excellent article by T.Moody: http://plus.autosport.com/free/feature/3450/debating-the-motogp-ballast-idea/
Joined Apr 2011
1K Posts | 87+
Pangea
Yes that article certainly is bang on the money.
Look at the statistics of the riders who have won world titles over the past decade - not too many lightweights in there apart from Stoner perhaps.....but he only won because of TC, superior electronics, having the best tyres and the most powerful engine so his world title can be disregarded.
If heavier riders are being disadvantaged with respect to fuel usage get rid of the ridiculous fuel limits....it has ZERO relevance to racing AND adds additional financial strain to the engineering costs involved in producing a powerful and reliable engine whilst also having to make it economical.
The fact that Rossi and Simoncelli have raised this in a safety meeting has to cast doubts over the validity of the riders safety commitee. Stoner has already stated that he no longer attends these meetings as there is no parity when it comes to having the opinions of certain riders heard and I think this type of posturing adds some weight to his claims......There is no way this can be interpreted as a "safety issue"....unless your name is Talpa
Very good article & a balanced view on the +++ & ---- of a riders weight on performance aspects of a GP bike.
I call a load of .... on the rider/bike minimum weight call by Rossi & Simoncelli (BFF's). And to bring it up in the safety commission is ridiculous in the extreme. If ballast has to be added to a bike to meet a minimum weight, this is creating a larger safety problem relating to mass & inertia. I thought the safety committee should be for addressing safety concerns, not creating them. If they want to go down this minimum weight route, it should be through the rules committee.
Leave it as it is. There has never been a problem before & i think the positives & the negatives end up negating each other in lap times anyway. Honestly, i think this is just another excuse for Rossi's poor performance on the Ducati. He is about the same weight as Lorenzo & equality didn't help last year. He's going to need a lot more than 5kg ballast on the Hondas & Yamahas if he wants to be competetive with them based on current dry performances.
I call a load of .... on the rider/bike minimum weight call by Rossi & Simoncelli (BFF's). And to bring it up in the safety commission is ridiculous in the extreme. If ballast has to be added to a bike to meet a minimum weight, this is creating a larger safety problem relating to mass & inertia. I thought the safety committee should be for addressing safety concerns, not creating them. If they want to go down this minimum weight route, it should be through the rules committee.
Leave it as it is. There has never been a problem before & i think the positives & the negatives end up negating each other in lap times anyway. Honestly, i think this is just another excuse for Rossi's poor performance on the Ducati. He is about the same weight as Lorenzo & equality didn't help last year. He's going to need a lot more than 5kg ballast on the Hondas & Yamahas if he wants to be competetive with them based on current dry performances.
Joined Oct 2006
25K Posts | 4K+
Your Mom's House
First of all, FU Toolie Moody, Laguna Seca is safer than most the tracks in GP.
Second, Mr. Squigz & Coupe d'etat, this certainly IS a "safety" issue! Its a matter of SAFETY for the millions of rabid Rossi fans that Vale get any edge possible to 'safely' regain the title. Its even a matter of 'safety' for the pocketbook of Dorna to keep the throngs of the Yellow Army glued to their TVs so as to provide the rating for which 9/10 of marketing dollars is sold to sponsors. In fact, its more than a matter of 'safety', for which Rossi was more than justified in bringing up the issue in said arm of the governing body, but its also a matter of survival.
Plus, i'd like to remind u, when Pedro, (the real villain in this story) came into the top category, he was 98lbs, in the years that followed, when Rossi was winning titles in 08/09, Dani balooned to a 108lbs. This kind of weight gain must be stopped. Sure, Rossi was too busy winning to pay much attention to Pedro, but at this rate, Dani will eventually be 290lbs. Its the least Rossi & Simocelli can do to stem the tide of unhealthy weight gain. Everybody knows obesity is linked to several diseases, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, and the wors of all, loss of titlenitous.
And third, "kerb"? Really? Is that how u ..... spell 'curb' in Euro?
Second, Mr. Squigz & Coupe d'etat, this certainly IS a "safety" issue! Its a matter of SAFETY for the millions of rabid Rossi fans that Vale get any edge possible to 'safely' regain the title. Its even a matter of 'safety' for the pocketbook of Dorna to keep the throngs of the Yellow Army glued to their TVs so as to provide the rating for which 9/10 of marketing dollars is sold to sponsors. In fact, its more than a matter of 'safety', for which Rossi was more than justified in bringing up the issue in said arm of the governing body, but its also a matter of survival.
Plus, i'd like to remind u, when Pedro, (the real villain in this story) came into the top category, he was 98lbs, in the years that followed, when Rossi was winning titles in 08/09, Dani balooned to a 108lbs. This kind of weight gain must be stopped. Sure, Rossi was too busy winning to pay much attention to Pedro, but at this rate, Dani will eventually be 290lbs. Its the least Rossi & Simocelli can do to stem the tide of unhealthy weight gain. Everybody knows obesity is linked to several diseases, diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, and the wors of all, loss of titlenitous.
And third, "kerb"? Really? Is that how u ..... spell 'curb' in Euro?
Personally I can't even believe this is being considered, just look at the top speeds.
The fastest speeds are not always the light weight guys.
Those 2 clowns Rossi and Simoncelli entered the sport being big guys so deal with it (yes yes I know Rossi was smaller when he was on a 125 etc.)
Where they sooking and asking for rule changes when they where beating people in the 125's and 250's?
No I don't think so, so to try and bring this rubbish in now is ridiculous.
It is not a safety issue and never will be.
Cheers
Gecko
The rule change the heavier riders should ask for is to increase the fule limits. I think both Rossi and Sic are taking an indirect approach to that goal (as no one in their right frame ofmind will agree of minimum weight
Joined Feb 2009
3K Posts | 2+
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
The rule change the heavier riders should ask for is to increase the fule limits. I think both Rossi and Sic are taking an indirect approach to that goal (as no one in their right frame ofmind will agree of minimum weight). But I think MSMA would want to keep the fuel rules as it will help them create commuter motorcycles in Asia (which sells in millions) where fuel efficiency is the most important factor.
i don't really see any connection between cheap mass produced honda dax and monkey bikes and the rc212v
but yes, its insane . but not the first ttime moody stated such bs
i agree with 125s, maybe even the middle class, but adding weight to the mgp bikes ?
if they feel weight is such a big advantage to others then sic should get rid of his hair and rossi rid of his ego
I don't think weight is the answer. Fuel is - why should simoncelli have to run a lean map because he is bigger just so he can get to the end. There is give and take with the lighter/heavier rider advantages but if one has to ride a de-powered bike come the race as opposed to someone else on the same machinery, that is not right.
Joined Feb 2009
3K Posts | 2+
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
agree, but then again what should be the solution? clown boy ,spies and rossi get a pint of fuel more than the others?
if they allowed just another litre or made the races a lap shorter this wouldn't even be up for debate
we need to return to the 2006 rules and state of electronics ....
Joined Mar 2005
7K Posts | 20+
Woody Creek
agree, but then again what should be the solution? clown boy ,spies and rossi get a pint of fuel more than the others?
if they allowed just another litre or made the races a lap shorter this wouldn't even be up for debate
we need to return to the 2006 rules and state of electronics ....
If I remember correctly, 2006 had fuel limitations as well. Not sure if it was the present 21 litres, but it was certainly a smaller capacity than in 2005.
Joined Oct 2007
4K Posts | 744+
Tuscany, Italy
"Word is that they said..." does not mean "They said...". This is another journalist's coup... based on nothing.
GPOne has this interesting bit:
"We asked [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]Franco Uncini of the Safety Commission, to try and get some clarification.[/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font][font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]"It's an entirely useless controversy. Just a waste of time! First and foremost, I want to say that there currently isn't any initiative on the table for a minimum rider/bike weight. I don't know who started this rumor, but I deny it. The issue came up by chance, as these things always do, since the Safety Commission fortunately gives time to any issue that might arise in our meetings."
So who raised the initial question?
"Everybody and nobody, I don't remember. It just came up... maybe because we were talking about the weight of the on-board cameras, or something like that. If someone is saying that it came from Valentino, I can assure them that he recognizes Pedrosa's advantage on the straights, and disadvantage in the corners."
[/font]End of another 'big story'.... [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"][/font]
Joined Feb 2009
3K Posts | 2+
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
of course it was limited in 2006 ! i think it was 22l.... apparently that one liter more makes the difference
Joined Feb 2009
3K Posts | 2+
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
"Word is that they said..." does not mean "They said...". This is another journalist's coup... based on nothing.
GPOne has this interesting bit:
"We asked [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]Franco Uncini of the Safety Commission, to try and get some clarification.[/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font][font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]"It's an entirely useless controversy. Just a waste of time! First and foremost, I want to say that there currently isn't any initiative on the table for a minimum rider/bike weight. I don't know who started this rumor, but I deny it. The issue came up by chance, as these things always do, since the Safety Commission fortunately gives time to any issue that might arise in our meetings."
So who raised the initial question?
"Everybody and nobody, I don't remember. It just came up... maybe because we were talking about the weight of the on-board cameras, or something like that. If someone is saying that it came from Valentino, I can assure them that he recognizes Pedrosa's advantage on the straights, and disadvantage in the corners."
[/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font]
good to hear that such rubbish isn't seriously up for debate ,thanks j4rno
Joined Mar 2005
7K Posts | 20+
Woody Creek
Yeah, that sounds about right. Coming down from 24 litres the previous seasons, wasn't it?
i don't really see any connection between cheap mass produced honda dax and monkey bikes and the rc212v
Not sure of that. I remember Kropotkin saying in his site that the fuel R&D of efficient fuel consumption allows the manufacturers to understand the fule consumption at partial throttle which is very important to the cheaper bikes ridden in Asia for commuting. Moreover, most of the current bike technologies originated from racing. So its not a stretch to assume that the manufacturers want to gain knowledge in this area which would allow them to sell another 10 million bikes across Asia
i agree with 125s, maybe even the middle class, but adding weight to the mgp bikes ?
if they feel weight is such a big advantage to others then sic should get rid of his hair and rossi rid of his ego
Adding weight or restricting fuel are I feel not the correct in racing. All the MotoGP riders, grew up learning and honing their riding styles without these restrictions rules. There may be some guys used to styles which doesn't gel well with these rules which hamper them more compared to others (Hayden comes to my mind). As long as the entire bike racing infrastructure across the world take up these rules at all levels(so that riders can change their styles at a younger age), I feel these rules just make it difficult to measure the true riding talent of any rider.
Renjith
Joined Feb 2008
2K Posts | 0+
home
"Word is that they said..." does not mean "They said...". This is another journalist's coup... based on nothing.
GPOne has this interesting bit:
"We asked [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]Franco Uncini of the Safety Commission, to try and get some clarification.[/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font][font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]"It's an entirely useless controversy. Just a waste of time! First and foremost, I want to say that there currently isn't any initiative on the table for a minimum rider/bike weight. I don't know who started this rumor, but I deny it. The issue came up by chance, as these things always do, since the Safety Commission fortunately gives time to any issue that might arise in our meetings."
So who raised the initial question?
"Everybody and nobody, I don't remember. It just came up... maybe because we were talking about the weight of the on-board cameras, or something like that. If someone is saying that it came from Valentino, I can assure them that he recognizes Pedrosa's advantage on the straights, and disadvantage in the corners."
[/font]End of another 'big story'.... [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"][/font]
The first I heard of it was through an interview with Stoner, who is a member of the Safety Commission. To say this is based on nothing seems a bit harsh.
Uncini is saying it's not on the table currently, not that it has not been a few weeks ago.
Also, rather than denying that Rossi started this thing, Uncini is merely saying that Rossi is recognizing Pedrosa's disadvantage in the corners. That's deflecting.
Sounds to me like it was very much on the table, but after all the debate surrounding the Rossi-Stoner incident last race a few people realized that pushing the matter might have some pretty nasty PR consequences and decided to act like there never was anything to it.
is it sure that Simoncelli has to run a lean map because he is bigger? he seems to have an aggresive ridding style.
Joined Apr 2011
1K Posts | 87+
Pangea
"Word is that they said..." does not mean "They said...". This is another journalist's coup... based on nothing.
GPOne has this interesting bit:
"We asked [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]Franco Uncini of the Safety Commission, to try and get some clarification.[/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font]
[font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"] [/font][font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"]"It's an entirely useless controversy. Just a waste of time! First and foremost, I want to say that there currently isn't any initiative on the table for a minimum rider/bike weight. I don't know who started this rumor, but I deny it. The issue came up by chance, as these things always do, since the Safety Commission fortunately gives time to any issue that might arise in our meetings."
So who raised the initial question?
"Everybody and nobody, I don't remember. It just came up... maybe because we were talking about the weight of the on-board cameras, or something like that. If someone is saying that it came from Valentino, I can assure them that he recognizes Pedrosa's advantage on the straights, and disadvantage in the corners."
[/font]End of another 'big story'.... [font="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif"][/font]
It has been reported in a number of separate articles recently so I am not so sure there is zero truth to this rumour.....for example
In a recent MCN article...
It emerged in Jerez earlier this month that a campaign, spearheaded by Valentino Rossi and fellow Italian Marco Simoncelli, has been launched to get a rider and bike weight limit introduced.....
and this from Simoncelli himself...
Simoncelli is adamant he's at an unfair disadvantage being the heaviest rider in MotoGP at 72kg. The San Carlo Gresini Honda rider said: "My problem is that I'm bigger than the other riders and this messes up the fuel consumption and I have to go for a more lean engine set-up, and this is not good for the bike's performance on the straight and the bike can push less."
From Motomatters.....
It emerged that Marco Simoncelli and Valentino Rossi had submitted an informal proposal to the Safety Commission to examine having a combined minimum weight for both bike and rider in MotoGP, just as there currently is in the 125cc class. Their argument was that lighter riders had an unfair advantage, and that by setting a minimum weight, the larger riders would have a better chance of competing.
I also vaguely recall some recent quotes from both riders but cant remember where I might have seen it.....
This bit here that Uncini is quoted as saying just sounds completely ridiculous....
So who raised the initial question?
"Everybody and nobody, I don't remember. It just came up... ....hmmmmmmm - it was the one armed man!!!!!!!!
I would back Rossi and Marco 100% on scrapping fuel restrictions....but if it is true (it was on the internet so it MUST be true - right
Fair comment but neither you or I know the answer to that. I thought simoncelli reported that he had a lean map because he was heavier which has to be scientifically correct. Whether or not he has to run an even leaner map due to an aggressive style is a different question which can only be answered through a comparison on all rider's styles.
Joined Oct 2007
4K Posts | 744+
Tuscany, Italy
It has been reported in a number of separate articles recently so I am not so sure there is zero truth to this rumour.....for example
In a recent MCN article...
It emerged in Jerez earlier this month that a campaign, spearheaded by Valentino Rossi and fellow Italian Marco Simoncelli, has been launched to get a rider and bike weight limit introduced.....
and this from Simoncelli himself...
Simoncelli is adamant he's at an unfair disadvantage being the heaviest rider in MotoGP at 72kg. The San Carlo Gresini Honda rider said: "My problem is that I'm bigger than the other riders and this messes up the fuel consumption and I have to go for a more lean engine set-up, and this is not good for the bike's performance on the straight and the bike can push less."
From Motomatters.....
It emerged that Marco Simoncelli and Valentino Rossi had submitted an informal proposal to the Safety Commission to examine having a combined minimum weight for both bike and rider in MotoGP, just as there currently is in the 125cc class. Their argument was that lighter riders had an unfair advantage, and that by setting a minimum weight, the larger riders would have a better chance of competing.
I also vaguely recall some recent quotes from both riders but cant remember where I might have seen it.....
This bit here that Uncini is quoted as saying just sounds completely ridiculous....
So who raised the initial question?
"Everybody and nobody, I don't remember. It just came up... ....hmmmmmmm - it was the one armed man!!!!!!!!
I would back Rossi and Marco 100% on scrapping fuel restrictions....but if it is true (it was on the internet so it MUST be true - right) that they initiated a discussion on minimum rider/weight limits - I say bad call and dont support this rule no matter who raised the issue to begin with.
So, explain why there is no direct quote from Rossi on this issue? Normally he's not shy about what he thinks. Fact is, he's not on record at all on this subject. Wonder why? Maybe Uncini is right, and those who are ridiculous are those who lie in ambush ready to jump on anything that can be used against the hated #46.
This is the kind of stuff that is used to make easy and useless headlines -- if they write that something was said by Mr. Squiggle, for example, nobody could care less; but if they write that "word is" it was Rossi saying it, then the big headlines are guaranteed. At no risk, because "word is" is a safe enough formula for journalists...
