VALENCIA 2011:RACE, end of era, CIAO MARCO

Jumkie said:

I had to turn to crash.net to find something on Hayes' performance in the race. WTF

Click to expand...

My god. Next you'll be turning to BM for salient posts!!!!

Jumkie said:

I spoke to one AMA crewchief, and asked him Thursday what were his thoughts on Hayes for the GP weekend. he said, top 10, without hesitation. Really, I said to him, Hayes has no prior knowledge on the bike, track, and tires. He replied, Hayes has plenty of knowledge! And added, he's been riding at a high level for years in the AMA. He went on to say, something that the Euros and journalist never seem to get is that in the AMA, the tracks are very tricky and the competitiveness of the field sharpens rider's racecraft. They go to European tracks and they realize that the tracks are easier to negotiate than American tracks. He said, in the States, you screw up one corner and you've messed up the three corners that follow because they are very connected and dependent. He said, European tracks are designed so safe and wide that AMA riders find the tracks relatively easier to rider than the ones here in the States.

Click to expand...

I can attest to the fact that N.A. tracks that amateurs use are (mostly) .... (bumpy, rippled, potholed tarmac that hasn't been resurfaced in decades - little or no real "run-off" etc...). Its kinda like learning to ski/board in Ontario... ice covered slopes are the norm - powder a rarity. When I first went to mountains out west and in Europe I thought, "WOW! Powder is cool, and sooooo forgiving"!!!

birdman said:

You are correct. But still they had no need to push those bikes until they crashed, yet they did anyway. So they crash on under-developed bikes in infancy, they crash over developed bikes with too much electronics. They crashed on a perfect developed V5. Stoner crashed on 125 and 250. They just plain old crash because going too fast is fun for them I guess?



I dont understand why they cant have more tyre options. Why not either stiff or soft or medium or whatever the hell rider wants?

Click to expand...

Didn't mean to single you out or anything. I think my point was that the formula probably has little to do with the amount of crashes. Riders are going to crash because they have a habit of it or the bike is underdeveloped or they don't get on with the tires. The biggest problem, at the moment, is tires. We seem on the same page here, I'm just enjoying bringing up how poor the original ZX-RR was and how insane the Cube was.

Jumkie said:

He also mentioned something that I've long held, he said, MotoGP is not about getting the best riders, its about getting the best riders that can be marketable. He said Josh Hayes would be a upper third rider given a decent ride even at 36. He also said, Mladin would have tore up Wsbk and been an easy front runner in GP, but he never could be guaranteed a competitive bike, and he wasn't willing to ride as hard to only arrive upper one third knowing he could win given a factory machine. Plus, he added, he was making lots of money in the AMA, and that was just to comfy to let go. Just sharing somebody else's opinion here. One that I particularly think has good insight.

Click to expand...

The reason you don't see much Hayes coverage today is because it was a strong news day. The race was absolutely fantastic at the front and stretching back to fifth, it's the end of the 800 era, silly season is still in swing, the 1000s debut Tuesday, and the tribute to Simoncelli. There was a lot going on today. When there's that much to talk about, a wildcard rider finishing seventh isn't going to be high up MCN or Kropotkin's priorities. Especially when that seventh would've likely been a 16th under normal conditions. Again, pardon my buzzkill.



You're right about marketability, but there is also visibility. Coverage of the US in Europe is poor. Team bosses don't get to see much of the AMA, but they see World Supers going considerably faster at Miller than AMA (without factoring in technical differences), and they see Bostrom at Laguna, and they see Hayes at Valencia. Ben Spies was considerably more impressive in his wildcards with his Suzuki and he's still not a regular front runner. They're not going to take a punt on someone who brings in fewer sponsorship dollars and shows less promise than Spies.



I'm not sure I buy into Hayes being a top third guy, but certainly Mladin could have run World Superbike for a decade if he felt like it. But as you've been accurately been informed, no one was willing to match the financial nor competitive commitment Yoshimura American Suzuki were making to Mladin, so he stayed home. There were rumors in 2004 or 2005 that Gresini were interested in Mladin. I was convinced he'd be a regular podium guy.



There's talent in the AMA, I have little doubt about it. However, it's hard to see from afar and I, for one, don't believe it's Josh Hayes or Ben Bostrom who are the riders team bosses should be looking at.

BarryMachine said:

WHy anybody would place the likes of Hayes or Bostrom on a gp bike instead of say Ant West or Vermulen is beyond me

( other than the fact that their are many more to .... over Hayes )

Click to expand...

I like Westy, but he had his go. He had a good run at Kawasaki, but it wasn't enough to keep his seat. He had a good ride in World Supersport but he still couldn't seem to regain the magic. And I'm not saying the MZ is a great Moto2 bike, but I haven't seen any signs of life in the past two years. As far as Vermeulen, I'd love for him to get another chance, but you've got to wonder about his health. He's hardly ridden a bike in the past two years. But he said that he's in discussion with some CRT teams and World Supers, so best of luck to him.

Mick D said:

Its kinda like learning to ski/board in Ontario... ice covered slopes are the norm - powder a rarity. When I first went to mountains out west and in Europe I thought, "WOW! Powder is cool, and sooooo forgiving"!!!

Click to expand...

Learning and riding regularly on ice and hard-pack makes going to the mountains that much more enjoyable.

Mistake by Spies in the last corner, he went too wide and offered the best acceleration line to Stoner and the Honda. He was able to come from behind when it started raining, because he used unconventional lines to stay out of the 'rubberized' part of the track, (that becomes slippery when wet). It is something everybody does in car racing when it rains, but it's not so easy to do with motorcycles.

Austin said:

Didn't mean to single you out or anything. I think my point was that the formula probably has little to do with the amount of crashes. Riders are going to crash because they have a habit of it or the bike is underdeveloped or they don't get on with the tires. The biggest problem, at the moment, is tires. We seem on the same page here, I'm just enjoying bringing up how poor the original ZX-RR was and how insane the Cube was.

Click to expand...

I understood where you were coming from. Was talking (edit typing) to myself as much as anyone, bad habit.



insane Cube

J4rn0 said:

Mistake by Spies in the last corner, he went too wide and offered the best acceleration line to Stoner and the Honda. He was able to come from behind when it started raining, because he used unconventional lines to stay out of the 'rubberized' part of the track, (that becomes slippery when wet). It is something everybody does in car racing when it rains, but it's not so easy to do with motorcycles.

Click to expand...

That flies in the face of Spies own take on the last corner in the post race press conference where he said that he made no mistakes and got the same drive he had every other lap. Not sure but he sounded pretty genuine and I guess he probably knows. On the other bike Stoner said he threw caution to the wind went for it and hooked it up for a perfect corner and perfect acceleration. He said that on the previous lap he had noticed that he could run the corner better than Spies so he knew he was in with a chance.

Mental Anarchist said:

I reckon you could probably find 10 riders in Moto2 who could beat Marquez if given the same opportunity.

Click to expand...

Over a season, and now that Marquez has his rookie year done i think you'd find less than 3, and still struggle

Tom said:

Over a season, and now that Marquez has his rookie year done i think you'd find less than 3, and still struggle

Click to expand...

The problem is Tom we will never know because politics and money dictates who gets winning machinery. You think there would be less then 3, I think there would be 10. There are guys in that field that would be far hungrier then Marquez because they have had to scrape dollars together just to get a bike that will always only run at the back.



Personally I think Marquez will just be another on the long list of lower class champions who does nothing on a MotoGP bike. I would back Bradl over Marquez everyday on a MotoGP bike. Same as I would back a hungry guy down the back of the grid with raw talent over Marquez everyday. The problem is all bikes are bought these days and the guy at the back will never raise the funds to get the good ride to prove himself.

Mental Anarchist said:

That flies in the face of Spies own take on the last corner in the post race press conference where he said that he made no mistakes and got the same drive he had every other lap. Not sure but he sounded pretty genuine and I guess he probably knows. On the other bike Stoner said he threw caution to the wind went for it and hooked it up for a perfect corner and perfect acceleration. He said that on the previous lap he had noticed that he could run the corner better than Spies so he knew he was in with a chance.

Click to expand...

My first thoughts were that he also said that he was losing time to Dovi and Pedrosa every lap out of that corner and down the straight, then having to make it up around the rest of the circuit. In other words, the corner, or his line through it, were a problem for him all race. As to Spies running too wide, most of the riders were on that same line all race weren't they? I particularly remember the onboard footage of various riders going very wide coming onto the straight. I think it was fair to say that it was Stoner who changed his line, and let's face it he owned that corner (that entire final section) all weekend.



But then I found a couple of stats (I've been going over the pdfs from the race):



- Stoner was about 8 tenths of a second faster than Spies through the final sector (26.312 vs 27.106) on the last lap. You don't make up nearly a second coming out of the final corner, he already had some serious momentum coming in.



- Fastest speed of the race was from Toni Elias (313.2 km/h), nearly 10 km/h faster than Spies who was 11th fastest. BUT - Stoner's top speed on the last lap (303.8 km/h) is similar to Ben's top speed during most of the race (top of 303.6; over 300 km/h more than half the laps) but Spies slowed down to mid-290s for the last two laps and the last lap was his slowest top speed by a fair margin (293.4). In other words he was 10 km/h slower than Stoner, but more importantly he was 10 km/h slower than HIMSELF.



- Spies was in the 25s for the final sector every lap without exception until lap 24. He then rode 3 laps in 26.xxx and finished with 3 laps in 27.xxx. He clearly was not 'getting the same drive' as he said. Maybe those injuries caught up with him.

birdman said:

I understood where you were coming from. Was talking (edit typing) to myself as much as anyone, bad habit.



insane Cube

Click to expand...

No need to do CRT now Colin.....we have a part in `Ghostrider II` for you.

birdman said:

Not sure. 990's had plenty of crashes though. Was not so good a time for McCoy to be on a Kawasaki, or Edwards on an Aprilia Cube, Bayliss had a terrible year in 2004 crashing the Ducati out of 8 races. Or even Stoner on a Honda. 2006 w/c was decided by two crashes in the last two races.



All in all, not a massive difference. 2006, 22 listed retirements for the top ten. 2011, 24 retirements. 2005, 27 retirements.



Anyway what do I know? Nothing, better to read what he thinks...........................



http://motomatters.c...ner_talks_.html



http://motomatters.c...cati_s_scr.html

Click to expand...

The number of finishers in the last 2 completed races was nigh on farcical for the pinnacle of bike racing in the world, and the number of starters not all that flash either, imo.



Whether due to electronics , tyres/tires or whatever , the number of injuries costing the top riders multiple race starts also seems excessive to me, again only imo. In deference to our compatriot Mental Anarchist I will leave out ducati. Yamaha have had 3 factory riders in the last 2 years, all of whom have missed multiple races through injury. The first, arguably the goat and with the longest streak of consecutive race starts in history going back to the 500s in the premier class had his first serious injury, a season defining one. The second, admittedly a european rider with a background in the 125s and 250s for which it seems some might deride him was closely competitive with the first rider in the 2009 season when both were last fully healthy. The third has never even sat on a 125 or 250 to my knowledge and is a veteran of hand to hand combat with the likes of matt mladin and subsequently max biaggi and carlos checa, both experienced 500 riders, and was victorious against them at that. The sole suzuki factory rider missed several races with a fractured femur not long ago. It is not a good time to go into riders of factory hondas, but only dovi who many have argued does not push sufficiently hard is completely unscathed. Their veteran factory rider pedrosa missed several races with fractures both this year and in 2010, and even stoner was perhaps fortunate to escape more serious injury from a massive practice highside which nevertheless impaired him for several races this year.



I don't dismiss MA's contention, which followed on from johnny knockdown, that 125s and 250s may not prepare riders well for bigger bikes. In fact one slant that could be put on the push for CRT bikes is that they will be more suitable for the products of dorna's apparently massively successful moto2 formula (if anyone cares who actually wins those races, close though they may be), which does not show strong signs of producing 800/1000 riders as yet.

jeez some peopl just cant listen to the rider do they.



why is always a conspriacy theory when stoner wins.



stoner was way over cautious at the front losing the 10s lead and hit a false neutral in one of the corners...



he pushed harder/threw caution to the wind in the last corner more than speis did. stoner even said he took more of a risk more than any time during the season.





had nothing to do with engine, electronics coz it was wet and traction was low anyway, and electronics was setup for the dry



end of story.

I think Spies is looking fat again, that was what cost him the win.



Too many rounds off, and too much "supersize me".

corinthian said:

My first thoughts were that he also said that he was losing time to Dovi and Pedrosa every lap out of that corner and down the straight, then having to make it up around the rest of the circuit. In other words, the corner, or his line through it, were a problem for him all race. As to Spies running too wide, most of the riders were on that same line all race weren't they? I particularly remember the onboard footage of various riders going very wide coming onto the straight. I think it was fair to say that it was Stoner who changed his line, and let's face it he owned that corner (that entire final section) all weekend. But then I found a couple of stats (I've been going over the pdfs from the race): - Stoner was about 8 tenths of a second faster than Spies through the final sector (26.312 vs 27.106) on the last lap. You don't make up nearly a second coming out of the final corner, he already had some serious momentum coming in. - Fastest speed of the race was from Toni Elias (313.2 km/h), nearly 10 km/h faster than Spies who was 11th fastest. BUT - Stoner's top speed on the last lap (303.8 km/h) is similar to Ben's top speed during most of the race (top of 303.6; over 300 km/h more than half the laps) but Spies slowed down to mid-290s for the last two laps and the last lap was his slowest top speed by a fair margin (293.4). In other words he was 10 km/h slower than Stoner, but more importantly he was 10 km/h slower than HIMSELF. - Spies was in the 25s for the final sector every lap without exception until lap 24. He then rode 3 laps in 26.xxx and finished with 3 laps in 27.xxx. He clearly was not 'getting the same drive' as he said. Maybe those injuries caught up with him.

Click to expand...

I appreciate the effort you have gone to to bring these stats. However your stats do not take note of the condition of the track, fuel management and other factors. The condition of the track deteriorated sufficiently for Stoner (the best wet weather rider in MotoGP) to lose 10 sec in a couple of laps.

Maybe Spies was just giving PR dribble like the euros and the 2nd riders do but from my understanding it is not his style. We know Stoner doesn't do PR so I will take their words on their own performances in this instance.

I had to laugh just read on facebook from some how it was a ..... trick for stoner to take the win off spies, they have got to be kidding, obviously their bias against stoner talking!

Mental Anarchist said:

That flies in the face of Spies own take on the last corner in the post race press conference where he said that he made no mistakes and got the same drive he had every other lap. Not sure but he sounded pretty genuine and I guess he probably knows. On the other bike Stoner said he threw caution to the wind went for it and hooked it up for a perfect corner and perfect acceleration. He said that on the previous lap he had noticed that he could run the corner better than Spies so he knew he was in with a chance.

Click to expand...

Well, I do not want to fly in the face of anybody, leave alone Spies who is a great rider, but why rely on words when it's enough to watch a video. He went too wide and so he had to wait a tiny bit more before opening up the throttle fully. The Honda may have a little more power than the Yamaha, but not that much.

J4rn0 said:

Well, I do not want to fly in the face of anybody, leave alone Spies who is a great rider, but why rely on words when it's enough to watch a video. He went too wide and so he had to wait a tiny bit more before opening up the throttle fully. The Honda may have a little more power than the Yamaha, but not that much.

Click to expand...

Or it could simply be that in that corner of that lap Stoner just did better! I know that this is often the last thing to come into the minds of some (not necessarily you as you often give props) people when it comes to deciphering events.

Mental Anarchist said:

The condition of the track deteriorated sufficiently for Stoner (the best wet weather rider in MotoGP) to lose 10 sec in a couple of laps.

Maybe Spies was just giving PR dribble like the euros and the 2nd riders do but from my understanding it is not his style. We know Stoner doesn't do PR so I will take their words on their own performances in this instance.

Click to expand...

Spies is really good in these damp conditions, he was at assen as well. Stoner is great in the wet as you say, and usually good in damp conditions when he goes for it, cf the impossible win in the italian race (mugello) in 2009 when he gained 10 or more seconds in 2 or 3 laps in the bike changeover in a flag to flag race.



My impression was that he wasn't prepared to go all out in the damp with the championship decided etc, had a near lose which cost him several seconds after which ben passed him, then with 2 laps to go thought bugger it I can still win and went harder. It being easier to judge changing conditions when not the first to encounter them comes into it as well as has been said.



Ben's riding to catch him was brilliant, particularly given his recent injuries, and he would have been a well deserved winner. However most other riders (?any other rider) would have drawn universal praise for a last corner move like stoner's. Even kropotkin said something about it being a change for him to win on the last lap rather than be passed. Maybe I am losing it but I don't remember him losing to last lap moves very many times, apart from to melandri in 2006; if he is fast enough to be still in front on the last lap he is usually well ahead.

Mental Anarchist said:

Or it could simply be that in that corner of that lap Stoner just did better! I know that this is often the last thing to come into the minds of some (not necessarily you as you often give props) people when it comes to deciphering events.

Click to expand...

So, was it Stoner's feat or Spies' fault in that last corner? The video leaves no doubt to me: it was more Spies' mistake of going too wide, than anything out of the ordinary by Stoner. The speed data confirm this, with Spies much slower than Yamaha's potential at the flag.

J4rn0 said:

Mistake by Spies in the last corner, he went too wide and offered the best acceleration line to Stoner and the Honda. He was able to come from behind when it started raining, because he used unconventional lines to stay out of the 'rubberized' part of the track, (that becomes slippery when wet). It is something everybody does in car racing when it rains, but it's not so easy to do with motorcycles.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, it almost looked like a combined pass! Even what Spies said on the interview that he made no mistake, he is obviously lying to himself.

Strange, he dind´t show any disapointment, on what would have been a win on the last MotoGP 800cc race!