What happened?

First off, I've only really followed MotoGP since around 04-05, so if someone can enlighten me that would be awesome. I've recently been watching some of the MotoGP classic races on YouTube, and it seems like it was an actual race then. Was this the norm, or am I just lucky enough to have the exciting races filtered out for me? Otherwise, what happened? It's so far and few in between that this takes place anymore. I've really gotten sick of watching someone win by a huge margin or have anyone after 5th become a placemarker thats 30+ seconds off the lead pace. It can't be just Dorna wrecking it because every other motorsport I care to watch is the same way. 


 


There has to be some type of formula that would make GP racing more exciting again. It doesn't even seem like riders are excited to be on the track anymore. I live in the States and the AMA is a bit of a snooze, so I have to get up to watch an uneventful GP race at 6am. I think I'd rather stay in bed. Sorry if this topic has been exhausted to death, but I just noticed it from watching the days of the 500's. So my question is, how does the excitement from a race down to the wire happen again or was that rare even way back when?

gbphantom

3563111373979358

I've really gotten sick of watching someone win by a huge margin

Click to expand...

I'd strongly recommend you avoid the 2002 season review as though it were herpes then.

gbphantom

3563111373979358

First off, I've only really followed MotoGP since around 04-05, so if someone can enlighten me that would be awesome. I've recently been watching some of the MotoGP classic races on YouTube, and it seems like it was an actual race then. Was this the norm, or am I just lucky enough to have the exciting races filtered out for me? Otherwise, what happened? It's so far and few in between that this takes place anymore. I've really gotten sick of watching someone win by a huge margin or have anyone after 5th become a placemarker thats 30+ seconds off the lead pace. It can't be just Dorna wrecking it because every other motorsport I care to watch is the same way. 


 


There has to be some type of formula that would make GP racing more exciting again. It doesn't even seem like riders are excited to be on the track anymore. I live in the States and the AMA is a bit of a snooze, so I have to get up to watch an uneventful GP race at 6am. I think I'd rather stay in bed. Sorry if this topic has been exhausted to death, but I just noticed it from watching the days of the 500's. So my question is, how does the excitement from a race down to the wire happen again or was that rare even way back when?

Click to expand...

 


Those "classic" races that you have been watching are the best over the years.  They were not all like that. There is always nastalgia about the "good old days."  Keep watching because this could be the best championship in years IMO.  Also,  I have been getting my fix of close racing from moto3 and moto2.  The formula there usually brings together a few riders throughout the race.  

Yeah I've been watching since 05 ..and 06 was a barn burner for me.. But it all depends on who you're a fan of.. Obviously I started with Hayden.. So that got me hooked, seems like since the traction control really caught on its been more of a snooze.. But every year a manufacturer is going to have a leg up on the competition, back in the day I'm guessing the talent was a little less so maybe you had more parity, but now we have a few that definitely have the ability it just seems to come down to the setup or their take on the track.. Whoever gets the best setup wins.. Maybe week long practice sessions so everyone gets to the max by race day? Lol I dunno but we all remember the good ones eh?

True,


The reality is that the 500's were so maturely developed by all the factories over the years, with extremely stable rules for a very long time that basically there was very little to choose between the machines in the end. There were no engine limits, fuel limits, tyre limits etc etc so is was basically a free for all & at the same time there were anywhere up to a dozen riders through the "golden years" who actually had the talent to win races.


My thoughts are that there are still a decent number of riders that can win races but it's been the constant rule changes & sheer expense of developing true cutting edge 4 stroke GP bikes that has gradually eroded the number of competitive bikes & therefore potential winners. The push for parity is in some ways partly to blame perhaps?

I heard electronics is the main culprit. Since it has invaded every part of the bikes, and it's all about settings.

The 500s were not strictly fuel limited, and the engines generally made more power than the crappy tires could use. The sport was affordable, and the riders more or less ran the show. GP went 4-stroke. The 990s became too fast for the track. For the 2007 season, the MSMA attempted to rein in performance by reducing engine displacement and fuel capacity. They failed. Fuel-efficiency technology, including electronics, and engine performance became critical. The new formula and the new tire regulations destabilized the tire war, which led to a control tire in 2009. Now we have 81mm and 4-cylinder restrictions.


 


The riders can no longer gamble or strategize with tire compound selection, and all chassis development costs are dumped on the manufacturers, since they can't request different tire compounds. The tires and fuel allow one line. The rider, crew, and manufacturer either understand the line and the tires or they don't get it. Rossi has been on a terrible bike for 2 seasons. Stoner retired. The sport bike segment has been severely depressed for a half decade, and MotoGP is becoming increasingly expensive and technologically irrelevant.


 


Maximum boring.


 


Hasn't been fixed b/c getting the manufacturers to agree on a rule set is like asking them to agree on the best place to vacation. One class is not enough to explore the future of technology and racing.

Good post, Lex.


I'd also like to posit that the 500s were rather compromised bikes.


No-one would stick a whopping great 30litre tank on top of a frame and expect consistent handling over a full race. On a 500, underseat tanks were basically impossible, that's where the rear expansion chambers run. There was no way to achieve the 'mass centralisation' that seems a central tenet of bike design. Much as I dislike them, the 4 stroke MotoGP engines allows the packaging a bike needs. 


 


The engine dictated the bike's packaging to a massive degree. So much for all this about 2 strokes being compact...only if you run them without pipes...


Hence, 'bad' packaging results in 'poor' handling results in more rider influence.

Arrabbiata1

3563121373979900

I'd strongly recommend you avoid the 2002 season review as though it were herpes then.

Click to expand...

 


2007 likewise...

Dr No

3563471374021206

 The engine dictated the bike's packaging to a massive degree. So much for all this about 2 strokes being compact...only if you run them without pipes...

Click to expand...

 


What he said:


 

Dr No

3563471374021206

Good post, Lex.


I'd also like to posit that the 500s were rather compromised bikes.


No-one would stick a whopping great 30litre tank on top of a frame and expect consistent handling over a full race. On a 500, underseat tanks were basically impossible, that's where the rear expansion chambers run. There was no way to achieve the 'mass centralisation' that seems a central tenet of bike design. Much as I dislike them, the 4 stroke MotoGP engines allows the packaging a bike needs. 


 


The engine dictated the bike's packaging to a massive degree. So much for all this about 2 strokes being compact...only if you run them without pipes...


Hence, 'bad' packaging results in 'poor' handling results in more rider influence.

Click to expand...

 


Keen observation.


 


I prefer the 4-strokes, though I lament the inefficiency of the moving parts, extra space, and the extra weight of the cylinder head. I often forget that 4-strokes have a few packaging advantages.

Only if one insists with having 4 cylinders. A nice modern 2-strokes twin could be packaged quite nicely...

J4rn0

3565511374253005

Only if one insists with having 4 cylinders. A nice modern 2-strokes twin could be packaged quite nicely...

Click to expand...

what capacity?

Arrabbiata1

3563121373979900

I'd strongly recommend you avoid the 2002 season review as though it were herpes then.

Click to expand...

 


Damn you Arrab, now I have an 'itch to scratch' and need to watch some from 2002  

Bridgestone

The ingredients that go into what is normaly considered the golden era of any motorsport are numerous and cannot be manufactured.  Occasionally everything just comes together at the right time so the machines, the manufacturer interest, the tracks, the status of the series, the level of the riders/driver, the characters they are and the rivalries they have will all be just right and it will create a spectacle that generates loads of fan interest.


 


Be careful looking back though, especially with edited highlights of races, seasons and eras, they will often make things seem better than they were.