VALENCIA 2011:RACE, end of era, CIAO MARCO

spooky · Nov 7, 2011

Have only seen the race once so cant comment on whether or not Spies fluffed the last corner but what i will say is that it was probably the most entertaining race of the season, real shame Rossi etc got taken out as they could have been up there battling. The battle between Dovi and Pedrosa was class, the way Spies hunted down Casey and passed him was also class. All in all, a pretty good race!

The tribute to Simo was really nice, very touching and good way to honour him. The noise of the fireworks and the engines sent shivers down my spine....lovely stuff!

Edwards · Nov 7, 2011

Mick D said:
Rossi DID pull this stunt - watch Motegi again.

What a ..... Jump right in with the, "I'm a racer, you're not na na na na boo boo" ..... Many racers at many different levels here and many non racers who comprehend very well the dynamics of racing who all understood what you eventually come out and say, IF fault is to be divvied, then it goes to Alvaro.

Mine too.

Your

Keshav said:
On the other hand, luck is, as everybody can agree, a major contributing factor when that many people are all vying to get safely through turn one, while riding the world's fastest bikes on cold tires before all their competitors. It isn't as if the whole thing is choreographed in advance.

+1

Edwards · Nov 7, 2011

Edwards said:
+1

Jumkie · Nov 7, 2011

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.

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.

Are you trying to pick a fight with me?

mylexicon · Nov 7, 2011

Austin said:
My personal opinion is that much of the crashing in today's MotoGP is a result of the extremely stiff Bridgestones. In attempt to construct a tire that will offer optimal grip for the duration, they've constructed something so stiff and hard, that there is little flex or warning. From what I gathered in listening to Toby and Jules during qualifying, the next generation of Bridgestones are said to be even squishier than the prototypes that were tested with such positive reaction at Estoril back in April/May. That should alleviate some of the crashes we've seen this season.

Think RDP 2008 or Casey Stoner 2006.

Squishy tires are supposed to give more feel so the rider can feel them letting go, but it doesn't mean they won't chuck it down the road in spectacular fashion.

Jumkie · Nov 7, 2011

Mental Anarchist said:
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.

No disrespect to Marc, but I agree that power politics drives results more than we think. I don't know how many riders are on par to Marc given equal opportunity, I'd like to think there are a few, but probably not too many. I like the kid, and he seems genuine from his body language on TV and reading his interviews speaking as a distant spectator. I think he will do fine in GP because I don't think the powers that be will groom the kid to see him fail in the premier class. Plus I think the kid has exceptional talent despite having a great package under him. This is what makes the difference. I don't think they just take any kid and say, hey, you're going to be the golden boy. What I think they do is find some kid that has astonishing talent and fantastic will to win, then check his passport to make sure he's Spanish, then say, hey, we're gonna surround you with an exceptional situation in GP. Keep in mind though, it doesn't always work, as it didn't work out for Pedrosa. Interestingly enough, one of the guys they sent packing to buffer Pedro from direct competition, was a kid named Casey. Perhaps this may explain Pedro's lower class titles. However, now both are on equal packages. Pedro is an exceptional talent, but Casey has two premier class titles, one against the Pedro straight up. So, maybe there is support for what you are contending above, eh.

Edwards · Nov 7, 2011

mylexicon said:
Think RDP 2008 or Casey Stoner 2006.

Squishy tires are supposed to give more feel so the rider can feel them letting go, but it doesn't mean they won't chuck it down the road in spectacular fashion.

I have to agree with this...if a rider is going to crash then it is more than likely they will still crash. However, we will have to wait and see...I understand your point too.

Austin · Nov 7, 2011

Jumkie said:
Are you trying to pick a fight with me?

Always.

mylexicon said:
Think RDP 2008 or Casey Stoner 2006.

Squishy tires are supposed to give more feel so the rider can feel them letting go, but it doesn't mean they won't chuck it down the road in spectacular fashion.

I'm not saying this new Bridgestone is going to be a cure all. There are still going to be plenty of guys losing the front. I just believe we will likely see fewer of those instances where they let go without any warning, which was so rampant in the first two-thirds of the season.

And wouldn't it be fair to say that RdP's crashfest of a season was when Bridgestone had first begun to implement this stiffer construction, rather than suiting their tires to Ducati, Suzuki, and Kawasaki? And Stoner, although he was going to throw the thing away regardless, just as Lorenzo and Simoncelli had done since, was at the bottom of the Michelin pecking order in the height of the Saturday Night Specials era. If you're not getting tires built especially for you, what chance do you have against riders who are?

corinthian · Nov 7, 2011

Mental Anarchist said:
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.

Regarding fuel consumption and track conditions, of course I had considered both. I wasn't trying to explain why Spies was slower over the final laps and particularly the final sector on the last couple of laps, just that he was. Besides, the stats don't have to take anything into account - just to say what went down. We're the ones that do the taking into account a posteriori. And if you want to argue that the conditions favoured Stoner at the end of the race then why did they so clearly seem to favour Spies a few laps earlier?

Mental Anarchist said:
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 totally agree. My point is that he might have felt like he was giving it his all just like every other lap but for one reason or another his 100% just wasn't 100% anymore, if you know what I mean. Injuries, track conditions, running lean, no tyres left, snack attack, whatever.

I'm not out to argue, just making a point which isn't necessarily opposite to yours. The lap times and split times are enough for me to draw a certain conclusion, which is simply that whatever the reasons behind this particular finish were, it didn't just come down to Honda grunt as some people are painting it. I just don't want to have to put up with another round of 'he only won it because of the bike' ......... that's not aimed at you mate, I bet you feel the same, I just don't want to sit through more crap like after 2007.

Which reminds me, Lorenzo was up in the Spanish commentary booth early in the race and he spoke specifically about the difference between the Honda and the Yamaha. He stated very generously that the difference was smaller than everybody had made out, that it varied from track to track, and that at a number of circuits the Yamaha had an advantage this year. Takes a big man to say that when the easiest thing would just be to go with the flow and talk about the gearbox that costs more than a house. I wonder how this race would've turned out if he'd been riding.

ScottP · Nov 7, 2011

Edwards said:
I have to agree with this...if a rider is going to crash then it is more than likely they will still crash. However, we will have to wait and see...I understand your point too.

I would rather have a rider that crashes because hes on the limit (CS in 2006 and RDP in every season) than an average rider that just goes around and does not crash because hes slow and boring (eg NH 2006 W/C season)

mylexicon · Nov 7, 2011

Austin said:
Always.

I'm not saying this new Bridgestone is going to be a cure all. There are still going to be plenty of guys losing the front. I just believe we will likely see fewer of those instances where they let go without any warning, which was so rampant in the first two-thirds of the season.

And wouldn't it be fair to say that RdP's crashfest of a season was when Bridgestone had first begun to implement this stiffer construction, rather than suiting their tires to Ducati, Suzuki, and Kawasaki? And Stoner, although he was going to throw the thing away regardless, just as Lorenzo and Simoncelli had done since, was at the bottom of the Michelin pecking order in the height of the Saturday Night Specials era. If you're not getting tires built especially for you, what chance do you have against riders who are?

RDP was riding dirty on his Michelin-shod LCR in 2008, after two seasons on the harder Bridgestone tires. My point was that soft-tires and aggressive corner entry can have catastrophic consequences. Softer tires with more feel SHOULD lead to fewer crashes and happier riders, but we have examples to the contrary. I'm not sure we can draw a conclusion one way or the other. It is entirely in the rider's hands, and I don't think we can predict how the riders will treat the tires under racing conditions.

In other words, I agree with your reasoning, but I'm not sure reason will play a role on race day.

rickyduck · Nov 7, 2011

Just want to say goodbye Simoncelli and Capirossi, thank you both for all the great memories... you're both legends forever! So so sad, but what a great end to an absolutely horrid season..

Keshav · Nov 7, 2011

corinthian said:
And if you want to argue that the conditions favoured Stoner at the end of the race then why did they so clearly seem to favour Spies a few laps earlier?

I seriously don't think it's a question of conditions favoring one rider over another. My take is very simple: It was raining more in earnest and Stoner with a large comfortable lead slowed down. While I wouldn't say Stoner "predicted" Spies overtaking, it couldn't have taken him by surprise. He'd seen what Spies was capable of at Assen in comparable conditions and knows his character, that being, that he's got the talent and the hunger and likes sliding around at the end of the race. Stoner was being cautious and at the last second threw caution to the wind and went for it. To our eyes Spies looked to be running wide etc. But in Stoner's estimation (expressed at the post-race interview), Spies was totally in control and very smooth throughout those last three laps. Both riders were riding slower due to heavier precipitation - but both were comfortably ahead of Dovi and Pedrosa; the fact that both slowed down is not ergo an indication of any problem; they were both just riding smart, precisely meted out laptimes in order to finish shiny side up.

Edwards · Nov 7, 2011

Scotty said:
I would rather have a rider that crashes because hes on the limit (CS in 2006 and RDP in every season) than an average rider that just goes around and does not crash because hes slow and boring (eg NH 2006 W/C season)

I think the exact same way. Infact, I myself am that rider. haha win or go home.

birdman · Nov 7, 2011

J4rn0 said:
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.

Why not a bit of both? Without Spies going wider than Stoner, no way can Stoner get past. Without Stoner getting a good drive, Spies still wins the race regardless of the wider exit.

This quote from Dovi seems to explain the last corner pretty well, it might not be down to a mistake but more the difference between rider styles and bikes:

“I am soft and smooth and I don’t pick up the bike enough to use the potential of the Honda like Casey (Stoner) and Dani,” Dovizioso said. “I have to try and be faster in the middle of the corner and it looks like to be fast with Yamaha you have to brake harder, and it looks like they have more stability than Honda to keep high speed on exit. It looks like this is a smooth engine. Sure it has less power, but it is perhaps a little easier to control.”

Austin · Nov 7, 2011

mylexicon said:
RDP was riding dirty on his Michelin-shod LCR in 2008, after two seasons on the harder Bridgestone tires. My point was that soft-tires and aggressive corner entry can have catastrophic consequences. Softer tires with more feel SHOULD lead to fewer crashes and happier riders, but we have examples to the contrary. I'm not sure we can draw a conclusion one way or the other. It is entirely in the rider's hands, and I don't think we can predict how the riders will treat the tires under racing conditions.

In other words, I agree with your reasoning, but I'm not sure reason will play a role on race day.

My apologies, I didn't think de Puniet joined LCR until 2009. So yes, I see where you're coming from and agree. Results seem to different from theory. Fingers crossed.

Jumkie · Nov 7, 2011

Austin said:
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.

Btw, for the record, I disagree with the tone of your take(s) regarding Josh Hayes at Valencia. I haven't had the time to respond properly, as I've been busy with other ...., but suffice to say, its my opinion that you and other journalists have grossly misjudged his performance (hence the lack of coverage). A one sentence blip in their weekend's coverage would have sufficed, something like, AMA champ Josh Hayes put in a stellar performance, beating some GP regulars, all things considered.

Austin · Nov 7, 2011

Jumkie said:
Btw, for the record, I disagree with the tone of your take(s) regarding Josh Hayes at Valencia. I haven't had the time to respond properly, as I've been busy with other ...., but suffice to say, its my opinion that you and other journalists have grossly misjudged his performance (hence the lack of coverage). A one sentence blip in their weekend's coverage would have sufficed, something like, AMA champ Josh Hayes put in a stellar performance, beating some GP regulars, all things considered.

Considering the conditions, the short time he had to learn the track, the bike, the brakes, and the tires, he did a great job. Certainly did himself proud. But I just don't think he did enough to warrant more praise than to say he finished in seventh place, excellent job, well done, thanks for the effort, good luck in the AMA next year. You know what I mean? We lost a quarter of the field in the first turn, plus two more got pushed well behind in Aoyama and Barbera, Elias and Capirossi both managed to wind up behind Hayes despite running well in front of him for 25 laps, Abraham fell off. There are at least eight riders there that had shown better pace than Hayes throughout practice all weekend and you would have to believe would have finished ahead of Hayes without those incidents. But that's racing, and Hayes brought it home. So for that, I think he did a fantastic job. Like I said before, I was looking to Nakasuga as a benchmark so I was personally a little disappointed, but I don't think you could ask any more from a wildcard considering the conditions.

Nuts · Nov 7, 2011

I'm the first to admit, I know .... all about AMA, and never see the races televised........ (anyone know if AMA is on Speed in Aust ??)

Do the top AMA guys aspire to go to WSBK ???

Maybe the right step should be AMA / WSBK to Moto2, and then hopefully to MotoGP, rather than direct AMA / WSK to MotoGP. I think Spies is the best rider I have seen come from WSBK to MotoGP (with exception of Bayliss), and even on a factory Yamaha, he has generally struggled to match the outright speed of the top guys who came up through 125's / 250's.

So how do US riders get into that route, maybe Red Bull Rookies, and then to Moto 2.

tphil · Nov 8, 2011

I will repeat my previous comment.

At tracks like Valencia, the grid should be two riders wide and have more distance between rows.

A tight first turn invites a compression of the field.

Imagine if someone in Moto2 had pulled Alvaro's mistake.

8 or more bikes would have hit the gravel.

Rember Moto2 at Indy in 2010?

VALENCIA 2011:RACE, end of era, CIAO MARCO

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

spooky

Edwards

Edwards

Jumkie

mylexicon

Jumkie

Edwards

Austin

Dr. Gonzo

corinthian

ScottP

mylexicon

rickyduck

Keshav

Edwards

birdman

Austin

Dr. Gonzo

Jumkie

Austin

Dr. Gonzo

Nuts

tphil

Similar threads

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions