Spies to announce deal at Indy.

4768:cliffnotes.jpg]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mick D @ Sep 17 2008, 12:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>MotoGP has the greatest DEPTH OF TALENT in the road racing world, period.

Oh please

Hacking rode the Kawi better than most on the GP grid. And he definitely rode better than any of those jokey 250 midgets.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 16 2008, 10:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>There been several scandalous things going on in MotoGP the last month: Peders getting bstones mid season and Spies having great showing at all three wild card entries, wet & dry, and beating his two capable factory teammates at Indy while still not signed with his own factory. The Euros have totally ignored this fact, while the American fans have only mildly brought it to anybody's attention. It seems a PR nightmare that Suzuki could explain this away. At Indy, Spies was hounding Pedrosa, Dovi, and Casey. He was about 1.4 second behind Stoner & Dovi COMBINED at the finish. Basically you could have thrown a blanket over the 4, 5, & 6th place finishers. He put a move on Peders as if he was a third tier rider (yes, the man who threatened to boycott and got his bstones) the same tires by Spies, who kicked his ... on lessor equipment.

MotoGP is a scandalous place. How in the world do we have Guintoli & West in talks about rides but nobody calling for Spies? Who can say MotoGP have the "best" riders in the world? I for one don't believe it. Fairy tales are for people like Tom and Babel, I for one know that only, and maybe we have 10/18 of the best riders in the world, the rest are ........ token riders from Japan, France, etc.

I love a good scandal. I'm all about finding the over-politicized crap that gets swept under the rug by incompetent leaders who have no vision other than money or popularity.

The Spies situation isn't much of a scandal. DMG have made him a lucrative offer. Suzuki put a sour taste in his mouth b/c Denning is the ultimate non-committal nit-picker. Ben hates to fly. I've heard he has put himself under sedation to calm his nerves.

The only scandal is once again Ezy. The man who walks around brokering deals for every little Spaniard who's ever won a race, has to this point refused to broker a deal for Ben. I guess Ezy thinks he should get the best talent for free. Unfortunately, no one has ever challenged the status quo until now.

As you point out, it makes GP look less about talent and more about politics. Are Suzuki really going to get more out of $1,000,000 in development than they would out of Spies. I dunno, but I can't imagine development money would help them any more than it has in the past.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Sep 17 2008, 10:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The only scandal is once again Ezy. The man who walks around brokering deals for every little Spaniard who's ever won a race, has to this point refused to broker a deal for Ben. I guess Ezy thinks he should get the best talent for free. Unfortunately, no one has ever challenged the status quo until now.

As you point out, it makes GP look less about talent and more about politics. Are Suzuki really going to get more out of $1,000,000 in development than they would out of Spies. I dunno, but I can't imagine development money would help them any more than it has in the past.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 16 2008, 10:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Now, when you are at a track whereby you have some data you have a massive head start as you would already have a base from which to work (even if different tyres/biukes, you still have a base).

Although i think there is an advantage in having track knowledge and time, i think Spies' advantage in this area will be reduced by the fact that all the data he has gathered was almost certainly shared with his teammates.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 17 2008, 06:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I for one know that only, and maybe we have 10/18 of the best riders in the world, the rest are ........ token riders from Japan, France, etc.

You will also know then that many of the American riders who find their way to the motogp grid do so at the hands of marketting decisions, making them "token" (as you call it riders).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Sep 17 2008, 10:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You will also know then that many of the American riders who find their way to the motogp grid do so at the hands of marketting decisions, making them "token" (as you call it riders).



Many? Count them out for me. (I’m assuming you must have a prepared list); or are you gonna try to spit hairs as to the meaning of the word “many”.

Lets examine this notion that they are "token" Americans in MotoGP for their marketing value as oppose for their track record previous to their promotion into GP:

Nicky Hayden, multiple AMA champ, delivers World Championship. (I'd say he deserved a seat)
Collin Edwards, 250 AMA champ, multiple World Superbike champion (I'd say he deserved a seat)
John Hopkins, multiple AMA champion in Formula Extreme and Superstock (I'd say he deserved a seat).

Ok, now explain why they are any different then any of the previous Americans that have ever made the MotoGP grid? Most all Americans have come up through the AMA, how are these three any different? How in the world did you come up with the idea that they got their seat as "token" riders? The least successful of the three is Hopkins, yet is easily the least marketable of the three as well. So your idea of marketability doesn't hold much value. Keep in mind, the first on the list, being the most popular actually won a MotoGP title, so not much of a token there.

Perhaps you mean they were allowed to stick around for "token" purposes. Well then, each of them have improved in stand classification over the years, with only one blip year of lower classification; bet you didn't know. But for John and Nicky, their classification actual got better until their best showing with only one year as an exception. We usually retain "token" riders when they are NOT improving, right?

Perhaps you were thinking of a past American rider. Well let’s see, pick form the list, I think you may find most of them actually became World Champions and runner ups.

Jumkie, not going to enter whether there are 'token' riders in MotoGP as personally I do not think that to be the case as to me the word 'token' would indicate a lacking in abiality therefore making them both undeserving and dangerous. In honesty, the days of the 'token' rider has long since passed (by the way, fully recognise you did not use the term but supporting you in this aspect).

You also point out the results of Hayden, Hopkins and Spies as an argument for their being deserving of a ride in MotoGP.

Not arguing with you, but is an AMA championship worth more in terms of deserving a ride than a BSB championship (as an example)?

I could (and owuld) love to argue for the Australian Championship but cannot for sheer quality terms (riders very good, but not a major world recognised championship), but what of other championships.

IMO, winning a championship should get the rider enough sufficient recognition that the door of opportunity opens (such as in Spies case). It is then up to the rider to produce sufficient results to indicate that they are deserving of a ride in the championship.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Spies has been given that opportunity and proven that he deserves a longer opportunity. It is now for the teams to provide that opportunity and for Spies to accept. We do not know what machinations may have been occurring of late behind the scenes in terms of offers and counter offers.

Is it possible that one of the new SBK classes in the US has made huge offers for him to stay (as the reigning champion he could command and receive big $) in order to give their series a high profile for 2009?

Is it just me or is it also interesting that both Vermuelen and Capirossi only got 1 year contracts at this time?

Or is that a Lex conspiracy?

I would personally like to see a situation where each factory had to supply one bike (it could be the previous year model) and a team of mechanics to be run as a 'junior' team. The contracts to ride must go to a rider not in MotoGP and can be for no longer than 1 year (alternatively, the factory can select wildcards and place them on the bike). At the end, if the results are good enough the rider will be picked up, if not they can return to other categories but cannot fill that seat again. IMO, this would serve the purpose of increasing grids and providing a low pressure entry to allow testing of individuals throughout the season.

Please do not think that I am anti-Spies as my thinking is that the opportunity he has received has been grabbed and taken, but that opportunity should be available to all riders that are deemed to have the potential.





Garry

What was Spies' announcement then?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 18 2008, 01:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Perhaps you were thinking of a past American rider. Well let’s see, pick form the list, I think you may find most of them actually became World Champions and runner ups.

^^^ Steady-Eddie Lawson, Revvin Kevin Schwantz, Wayne Rainey, Kenny Roberts junior, King-Kenny Roberts, Nicky hayden. All with at least one world championship many with multiple world championships. Contrary to what some may believe, no one and I mean no one wins a world title through luck. Yes, these guys are definitely Token American riders who were just there by virtue of their great marketability and pretty faces.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 18 2008, 07:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Many? Count them out for me. (I’m assuming you must have a prepared list); or are you gonna try to spit hairs as to the meaning of the word “many”.

Lets examine this notion that they are "token" Americans in MotoGP for their marketing value as oppose for their track record previous to their promotion into GP:

Nicky Hayden, multiple AMA champ, delivers World Championship. (I'd say he deserved a seat)
Collin Edwards, 250 AMA champ, multiple World Superbike champion (I'd say he deserved a seat)
John Hopkins, multiple AMA champion in Formula Extreme and Superstock (I'd say he deserved a seat).

Ok, now explain why they are any different then any of the previous Americans that have ever made the MotoGP grid? Most all Americans have come up through the AMA, how are these three any different? How in the world did you come up with the idea that they got their seat as "token" riders? The least successful of the three is Hopkins, yet is easily the least marketable of the three as well. So your idea of marketability doesn't hold much value. Keep in mind, the first on the list, being the most popular actually won a MotoGP title, so not much of a token there.

Perhaps you mean they were allowed to stick around for "token" purposes. Well then, each of them have improved in stand classification over the years, with only one blip year of lower classification; bet you didn't know. But for John and Nicky, their classification actual got better until their best showing with only one year as an exception. We usually retain "token" riders when they are NOT improving, right?

Perhaps you were thinking of a past American rider. Well let’s see, pick form the list, I think you may find most of them actually became World Champions and runner ups.

Firstly I’d like to point out that I don’t have a problem with “token” riders as you put it. I think that being sponsor friendly and good at associating and communicating with the right people in the right ways now comes under the demands a modern pro racer faces. Also I think that the advantage of being from a country with high marketability is as good as neutralized by the fact that those riders face the task of standing out from the crowd of riders their country produces.

Naturally there are varying degrees of speculation when it comes to understanding the motives of any riders opportunities, but in the last 15 years it seems that KRJR, Nicky Hayden, John Hopkins, Scott Russell and Mike Hale all made their way to motogp at the hands of their marketability, while Edwards would seem to have done so on merit.

Naturally there are riders who get opportunities like this and go on to justify them in the future, obvious examples being Talmacsi, Tamada, Debon, Checa and one or two of the names above. Also as you mentioned, some riders manage to stick around for “token” purposes, but as I mentioned earlier I think in context the “token” effect balances out and I have no problem with it.

My issue is simply with people who chose to apply a situation which is universal in the sport only when it suits them, even though you were able to offer examples of when “token” riders have justified there presence. We all feel like some of the back markers could be replaced by better riders but it’s not fair to label only these riders as “token” when riders throughout the grid, and even some that you may support.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 17 2008, 10:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Jumkie, not going to enter whether there are 'token' riders in MotoGP as personally I do not think that to be the case as to me the word 'token' would indicate a lacking in abiality therefore making them both undeserving and dangerous. In honesty, the days of the 'token' rider has long since passed (by the way, fully recognise you did not use the term but supporting you in this aspect).

You also point out the results of Hayden, Hopkins and Spies as an argument for their being deserving of a ride in MotoGP.

Not arguing with you, but is an AMA championship worth more in terms of deserving a ride than a BSB championship (as an example)?

I could (and owuld) love to argue for the Australian Championship but cannot for sheer quality terms (riders very good, but not a major world recognised championship), but what of other championships.

IMO, winning a championship should get the rider enough sufficient recognition that the door of opportunity opens (such as in Spies case). It is then up to the rider to produce sufficient results to indicate that they are deserving of a ride in the championship.

As I mentioned in a previous post, Spies has been given that opportunity and proven that he deserves a longer opportunity. It is now for the teams to provide that opportunity and for Spies to accept. We do not know what machinations may have been occurring of late behind the scenes in terms of offers and counter offers.

Is it possible that one of the new SBK classes in the US has made huge offers for him to stay (as the reigning champion he could command and receive big $) in order to give their series a high profile for 2009?

Is it just me or is it also interesting that both Vermuelen and Capirossi only got 1 year contracts at this time?


Please do not think that I am anti-Spies as my thinking is that the opportunity he has received has been grabbed and taken, but that opportunity should be available to all riders that are deemed to have the potential.

Great post Garry. I agree with everything above. As to your question about the BSB, I think it is a very competitive series that produces worthy riders. I don't know why they usually choose to go to WSBK, which seems to be the trend. It almost seems like BSB is to WSBK as 125/250s are to MotoGP premier. Perhaps it’s the bias of MotoGP talent scouts that think them not worthy or they are simply focused on the feeder series of the lower classes. I have had several exchanges with Tom about this question. Here is why I think the AMA gets more of a shot to go directly into MotoGP. Because if you look at the tradition of American riders who have come from the AMA into MotoGP you will find great success. Just take a look at Ogunski's list below (which we could add many more names to). Granted, the BSB hasn't been around as long, but they have yet to produce a successful rider from that series in MotoGP. So to answer your question directly, I have great respect for the BSB, and I do think their champs deserve a look into MotoGP. The current BSB champ, Kyonari, has just turned the corner in WSBK and seems to have found a winning formula. Not sure if this will continue, but he has shown he belongs with the big boys in WSBK. Perhaps they should have looked to Kyonari rather than Takahashi for a few wild rides in MotoGP as they did with Spies. I suppose they can't give wilds to everybody, but there are a few who stand out, and Spies for sure is one of a very short list. Why Spies in particular for Suzuki? Well, he has won them three national titles, and so I think he deserves the first look (as they did), but I still find it hard to understand why they signed the two regulars before they ruled Spies out. The still doesn't make sense to me why Suzuki would announce the factory line up before seeing the Indy results. Just imagine if he had podiumed (which is not a stretch considering the revelation that his visor was mistakenly not treated for fogging up in the rain, and still finished less than 1.5 seconds within Stoner & Dovi in 4th & 5th respectively).

As to the speculation of Spies demands, I hope something comes to light soon. You ask fair questions, and surely it is not all simply politics (though I believe at heart most is). I hope both Spies and prospective teams can humble themselves enough to cease an opportunity rather than make one on compensation packages.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 17 2008, 10:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I would personally like to see a situation where each factory had to supply one bike (it could be the previous year model) and a team of mechanics to be run as a 'junior' team. The contracts to ride must go to a rider not in MotoGP and can be for no longer than 1 year (alternatively, the factory can select wildcards and place them on the bike). At the end, if the results are good enough the rider will be picked up, if not they can return to other categories but cannot fill that seat again. IMO, this would serve the purpose of increasing grids and providing a low pressure entry to allow testing of individuals throughout the season.

I think that is what the national and lower classes are for, I'd rather see them pump that money into a competitive third bike for Suzuki & Kawasaki. The other brands seem already to run a "junior" series, they are call 'satellite' teams.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Sep 18 2008, 09:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^^ Steady-Eddie Lawson, Revvin Kevin Schwantz, Wayne Rainey, Kenny Roberts junior, King-Kenny Roberts, Nicky hayden. All with at least one world championship many with multiple world championships. Contrary to what some may believe, no one and I mean no one wins a world title through luck. Yes, these guys are definitely Token American riders who were just there by virtue of their great marketability and pretty faces.
Not luck alone, but sometimes good fortune fate and providence provide more than just a subtle shove in the right direction. Pray reacquaint yourself with Messrs Uncini and Lucchinelli

Rumor is Spies signed a 2 year deal with Yamaha to race in the AMA/DMG series or whatever the hell theyre called now.

There is a backdoor deal on top of that to take Rossi's place after his contract is over.


I cant confirm the info though. We will have to wait and see.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LorenzoFan @ Sep 18 2008, 04:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Rumor is Spies signed a 2 year deal with Yamaha to race in the AMA/DMG series or whatever the hell theyre called now.

There is a backdoor deal on top of that to take Rossi's place after his contract is over.


I cant confirm the info though. We will have to wait and see.
Welcome to the forum, hope I don't sound like I'm jumping down your throat. To take over Rossi's seat when he leaves? That's not until 2010 at earliest. By that time Spies will be what, somewhere around 25ish? If that's the case he must really be committed to making Hopkins money.

Thanks for posting.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Sep 18 2008, 03:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Welcome to the forum, hope I don't sound like I'm jumping down your throat. To take over Rossi's seat when he leaves? That's not until 2010 at earliest. By that time Spies will be what, somewhere around 25ish? If that's the case he must really be committed to making Hopkins money.

Thanks for posting.


Theres a lot more to it than you think. Spies carries baggage along with him. His mother, shes basically running his career. Did you hear about the incident at Laguna with the Rizla team?

As far as Gresini Honda, they cant afford him. Honda spent their money on Neil Hodgson and Corona Honda next year. No money for Spies. What else is left for him?

His relationship with Suzuki is pretty much over now and Honda didnt come through. We'll just have to wait and see.

I feel the same way you do and i couldnt have said it better. But neither you or i can change his plans. Im just sharing info.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LorenzoFan @ Sep 19 2008, 01:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Did you hear about the incident at Laguna with the Rizla team?

Do tell..............

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LorenzoFan @ Sep 18 2008, 07:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Im just sharing info.
Thanks for it, again, not trying to jump down your throat. Just trying to figure out what he's thinking.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Sep 18 2008, 07:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Do tell..............
+1

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (LorenzoFan @ Sep 18 2008, 08:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Theres a lot more to it than you think. Spies carries baggage along with him. His mother, shes basically running his career. Did you hear about the incident at Laguna with the Rizla team?

^^^I compel you to explain this statement!!
4807:vader.jpg]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Sep 19 2008, 11:34 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^^I compel you to explain this statement!!
4807:vader.jpg]
I aswell come on man

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Sep 18 2008, 04:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Do tell..............

Parc started a thread titled, the day Spies lost his GP ride. Pretty much explains his mom being a pain in the ... to deal with.

http://www.powerslide.net/forum/index.php?...20&start=20


Heres the incident that killed his GP ride.

Ben wasnt doing too well at Laguna, Mary Spies accused the crew of putting the wrong tire on Ben's bike. She became indignant and yelled at all the mechanics. Stuart Shenton didnt like that very much and killed the deal. Unless his mom goes bye bye(probably never happen)Spies will never have a ride for the factory Suzuki team.