but they did propose restricting rpm when ducati looked dominant at qatar. This does not mean that traction control should not be reduced.

If they do mandate a control ecu, I presume it would have restricted functions; if it still allowed engine mapping by corner/position it might equalise racing but might not increase rider input. Does wsbk have control ecus?

I think whatever happens wsbk has an advantage in terms of produing close racing, as they are prepared to equalise bikes, even whilst a season is in progress.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jul 18 2008, 09:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think whatever happens wsbk has an advantage in terms of produing close racing, as they are prepared to equalise bikes, even whilst a season is in progress.

Imagine having a prototype series, where IF you build a prototype racer that is faster than other prototypes (although not on average only in the hands of one rider) then we change horses mid stream and declare that this is no longer really a prototype series because somebody dared build a faster prototype than the other. Not just any other but the one expected to win.

This article should be called the manifestations of egocentric attributional bias displayed when alarming self confidence is shattered – i.e. how to cope when someone else is winning or to simplify it just that step further – blame the tools and not the worker. Blame the other worker perhaps

How much of this self serving guff can we tolerate before Kleenex or some other tissue company takes over as the major sponsor for motogp. Maybe someone who makes moisturiser, I see it now “New motouriser - because a few mediocre laps can really dry out your skin and chaff your man ....s".

Discovering your limits is about falling off, not getting cellulite or some crunchy little diet biscuit.

I have given it much thought and rider X couldn’t put his name to this rubbish because his hormone treatment prior to his ... change may have been revealed. He is giving up racing to become a cabaret dancer. Perhaps he should have been called rider XX to indicate his desired chromosomal pattern. Can’t change the genotype, with tablets and a bit of makeup we can work on phenotype – and an operation but it sounds like he’s already had that…

The question is, if you have your way and change everything rider XX and Casey still dominates, what will you do then.

The whole argument is based on this retrospective results scenario - a "back to the future" piece of prognostication that is simply wishful nostalgic rubbish and very unlikely.

I throw up a couple of what ifs.

What if Casey's success was due to being on a factory bike period and not just the incredibly easy to ride grossly unfair computerised Ducati.

What if Casey's success just represented the progression of his skills as a rider and he dominates no matter what format you choose (his results -vs- his team mates certainly suggest this is possible and probable)

What will you do then rider XX - sing and dance and get off motorcycles – how about get off now and save us this doleful excuse for mediocrity.

MOTOGP

It used to be about racing