Superbikes VS MotoGP Which is the premier class ?

Jumkie and I touched on this subject recently after i "assumed" that motogp was the hardest racing in the world. He put forward a good case for motocross and it was quite interesting.

But, I do believe that motogp is the true premier class of motorcycle roadracing. It has always been the ultimate test, and only seriously good riders can make their way to the top.

Also worth noticing how many successful superbike racers are riders who had poor performance in GP racing. The list is almost endless.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dion @ Jan 31 2007, 10:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It would seem Barros is setting the pace at the moment, granted Yamaha are not there, but he is up there big time. Troy Bayliss whipped ... in the last MotoGP.
Could it be that Superbikes has a higher standard of riding ability than MotoGP ?
Toseland had v fast test times on pedrosa's bike doing only 20 laps.

Which is the premier class ???????????/

I admit i much prefer MotgGP.



It has to be motogp, racing prototype race machines is always gonna be the pinnacle, just as F1 is the top of car racing.

It's not unusual for diesel riders to come to GP and put in some good results, but putting in a whole season is a different matter.

On the flip side, a couple of seasons on the diesels, and lil John Koscinski kicked ... and git the No1 plate. On the bike that Diesel king Foggy said was crap.

Gotta be GP

Pete

pete is right, its the prototype racing for sure. And again, the superbike guys like Bayliss can come over and put in a good ride, but there is no way he could put a season together to the standard of the GP top stuff, which is why he ended up back in the superbike paddock.

well it's not like Bayliss or Barros haven't ridden a GP bike before..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dion @ Jan 31 2007, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Which is the premier class ???????????/

I
Hi Dion, nice to see you still on the site (glad that roger didn't scare you away).

You may want to check out a great article from Speed channel that Frosty posted on another thread. I think you will find it very interesting.

At first glance it would seem that Pete is right, and certainly the general perception is that MotoGP is the pinnacle of motorcycle "road" racing. I would tend to agree.

So to answer your question, MotoGP.

However, I think the more interesting question is what series has the greatest talent? (sorry if I'm hijacking your thread)




There is much evidence to suggest that the top racers in MotoGP/WSBK/AMA are equal. I don't want to get long winded here so I just will point you to some test from boys from other series on GP tracks that had similar or better times to their contemporaries in GP: Ben Spies (AMA), Troy Bayliss (WSBK). If you accept that GP is the "premier" racing series, then the question becomes, are the riders in entire GP grid the "best???" My short answer is--NO.

Debate...




(side note, since Tom mentioned it, if we were asking which is the top motorcycle off-road series, I'd have to say US Supercross/Motocross.)

(2nd side note:I really don't want to get into this one too much but the WSBK boys have experience on many of the same tracks as MotoGP, so when you get a guy like Ben Spies testing well in Europe, well that to me just seems more impressive, which may explain why the American boys have more success in Laguna, as oppose to the argument that they can't win outside the US, its simply, they have more experience here.)

(3rd side note: Pete, nice new flag "If its not Scottish, its crap!"

Worthless thread. Obviously Motogp

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Morgo @ Jan 31 2007, 03:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Worthless thread. Obviously Motogp
Not really. I thinks its an intriguing question. Don’t look at it as black and white but rather at the implications of the question. How well do you think Rossi, Loris, or Melandri would do in AMA? Would they run 1, 2, 3, ?


(assuming they had competitive packages that obviously they would merit)

I think there can be no mistake that Motogp bikes are far superior technologically compared to a World Superbike for example. The question of better riders is another matter entirely. I do believe that their are superior riders. I do not bel;ieve that they are only located in Motogp. A riders success in Motogp has a lot to do with the opportunity they have and the support they receive. There are plenty of examples of riders who did not have the right opportunity at the right time, and as a result they did not fare very well. On the flip side there are riders who seem to have been given every advantage available regardless of their success/failure rate. I believe I can use an old saying "there is no superior martial art, only superior martial artists", "there is no superior racing class, only superior racers.

This concludes today's lesson grasshoppers

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Feb 1 2007, 10:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>believe I can use an old saying "there is no superior martial art, only superior martial artists", "there is no superior racing class, only superior racers.

Very good quote, I think it sums up the relationship nicely. It's hard to say which one is "Superior", because while a guy like Rossi could come in and probably kick arse on a Superbike, I don't think a guy like Hoffman could. They're both great classes of racing, but if you had to say which one has a higher level of competition, it would be motoGP. It's intresting how the times are getting closer, now though. Kinda like the last days of the 500s.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Feb 1 2007, 09:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>pete is right, its the prototype racing for sure. And again, the superbike guys like Bayliss can come over and put in a good ride, but there is no way he could put a season together to the standard of the GP top stuff, which is why he ended up back in the superbike paddock.

Your kidding right? Bayliss' years in motogp were on a brand new bike (for the first two) or a bike that was not suited to him. Last years win at Valencia shows that had he been riding for, say, the factory ducati squad in 2006, he could have definately run at the pace of the frontrunners, no question.. He did alll that in one race weekend ffs!

As far as comparing GP with WSBK goes, well its not that easy. Theyre two very different forms of racing and require different strengths and weaknesses in different areas. So, i think most top level riders in either classes, given the time to adapt, could be competetive in either class..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Feb 1 2007, 08:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I believe I can use an old saying "there is no superior martial art, only superior martial artists", "there is no superior racing class, only superior racers.

I just have to quote you again in total agreement.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (antfan @ Feb 1 2007, 01:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Your kidding right? Bayliss' years in motogp were on a brand new bike (for the first two) or a bike that was not suited to him. Last years win at Valencia shows that had he been riding for, say, the factory ducati squad in 2006, he could have definately run at the pace of the frontrunners, no question.. He did alll that in one race weekend ffs!

To put the Bayliss win in perspective a bit. He was freash off a holiday having finished superbikes, the other guys were at the end of a 17 round gp season and recently back from the taxing flyaways. Bayliss had nothing at all to loose, everyone riding near him would not be prepared to risk championship positions for the sake of beating him. It was also fortunate for him that he was on the best bike and tires for the day, and on a track he was quite familiar with.

We have seen before that when things arn't working well for Bayliss, or if pressure is on, he is more likely to get agrressive, over ride the bike and make way too many mistakes. That is not a quality that would serve him well as a gp rider. He is obviously the worlds best superbiker at the moment, but in Gp's i'd expect him to be in the top ten, but not the top 5 of the championship (edwards area).

I think Bayliss is an excelent rider, motogp is too hard for him to have major success in. His abilities go much better with a forgiving and less precise superbike.

MotoGP.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Feb 1 2007, 11:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To put the Bayliss win in perspective a bit. He was freash off a holiday having finished superbikes, the other guys were at the end of a 17 round gp season and recently back from the taxing flyaways. Bayliss had nothing at all to loose, everyone riding near him would not be prepared to risk championship positions for the sake of beating him. It was also fortunate for him that he was on the best bike and tires for the day, and on a track he was quite familiar with.

We have seen before that when things arn't working well for Bayliss, or if pressure is on, he is more likely to get agrressive, over ride the bike and make way too many mistakes. That is not a quality that would serve him well as a gp rider. He is obviously the worlds best superbiker at the moment, but in Gp's i'd expect him to be in the top ten, but not the top 5 of the championship (edwards area).

I think Bayliss is an excelent rider, motogp is too hard for him to have major success in. His abilities go much better with a forgiving and less precise superbike.

Says it all Tom, Bayliss was on a high and had no pressure. A season is a long time. Edwards destroyed him the last time they were both in supers to take the title, and he's not exactly dominated GP.

And if I remember rightly, we have been assured on here that Nicky could have picked up the pace at any time, and lap the entire field if he had needed to. Jumkie said it so it must be true.....

I think, as we have agreed before, it comes down to, the fast guys will always be fast, but, the guys who hit the top of GP will always be a bit special. It has changed a bit now GP is on diesels, it took someone from another level to ride a 500 2 stroke to the limit every week.

I keep going back to lil John, but he demonstrated what a gifted, (if inconsistant) GP rider could do on a superbike.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Feb 1 2007, 01:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Says it all Tom, Bayliss was on a high and had no pressure. A season is a long time. Edwards destroyed him the last time they were both in supers to take the title, and he's not exactly dominated GP.

And if I remember rightly, we have been assured on here that Nicky could have picked up the pace at any time, and lap the entire field if he had needed to. Jumkie said it so it must be true.....

I think, as we have agreed before, it comes down to, the fast guys will always be fast, but, the guys who hit the top of GP will always be a bit special. It has changed a bit now GP is on diesels, it took someone from another level to ride a 500 2 stroke to the limit every week.

I keep going back to lil John, but he demonstrated what a gifted, (if inconsistant) GP rider could do on a superbike.

Pete

Exactly, John never quite had what it takes to run at the front in the Gp field, then went over to superbikes and in two years won the title on the bike that King Carl said was crap. That shows you the difference in rider talent perfectly.

And how Foggy came to the conclusion he could have beaten Doohan??? I'm not even sure he actually believed that, he can't be that stupid. I reckon his just said it to get some attention.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Feb 1 2007, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Exactly, John never quite had what it takes to run at the front in the Gp field, then went over to superbikes and in two years won the title on the bike that King Carl said was crap. That shows you the difference in rider talent perfectly.

And how Foggy came to the conclusion he could have beaten Doohan??? I'm not even sure he actually believed that, he can't be that stupid. I reckon his just said it to get some attention.

Foggy loved the sound of his own voice, and lets be honest, he was never going to get the chance to prove it. He had a major chip on his shoulder that he was No 1 in the lower class than GP. The British press didnt help by going on about how Superbikes were the big thing at the time. The whole 90's thing put Britain backwards as far as GP was concerned, all the young Brits wanted to be the next Foggy instead of Barry, and went into supers.


Nah, GP all the way for me.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Feb 1 2007, 09:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Foggy loved the sound of his own voice


gotta be gp's i love all of it mind u, but motogp is the top of the pyramid.

nothing against wsb, but's its motogp for me everytime,racing prototypes should be the pinicle because its that technology thats past down to wsb and street bikes not the other way.