Rossi's MotoGP formula

chopperman said:

Who do you know (rider) asking for it to be banned ? There silence on the subject tells me they want it.

Click to expand...

i can see why you think that everyone would want it,



But great riders and drivers have always been against anything that takes away from the riding/driving experience,or at least most of them as i can't recall anything else

but really i can recall a couple of statements of different riders asking for it to be removed like the mentioned fiat interview where lorenzo and rossi are directly asked what they would like to change in motogp and they both said getting rid of TC and i recall rossi saying he wanted to switch to liter bikes.



i'm sorry but i can't seem to find it,maybe someone else has the interview?used to be online somewhere and it's no older than a year or so

cliché guevara said:

i can see why you think that everyone would want it,



But great riders and drivers have always been against anything that takes away from the riding/driving experience,or at least most of them as i can't recall anything else

but really i can recall a couple of statements of different riders asking for it to be removed like the mentioned fiat interview where lorenzo and rossi are directly asked what they would like to change in motogp and they both said getting rid of TC and i recall rossi saying he wanted to switch to liter bikes.



i'm sorry but i can't seem to find it,maybe someone else has the interview?used to be online somewhere and it's no older than a year or so

Click to expand...

Yeah, a couple of seasons ago.; Now there saying keep a basic tc but get rid of the tc where every corner is programed into it.

cliché guevara said:

i can see why you think that everyone would want it,



But great riders and drivers have always been against anything that takes away from the riding/driving experience,or at least most of them as i can't recall anything else

but really i can recall a couple of statements of different riders asking for it to be removed like the mentioned fiat interview where lorenzo and rossi are directly asked what they would like to change in motogp and they both said getting rid of TC and i recall rossi saying he wanted to switch to liter bikes.



i'm sorry but i can't seem to find it,maybe someone else has the interview?used to be online somewhere and it's no older than a year or so

Click to expand...

Rossi knows that he is the MotoGP benchmark, and that other companies have used him and the Yamaha that he helped develop in order to gauge their own engineering success. Bridgestone openly admitted that Rossi was their benchmark in 2007. Honda always used Rossi's pace as a development benchmark for their electronics systems and chassis development. If Rossi believes that electronics are the reason that other riders have been able to match his raw pace and his development abilities, perhaps we should listen if he believes some manner of the system should be retained. No one would want it gone more than him.



In reality you can't get rid of it. MotoGP will always have quick shift and EFI. With quick shift the bike knows what gear its in and it can probably calculate torque to the wheel given a particular throttle input. This can be fed into the TC and the air fuel can be adjusted to reduce power. It doesn't stop the rear from spinning, but it does control the spin of the rear wheel. The only way to ban traction control via the rules is to eliminate all electric devices other than magneto, spark plug wires, and maybe fuel pump. Even then, you can't be sure that someone will develop an absurd slipper clutch that functions as some form of traction control. Mechanical traction control is not out of the question.



If traction control is ever going to be vanquished, it needs to be made ineffective. Drastically simplifying the way in which TC works may actually create a clumsy system that gets in the riders way. If you look at roadracingworld they have an article where Mat Mladin explains the effect of traction control, and he explains how Suzuki (widely regarded as cheating the TC ban during 2004-2006) actually dominated the sport after the TC ban was lifted. He rambles on for about 5 minutes, but he finally says that a bad traction control system actually makes things worse. In his opinion, introducing new complications actually allowed other teams to slow themselves down while Yoshimura (who have always had extremely advanced electronics) were able to gain a bigger advantage.



That phenomenon still exists. WSBK electronics are not homologated for AMA competition. Yosh have a very good in-house system. Graves do not. Tommy had TC. Josh Hayes did not. Josh Hayes won the SBK title this season, and his victory did more for the elimination of traction control than any rules change. Granted the situation is more difficult in SBK b/c some bikes are screamers and some bikes are big bang.

mylexicon said:

Rossi knows that he is the MotoGP benchmark, and that other companies have used him and the Yamaha that he helped develop in order to gauge their own engineering success. Bridgestone openly admitted that Rossi was their benchmark in 2007.

Click to expand...

And they did not want to sign him yeah bs. not wanting to start yet another old debate but i could not resist because of the irony !

chopperman said:

And they did not want to sign him

yeah bs. not wanting to start yet another old debate but i could not resist because of the irony !

Click to expand...

Beating Rossi was their goal. If their goal is to beat Rossi, they can't sign him can they? They were also worried that it would nearly guarantee a control tire (they were right), and Bridgestone were openly against a control tire as well b/c the marketing department wanted to beat Michelin.

mylexicon said:

Beating Rossi was their goal. If their goal is to beat Rossi, they can't sign him can they? They were also worried that it would nearly guarantee a control tire (they were right), and Bridgestone were openly against a control tire as well b/c the marketing department wanted to beat Michelin.

Click to expand...

Not much of a goal considering the problems Michelin were having from the boardroom down. Was a bit like picking a fight with a crippled man. Bridgstone must have known it was looking very unlikely Michelin would be racing the following year. From a marketing point of view bridgstone did beat Michelin, they got the single tyre contract !

chopperman said:

Not much of a goal considering the problems Michelin were having from the boardroom down. Was a bit like picking a fight with a crippled man. Bridgstone must have known it was looking very unlikely Michelin would be racing the following year. From a marketing point of view bridgstone did beat Michelin, they got the single tyre contract !

Click to expand...

Something they never really wanted. They loved beating Michelin head to head, that was the marketing bonanza. They lose their ... selling tires below cost to race against themselves, makes no sense.

chopperman said:

Not much of a goal considering the problems Michelin were having from the boardroom down. Was a bit like picking a fight with a crippled man. Bridgstone must have known it was looking very unlikely Michelin would be racing the following year. From a marketing point of view bridgstone did beat Michelin, they got the single tyre contract !

Click to expand...

I certainly didnt know Michelin was going to suck in 07. Up until that point, the competition was pretty damn good and a great source of debate. Michelin finished 1st and 2nd in 2006 GP, not exactly a crippled man. I dont remember many predictions that stated Stoner and Bridgestone would dominate the 07 season.

povol said:

I certainly didnt know Michelin was going to suck in 07. Up until that point, the competition was pretty damn good and a great source of debate. Michelin finished 1st and 2nd in 2006 GP, not exactly a crippled man. I dont remember many predictions that stated Stoner and Bridgestone would dominate the 07 season.

Click to expand...

I think Dorna and Bridgestoner were fully aware of the problems Michelin were having. It's their business to know whats going on. The CEO of Michelin died and that resulted in some in-fighting within the family and board. Michelin were talking about pulling out long before Rossi and dani switched. You as a fan ,may have been unaware but those contracted to them new what was happening.

From a marketing point, regardless of what rubber was being used on track, all the japanese road bikes were being fitted with Bridgstone rubber as standard.

chopperman said:

I think Dorna and Bridgestoner were fully aware of the problems Michelin were having. It's their business to know whats going on. The CEO of Michelin died and that resulted in some in-fighting within the family and board. Michelin were talking about pulling out long before Rossi and dani switched. You as a fan ,may have been unaware but those contracted to them new what was happening.

From a marketing point, regardless of what rubber was being used on track, all the japanese road bikes were being fitted with Bridgstone rubber as standard.

Click to expand...

What happened was their ace in the hole was banned, the overnight specials.From that point on, they were doomed. In my opinion, that had more to do with Michelins decline than the death of a CEO.

povol said:

What happened was their ace in the hole was banned, the overnight specials.From that point on, they were doomed. In my opinion, that had more to do with Michelins decline than the death of a CEO.

Click to expand...

agreed



it has often been said that bridgestones advantge was that their tyres weren't as dependend on particular surfaces and temperatures as the michelins,something michelin could only counter by creating special compounds at the tracks.

when they weren't allowed to do that anymore they completly lost it.



remember laguna seca when a lot of the michelin riders had to use intermediates in dry conditions because the slicks wouldn't pick up the temperature?embarassing for michelin for sure...

SprogTheDog said:

Back to the good old days.

I've forgotten what its like to see them spinning the rear wheel up round corners

Click to expand...

Wait no longer than PI to see fat slides.

cliché guevara said:

agreed



it has often been said that bridgestones advantge was that their tyres weren't as dependend on particular surfaces and temperatures as the michelins,something michelin could only counter by creating special compounds at the tracks.

when they weren't allowed to do that anymore they completly lost it.



remember laguna seca when a lot of the michelin riders had to use intermediates in dry conditions because the slicks wouldn't pick up the temperature?embarassing for michelin for sure...

Click to expand...

So you don't think Michelin didn't bother to fight this rule change because they knew they were more than likely going to pull out of racing anyway ?

mylexicon said:

In reality you can't get rid of it. MotoGP will always have quick shift and EFI. With quick shift the bike knows what gear its in and it can probably calculate torque to the wheel given a particular throttle input. This can be fed into the TC and the air fuel can be adjusted to reduce power. It doesn't stop the rear from spinning, but it does control the spin of the rear wheel. The only way to ban traction control via the rules is to eliminate all electric devices other than magneto, spark plug wires, and maybe fuel pump. Even then, you can't be sure that someone will develop an absurd slipper clutch that functions as some form of traction control. Mechanical traction control is not out of the question.

Click to expand...

Without lean angle and front wheel sensor "your" TC are almost worthless and mission are by all means accomplished.

Should it ever be found ways around a standard ECU would fix that. No need to ban all electric devices.

If traction control is ever going to be vanquished, it needs to be made ineffective. Drastically simplifying the way in which TC works may actually create a clumsy system that gets in the riders way. If you look at roadracingworld they have an article where Mat Mladin explains the effect of traction control, and he explains how Suzuki (widely regarded as cheating the TC ban during 2004-2006) actually dominated the sport after the TC ban was lifted. He rambles on for about 5 minutes, but he finally says that a bad traction control system actually makes things worse. In his opinion, introducing new complications actually allowed other teams to slow themselves down while Yoshimura (who have always had extremely advanced electronics) were able to gain a bigger advantage.



That phenomenon still exists. WSBK electronics are not homologated for AMA competition. Yosh have a very good in-house system. Graves do not. Tommy had TC. Josh Hayes did not. Josh Hayes won the SBK title this season, and his victory did more for the elimination of traction control than any rules change. Granted the situation is more difficult in SBK b/c some bikes are screamers and some bikes are big bang.

Click to expand...

And that was an argument pro or against limitations in TC? I fail to see what the problem is. First you say we won't get rid of it and then you argue it won't work? I would guess that the GP teams have somewhat more resources to exploit the rules than the average AMA team so I wouldn't expect that to be a real problem.





I disagree with your arguments. A TC without all the traditional sensors will be very primitive compared to what they have today, and that's the whole point. They need the electronics for power curve control and fuel management and they would put a lot of fancy calculations as you expect but that's just fine. Worse or better than nothing it will not enable for the fine control needed to all but eliminate slides at high lean angles.

povol said:

A malfunction with the fly-by-wire throttle caused the gas to stay open as Pedrosa braked,









The unlucky fall, just three laps into the session, was caused when a small problem with the throttle cable didn't allow Pedrosa to close the throttle when he came to brake,

Click to expand...

Nice to see the eyes of traditonal Rossi haters work just as bad on other subjects as well.

Babel, this is a side conversation amongst people who want traction control banned. Attempting to completely ban traction control is a waste of time b/c humanity will always find a way around it, even by using mechanical means if necessary. The best way to "ban" traction control is to reduce its sophistication and complication until it becomes an undesirable hindrance.

chopperman said:

So you don't think Michelin didn't bother to fight this rule change because they knew they were more than likely going to pull out of racing anyway ?

Click to expand...

i never said that



i was just stating the fact that bridgestone were just so much better at selecting a number of competitve compounds days before the actual race because their tyres usually worked as opposed to the michelins "hit or miss" characteristic

cliché guevara said:

i never said that



i was just stating the fact that bridgestone were just so much better at selecting a number of competitve compounds days before the actual race because their tyres usually worked as opposed to the michelins "hit or miss" characteristic

Click to expand...

Bridgestone also missed a lot. In fact they missed every season before 2007 since they came in. Many tracks were also resurfaced in late 2006 early 2007. We also had major rule changes-choking supply, despite Bridgestones size and the overwhelming dollars they put in to beat Michelin, they still missed badly at some circuits, like Germany, Portugal, Herez and to a lesser extent Assen and Mugello.



Pointless argument, BS are pulling out anyway, hopefully replaced with Michelin and Dunlop.

mylexicon said:

Babel, this is a side conversation amongst people who want traction control banned. Attempting to completely ban traction control is a waste of time b/c humanity will always find a way around it, even by using mechanical means if necessary. The best way to "ban" traction control is to reduce its sophistication and complication until it becomes an undesirable hindrance.

Click to expand...

I believe we completely agree here Lex.



I agree in that and I believe that's what Rossi and other riders have found as the only way to go. Not because they want traction control but because they realize they can't get it 100% banned.

cliché guevara said:

agreed



it has often been said that bridgestones advantge was that their tyres weren't as dependend on particular surfaces and temperatures as the michelins,something michelin could only counter by creating special compounds at the tracks.

when they weren't allowed to do that anymore they completly lost it.



remember laguna seca when a lot of the michelin riders had to use intermediates in dry conditions because the slicks wouldn't pick up the temperature?embarassing for michelin for sure...

Click to expand...

It seems to be a common misconception that the overnight specials played a major role in Michelin's success.

- First of all they didn't have real competitors for years until Bridgestone started to get it right.

- Secondly, Overnight specials were only available in Europe

- Third, they weren't even made or used that often. Only when they got the conditions wrong they would make a few specials that could be used if the racer meant it would be to an advantage.



Their major problem were not the end of the overnight specials but rather the limited amount of tires the teams got. As you said their tires worked optimal only in a very narrow band of temperature and surface conditions and they often got it wrong when they brought tires to their riders. The "counter" would rather be to bring all the tires needed to cover all possible conditions. Overnight specials were more an extreme form of optimization and good race tires were still needed for practice and setup.