What if Rossi leaves GP?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigAl @ Jun 30 2008, 09:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^+1

the letters NSR had a menace to them that nothing else could, including 888, 916, GSX-R, ZXR etc.

the premier class has lost that aura about it now, who here thinks "RC212V aahh fuuuck!"

its now a case of people thinking "R1 eeek!" that aint right.

Dead right mate, the letters TZ or RG always make me smile nervously.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jun 30 2008, 09:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I know what you mean..i grew up with 2 strokers...but both the 2 strokes and the 990s had one thing in common, you could make your own lines....cause the power was there...with the 800s it's all about momentum...you can't pick and choose your lines...follow the leader has become the norm..and its boring people.

Agree

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jun 30 2008, 09:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I know what you mean..i grew up with 2 strokers...but both the 2 strokes and the 990s had one thing in common, you could make your own lines....cause the power was there...with the 800s it's all about momentum...you can't pick and choose your lines...follow the leader has become the norm..and its boring people.

The new bikes have more power and torque than the old 500's, are heavier and faster and should in theory be more intimidating. Despite what is often said about the electronics, the fuel restrictions, the capacity and the 4 stroke thing (which i'm totally on board with these days, sorry pete) i believe that tyres are the problem. Not a lack of parity or the fact that there is a tyre restriction, but just that tyres are simply too good these days and one of the most unknown variables is becoming understood, narrowing the evelope of their effective use.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 30 2008, 09:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The new bikes have more power and torque than the old 500's, are heavier and faster and should in theory be more intimidating. Despite what is often said about the electronics, the fuel restrictions, the capacity and the 4 stroke thing (which i'm totally on board with these days, sorry pete) i believe that tyres are the problem. Not a lack of parity or the fact that there is a tyre restriction, but just that tyres are simply too good these days and one of the most unknown variables is becoming understood, narrowing the evelope of their effective use.

More power and torque yep, but it was the nature of the old beasts that gave them the appeal. If you have ridden a tuned 2 stroke and 4 stroke of similar capacity back to back you know the score. The power delivery is the killer. From my off road experience I know full well that a diesel will find grip where a 2 stroke will dig a hole then smack you in the face with the cross brace of the bars.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 30 2008, 02:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The new bikes have more power and torque than the old 500's, are heavier and faster and should in theory be more intimidating. Despite what is often said about the electronics, the fuel restrictions, the capacity and the 4 stroke thing (which i'm totally on board with these days, sorry pete) i believe that tyres are the problem. Not a lack of parity or the fact that there is a tyre restriction, but just that tyres are simply too good these days and one of the most unknown variables is becoming understood, narrowing the evelope of their effective use.

have you ever rode a 500 2 stroke???..i have, along with just about every street bike and a few race bikes to...and let me tell you...that old 500 scared me more on one ride than ANY of my liter bikes ever did....yeah sure the 800s have more power and torque than the 500s...but the power band on the 800 is the width of a door compared to the 500s...it took more balls and talent to put a 500 and 990 through it's paces than the 800..period..

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jun 30 2008, 09:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>More power and torque yep, but it was the nature of the old beasts that gave them the appeal. If you have ridden a tuned 2 stroke and 4 stroke of similar capacity back to back you know the score. The power delivery is the killer. From my off road experience I know full well that a diesel will find grip where a 2 stroke will dig a hole then smack you in the face with the cross brace of the bars.

Pete

yep, thats how i remember it too! epitomises the word "powerband" unlike a 4T which has a much softer less violent power delivery.
my CR would try to kill me often and so did the KTM 550. my YZ 426F was a much easier bike to cope with but had less of the "white knuckle" ride.

damn i miss 2-strokes

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jun 30 2008, 09:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>have you ever rode a 500 2 stroke???..i have, along with just about every street bike and a few race bikes to...and let me tell you...that old 500 scared me more on one ride than ANY of my liter bikes ever did....yeah sure the 800s have more power and torque than the 500s...but the power band on the 800 is the width of a door compared to the 500s...it took more balls and talent to put a 500 and 990 through it's paces than the 800..period..


Well put, Ive ridden the latest WR450 crosser, and an old big bore Maico.

Guess what made the biggest impression!

(Clue, not the Yamaha!)

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jun 30 2008, 09:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>have you ever rode a 500 2 stroke???..i have, along with just about every street bike and a few race bikes to...and let me tell you...that old 500 scared me more on one ride than ANY of my liter bikes ever did....yeah sure the 800s have more power and torque than the 500s...but the power band on the 800 is the width of a door compared to the 500s...it took more balls and talent to put a 500 and 990 through it's paces than the 800..period..

I've not ridden a 2 stroke bigger than an RGV 250 but i understand the 2 stroke thing. Lets not forget that the 500's that ended the era were relatively drivable and torquey, with sorted chassis, engine management and tyres, unlike the bikes from the earlier days. Also the 880's will not have a power band as wide as the old 990's. The nature of having the smaller engines is that the engineers now chose where they want the power, rather than having plenty everywhere.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 30 2008, 09:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I've not ridden a 2 stroke bigger than an RGV 250 but i understand the 2 stroke thing. Lets not forget that the 500's that ended the era were relatively drivable and torquey, with sorted chassis, engine management and tyres, unlike the bikes from the earlier days. Also the 880's will not have a power band as wide as the old 990's. The nature of having the smaller engines is that the engineers now chose where they want the power, rather than having plenty everywhere.

Says it all Tom, it's gone soft

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jun 30 2008, 09:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Says it all Tom, it's gone soft

Pete

It's just the nature of development. The modern bikes are superior machines, where issues like uncontrollable powerbands and fading brakes can be done away with. It might be scarier or "more exciting" to have things the old way but it would be a performance hindrance which racing hasn't got time for.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jun 30 2008, 04:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I know what you mean..i grew up with 2 strokers...but both the 2 strokes and the 990s had one thing in common, you could make your own lines....cause the power was there...with the 800s it's all about momentum...you can't pick and choose your lines...follow the leader has become the norm..and its boring people.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 30 2008, 09:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's just the nature of development. The modern bikes are superior machines, where issues like uncontrollable powerbands and fading brakes can be done away with. It might be scarier or "more exciting" to have things the old way but it would be a performance hindrance which racing hasn't got time for.

i agree about the nature of development, BUT, there has to be a draw factor to get people to watch and spend their money. The perfect racebike anyone? how developed must the bikes be before no-one will watch the series anymore? victims of their own "success" ( and victims of DORNA) IMO.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 30 2008, 01:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's just the nature of development. The modern bikes are superior machines, where issues like uncontrollable powerbands and fading brakes can be done away with. It might be scarier or "more exciting" to have things the old way but it would be a performance hindrance which racing hasn't got time for.

It's not about the bike, it's about the living organism that is sitting in the saddle (I would have said human, but Pedro is a cyborg).

The prototype class is just a way for manufacturers to offset the expenses of development. But, it's gotten to the point where the formula is so restricted (to keep racing close ), the only technical innovation a manufacturer can market is winning

The easiest way to win, is to get the video game kids in the development lab and whip them until the new electronics package is .1 faster.

MotoGP is 1 part bad racing, mixed with 1 part bad soap opera, garnished with a healthy overdose of techno-lingo, governing body corruption, and sweat shop labor.

I'm nearly morally opposed to the premier class these days.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jun 30 2008, 03:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I know what you mean..i grew up with 2 strokers...but both the 2 strokes and the 990s had one thing in common, you could make your own lines....cause the power was there...with the 800s it's all about momentum...you can't pick and choose your lines...follow the leader has become the norm..and its boring people.
i believe true fans of racing will continue to watch. there would probably be some defectors because rossi is very,very popular, but motorcycle fans will continue to watch, as they always have.
BTW: forgive any grammatical errors, but i just got out of surgery today, and am still quite"doped" up

Years ago there was a guy called Mick.

When he was racing I never missed a race if it was on TV.

He retired.

I kept watching because it is the sport that I enjoy.

When Valentino goes, that won't change a thing, I will still tune in to watch the MotoGP.

Were he to go to WSBK (or any other series), it would mean sweet diddly for me as I consider MotoGP the pinnacle and will continue to watch it. IMO, WSBK offers a different 'type' of racing and is a thoroughly attractive series in it's own right, but with respect, it is not GP.

I would however expect that once VR retires or in general leaves MotoGP there will be a drop in terms of viewers and/or sponsorship. But, that will simply mean a return to the pre-VR days amd as soon as anotehr marketable racer comes along, all will return bigger and better with more dollars (the length of the wait will be interesting).




Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (dannyisnow @ Jul 1 2008, 01:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That would be one hell of a championship, but i would not want to see rossi leave moto gp just yet he's got two championships to fight back at for now . And apart from that, surely wsbk would could be viewed as a step down ??, from prototype million pound bikes to factory bikes doesnt really add up.

There is nothing special about a million pound prototype bike if the riders size is the main factor and same power with WSBK bikes ( a lot heavier and difficult to tame compare to GP bikes.) and the racing is boring as Sh

DORNA should limit the use of TC, increase the engine capacity to 1000 c.c and leaves to the teams to decide the size of engine and no of cylinder and configuration and what type of chasis to use.

OTH, If Rossi think Pedrosa and Stoner win the championship due to their size advantage and SBK can pay Rossi better than DORNA, why not he move to WSBK ?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jun 30 2008, 09:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Suppose Rossi isn't happy about the technical changes in GP. What would happen if he took his 20M Euro parade on the road to WSBK?

Personally, I think he should do it. He showed he has enough power to do whatever he wants (he got standing ovations at Assen while he was at the back), why not bail on Ezy's brokedown palace and take his show on the road.

Think about how much WSBK would be willing to pay to inherit half of motogp's fans. Overnight, WSBK would be the premier championship. Manufacturers would drastically reduce their GP budgets and the sponsors would go running for the exits.

Seriously, what would happen in WSBK could successfully poach Rossi, Hayden, and one of Hopper/Melandri/Capirossi/Edwards, then bring Gibby and Barros out of retirement? Then get Schumacher & SPIES?!!! Maybe they could even convince Bayliss to stay.

Bayliss, Haga, Neukircher, Xaus, Corser, Biaggi, Checa, Hayden, Rossi, Gibernau, Capirossi, Edwards, SPIES, & Schumacher! That grid would have approximately 8,000 major championships between them. It would be the world series of awesomeness, who cares what happens to GP. Just the thought of such a line up, makes my head spin. All WSBK have to do, is line up the sponsorship $$$.

Many unanswered questions, I'm surprised I haven't let my mind wander down this road before. BTW how much are DORNA already paying Rossi to make sure this doesn't happen?
This maybe the best post this forum has ever seen.

oh boy 1 crash and lost the championship lead by 4 points and its all doom and gloom. take my bat and ball and go home syndrome all over again.

you fan boys need to grow some balls and man up

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jul 1 2008, 03:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Seriously, what would happen in WSBK could successfully poach Rossi, Hayden, and one of Hopper/Melandri/Capirossi/Edwards, then bring Gibby and Barros out of retirement? Then get Schumacher & SPIES?!!! Maybe they could even convince Bayliss to stay.

Bayliss, Haga, Neukircher, Xaus, Corser, Biaggi, Checa, Hayden, Rossi, Gibernau, Capirossi, Edwards, SPIES, & Schumacher! That grid would have approximately 8,000 major championships between them. It would be the world series of awesomeness, who cares what happens to GP. Just the thought of such a line up, makes my head spin. All WSBK have to do, is line up the sponsorship $$$.



haha funny you dont mention any one of rossis main cometitors, that is stoner, pedro and horhey. hahaha thats comedy, and why didnt you mention anyone of them

you all complain the 800s are ...., there slow etc etc, but the 800s are now faster than the 990s ever were, even if they were slower, you are now saying 800 are ...., but lets go move to an production bikes which are even slower stil. hahahahah.

your demented thinking is pure comedy

you guys remind me of some stupid 10 year old in the play grounds. oh lets go over there and play where and dont let so and so come hahahhaaha

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pinky @ Jul 1 2008, 08:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>haha funny you dont mention any one of rossis main cometitors, that is stoner, pedro and horhey. hahaha thats comedy, and why didnt you mention anyone of them

you all complain the 800s are ...., there slow etc etc, but the 800s are now faster than the 990s ever were, even if they were slower, you are now saying 800 are ...., but lets go move to an production bikes which are even slower stil. hahahahah.

your demented thinking is pure comedy

you guys remind me of some stupid 10 year old in the play grounds. oh lets go over there and play where and dont let so and so come hahahhaaha


Read the posts properly you .....

Pete