Rossi: "MotoGP is boring..."

[sidewazzz]

ignoring Jorge this last round and maybe the one b4, i hope u dont think anyone in GP races like this.

to say that WSBK riders are trying harder, going more ballz to the wall than GP riders is absurd. gtfo of here w/ that shit . crashing is NOT validation of effort.

Not saying they are trying harder but certainly looks like if they dont have the pace they will still attempt to race with the faster guys. While in GP it's pretty appearment if someone doesn't have the pace the other guy walks away.

I'm glad GP went back to 1000's but it's biggest problem still today is they very fact that all the bikes are so different facotry/ sat/ crt. Moto3, 2, wss, WSBK have all proved you give riders simular equip they racing will be closer. Look at the M1... their sat bike is somewhat close to a factory bike and Cal & Dovi are doing the best they ever have (kinda keeping up with factory bikes).

Crashing is not a validation to effort, riding errors typically are.

 

[ToraTora]

.

 

[nvp]

Moto2 and 3 are definitely edge of your seat shows.. awesome.

MotoGP by an entertainment factor are not so much.
MotoGP by a real fan of motorcycle racing at the top level are still very cool and amazing.

Hope that Rossi gets what he is seeking next year.. more guys at the front battling... and him being one of them.

Well said. Agree 100%.

 

[JO EBRMC]

CRT IS an extension of Moto2 components in GP. Prototype frame manufacturers outside of the MSMA making bikes to run production based engines for individual teams to OWN. if CRT was a spec engine and spec electronics, itd be exactly like Moto2 w/ more CC's.

I think it would be more correct to say that CRT is the same as Moto3 - engines available on the market but not a single supplier.

when Moto2 started, everyone griped and wished that it hadnt gone spec engine. THAT is exactly what we will see in GP after the spec ECU is adopted, though the electronics will be dramatically more open than in Moto2. hell, even now, a CRT can put ANY engine in their chassis that they want. there is just no one on the planet willing to selling a full prototype racing engine to anyone... too much intellectual property to give away.

A single supplier motor as in Moto2 is overkill and has some important areas of failure when compared to the spec engine of Moto3. With a single supplier motor, factories have no incentive to enter and engine performance is completely static, the latter being antithetical to what MotoGP is about and would lead to street bikes eventually being higher performance.

 

[JO EBRMC]

This is an excellent example of confusing correlation with causation. Just because Moto2 is currently producing an interesting show you believe it is the specs involved. Go check out Marquez when he was a Derbi one two five rider:


It's not the crapy spec Hondas that they have now, or the super cool Derbi/Aprilia he rode in 2010--as Rossi has said "it's the rider."

Ahh, you start out making so much sense and then end with a logical failure.

 

[alcoHK]

Need to learn from WSB. More face time to girlfriends in the paddock

 

[stangmx13]

Not saying they are trying harder but certainly looks like if they dont have the pace they will still attempt to race with the faster guys. While in GP it's pretty appearment if someone doesn't have the pace the other guy walks away.

"race with the faster guys"?? u mean do some blocking for a lap or two, then get left? Sykes did a very good job of running fast and falling off for the first 3/4 of the season... and this does not happen in GP... but thats not "racing with the faster guys". this is all your opinion, purely based on your perception of the race, and ill agree to disagree.

I'm glad GP went back to 1000's but it's biggest problem still today is they very fact that all the bikes are so different facotry/ sat/ crt. Moto3, 2, wss, WSBK have all proved you give riders simular equip they racing will be closer. Look at the M1... their sat bike is somewhat close to a factory bike and Cal & Dovi are doing the best they ever have (kinda keeping up with factory bikes).

Crashing is not a validation to effort, riding errors typically are.

differences in machinery?? which sets are more different... RC213V/M1/GP12 or RSV4/S1000RR/ZX-10R? all are winning bikes that fought for the championship (except the Duc). all have different engine configs. all are running different electronics either in hardware or in-house software. at least in GP they are all running the same Ohlins and Brembo stuff. rly, they are all different in the same amount. hell, if i throw the other Duc in there you are screwed... that bike doesnt even have 4 cylinders haha.

but lets ignore machinery differences and just go w/ overall packages. GP has 10 distinct racing packages, bikes that are built to a diff spec if only slightly in the case of factory-to-satellite comparison. its 11 if u thrown in the Ioda bike though i think hes on the same thing as Edwards now.
- factory & sat RCV
- factory & sat M1
- factory & sat Duc
- ART CRT
- Kawi CRT
- Suter/BMW CRT
- FTR/Honda CRT

WSBK has... wait for it... 9. all differ in chassis, components, engine config, or electronics in some way, just like the GP bikes.
- factory & customer Aprilia
- factory & customer Ducati
- factory BMW
- BMW Italia
- Suzuki
- factory Kawasaki
- Ten Kate Honda

"Crashing is not a validation to effort, riding errors typically are."... i assume u meant "riding errors cause crashing"... not "riding errors typically are validation to effort".

so the million-dollar question remains, why is WSBK more entertaining (now) than GP as far as race action? heres a little thought-experiment for u (anyone)... how entertaining would GP racing be if Jorge, Dani, and Stoner were only as good as Dovi, Bautista, and Bradl?

 

[stangmx13]

I think it would be more correct to say that CRT is the same as Moto3 - engines available on the market but not a single supplier.

A single supplier motor as in Moto2 is overkill and has some important areas of failure when compared to the spec engine of Moto3. With a single supplier motor, factories have no incentive to enter and engine performance is completely static, the latter being antithetical to what MotoGP is about and would lead to street bikes eventually being higher performance.

we've had this convo b4 Jerry. when i saw "spec", i mean what u refer to as "single supplier". everything i said pretty much agrees w/ what we both know, i think u just read it too fast and missed some key words

 

[JO EBRMC]

we've had this convo b4 Jerry. when i saw "spec", i mean what u refer to as "single supplier". everything i said pretty much agrees w/ what we both know, i think u just read it too fast and missed some key words

I wasn't so much trying to correct you, I just feel that Moto3 is a more applicable and likely to succeed model than Moto2. Moto2 has flaws that are totally unnecessary whereas, Moto3 is fairly simple and solid.

 

[Shaggy]

Be careful what you wish for cuz you may end up with NASCAR on two wheels.

NASCAR only sucks because of the tracks they run on. Put more road courses in the schedule other than Sears Point and I'd be a huge fan. Low-tech pushrod V8s banging fenders on a road course? What's not to like? It'd be a high class American Iron Series.

Back on topic.... I think it's a tough situation. You want the top tier of moto racing to allow for technological development, but at the same time the series will die of the races continue to be parades like they have been for a few years now.

 

[stangmx13]

I wasn't so much trying to correct you, I just feel that Moto3 is a more applicable and likely to succeed model than Moto2. Moto2 has flaws that are totally unnecessary whereas, Moto3 is fairly simple and solid.

agreed. i mostly responded w/ Moto2 earlier because Raptor brought it up.

ive been saying it since Moto3 was first proposed, both Moto2 and Moto3 have been Dorna's little experiments to figure out what direction they could take the world championship. so far, theyve prob learned a lot and had some great successes both w/ racing and the show.

NASCAR only sucks because of the tracks they run on. Put more road courses in the schedule other than Sears Point and I'd be a huge fan. Low-tech pushrod V8s banging fenders on a road course? What's not to like? It'd be a high class American Iron Series.

Back on topic.... I think it's a tough situation. You want the top tier of moto racing to allow for technological development, but at the same time the series will die of the races continue to be parades like they have been for a few years now.

u do watch V8 Supercars, right? its exactly what u said there, NASCAR on road courses w/ pushrod engines.

 

[fawndog]

NASCAR only sucks because of the tracks they run on. Put more road courses in the schedule other than Sears Point and I'd be a huge fan. Low-tech pushrod V8s banging fenders on a road course? What's not to like? It'd be a high class American Iron Series.

Back on topic.... I think it's a tough situation. You want the top tier of moto racing to allow for technological development, but at the same time the series will die of the races continue to be parades like they have been for a few years now.

Interesting, F1 seems to be dominated by the most innovative, but they have really strict rules for building and maintaining the cars.

 

[Shaggy]

u do watch V8 Supercars, right? its exactly what u said there, NASCAR on road courses w/ pushrod engines.

I am familiar with the series, but I don't follow it. I'm excited for them to come to the US for CotA in 2013 though!

 

[fast4ward]

Bingo! They should remove a fuel limit completely. Unleash the beast!

The riders are riding in such a way as to preserve fuel, and tires, and engines.

Remove the limitations and allow them to ride to their limits without restriction, and see who the last man standing is.

If it's still boring after that, then maybe you have to introduce silly rules (like F1 did) to make it more competitive. It has to be a good show - poor show, no-one watches. That's an ever increasing downward spiral as the Sears Point Raceway found with AMA.

 

[TTTom]

Ain't gonna be no spec ECU, ain't gonna be no change in fuel limits:

October 17 interview with HRC vice-president Shuei Nakamoto

Q: Tell me the situation of what is going on. We hear that you are against the idea of single ECU and rev. limit which Dorna will enforce from 2014.

N: First of all, I want to make clear that the rumors are only rumors and the situation between me and Carmelo (Ezpeleta) is very good. I am the one who suggested Carmelo to use ECU made by Magneti Manelli to CRT bikes, in order to reduce the difference between prototypes and CRT. Also there is no announcement or what so ever which says single ECU will be enforced to all the bikes from 2014. Also from 2013, it is not compulsory for all the CRT to use this Maneli ECU. They can use it if they want.

Q: But the story says you said Honda will quit MotoGP and go to World Superbike if Dorna enforces single ECU from 2014. Further story is that Bridgepoint gave the right to control both MotoGP and WSB, so you have no where to go.

N: As I said, that won't be the case, because they will not enforce single ECU from 2014. Dorna must discuss about technical rules with MSMA before a decision is made. We have a five year contract with Dorna(2012-2016) and it has detailed clauses. With this contract, Dorna cannot do anything unless we agree.

 

[Shaggy]

+1 to the fuel limits. Their heart was in the right place, with restricting fuel so the major constructors couldn't just build a motor to the hilt and blow everyone else away. I think the same could be accomplished through other means, like a spec ECU for example.

Bottom line, I think DORNA will have to figure out the equation soon because rule changes every other year aren't keeping people interested in the sport, which is part of the problem. Changing the rules so frequently makes it so that whoever figures it out first has a huge advantage. Some consistency in the rules will allow other manufacturers to catch up and level the playing field.

 

[stangmx13]

The riders are riding in such a way as to preserve fuel, and tires, and engines.

Remove the limitations and allow them to ride to their limits without restriction, and see who the last man standing is.

Cal wasnt riding to preserve fuel in Motegi, the electronics (unsuccessfully) managed that for him. Cal used more fuel AND went slower than Bautista; no one needs to ride to preserve fuel.

Jorge wasnt riding to preserve his rear tire in Sepang. and last year, GP did have Bridgestones that would last forever and the show wasnt any better. this year, they last only slightly less laps and the show isnt any better either.

No one needs to ride to preserve engines. the factories, esp HRC, could run the entire season on 4 engines with a bit of work or 5 engines very easily... baring an mishaps. they have 6 now. id bet the issue that caused both Jorge and Spies engines to grenade during a crash has already been solved for their remaining engines.

 

[JO EBRMC]

Ain't gonna be no spec ECU, ain't gonna be no change in fuel limits:

That's just posturing from Honda. If a spec ECU is needed, it will be put in place.

+1 to the fuel limits. Their heart was in the right place, with restricting fuel so the major constructors couldn't just build a motor to the hilt and blow everyone else away. I think the same could be accomplished through other means, like a spec ECU for example.

The intent of the fuel limits wasn't to restrict engine tuning, in fact, it was accepted that it would dramatically increase costs. The intention was to provide R&D for the factories on fuel efficiency and throttle response.

 

[Shaggy]

The intent of the fuel limits wasn't to restrict engine tuning, in fact, it was accepted that it would dramatically increase costs. The intention was to provide R&D for the factories on fuel efficiency and throttle response.

Interesting... I was always under the impression that it was an effort to reduce racing costs. If that's the case, they might as well get rid of the fuel limit just for parity's sake.

 

[stangmx13]

Basically Rossi is saying here:

If the guy can't develop a motorcycle why should we believe he can sort out a whole series of them?

please point me to the line in that interview where Rossi proposed a solution to this problem of boring races so i may better trash on his "sorting a whole series" and "development" skills.