I agree, thats why i said they cant stand on their own. Moto 2 is like any other 600 series. It has more performance restrictions that ensure close racing. When you govern performance to a point where numerous riders feel comfortable in that performance range, you create , with emphasis on create, close racing. Take those same riders and add 30 hp to the machine, the number of riders at the front will decrease. The elite will separate themselves from the pack so to speak. Thats why i enjoy Moto GP. The elite, be it technicians, factories, or riders separate themselves from the competition. Personally, the more they separate themselves, the more admiration i have for them.
absolute rubbish, and here's why IMO.
Motogp is more governed and restricted than ever before, remove some aids and lets see how comfortable the current crop feel on their monsters.
Motogp times this year have been close and sometimes slower than 2006, so the amazing speeds you mention and incredible riders that are separating themselves from the competition because of the added ferocity of this apparent 'elite' class would have been flat out beating Rossi, Caparossi, Hayden and Gibernau on 2006 spec 990's-with proper rubber. So they aren't getting faster at all. The argument of new regs, time to get up to speed is completely flawed, 2006 was '6' years ago.........
A question or two; how would Dani Pedrosa perform on a Ducati in 2012? How would Jorge Lorenzo perform on a Ducati in 2012? How would Casey Stoner perform on a Ducati in 2012? Not too well is the simple answer-their Alien status would be removed just as quick as Rossi's on that bike in this current series. Just take a look at Stoner turn around in form from Mugello, why-new engine, 10 new chassis's to choose from........all of this = Factory Honda. Did Stefan get a new chassis or engine? Did Alvaro? Have Ducati updated anything of serious consequence? No
The problem is this is not elite-or at least not the Human elite, results are determined by how well the GPS mapping is translated to the setup, how well the fuel management holds out for the race, how well the engineers can build a bike around spec tyres etc etc etc. Moreso than ever!
We are not seeing the best, because we all know that the bikes will not allow the riders to get the most out of them-fuel management/GPS TC/Anti-wheelie will not allow this, this is why we either see a factory Honda or Yamaha win every race. Without one of these two bikes right now, it cannot be done. So how do we who are the elite riders? We don't, we know they are very good riders, but to win or podium, all they have to do is beat their teammate.
The problem with all of this governing is that its not producing close racing at all, its just made things slower, more expensive and far more unfair. If a GPS sensor is controlling the fueling of the bike from where it is on track and its current lean angle etc, if the engine management through TC is sorting the balance of the bike during braking, if the anti-wheelie is controlling the front wheel lift allow the rider to just crack the throttle on corner exit, and dito for real wheel traction, considering these and many other factors how much can a rider really make a difference-especially if they are not on a Factory Honda or Yamaha?
The only reason that the gap to the front three riders in Motogp riders exists is because of tech advantage, which is predominately unfair because of the tyre rule, the engine rule and the fuel limit. Honda and Yamaha have always been the top dogs in Motogp, but the factory teams use to get beaten by Sat efforts, Ducati and Suzuki. And we all know that is now impossible, elite machinery rules the roost completely due to selectively written regs-this is why a lot of Motogp fans are upset, this is why its more popular in discussions IMO.
