Donington race (spoiler, for those with intellectual deficiencies)
Mark N
mistake rushing to get by early leader Melandri but came back and ran
away. Riding wounded Rossi and Melandri battle for second, two passes in
the last two corners, and both clearly not hurting that badly. Stoner
has to be disappointed with 4th after his pace in practice; he must have
thought he could win this one, as did I. Roberts trails them home in
5th, quietly making more progress on that machine. Edwards gets his
revenge over Hayden, but it's only for 6th place. Hayden is the most
aggressive guy on the 4th row at the start, but went through at the
chicane trying to get by Vermeulen and dropped back to 11th, then seemed
just a bit detuned from there, probably deciding not to push and risk
crashing. Hopkins fades to 8th after running at the front early,
Capirossi guts out a few points in 9th, Checa and Dunlop get another top
ten, Vermeulen pulls in for a tire after fading as well, and it looked
like Nakano had a mechanical.
The championship now looks like this:
Hayden 153
Pedrosa 127
Rossi 118
Melandri 114
Capirossi 107
Stoner 91
Edwards 73
Roberts 66
So in addition to a sparkling ride through the field by Rossi, 10th
early on, I think we saw the best two bikes on the grid in first and
second. Pedrosa did the only 28 of the day and was able to do steady low
29s, and Rossi able to do low 29s and steady mid-29s, while no one else
really did better than mid-high 29s. Hayden struggled with his machine
this weekend, first trying and then rejecting new chassis parts, waiting
to test them outside of a race weekend, lost the warmup to rain, and
really could only do low 30s in the race.
Now a weekend off, so the injured have a chance to heal up properly and
will probably be 100% then. The next two tracks before the summer break
are the Sachsenring and Laguna, so Nicky has to stretch that gap if he's
to win the thing, and if the new parts improve the bike, that can only
help. Pedrosa won the 250 races easily in Germany the last two years,
Rossi won in MotoGP last year after struggling badly before that on the
Yamaha, Hayden was a close 3rd after taking pole, but Melandri has
struggled there, 7th last year after crashing out in '04, and Capirossi
was in 9th, well behind fellow Bridgestone runner Nakano. After that at
Laguna, Pedrosa is likely to struggle in his first attempt and Melandri
showed nothing on a track that bites those who make mistakes (like he
made today), but Hayden and Rossi (and Edwards) should be flying, and
perhaps Capirossi as well.
So what sort of stretch run we'll see may be decided over the next two
weekends. Hayden and Rossi will be in it, but will Pedrosa, Melandri and
Capirossi?
Carl Sundquist
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:WL6dnf9tzYdnVjrZ...@giganews.com...
> No huge surprises today: Pedrosa fastest man on the track, made a mistake
> rushing to get by early leader Melandri but came back and ran away. Riding
> wounded Rossi and Melandri battle for second, two passes in the last two
> corners, and both clearly not hurting that badly. Stoner has to be
> disappointed with 4th after his pace in practice; he must have thought he
> could win this one, as did I. Roberts trails them home in 5th, quietly
> making more progress on that machine. Edwards gets his revenge over
> Hayden, but it's only for 6th place. Hayden is the most aggressive guy on
> the 4th row at the start, but went through at the chicane trying to get by
> Vermeulen and dropped back to 11th, then seemed just a bit detuned from
> there, probably deciding not to push and risk crashing. Hopkins fades to
> 8th after running at the front early, Capirossi guts out a few points in
> 9th, Checa and Dunlop get another top ten, Vermeulen pulls in for a tire
> after fading as well, and it looked like Nakano had a mechanical.
>
In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike. When
Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
> So what sort of stretch run we'll see may be decided over the next two
> weekends.
Genius, Mark. Pure genius.
BTW, you're not the alter ego of Davide Tosi, are you?
Tosi: "Duke, Surtees, Mike the bike and Ago. They all emerged from a much
more competitive scene than the '80s-'90s one. Those 4 guys would have
easily lapped all those yankee/aussie guys. It's the genetic superiority of
the European cream compared to nations born out of convicts and refugees."
Julian Bond
>In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike. When
>Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
>
>Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
You could always blame Honda. They came up with a bunch of new parts
that didn't work and Hayden's weekend was ruined.
--
Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
*** Just Say No To DRM ***
Mark N
> In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike. When
> Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
>
> Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
Actually that bike comment was thrown in as a bit of a wind-up, but I
probably didn't need to throw it in - not falling all over Rossi was all
it would take, I'm sure. And I could just as easily say your summary of
the race is Rossi, barely able to drag himself onto the bike, a trail of
blood and broken parts behind him, put in a heroic ride to a 2nd that
was as good as a win, and probably only second because he started so far
down field due to the toll his massive injuries in qualifying and so
couldn't catch the new riding genius Pedrosa, and received a hero's
welcome at the finish by the thoroughly indifferent British crowd.
I noticed Rossiphile Nick Harris started hinting at Hayden bowing under
the pressure of the championship after the race, and both his broadcast
partner and Leon Haslam stepped in and corrected him by pointing out
that Nicky is trying to develop that bike and that he lost setup time
trying the new parts. Just that Honda is making those sorts of wholesale
changes to a bike leading the championship by 42 points speaks volumes
about the issues - when have we ever seen that before? So, yes, when
Nicky does well he deserves credit. But was I crowing about the
brilliance of his win last week? No, I was not. And at least his mistake
today was made trying to pass someone, trying to get into the fight at
the front. As compared to, say, Rossi, who was handed countless
positions in this race by other riders' mistakes...
>> So what sort of stretch run we'll see may be decided over the next two
>> weekends.
>
> Genius, Mark. Pure genius.
Carl, if you don't have anything worthwhile to add, just go back to
sitting on the toilet.
T3
"Julian Bond" <julia...@voidstar.com> wrote in message
news:ZSZLVnCZ...@jblaptop.voidstar.com...
> Carl Sundquist <car...@cox.net> Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:24:16
>>In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike. When
>>Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
>>
>>Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
>
> You could always blame Honda. They came up with a bunch of new parts that
> didn't work and Hayden's weekend was ruined.
Whatever happened I think it's fairly safe to say Dani not only had the best
bike, but rode it extremely well. Was that a save early on, or what? He
almost ripped the tire from the wheel! I thought he was gonna collect Marco
in the process too.
Later on Casey, Marco and Roberts prolly started racing a little too soon,
and paid for it, as that allowed Vale to trim their lead. Good race, glad it
didn't rain during it...
pablo
"Carl Sundquist" <car...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:sGQpg.298212$5Z.7988@dukeread02...
>
> In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike. When
> Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
That has lost novelty value, hasn't it?
In any case, again a very good result by Roberts on the TR bike.
Also, slowly but surely it seems that Dunlop tires are coming up in quality,
it'd be good if there's another competitive option.
Despite his claim that this "felt like a victory", this must have been
disappointing for Rossi.
Hayden to his credit acknowledges he didn't have a the pace and made a
mistake, and he has 2 strong circuits coming up. It's probably vital he bags
40 points over the text 3 weeks, that'll solidify his lead.
Best wheelies of the day at the end of the 250c race...
...pablo
Julian Bond
>Good race, glad it
>didn't rain during it...
Best race of the day was of course Bradley Smith into 12th for his first
125GP championship points. And look Ellison finished the race in the
points and wasn't lapped. Result! (Tongue firmly in cheek for that one.
;) ). And even Edwards did his job and finished in front of Hayden.
And that Marco Melandri? Out of control or what?
Mark N
> And that Marco Melandri? Out of control or what?
I wasn't going to say it, but did anyone watch those last couple laps
and not think about a coming together between he and Rossi? As many
slides and mistakes as he made today, I have to take my hat off for him
for hanging in there all race and coming that close to beating Rossi. No
one can say he left anything in the garage today.
T3
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
be fixin to put himself in the hospital for a while...
Jake
> Carl Sundquist <car...@cox.net> Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:24:16
> >In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike. When
> >Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
> >
> >Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
>
> You could always blame Honda. They came up with a bunch of new parts
> that didn't work and Hayden's weekend was ruined.
Hard to say. I think it's clear that the '06 RC211V is having
development issues, and while some of the blam for that falls on the
rider, not all of it does. By all accounts, Yamaha is operating under
a "what Rossi wants, Rossi gets" development strategy, which makes a
lot of sense and is working out very well for them. By all accounts,
Honda is not doing the same with Nicky, which makes some degree of
sense, but is not working out for them so well this year.
Hayden did make a mistake and ran off, but he didn't have the pace to
hang with the top five anyway, so it looks like that cost him 1 point.
Could have been much worse - Nicky gave up 11 points to Rossi this
weekend after taking 13 from him last weekend, but now he's back to
needing to win, and one more weekend like this and he's done.
Pedrosa can be counted on to throw it away at least once more, like he
ALMOST did today, so I don't think he's a threat. But Rossi is, as
always, dangerous.
I'm pulling for that little redneck to git-R-done, but I have to
wonder.
-jake
T3
"Jake" <jamc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1151874537.2...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Julian Bond wrote:
>> Carl Sundquist <car...@cox.net> Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:24:16
>> >In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike.
>> >When
>> >Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
>> >
>> >Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
>>
>> You could always blame Honda. They came up with a bunch of new parts
>> that didn't work and Hayden's weekend was ruined.
>
> Hard to say. I think it's clear that the '06 RC211V is having
> development issues, and while some of the blam for that falls on the
> rider, not all of it does. By all accounts, Yamaha is operating under
> a "what Rossi wants, Rossi gets" development strategy, which makes a
> lot of sense and is working out very well for them. By all accounts,
> Honda is not doing the same with Nicky, which makes some degree of
> sense, but is not working out for them so well this year.
Heh, or last year either, or the.......
>
> Hayden did make a mistake and ran off, but he didn't have the pace to
> hang with the top five anyway, so it looks like that cost him 1 point.
> Could have been much worse - Nicky gave up 11 points to Rossi this
> weekend after taking 13 from him last weekend, but now he's back to
> needing to win, and one more weekend like this and he's done.
Oh please, why so quick to write the dude off? Just a week ago Vale was
barely on life support, now you're suggesting Nicky's one race from fork
time?
>
> Pedrosa can be counted on to throw it away at least once more, like he
> ALMOST did today, so I don't think he's a threat. But Rossi is, as
> always, dangerous.
>
> I'm pulling for that little redneck to git-R-done, but I have to
> wonder.
He needs to do either win one more that Vale is counting on, or score much
better than he did today...
S Frank
"T3" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:EDSpg.26771$LT2....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "Julian Bond" <julia...@voidstar.com> wrote in message
> news:ZSZLVnCZ...@jblaptop.voidstar.com...
> > Carl Sundquist <car...@cox.net> Sun, 2 Jul 2006 09:24:16
> >>In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the bike.
When
> >>Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
> >>
> >>Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
> >
> > You could always blame Honda. They came up with a bunch of new parts
that
> > didn't work and Hayden's weekend was ruined.
>
> Whatever happened I think it's fairly safe to say Dani not only had the
best
> bike, but rode it extremely well. Was that a save early on, or what? He
> almost ripped the tire from the wheel! I thought he was gonna collect
Marco
> in the process too.
his great save would have been an idiotic move if had taken marco and
himself out, and it was luck (not skill) that kept that from happening.
T3
"S Frank" <lemm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a6f92$44a880ea$186068cd$22...@KNOLOGY.NET...
>> Whatever happened I think it's fairly safe to say Dani not only had the
> best
>> bike, but rode it extremely well. Was that a save early on, or what? He
>> almost ripped the tire from the wheel! I thought he was gonna collect
> Marco
>> in the process too.
>
> his great save would have been an idiotic move if had taken marco and
> himself out, and it was luck (not skill) that kept that from happening.
Oh yeah, skill had nothing to do with it, 100% luck and for Melandri too..
sturd
> I think we saw the best two bikes on the grid in first and
> second.
Well, for certain we saw the best two rider/bike combinations
on the day in first and second. That's why they have a race.
Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.
pablo
"sturd" <mikestur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> Well, for certain we saw the best two rider/bike combinations
> on the day in first and second. That's why they have a race.
The best bike will never win with a bad rider. The best rider may win on a
bad bike. That's what makes motorcycling the most enjoyable racing event.
...pablo
Mark N
> Julian Bond wrote:
>> Carl Sundquist
>>> Hayden does well it's because of the rider.
>>> Will you blame his mistake today on the bike?
>> You could always blame Honda. They came up with a bunch of new parts
>> that didn't work and Hayden's weekend was ruined.
> Hard to say. I think it's clear that the '06 RC211V is having
> development issues, and while some of the blam for that falls on the
> rider, not all of it does. By all accounts, Yamaha is operating under
> a "what Rossi wants, Rossi gets" development strategy, which makes a
> lot of sense and is working out very well for them. By all accounts,
> Honda is not doing the same with Nicky, which makes some degree of
> sense, but is not working out for them so well this year.
I think it's hard to put much blame at all on Nicky, if what we hear
(and what we don't) is true. And that is that Honda has developed next
to nothing for the bike since the season started. Nicky has consistently
talked about three basic problems with the bike - the new clutch that
warps, the lack of side grip, and the lack of horsepower.
What we know about the clutch is that they replaced the new clutch with
last year's design, which gets Nicky off the line and holds up fine, but
doesn't work all that well in the races. Nicky blamed the clutch for
that false neutral into the chicane at Assen, for instance. So that's a
stop-gap solution and not a real one. It appears the power may have been
increased some, he doesn't seem quite so far down on top speed as he
used to be and Honda has said they've made some progress on that, but it
appears he may still be lacking a bit compared to the evo bikes, and not
more as it should be. On side grip, the new swingarm and frame that
arrived at Donington appears to be the first real attempt to deal with
that. (Ryder wrote yesterday, "Nicky Hayden struggled all through
qualifying, his RCV looked unstable and twitchy when he got the power
on. Remember that he is still on the development bike. They tried a new
swingarm but that involved putting the exhaust on the other side of the
bike and he didn't like the sound and feel, it was too different and he
wants to test it first.")
So what improvement that the bike has shown this year is likely down to
the work that Nicky and his team have done through conventional means -
setup work. That chassis needs to be tested, and I don't know that they
are testing tomorrow at Donington. If not, then not until after the
break, and that means Nicky goes into his strongest two tracks with the
same old problems he's had all year, which could be disastrous in terms
of his championship chances. He really needs to outpoint Rossi in these
races.
> Hayden did make a mistake and ran off, but he didn't have the pace to
> hang with the top five anyway, so it looks like that cost him 1 point.
> Could have been much worse - Nicky gave up 11 points to Rossi this
> weekend after taking 13 from him last weekend, but now he's back to
> needing to win, and one more weekend like this and he's done.
He actually took 17 from Rossi at Assen, so he's a net gain of 6 over
two races where, were it not for Rossi's crash and injury, Hayden might
have lost 10, 14, 18 points. Going into Mugello, when he was up 43 on
Rossi, I figured he had to come out of Donington up by at least 10 - I
figured Rossi could win all four races - and then open that up a bit at
the next two rounds, going into the break up 15-20 points or more. Well,
now he's up 35 on Rossi, so I can't see him being in real trouble right
now. But he will be, if he gets beat by Rossi at the next two rounds and
Honda doesn't do more about fixing that bike.
> Pedrosa can be counted on to throw it away at least once more, like he
> ALMOST did today, so I don't think he's a threat. But Rossi is, as
> always, dangerous.
Yep, I still think Capirossi is more of a threat than Pedrosa or
Melandri, although Loris took a real pounding the last three races. What
Loris can do is take points away from Rossi by beating him at some of
the tracks after the break, even if he's not in the fight. But I said I
thought Nicky and Vale were basically pick 'em for the championship
going into Donington, not knowing what Rossi could manage there. Now I'm
back favoring Rossi.
> I'm pulling for that little redneck to git-R-done, but I have to
> wonder.
Hey, at least he's up now and is making this a very interesting
championship. Too bad Honda isn't playing along...
Mark N
> "S Frank"
>> best
>>> bike, but rode it extremely well. Was that a save early on, or what? He
>>> almost ripped the tire from the wheel! I thought he was gonna collect
>> Marco
>>> in the process too.
>> his great save would have been an idiotic move if had taken marco and
>> himself out, and it was luck (not skill) that kept that from happening.
> Oh yeah, skill had nothing to do with it, 100% luck and for Melandri too..
Also recall that he almost highsided himself out of the race once he got
it stopped, as he turned and was getting back on the gas.
Mark N
> Mark N pontificates:
>
>> I think we saw the best two bikes on the grid in first and
>> second.
> Well, for certain we saw the best two rider/bike combinations
> on the day in first and second. That's why they have a race.
That's usually the case, isn't it? And don't forget the tires...
Mark N
> "sturd" wrote in message
>> Well, for certain we saw the best two rider/bike combinations
>> on the day in first and second. That's why they have a race.
> The best bike will never win with a bad rider. The best rider may win on a
> bad bike. That's what makes motorcycling the most enjoyable racing event.
The best bike will never win with a bad rider because the best bike will
never be ridden by a truly bad rider. But relative to the riders in
MotoGP, a lesser rider can win on the best bike... if he's light enough,
that is...
Will Hartung
news:a6f92$44a880ea$186068cd$22...@KNOLOGY.NET...
> his great save would have been an idiotic move if had taken marco and
> himself out, and it was luck (not skill) that kept that from happening.
Luck prevented Dani from taking out Melandri, because Melandri wasn't in the
wrong place at the wrong time.
Skill/talent brought the bike back under control and didn't make the
situation worse than it already was.
Zeal let him almost highside as he was coming out of it.
Zeal will most probably rear its ugly head again for Pedrosa.
Regards,
Will Hartung
Pierre Bonneau
will have a hard second half.
He can only hope some rain to stay where he is.
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
T-ednbH4f7KiDjXZ...@giganews.com...
Julian Bond
>Arf, Pedrosa is a class ahead of Hayden. we saw it yesterday and I bet Nicky
>will have a hard second half.
>He can only hope some rain to stay where he is.
Note here that Pedrosa took 5 more points out of Hayden's lead than
Rossi did. It may well end up that Nicky needs to watch Pedrosa's
progress in the championship more than Rossi's.
T3
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
> He actually took 17 from Rossi at Assen, so he's a net gain of 6 over two
> races where, were it not for Rossi's crash and injury, Hayden might have
> lost 10, 14, 18 points. Going into Mugello, when he was up 43 on Rossi, I
> figured he had to come out of Donington up by at least 10 - I figured
> Rossi could win all four races - and then open that up a bit at the next
> two rounds, going into the break up 15-20 points or more. Well, now he's
> up 35 on Rossi, so I can't see him being in real trouble right now. But he
> will be, if he gets beat by Rossi at the next two rounds and Honda doesn't
> do more about fixing that bike.
Unless something is critical wrong with his bike I think they should not try
to mess with it until the break, whatever they were testing this week cost
him a lot of time. As far as points go, He needs to win at least one
someplace that Rossi might be counting on, or Vale have another DNF.
Whatever happens he better not get into the damage control mode, as the more
pressure he can apply the better probability that Rossi might get desperate
and wad it...
Mark N
> Pierre Bonneau <pierre-...@wanadoo.fr> Mon, 3 Jul 2006 09:00:00
>> Arf, Pedrosa is a class ahead of Hayden. we saw it yesterday and I bet
>> Nicky
>> will have a hard second half.
>> He can only hope some rain to stay where he is.
> Note here that Pedrosa took 5 more points out of Hayden's lead than
> Rossi did. It may well end up that Nicky needs to watch Pedrosa's
> progress in the championship more than Rossi's.
After losing 45 points to him over the previous two rounds. Pedrosa will
finish ahead of Hayden this year only if Honda/Repsol make it so. Could
happen, they've been pretty effective so far. After this year, we move
on to the larger question of doing something about the weight
discrepancies between riders - how much of an advantage is 40 lbs.? And
will the FIM and Dorna do anything about it if the principal victim is
the new European prince? Took the FIM forever to add real weight to the
Ducatis in WSB, so my guess is they won't. But were Pedrosa an American...
Mark N
> After losing 45 points to him over the previous two rounds.
Sorry, meant 29 points.
Champ
Ha! Now I know you're a comedian - you're suggesting that riders from
the nation with the highest obesity rates on earth needs a
handicapping system for rider weight. That's funny!
--
Champ
sturd
> Ha! Now I know you're a comedian - you're suggesting that riders from
> the nation with the highest obesity rates on earth needs a
> handicapping system for rider weight. That's funny!
So you're saying that Hayden, Edwards, et al are fat?
Now THAT's funny.
Julian Bond
>Ha! Now I know you're a comedian - you're suggesting that riders from
>the nation with the highest obesity rates on earth needs a
>handicapping system for rider weight. That's funny!
Heh!
And note here that Pedrosa is only 26 points behind Hayden. That's only
just more than one win and one DNF.
Will Hartung
> After losing 45 points to him over the previous two rounds. Pedrosa will
> finish ahead of Hayden this year only if Honda/Repsol make it so. Could
> happen, they've been pretty effective so far. After this year, we move
> on to the larger question of doing something about the weight
> discrepancies between riders - how much of an advantage is 40 lbs.? And
> will the FIM and Dorna do anything about it if the principal victim is
> the new European prince? Took the FIM forever to add real weight to the
> Ducatis in WSB, so my guess is they won't. But were Pedrosa an American...
The weight problem is an interesting conumdrum.
They've pretty much handwaved that away by only putting weight limits on the
machines, but not the entire package.
They can always make a minimum weight for the whole set, and that will force
both weight addition to the bike as well as favoring smaller riders.
Then, I can see a debate as to whether Ben Spies or Jason DiSalvo going to
GP coming down to DiSalvo being the smaller of the two, and there's simply
just something wrong with that at a fundamental level.
Racers tend toward the small size anyway, but we certainly have exceptions.
Larger racers are at a disadvantage for both weight and simply fitting
behind the fairing of the bike.
Also, isn't it a bit difficult to easily add weight to a motorcycle? I would
think the dynamics would change quite a bit, and it would suck having to
weigh the package every race and adjust it. Just one more setting to go
wrong. They complain enough about a full tank of gas as it is.
Maybe they can stuff some lead sinkers in to Pedrosas leathers, or give him
some Dirt Track Style steel soled shoes. "Here Dani, you need to wear this
chunk of 1 inch chain around your neck today."
Anyway, weight is a trick. It's obviously important, but I don't think I
want the riders under the same pressures as horse jockeys to keep the pounds
down and turn bolemic.
And anyone who thinks Nicky has an ounce of fat on him is in for a stark
surprise. He's always kept himself in shape. He just a big 'ol country boy.
Though I must say that Eric Bostrom looked quite a bit leaner this year than
previous years. Dunno if it was his leathers or what.
Regards,
Will Hartung
Champ
<redr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:vqydnQTo6bAbnTTZ...@giganews.com...
>> After losing 45 points to him over the previous two rounds. Pedrosa will
>> finish ahead of Hayden this year only if Honda/Repsol make it so. Could
>> happen, they've been pretty effective so far. After this year, we move
>> on to the larger question of doing something about the weight
>> discrepancies between riders - how much of an advantage is 40 lbs.? And
>> will the FIM and Dorna do anything about it if the principal victim is
>> the new European prince? Took the FIM forever to add real weight to the
>> Ducatis in WSB, so my guess is they won't. But were Pedrosa an American...
>
>The weight problem is an interesting conumdrum.
>
>They've pretty much handwaved that away by only putting weight limits on the
>machines, but not the entire package.
>
>They can always make a minimum weight for the whole set, and that will force
>both weight addition to the bike as well as favoring smaller riders.
As has been the case in 125GP for a decade.
>Then, I can see a debate as to whether Ben Spies or Jason DiSalvo going to
>GP coming down to DiSalvo being the smaller of the two, and there's simply
>just something wrong with that at a fundamental level.
>
>Racers tend toward the small size anyway, but we certainly have exceptions.
>
>Larger racers are at a disadvantage for both weight and simply fitting
>behind the fairing of the bike.
All true. I remember Rob McElnea being described as "drafting like a
truck" by his team mate Lawson.
But really, isn't it just a fact of life? Small guys have a bit of an
advantage, the same way that tall guys do in basketball.
--
Champ
Champ
wrote:
>Now THAT's funny.
Well, I did rather have my tongue in my cheek
--
Champ
Jake
So it goes, when you get 25 points for a win. If Hayden had been in
2nd to Rossi's 3rd, he'd be up by 50 points; as it is he's up by 35.
With one more weekend like this, he'll still be leading by 20, but
instead of being the relentless stalker who is always on the podium,
he's another guy who can go really fast at times, but other times is
way off the pace.
I mean, he was the slowest Honda rider on real tires.
> > Pedrosa can be counted on to throw it away at least once more, like he
> > ALMOST did today, so I don't think he's a threat. But Rossi is, as
> > always, dangerous.
> >
> > I'm pulling for that little redneck to git-R-done, but I have to
> > wonder.
>
> He needs to do either win one more that Vale is counting on, or score much
> better than he did today...
Yeah. Ideally both, but if I had to pick one, I'd pick the latter.
Rossi is beatable, Melandri was within one turn of doing so, but Hayden
can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
-jake
Mark N
Will Hartung wrote:
> "Mark N" wrote in message
> > After losing 45 points to him over the previous two rounds. Pedrosa will
> > finish ahead of Hayden this year only if Honda/Repsol make it so. Could
> > happen, they've been pretty effective so far. After this year, we move
> > on to the larger question of doing something about the weight
> > discrepancies between riders - how much of an advantage is 40 lbs.? And
> > will the FIM and Dorna do anything about it if the principal victim is
> > the new European prince? Took the FIM forever to add real weight to the
> > Ducatis in WSB, so my guess is they won't. But were Pedrosa an American...
> The weight problem is an interesting conumdrum.
>
> They've pretty much handwaved that away by only putting weight limits on the
> machines, but not the entire package.
>
> They can always make a minimum weight for the whole set, and that will force
> both weight addition to the bike as well as favoring smaller riders.
>
> Then, I can see a debate as to whether Ben Spies or Jason DiSalvo going to
> GP coming down to DiSalvo being the smaller of the two, and there's simply
> just something wrong with that at a fundamental level.
Absolutely.
> Racers tend toward the small size anyway, but we certainly have exceptions.
>
> Larger racers are at a disadvantage for both weight and simply fitting
> behind the fairing of the bike.
>
> Also, isn't it a bit difficult to easily add weight to a motorcycle? I would
> think the dynamics would change quite a bit, and it would suck having to
> weigh the package every race and adjust it. Just one more setting to go
> wrong. They complain enough about a full tank of gas as it is.
I don't think it would be difficult at all. They could have a weigh-in
for riders once a month or so, and that would set the minimum weight
for their bike until the next one. The bikes could be set up with
ballast containers, probably on the inside of the framerails or
something similar, to centralize the weight. At races the bike would be
set up with the weight in place, so there would be no real issue with
machine balance at all. For a lighter rider the additional weight would
be handled in a way that's more controlled and optimized than simply
having it spread over the body of a heavier rider on the bike.
125 already does a combined weight minimum, as does F1. So it can be
done, and without great difficulty. Not sure how they do it in 125,
though.
> Anyway, weight is a trick. It's obviously important, but I don't think I
> want the riders under the same pressures as horse jockeys to keep the pounds
> down and turn bolemic.
What I don't want to see is riders becoming like jockeys, their size an
absolutely critical component to their inclusion in the class. Pedrosa
brings this all into sharp focus, because he's so small, must gain some
advantage from it, and hasn't proven to be too small or weak to handle
a MotoGP bike. But Honda is moving in this direction beyond Dani, it
seems. What we see is the nature of the bikes being developed in a way
that doesn't require the physical attributes that 500s once did, or may
have.
Unfortunately, decisions like this don't get made in a vacuum and are
always political. Will the powers eliminate an apparent advantage for a
potential Spanish superstar? Will they change the class in a way which
may make it more accessable to riders not coming out of 125/250? Will
they move in a direction contrary to the intentional and desired trend
that has been in place in GP for the last15 years? Sadly, I doubt it...
Andrew
>
> Also recall that he almost highsided himself out of the race once he got
> it stopped, as he turned and was getting back on the gas.
I thought he was just squaring off the last 10 feet of run off before he
actually got back on the track. :P
--
Andrew
00 Daytona
00 Speed Triple
71 Kawi H1
05 Infant
Dirt
Mark N wrote:
> how much of an advantage is 40 lbs.? And will the FIM and Dorna do anything
> about it ...
Fourty lbs? I though the weight difference was closer to 50 lb.
Pedrosa 105-110 lb and Hayden 155-160 lb.
-Dirt-
Julian Bond
>but Hayden
>can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
Like. Um. Max?
Dirt
site claims, add 145 kg for the bike, ~3 kg of gear and ~21 kg of fuel
and Pedrosa has a combined rider/bike weight advantage of 7.5%, which
is no small advantage.
Jake
> Jake <jamc...@yahoo.com> Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:40:56
> >but Hayden
> >can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
>
> Like. Um. Max?
I think Hayden is putting together a better season than Max ever did.
But even Max would still have a ride, I think, if he'd bitched about
his bike even slightly less frequently. Tell the world how good your
bike is and say that you just couldn't get it done, put it on the
podium at least semi-regularly, and Honda will love you.
Can you imagine what would happen if a Honda rider pulled a Hopkins and
kicked his bike on camera after it broke?
-jake
T3
"Will Hartung" <redr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1Waqg.115198$H71....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
Of course weight, or rather the lack of it is an advantage and not a small
one either, but what gets me is some OEM's actually crafting their programs
for a particular size. IIRC there are weight penalties/requirements for each
engine config. and that was OEM's doing and that seems fair on face value,
but when you realize that reducing weight thru the use of exotic materials
cost as much, if not more than HP from say, a V8 and now the direction is to
find smaller rider's, I don't think it's off base, or too far out to
question those motives. So yeah, maybe an overall weight minimum is in
order, I mean look at Mladin, he's a fairly large guy as far as MC racer's
go, why would anyone want to exclude him, or those that resemble him from
GP, unless of course a certain Nip OEM has other, if not somewhat darker
reasons...
T3
> Julian Bond wrote:
>> Jake <jamc...@yahoo.com> Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:40:56
>> >but Hayden
>> >can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
>>
>> Like. Um. Max?
>
> I think Hayden is putting together a better season than Max ever did.
> But even Max would still have a ride, I think, if he'd bitched about
> his bike even slightly less frequently.
Heh, he shoulda been more careful who overheard him bitchin' too!
Tell the world how good your
> bike is and say that you just couldn't get it done, put it on the
> podium at least semi-regularly, and Honda will love you.
>
> Can you imagine what would happen if a Honda rider pulled a Hopkins and
> kicked his bike on camera after it broke?
He'd probably be offered a choice of the hari-kari knife, or the door. Rossi
would probably be the only guy that could have done that and not
suffered....
Champ
wrote:
>In any case, if Pedrosa is 51 kg and Hayden is 69 kg like the MotoGP
>site claims, add 145 kg for the bike, ~3 kg of gear
That 51kg for Pedrosa is, if the commentators on Eurosport are to
believed, *with* full riding gear on!
>and ~21 kg of fuel
>and Pedrosa has a combined rider/bike weight advantage of 7.5%, which
>is no small advantage.
Discounting the 3kg for gear, that figure comes out at 7.65% i.e. it
doesn't really make a difference.
I can see the logic in the handicapping argument, but am reluctant to
go down that path. Once we start handicapping for physical
characteristics, where will it end? "I should get a 1 lap head start
cos I'm ten years older than these kids..."
--
Champ
S Frank
>
> So it goes, when you get 25 points for a win. If Hayden had been in
> 2nd to Rossi's 3rd, he'd be up by 50 points; as it is he's up by 35.
> With one more weekend like this, he'll still be leading by 20, but
> instead of being the relentless stalker who is always on the podium,
> he's another guy who can go really fast at times, but other times is
> way off the pace.
>
> I mean, he was the slowest Honda rider on real tires.
good god, i agree hayden needs to win more, and i agree that he looked like
shit and fucked up at donnington, but this is only the 2nd time this year he
has missed the podium.
S Frank
"Champ" <ne...@champ.org.uk> wrote in message
news:omoia2h9e9ih4ph9q...@4ax.com...
>
> But really, isn't it just a fact of life? Small guys have a bit of an
> advantage, the same way that tall guys do in basketball.
>
>
> --
> Champ
This is my opinion. I can't think of any sport where they try to make up
for some physical deficiency. Football favors the strong and fast, horse
racing and bicycle racing favors the thin. Basketball favors the tall....I
think it sucks because 40lbs is a big deal, but I think that is just the way
it is going to have to be.
S Frank
> I can see the logic in the handicapping argument, but am reluctant to
> go down that path. Once we start handicapping for physical
> characteristics, where will it end? "I should get a 1 lap head start
> cos I'm ten years older than these kids..."
> --
> Champ
Or "I hurt my wrist and should get 2 lap advantage".
Carl Sundquist
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> Carl, if you don't have anything worthwhile to add, just go back to
> sitting on the toilet.
So it's ok for you to spew your bigoted BS as long as you throw in something
contributory?
T3
"S Frank" <lemm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2776e$44a9b314$186068cd$28...@KNOLOGY.NET...
Last time I checked, none of those sports relied on engines and tires, and
after all, F1 does it, so I find it somewhat curious our friends across the
pond seem to be so intransigent, or dismissive to the mere suggestion of
weight restrictions. Heh, maybe it'll take a full on banzia assault from
Japan to change their minds, or not whatever...
Mark N
> Julian Bond wrote:
>> Jake
>>> can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
>> Like. Um. Max?
> I think Hayden is putting together a better season than Max ever did.
Just as a comparison by the numbers (and I can hear the groaning
already), Nicky has 1 win, 3 seconds, 3 thirds, a fifth and a seventh
through nine races, for 153 points. Last year after Donington and nine
races Max had a second, a third, a fourth, 2 fifths, 2 sixths, a seventh
and a DNF-crash, for 100 points. The year before he had a win, 3
seconds, 2 thirds, a fourth, an eighth and a twelfth, for 142 points.
The year before that he had a win, 3 seconds, 2 thirds, a fifth, a
fourteenth and a DNF-crash, for 130 points. So Max wasn't even close to
Nicky's performance last year, and was similar but with more poor
performances the two years before, and you need to recall that the
competition at the front those years wasn't nearly as great, mostly just
Max, Sete and Vale.
Also, in the 12 races prior to Donington Nicky had 11 podiums (1 win, 5
seconds, 5 thirds, plus a fifth), and the best premier-class streak of a
dozen races Max ever had was 00-01, 9 podiums (3 wins, 3 seconds, 3
thirds, but also a fifth, an eighth and an eleventh), but pre-MotoGP and
his competition was mostly just Rossi. He also had 8 podiums in his
first 11 races in 500 back in '98. 250 was a bit different - he had 17
podiums in a row in 95-96.
> But even Max would still have a ride, I think, if he'd bitched about
> his bike even slightly less frequently. Tell the world how good your
> bike is and say that you just couldn't get it done, put it on the
> podium at least semi-regularly, and Honda will love you.
I think it's also in how you do it. Nicky has actually been pretty open
about the problems with his bike, but he never quite sounds like he's
bitching, or very rarely. Then again, Honda hasn't really done anything
about the bike either, so there's a serious limit to their love. The
bottom line may well be that Honda is going to do whatever they want no
matter what you do, but if you just lay there and take it quietly, at
least they won't chase you to the ends of the earth to end your career...
> Can you imagine what would happen if a Honda rider pulled a Hopkins and
> kicked his bike on camera after it broke?
Can you imagine Honda having 13 engine failures in one weekend? Can you
imagine Honda going five years without a win? It's all relative...
Mark N
> "Mark N" wrote
>> sitting on the toilet.
> So it's ok for you to spew your bigoted BS as long as you throw in something
> contributory?
Give us an example of my bigoted BS spewing please, and we can discuss
it further. Otherwise, remember to flush every hour or so...
pablo
"Dirt" <christoph...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151957722.8...@b68g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So did Roberts -who was Pedrosa's size, by the way- when he moved to Europe
and beat Sheene. However I can't recall anyone asking for Roberts to be
penalized. I mean, come on, how bad a sport can you be? This has been the
way motorcycling has been forever. Big guys seldom win. None of these guys
are big.
I find the notion preposterous. Especially because I recall that a year ago
pretty much the same people were all saying Pedrosa was too small to compete
in MotoGP, simply not strong enough. Now he has an unfair advantage. Amazing
how things change, eh?
...pablo
Mark N
> So did Roberts -who was Pedrosa's size, by the way
Oh, come on, Roberts weighed under 110 lbs. when he went to Europe?!
Where do you get this shit? When he was racing Jimmy Filice weighed more
than that, and he's a lot smaller than Roberts.
> I find the notion preposterous. Especially because I recall that a year ago
> pretty much the same people were all saying Pedrosa was too small to compete
> in MotoGP, simply not strong enough. Now he has an unfair advantage. Amazing
> how things change, eh?
So Spain (or a reasonable facsimile) has spoken. And anyone thinks Dorna
will allow a rules change? Prepare for the era of the JIS midgets...
A year ago that was a legitimate question. It's been answered, but the
answer isn't that Pedrosa is stronger than we thought, it's that these
bikes simply don't require the muscle that we thought. We now are more
aware of the extent to which these bikes have been designed and build in
a manner that allows smaller 125/250-bred riders to do very, very well
on them. Stoner is evidence of this as much as Pedrosa, and then there's
Melandri, Capirossi, Elias, Nakano.
On the other hand, there is no question that a lighter rider has an
advantage based solely on that. So the question now is, should those
riders be allowed to retain that advantage, making smaller riders more
in demand? I don't think there's any question that, all things being
equal, this is a potentially bad situation. It should not be the case
that the most talented rider in the world should be denied a top GP ride
simply because he weighs a very average 155-160 lbs. But I can see that
happening.
I think a minimum weight of something like 65kg should be established,
and any rider lighter than that should have the bike ballasted. Whether
or not it's kilo for kilo, I'm not sure, but it should at least be
close. Riders larger than that have to deal with it, but their weight
will not be a big issue unless they are very heavy, at which point they
simply aren't optimal for bike racing anyway. Leave the machine minimums
as they are otherwise, and forget about the weight of riding gear - they
all have to wear it.
Maybe Spain thinks otherwise, but I would hate to see racing's premier
spectacle become a freak show...
Champ
>>> But really, isn't it just a fact of life? Small guys have a bit of an
>>> advantage, the same way that tall guys do in basketball.
>> This is my opinion. I can't think of any sport where they try to make up
>> for some physical deficiency. Football favors the strong and fast, horse
>> racing and bicycle racing favors the thin. Basketball favors the
>> tall....I
>> think it sucks because 40lbs is a big deal, but I think that is just the
>> way
>> it is going to have to be.
>
>Last time I checked, none of those sports relied on engines and tires, and
>after all, F1 does it, so I find it somewhat curious our friends across the
>pond seem to be so intransigent, or dismissive to the mere suggestion of
>weight restrictions. Heh, maybe it'll take a full on banzia assault from
>Japan to change their minds, or not whatever...
I don't see any "friends across the pond" being either dismissive or
intrasigent.
--
Champ
Mark N
> "T3" wrote:
>> Last time I checked, none of those sports relied on engines and tires, and
>> after all, F1 does it, so I find it somewhat curious our friends across the
>> pond seem to be so intransigent, or dismissive to the mere suggestion of
>> weight restrictions. Heh, maybe it'll take a full on banzia assault from
>> Japan to change their minds, or not whatever...
> I don't see any "friends across the pond" being either dismissive or
> intrasigent.
I guess you didn't read Pablo's post then - "I find the notion
preposterous"...
Will Hartung
news:Alfqg.26991$LT2....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> Of course weight, or rather the lack of it is an advantage and not a small
> one either, but what gets me is some OEM's actually crafting their
programs
> for a particular size. IIRC there are weight penalties/requirements for
each
> engine config. and that was OEM's doing and that seems fair on face value,
> but when you realize that reducing weight thru the use of exotic materials
> cost as much, if not more than HP from say, a V8 and now the direction is
to
> find smaller rider's, I don't think it's off base, or too far out to
> question those motives. So yeah, maybe an overall weight minimum is in
> order, I mean look at Mladin, he's a fairly large guy as far as MC racer's
> go, why would anyone want to exclude him, or those that resemble him from
> GP, unless of course a certain Nip OEM has other, if not somewhat darker
> reasons...
Ah, but it wouldn't bother me hardly at all if in fact they went with a
package weight of which the bike and rider a simply components. Say in
Mladins case, if they're allowed to REMOVE weight from the bike in order to
accomodate Mladin (or Nicky) where as they'd have to ADD weight to the bike
for Pedrosa. As long as the package overall met some minimum, then let 'em
do what they want.
I can understand why 125's have this limitation, simply because they don't
have the horsepower to overcome the weight differential. With F1, I think
they simpy don't have enough rules in that series and need one more.
And then what about courting women to race? We certainly have them over here
in club races, and one (I think) in AMA, FX I think. Do women in general
simply not have the upper body strength to compete, at least consistently?
Regards,
Will Hartung
T3
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
> pablo wrote:
>
>> So did Roberts -who was Pedrosa's size, by the way
>
> Oh, come on, Roberts weighed under 110 lbs. when he went to Europe?! Where
> do you get this shit? When he was racing Jimmy Filice weighed more than
> that, and he's a lot smaller than Roberts.
Kenny weighed 105? Yeah maybe in the 6th grade, jeez... There wasn't carbon
fiber stuff back then, or even titanium for that matter, if you were lucky
your bike had some aluminum and if you think a flyweight can pick one up
much less ride and win on a big hunk of iron like most of those miler's
were, well I suggest you might be trying to rewrite history, because you
certainly weren't there, as that was *not* how it was...
>
>> I find the notion preposterous. Especially because I recall that a year
>> ago pretty much the same people were all saying Pedrosa was too small to
>> compete in MotoGP, simply not strong enough. Now he has an unfair
>> advantage. Amazing how things change, eh?
IIRC the weight advantage was the reason I/we started the discussion about
Pedrosa coming to MGP, the strength end of it was just an offshoot of that
thread....
>
> So Spain (or a reasonable facsimile) has spoken. And anyone thinks Dorna
> will allow a rules change? Prepare for the era of the JIS midgets...
I don't know if it's gonna end up like that, but the interview in CN with
that HRC guy a few month's back raised a few eyebrows and given Nip
mentality and Big Red's in particular, rightly so, I might add...
>
> A year ago that was a legitimate question. It's been answered, but the
> answer isn't that Pedrosa is stronger than we thought, it's that these
> bikes simply don't require the muscle that we thought. We now are more
> aware of the extent to which these bikes have been designed and build in a
> manner that allows smaller 125/250-bred riders to do very, very well on
> them. Stoner is evidence of this as much as Pedrosa, and then there's
> Melandri, Capirossi, Elias, Nakano.
No, but they damn sure require some corner workers with a little ass in case
they drop it in the traps, cause none of those dudes can pick one up without
help, which I personally find a little strange, but that's just me...
>
> On the other hand, there is no question that a lighter rider has an
> advantage based solely on that. So the question now is, should those
> riders be allowed to retain that advantage, making smaller riders more in
> demand? I don't think there's any question that, all things being equal,
> this is a potentially bad situation. It should not be the case that the
> most talented rider in the world should be denied a top GP ride simply
> because he weighs a very average 155-160 lbs. But I can see that
> happening.
Heh, I think it already has...
A lighter rider uses less, not to mention different rubber, needs less fuel,
accelerates faster, reaches top end quicker and puts less stress on every
aspect of the whole machine. If that's not a huge advantage, I don't know
what is, though to me that is not what prototype racing is all about. There
is no doubt that racing is extreme to the max, always has been and always
will be, but using, or designing a program or series around such atypical
types of physical characteristic's is a little over the top in my view. I
just hope expecting real world advances in technology from racing is not
considered old school these day's and hopefully it won't be used to promote
one particular ethnic characteristic either, but realizing that at present 4
of the 5 OEM's hail from such a country should give one pause...
>
> I think a minimum weight of something like 65kg should be established, and
> any rider lighter than that should have the bike ballasted. Whether or not
> it's kilo for kilo, I'm not sure, but it should at least be close. Riders
> larger than that have to deal with it, but their weight will not be a big
> issue unless they are very heavy, at which point they simply aren't
> optimal for bike racing anyway. Leave the machine minimums as they are
> otherwise, and forget about the weight of riding gear - they all have to
> wear it.
The easiest way would be just to add x amount of weight to the existing
formula's and on the way to the starting grid everybody has got to roll
across a scale, though I doubt that will ever happen...
>
> Maybe Spain thinks otherwise, but I would hate to see racing's premier
> spectacle become a freak show...
I'll let that one slide....
T3
My apology, I should have added "some" to that...
Mark N
> Jake <jamc...@yahoo.com> Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:40:56
>> but Hayden
>> can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
> Like. Um. Max?
Perhaps a more appropriate comparison would be Lawson in '88, when he
finished 6th at Donington, 40 seconds behind race winner Rainey, in
equally unusual hot, dry weather. Lawson apparently has some sort of
engine problem and a rear tire that lacked grip. And leading up to the
race defending champ Gardner had been goading Lawson about riding around
in 2nd with a big points lead while Gardner had been going for the wins.
Lawson's comment: "He can badmouth me as much as he likes - it's
championships people remember, not race wins."
Mark N
> Ah, but it wouldn't bother me hardly at all if in fact they went with a
> package weight of which the bike and rider a simply components. Say in
> Mladins case, if they're allowed to REMOVE weight from the bike in order to
> accomodate Mladin (or Nicky) where as they'd have to ADD weight to the bike
> for Pedrosa. As long as the package overall met some minimum, then let 'em
> do what they want.
Not a good idea. The rather inflated minimum weights of the current
bikes were established to keep costs down, and I think that sort of
regulation is a good idea. What we don't want is a massive cost in going
with a larger rider, rung up over a pile of parts made of unobtainium.
The regulations related to the bikes themselves should remain pretty
much as they are, I think. And a package weight probably does mean
weight in everything at every round, which would be a hassle.
pablo
> Kenny weighed 105? Yeah maybe in the 6th grade, jeez...
I have no idea what his weight was, perhaps you can for once do some
homework. You'll find out he was supposed to have been as tall as Pedrosa,
and I don't think Roberts was ever fat.
...pablo
T3
"pablo" <pab...@simplyhombreDOT.net> wrote in message
news:Krwqg.126672$dW3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
I don't have to do any homework, I was there and remember it, very well
too...
pablo
> A lighter rider uses less, not to mention different rubber, needs less
> fuel, accelerates faster, reaches top end quicker and puts less stress on
You act as if it were a revolutionary insight that small guys have a racing
advantage. Care to dig up the statistics about Roberts', Mamola's, Rainey's
etc size?
In any case, last I checked Rossi is taller and about the same weight as
Hayden. Guy has won the title 5 times against the likes of Capirossi and
Biaggi. The size "disadvantage" can be overcome. It's been proven again and
again. You guys now act is if it was *all* that mattered.
Yeah, so Pedrosa is smaller. In an earlier thread it was discussed that his
size paradoxically represented an aerodynamic disadvantage and handicapped
his top speed. At least for now, until Honda builds him a slipperier
package.
The size comes with disadvantages as well as many advantages. It's always
been there in racing.
Pedrosa is not setting a precedent, because guess what: to ride at this
level you still have to be a standout as a rider. As long as guys ride at
that level, bring them on.
...pablo
Mark N
Pablo: So did Roberts -who was Pedrosa's size, by the way- when he moved
to Europe and beat Sheene. However I can't recall anyone asking for
Roberts to be penalized.
Mark: Oh, come on, Roberts weighed under 110 lbs. when he went to Europe?!
Tom: Kenny weighed 105? Yeah maybe in the 6th grade, jeez...
Pablo: I have no idea what his weight was... You'll find out he was
supposed to have been as tall as Pedrosa...
T3
"pablo" <pab...@simplyhombreDOT.net> wrote in message
Who has said, well, fuck it, I give up! You seem to read whatever it is you
need to satisfy some, whatever it is. I don't know if it's the lingo, your
interpretation, or just the translation. In any event, I'm outta this shit.
I'll swap pay pal accounts with you when the time comes, until then, ride
smart...
Mark N
> You act as if it were a revolutionary insight that small guys have a racing
> advantage. Care to dig up the statistics about Roberts', Mamola's, Rainey's
> etc size?
> In any case, last I checked Rossi is taller and about the same weight as
> Hayden. Guy has won the title 5 times against the likes of Capirossi and
> Biaggi. The size "disadvantage" can be overcome. It's been proven again and
> again. You guys now act is if it was *all* that mattered.
The issue at the moment is that I don't think we've ever seem a rider as
light as Pedrosa who can handle a premier-class machine. That is a
compliment to his talent, of course, but also a comment on his extremely
small size and the nature of the current machines. The situation was
different only a few years ago when Rossi and Hayden came in - 500s had
proven to be a bit of a handful for some smaller 250 riders, and in the
early days of MotoGP there seems to have been a feeling that SB guys
might be better suited to these machines. But with the current
electronics and tires and development focus, it seems that guys coming
out of 250 are very well-suited to ride these things, and many of them
have the weight and size advantage as a bonus.
And note that previously-dominant Rossi, the "best rider ever",
currently trails rookie Pedrosa in points. Again, hardly all because of
weight and size differential, but what will we see down the road? If
Pedrosa starts beating Rossi regularly, will it really be superior
talent? And if that is the case, what's wrong with finding out for sure?
> Yeah, so Pedrosa is smaller. In an earlier thread it was discussed that his
> size paradoxically represented an aerodynamic disadvantage and handicapped
> his top speed. At least for now, until Honda builds him a slipperier
> package.
No, I think you came up with that idea on your own, based on a
remarkably small top speed sample, at only one event, I believe. To me
it was as lame as your theory that Nieto never became a 500 champion
because the sponsors favored American riders like Roberts, something
created out of whole cloth by your fertile imagination.
Looking at the races this year overall, what you would see is the Honda
midgets at the top of the board almost every time out; Pedrosa had the
top trap speed at Donington, followed by Melandri; Stoner was unusually
far down, in 5th, while Hayden was 10th. That's almost certainly due to
a number of factors, but weight and small size is likely part of it. And
we have seen Pedrosa pass more guys under power along straights than
anyone else this year, I think - if you compared his passing to Hayden's
over the year I think you'd see a marked difference.
Carl Sundquist
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
First, even after I show examples, your self perception is so whacked it
won't make a difference,
Second, give me your definition of bigot (or bigoted BS), so you'll have
less wiggle room when I provide examples,
Third, let's recall the last time you wanted examples of your exemplary
personality:
"Mark N" <menusb...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net wrote in message
news:mfydnWWNTch...@giganews.com...
I certainly do see that other people disagree with me, and that's fine, I
have no issue with that at all. What you don't see is me spewing out the
personal abuse, attacks and belittlement that is evidenced by so many on the
other side on this topic, at least not to nearly the same extent (you know,
when in Rome...).
QUOTES FROM MARK N:
"What you don't see is me spewing out the personal abuse, attacks and
belittlement"
"dripping with your indignant disapproval and superiority, and you know it."
"So please get off your high horse."
"Don't be a dick, Carl"
"Carl, it's a fucking expression."
"In the future I'll try not to abuse the English language so cavalierly, so
as to not bruise your Rossiphile sensibilities."
"I think you're getting a little confused again, Mr. Sunpissed."
"Seems almost like a bit of a gay love jones to me."
"First, I meant exactly what I said, it's just that you're being incredibly
literal over an expression that apparently you aren't familiar with and
don't understand."
"Fuck you, Charlie."
"Don't be such a simpleton."
Mark N
> "Mark N" wrote
>> Give us an example of my bigoted BS spewing please, and we can discuss it
>> further. Otherwise, remember to flush every hour or so...
> First, even after I show examples, your self perception is so whacked it
> won't make a difference,
>
> Second, give me your definition of bigot (or bigoted BS), so you'll have
> less wiggle room when I provide examples,
You used the word, you define it.
> Third, let's recall the last time you wanted examples of your exemplary
> personality:
<snips the bug up Carl's ass>
Ah, so reposting that old shit, eh? I guess I was right when I said, "I
would challenge Carl to go through my race post and critique it word for
word, and not only criticize but suggest what would have been a fair and
balanced way to write it. That way we'd have something to debate that's
actually about the racing instead of just lobbing insults. I would, that
is, but he probably either wouldn't bother or would do some smart-ass
thing to sidestep it."
Why don't we review your contributions to this newsgroup then as well?
Here's everything you've posted in the last month, starting with this one:
7/3: - So it's ok for you to spew your bigoted BS as long as you throw
in something contributory?
7/2: - Not _all_ the Americans. I suppose we could go on about American
journo bias but it would be about not covering motorcycle racing, not a
nationalistic slant.
7/2: - In summary: when Pedrosa and Rossi do well, it's because of the
bike. When Hayden does well it's because of the rider. Will you blame
his mistake today on the bike?
- Genius, Mark. Pure genius. BTW, you're not the alter ego of Davide
Tosi, are you?
Tosi: "Duke, Surtees, Mike the bike and Ago. They all emerged from a much
more competitive scene than the '80s-'90s one. Those 4 guys would have
easily lapped all those yankee/aussie guys. It's the genetic superiority of
the European cream compared to nations born out of convicts and refugees."
7/1: - Where does Hayden live in Europe?
7/1: - Free Practice Three
3 Loris Capirossi
4 Valentino Rossi
5 Marco Melandri
Double curse those EuroMed Italians!
6/27: - 2nd biggest story: Gifted 2nd or fighting injured for 8th?
Unless you're a Kaw fanatic, which will be remembered longer?
6/25: - After Catalunya, you said, "Schwantz' first comments in the
booth yesterday were about how well Rossi's bike works now, and we're
probably back to that being the best bike on the grid.".
- I do. But I wish/think the production team might have possibly been
able to show it afterward although the schedule would have been tight
and there was nothing spectacular to show. We didn't get to seen the
overhead of the last lap chicane until right at the closing credits.
- No you weren't. Those were your words, not anybody else's.
- Excuses, pathetic excuses. What do you sleep in when your Kentucky
Kid pajamas are in the wash?
6/25: - He's 20 years old, in his first season in MGP, has a V already,
and is second on points in the championship. What adjectives do you
think are suitable for him?
- Maybe, maybe not.
- Are you saying that if Hayden wins the championship on points but
doesn't beat Rossi in a straight fight, it's similar to the 99 championship?
6/24: - Of course, since Edwards didn't take points away from Hayden,
et. al., he did the proper thing by not taking points from Rossi, either.
6/13: - Who has the rights to the currently unused spots? Pons,
Clifford? BMW would have to lease a spot through one of them, no?
6/13: - Come on. It's just more ass-kissing to the EuroGod. Right, Mark?
6/13: - It's a shame you don't have the balls to wear that as a sandwich
board all weekend at Laguna.
Yeah, a real worthwhile contributor, Carl. Sounds more like an American
Europhile pursuing a particular agenda to me, the new King of Snide
(step aside, Julian), tiptoeing along the like that separates
contributors from trolls...
Carl Sundquist
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> would challenge Carl to go through my race post and critique it word for
> word, and not only criticize but suggest what would have been a fair and
> balanced way to write it. That way we'd have something to debate that's
> actually about the racing instead of just lobbing insults. I would, that
> is, but he probably either wouldn't bother or would do some smart-ass
> thing to sidestep it."
>
I'll get to it, but you are hardly near the top of my priorities.
Do you mean sidestep it like you did when I asked you, "Will you blame his
Champ
<menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote:
>Carl Sundquist wrote:
>> "Mark N" wrote
>>> Carl, if you don't have anything worthwhile to add, just go back to
>>> sitting on the toilet.
>
>> So it's ok for you to spew your bigoted BS as long as you throw in something
>> contributory?
>
>Give us an example of my bigoted BS spewing please, and we can discuss
>it further.
Here yer go:
--
Champ
Mark N
> Do you mean sidestep it like you did when I asked you, "Will you blame his
> mistake today on the bike?"
I sidestepped that? I said what I said about that race, including
Hayden, in various posts, in great detail. My take on that was that it
was Hayden's mistake, of course, but was probably a function of him
pushing so hard to get toward the front, which was a function of his
starting position, which was at least in part a function of how the bike
is working or not working. So did the bike directly cause him to go off
the track? No, unless it contributed through the clutch functions and
Hayden hasn't said anything about that. But he hasn't, so we have to
assume it was just his error.
Mark N
> Mark N wrote:
>> Carl Sundquist wrote:
>>> So it's ok for you to spew your bigoted BS as long as you throw in something
>>> contributory?
>> Give us an example of my bigoted BS spewing please, and we can discuss
>> it further.
> Here yer go:
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&num=10&q=group%3Arec.motorcycles.racing+author%3AMark+N&safe=off&qt_s=Search
Huh? I don't get it...
sturd
> And then what about courting women to race? We certainly have them over here
> in club races, and one (I think) in AMA, FX I think. Do women in general
> simply not have the upper body strength to compete, at least consistently?
They don't have the testosterone. Maybe we could inject them.
Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.
pablo
>
> I don't have to do any homework, I was there and remember it, very well
> too...
So please share, what was his height/weight?
Champ
Hard to tell when you're being funny. Just in case you really don't
get it - it's just a plain google search of all posts on
rec.motorcyles.racing with an author of "Mark N".
I guess it's hard to tell when I'm being funny too :-)
--
Champ
Champ
T3
"sturd" <mikestur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1152044709....@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Heh, There's a couple we do work for and to be honest, I wouldn't like them
to get their hands on me, in anger that is. Both of um' ride full dress
Harley's and not just on weekends either. The standard answer to how they
manage such big machines is, "I don't carry it, I ride it" and I think that
pretty much says it all...
T3
I'm glad there's one other brave warrior still around, it's a tough job,
but somebody's got to do it!
Bruce Hartweg
> And then what about courting women to race? We certainly have them over here
> in club races, and one (I think) in AMA, FX I think. Do women in general
> simply not have the upper body strength to compete, at least consistently?
>
why do you want to court them to race? would that somehow magically improve racing?
Don't get me wrong, if there are women who *want* to race I say go for it, but
I don't think there needs to be any courting to convince women to race. Yes there
is one in the AMA right now, the announcers all talk about how great it is every
time her name comes up (once or twice this year before the race as a general interest
tidbit, the rest of the time it has been noted as she get lapped by the front half
of the field.
As to why they don't do well I would suggest there are two main reasons
1) not many have tried so there isn't a large pool to
develop the talents (this could change over time)
2) they are women. (this will always be true)
Bruce
Bruce Hartweg
of any desire or ability to race them.
Bruce
pablo
>
> Who has said, well, fuck it, I give up! You seem to read whatever it is
> you need to satisfy some, whatever it is. I don't know if it's the lingo,
> your interpretation, or just the translation. In any event, I'm outta this
> shit.
Excuse me, but didn't you say you believed in weight adjustments
specifically because Pedrosa seems freakishly small to your eye?
What exactly is it that upsets you?
I disagreed with the premise that size higher power intervention, and I have
done so without insulting you -in this thread, but I recall recently asking
you why you were chosing to join MN in the provincial village idiot corner
by painting *all* Euros with the same stroke, as he does all the time.
This is *open class* racing after all. Weight undoubedtly is *not* as much
of an issue as it is in smaller classes, otherwise Rossi himself would not
have been winning titles against much smaller rivals. But note none of these
guys are big, and never have been. The only legitimately big rider I recall
was Wil Hartog in the early 80s, who was nearly 190cm. And put his long legs
and knees to excellent effect, winning in the wet once he was basically
riding a tricycle.
...pablo
T3
"Bruce Hartweg" <bruce...@hartweg.us> wrote in message
news:ZyCqg.2$2Q...@dfw-service2.ext.ray.com...
I don't recall you asking anything about either ability, or desire, so I
wasn't addressing anything but your "upper body" strength queiry and it
takes a little to even nurse a 700lb dresser, however in this case, neither
one of those girls nurse anything, but maybe an expensive drink they had to
buy. The "I don't carry it" remark had to do with how smaller racer's seem
to ride. Ya'know, I heard the same sort of questions raised about female
pilots and those have been answered with a resounding, absolutely they can
fly, many times over. I just don't understand why some guys in this day and
age still seem to cast doubt on a woman's ability to do damn near anything
she sets her mind to...
T3
"pablo" <pab...@simplyhombreDOT.net> wrote in message
>
> "T3" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:SRwqg.38551$Ui7....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>
>> Who has said, well, fuck it, I give up! You seem to read whatever it is
>> you need to satisfy some, whatever it is. I don't know if it's the lingo,
>> your interpretation, or just the translation. In any event, I'm outta
>> this shit.
>
> Excuse me, but didn't you say you believed in weight adjustments
> specifically because Pedrosa seems freakishly small to your eye?
I don't really remember, but I kinda doubt I used the word freak. Yeah, he's
a little guy and having never seen him before I wondered how he rode, or if
he could handle all the juice a MGP bike has. That question has been
answered...
>
> What exactly is it that upsets you?
I'm not upset, I just get frustrated explaining shit over and over to no
end. It works like this for me, if someone has an opinion and I think it may
have merit I "might" inquire, if I have time to explore it thoroughly. I
wouldn't offer one unless I'm willing to explain it, but you're only gonna
get one and maybe a follow up, after that it's almost always just semantics
and somebody gets pissed...(sound familiar?)
>
> I disagreed with the premise that size higher power intervention, and I
> have done so without insulting you -in this thread, but I recall recently
> asking you why you were chosing to join MN in the provincial village idiot
> corner by painting *all* Euros with the same stroke, as he does all the
> time.
Look, I got nothing against Mark, in fact, I kinda like the fucker, and
yeah, I screw with him every now and then, just for sport if nothin' else.
He's damn sure not reluctant to dish it out and I sorta take it as a public
service to keep his sorry west coast ass half-way honest.(full fuckin' time
job lately too!) I have never taken that tact with you, because it's obvious
to me you can't take that kind of close quarters jabbing without going
vertical. That is not a slant, dig, or a cut on you either, it's Latin
temperament, or whatever. You have to understand I could piss off the Pope
without much trouble and I don't want to do that here, as I probably do it
way to much IRL and if you can't understand where I'm coming from on this,
I'm sorry, that just the way it is...(read this twice, 'cause this is all
you get on this matter:)
Besides I got go watch some fireworks and BTW, Happy 4th to all you sorry
ass, whinin' 'Merkans!
Mark N
> This is *open class* racing after all. Weight undoubedtly is *not* as much
> of an issue as it is in smaller classes, otherwise Rossi himself would not
> have been winning titles against much smaller rivals. But note none of these
> guys are big, and never have been. The only legitimately big rider I recall
> was Wil Hartog in the early 80s, who was nearly 190cm. And put his long legs
> and knees to excellent effect, winning in the wet once he was basically
> riding a tricycle.
It's interesting that you take this position, but not long ago you said,
"Fianlly, the tires. I think there is something to be said about a
series that tries to enforce equality. I for one *loved* the BMW boxer
series they had along with MotoGP a while ago, and not because I still
ride one of those boxers. It's simply cool to watch riders when all
machine equations are out of the way." So you like the idea of spec
tires, you like seeing equal equipment, but you absolutely don't want to
see anything done about equalizing the effect of rider weight on the
bikes. Strikes me as a very selective judgment, and I really don't think
there is a single person in this NG that doesn't suspect it's all
because Pedrosa is Spanish...
Mark N
>> Huh? I don't get it...
> Hard to tell when you're being funny. Just in case you really don't
> get it - it's just a plain google search of all posts on
> rec.motorcyles.racing with an author of "Mark N".
>
> I guess it's hard to tell when I'm being funny too :-)
I'll tell you one thing, though, Tom was right - looking at some of that
stuff, seems like things were a lot less abrasive around here in the past...
...but then I came across a thread where you took a shot at me and
Julian killfiled me, and I realized the more things change...
T3
"Tweak" <new...@keslers.removethistosend.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f157dcb...@news.giganews.com...
> In article <Dyfqg.34934$Ui7....@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
> spam...@nowhere.com says...
>>
>> "Jake" <jamc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1151958798....@j8g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > Julian Bond wrote:
>> >> Jake <jamc...@yahoo.com> Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:40:56
>> >> >but Hayden
>> >> >can't be coming home in 7th place and expect to win the championship.
>> >>
>> >> Like. Um. Max?
>> >
>> > I think Hayden is putting together a better season than Max ever did.
>> > But even Max would still have a ride, I think, if he'd bitched about
>> > his bike even slightly less frequently.
>>
>> Heh, he shoulda been more careful who overheard him bitchin' too!
>>
>>
>> Tell the world how good your
>> > bike is and say that you just couldn't get it done, put it on the
>> > podium at least semi-regularly, and Honda will love you.
>> >
>> > Can you imagine what would happen if a Honda rider pulled a Hopkins and
>> > kicked his bike on camera after it broke?
>>
>> He'd probably be offered a choice of the hari-kari knife, or the door.
>> Rossi
>> would probably be the only guy that could have done that and not
>> suffered....
>
> The guys at Suzuki were probably wondering what took so long for Hopkins
> to do something like that.
When you think about it, somethin' happened right after that. I mean he
hasn't won shit, but he sure has shown better, go figure...
Mark N
> I mean, come on, how bad a sport can you be? This has been the
> way motorcycling has been forever. Big guys seldom win. None of these guys
> are big.
Is this confusion or just a dodge? No, there are no riders out there
that are more than, say, 200lbs., and there never has been a champion
that was. But of course that's not what we're talking about, is it?
We're talking about guys who are average size at best. And they have won
championships, a lot of them - Spencer, Lawson, Schwantz, Doohan,
Roberts, Rossi. These are all guys who would be spotting Pedrosa
35-40lbs. and more. And guys who apparently fall into that category
today are Hayden, Gibernau, Edwards, Checa, Hoffman, Vermeulen, Hopkins,
who along with Roberts and Rossi are all listed by MotoGP as weighing
between 67 and 74 kg. The guys who are lighter than this are Melandri,
Tamada, Nakano, Stoner, Elias, Capirossi, the last four under 60kg but
still spotting Pedrosa some 20 lbs.
Jake
Was that about the same time Junior started doing better, also? Makes
it hard to point the finger at the riders.
But yeah, I'd imagine there were some pointed questions from Mr. Suzuki
to whomever is in charge of their GP team, and possibly some pointed
responses regarding sizes of budgets and such back.
-jake
pablo
>
> Was that about the same time Junior started doing better, also? Makes
> it hard to point the finger at the riders.
>
> But yeah, I'd imagine there were some pointed questions from Mr. Suzuki
> to whomever is in charge of their GP team, and possibly some pointed
> responses regarding sizes of budgets and such back.
I don't know. Kicking an object when one is hot-headed in the circuit itself
is a sign of frustration, and not a premeditated put-down of the bike and
team and brand. As when Biaggi went ad nauseam about how the bike just was
not ridable in half the circuits that constituted the tour, and indicated
other riders had a better bike (and that thus other manufacturers were
constantly able to build a better bike than whoever he happened to be
with) - different things altogether. I think if Biaggi had limited himself
to kick the bike at times, he'd still have a job. It's repeated *statements*
that cause damage and affect team morale.
I think there's a huge difference between a one-time hot-headed action, and
constant bagging remarks about the bike and its quality in front of the
press.
Hopkins is a model citizen, and I am sure Suzuki knows that. A kick on the
bike isn't going to change it. Hey, perhaps he was just trying to restart it
by re-arranging the electronics... a blow will do the trick at times...
If there's a reason why Hopkins is not quite shining as much, it may be
because he's been so close and then the bike let's him down that he just
isn't quite trying to go for that extra 5% now. It'd be idiotic for Suzuki
to withhold full support - what's the point of racing then? I think people
in this newsgroup constantly underestimate how badly team managers want to
win. They'd fight these part conspiracies with their lives, because it's
*their* jobs as team managers at stake - and that means they have the most
interest in their riders getting full support while they're part of the
team. Hopkins - maybe taking a summer break. He's one of the hardest riding
guys, and for over 2 years I have been wondering how he'd do on another
bike. He'll be back. Perhaps already in the next race...
...pablo
Morten Becker-Eriksen
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> And note that previously-dominant Rossi, the "best rider ever", currently
> trails rookie Pedrosa in points. Again, hardly all because of weight and
> size differential,
Are you suggesting that it has anyting what so ever to do with weight and
size?
If that's the case Rossi must have fallen far since his 125 and 250
championships.
> but what will we see down the road? If Pedrosa starts beating Rossi
> regularly, will it really be superior talent? And if that is the case,
> what's wrong with finding out for sure?
It's not that a discussion about weight is wrong, I might even agree that it
would be fair, but from there to your and toms argumentation!
In a few posts you to make this into a complete circus. You both must be on
drugs or somthing, I have no other rational explanation.
- this a Euro - US thing <sigh, get a life>,
- the racese could develop into a freak show. They havent so far, and for
your information, the journos found the last HRC 500 to be real easy to
ride.
- Pablo pointed out to very valid points. Pedrosa seems to suffer in top
speed, you all thought his size and weight would give him a disadvantage.
And now you scream out for justice? You fucking increidible.
>> Yeah, so Pedrosa is smaller. In an earlier thread it was discussed that
>> his size paradoxically represented an aerodynamic disadvantage and
>> handicapped his top speed. At least for now, until Honda builds him a
>> slipperier package.
>
> No, I think you came up with that idea on your own, based on a remarkably
> small top speed sample, at only one event, I believe.
No he didn't, it was widely discussed in more serious areanas than here at
r.m.r. To bad you missed it, you might have learned somthing.
> To me it was as lame as your theory that Nieto never became a 500 champion
> because the sponsors favored American riders like Roberts, something
> created out of whole cloth by your fertile imagination.
>
> Looking at the races this year overall, what you would see is the Honda
> midgets at the top of the board almost every time out; Pedrosa had the top
> trap speed at Donington, followed by Melandri; Stoner was unusually far
> down, in 5th, while Hayden was 10th. That's almost certainly due to a
> number of factors, but weight and small size is likely part of it. And we
> have seen Pedrosa pass more guys under power along straights than anyone
> else this year, I think - if you compared his passing to Hayden's over the
> year I think you'd see a marked difference.
If we compare those two, lets consider a few more things:
- Hayden is probably the one that slides the bike the most, both in and out
of the turns. Could that matter?
- Hayden is in his 4th year in a _the_ top team of MGP, Pedrosa the first,
what do that tell us?
- Hayden is now the no1 rider at HRC and are the one who gets the new stuff
first, you remember, up to now that was the one with the "huge" advantage,
now it is, according to you, a disadvantage, suddenly HRC are doing a number
of faults, or is it their no. 1 guy who cant tell them what he need?
- On a track like Donington with realative low top speed, and short
straight, the corner speed and exit count for quite a lot I guess, none of
those have to do with power as far as I know.
Back to the real world:
How much does the weight count on a 250hp bike? When traction seems to be a
major issue everywhere but on the main straights, how can we calculate the
weight advantage?
If it is as big as it sound like you two argue I probaly should have a MGP
ride as well as I took third in Thai National Championship round competing
with Thais wheighing at least 30kg less than me on 400cc stock bikes. Beaten
by two English residents weighing about the same as me. We probably earn an
MGP ride all three of us?
Will not a kg by kg weight increase on the bike give Pedrosa and the other
"midgets" a disadvantage? I mean, how can you compare a dynamic, suspended
mass as a human are, compared to dead wheight on the bike? In my opion that
would substitute an inherited advantage with a constructed disadvantage.
Fair?
/MBE
Morten Becker-Eriksen
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
> Carl Sundquist wrote:
>
>> Do you mean sidestep it like you did when I asked you, "Will you blame
>> his mistake today on the bike?"
>
> I sidestepped that? I said what I said about that race, including
> Hayden, in various posts, in great detail. My take on that was that it was
> Hayden's mistake, of course, but was probably a function of him pushing so
> hard to get toward the front, which was a function of his starting
> position, which was at least in part a function of how the bike is working
> or not working.
Isn't Hayden the guy with the unfair advantage of getting the now stuff
first now?
Seems like he has problem take as much advantage of that as others did
before him.
Mark N
> "Mark N" wrote in message
>> And note that previously-dominant Rossi, the "best rider ever", currently
>> trails rookie Pedrosa in points. Again, hardly all because of weight and
>> size differential,
> Are you suggesting that it has anyting what so ever to do with weight and
> size?
> If that's the case Rossi must have fallen far since his 125 and 250
> championships.
Pedrosa has, what, a nine-point advantage over Rossi now? Do I think
that can be attributed to weight? Sure it can. If you put 40 lbs. on
Dani's bike, does he beat Nicky in China? I kind of doubt it, and you're
halfway there just with that one result.
>> but what will we see down the road? If Pedrosa starts beating Rossi
>> regularly, will it really be superior talent? And if that is the case,
>> what's wrong with finding out for sure?
> It's not that a discussion about weight is wrong, I might even agree that it
> would be fair, but from there to your and toms argumentation!
> In a few posts you to make this into a complete circus. You both must be on
> drugs or somthing, I have no other rational explanation.
> - this a Euro - US thing <sigh, get a life>,
YOU are making it a US-Euro thing, not me. But there's no getting around
the fact that if very small riders have a notable advantage with the new
bikes, then riders from countries where people are generally smaller,
and where the bikes that riders start out on are generally smaller (125s
instead of 600s), the riders that rise to the top will generally be
smaller. That means Japan, Italy, Spain will have another advantage over
the US, Australia, the UK.
> - the racese could develop into a freak show. They havent so far,
Dani is pretty damned close, and a lot of people are talking about him
and the new 250 imports in terms of size. Mat Oxley wrote an editorial
on this topic earlier in the season, saying something needs to be done
about this size/weight issue. It is real, Mort.
and for
> your information, the journos found the last HRC 500 to be real easy to
> ride.
"Real easy"? I doubt that, but easier than the earlier 500s, for sure.
And they were that way in the end in part because the factories were
trying to make them more accessible to ex-250 riders to ride - the Euros
who were doing almost nothing in 500 and the Japanese homeboys.
> - Pablo pointed out to very valid points. Pedrosa seems to suffer in top
> speed, you all thought his size and weight would give him a disadvantage.
> And now you scream out for justice? You fucking increidible.
That is absolutely false, and anyone who takes that position without
even looking at an adequate sample of trap speeds is just hiding their
head in the sand. In the nine races this year, Pedrosa has posted the
fastest event top speed in six of them, according to the official MotoGP
stats. And have you ever seen anyone just power by Dani along a straight
this year, the poor boy suffering with his slower bike?
>> Looking at the races this year overall, what you would see is the Honda
>> midgets at the top of the board almost every time out; Pedrosa had the top
>> trap speed at Donington, followed by Melandri; Stoner was unusually far
>> down, in 5th, while Hayden was 10th. That's almost certainly due to a
>> number of factors, but weight and small size is likely part of it. And we
>> have seen Pedrosa pass more guys under power along straights than anyone
>> else this year, I think - if you compared his passing to Hayden's over the
>> year I think you'd see a marked difference.
> If we compare those two, lets consider a few more things:
> - Hayden is probably the one that slides the bike the most, both in and out
> of the turns. Could that matter?
As I said, there are a lot of factors, but it doesn't do a rider any
good to reduce his speed along a straight unless he's created a greater
advantage elsewhere. The advantage of sliding the bike out of a turn is
to get it turned and straight up more quickly, allowing him to get on
the gas earlier, which should mean getting to a higher top speed or to
top speed more quickly.
> - Hayden is in his 4th year in a _the_ top team of MGP, Pedrosa the first,
> what do that tell us?
And Dani is in his 5th year in GP overall. What does that tell us?
> - Hayden is now the no1 rider at HRC and are the one who gets the new stuff
> first, you remember, up to now that was the one with the "huge" advantage,
> now it is, according to you, a disadvantage, suddenly HRC are doing a number
> of faults, or is it their no. 1 guy who cant tell them what he need?
Ah, the other Pablo position. Sure, let's just ignore that fact that
Hayden's bike represents the first whole-cloth redesign of the RCV since
the start of MotoGP, it's had problems from the start, he's the only one
riding and developing it, the bike has had some fairly serious problems
during the season, HRC has supplied very few new parts to them, all of
this well-documented...
> - On a track like Donington with realative low top speed, and short
> straight, the corner speed and exit count for quite a lot I guess, none of
> those have to do with power as far as I know.
Again, look at a larger sample and see what you find.
> Back to the real world:
> How much does the weight count on a 250hp bike? When traction seems to be a
> major issue everywhere but on the main straights, how can we calculate the
> weight advantage?
> If it is as big as it sound like you two argue I probaly should have a MGP
> ride as well as I took third in Thai National Championship round competing
> with Thais wheighing at least 30kg less than me on 400cc stock bikes. Beaten
> by two English residents weighing about the same as me. We probably earn an
> MGP ride all three of us?
Don't be an idiot, Mort, we're not talking about clubracing here. You
might as well be talking about playing as Hayden and winning in a MotoGP
video game...
> Will not a kg by kg weight increase on the bike give Pedrosa and the other
> "midgets" a disadvantage? I mean, how can you compare a dynamic, suspended
> mass as a human are, compared to dead wheight on the bike? In my opion that
> would substitute an inherited advantage with a constructed disadvantage.
> Fair?
That's the issue, how much weight do you add? It seems like most racing
people think centralizing mass is an advantage, and having that mass be
predictable in effect is another advantage (a rider has to "manage" his
mass all the time). And not having it creating wind resistance is
another advantage, of course. So the issue is what advantages does a
larger, stronger rider have that should be factored into any such
formula, and what advantages does a smaller rider still retain even if
the bike/rider package is equalized on weight? I really have no answer,
but my guess is that in lieu of anything else they probably should be
considered to be a wash.
sturd
> Morten Becker-Eriksen wrote:
> > - Hayden is in his 4th year in a _the_ top team of MGP, Pedrosa the first,
> > what do that tell us?
>
> And Dani is in his 5th year in GP overall. What does that tell us?
That Dani is already multiple world champion and winning races in
his first year in MotoGP?
> That's the issue, how much weight do you add? It seems like most racing
> people think centralizing mass is an advantage, and having that mass be
> predictable in effect is another advantage (a rider has to "manage" his
> mass all the time).
Having to "manage" the rider's weight is an advantage, not a
dissadvantage. Indeed, just being able to weight the front by
an extra 40kg removes a fair part of Pedrosa's advantage over
Hayden for example. Not all of it or anywhere near but the
point is that Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
and a disadvantage in others. His biggest advantage is that
he's a damn good racer, nothing to do with weight.
> I really have no answer,
> but my guess is that in lieu of anything else they probably should be
> considered to be a wash.
So you agree weight rules for rider/bike combo, like in 125,
is not merited?
Mark N
> Mark N asks:
>
>> Morten Becker-Eriksen wrote:
>> That's the issue, how much weight do you add? It seems like most racing
>> people think centralizing mass is an advantage, and having that mass be
>> predictable in effect is another advantage (a rider has to "manage" his
>> mass all the time).
> Having to "manage" the rider's weight is an advantage, not a
> dissadvantage. Indeed, just being able to weight the front by
> an extra 40kg removes a fair part of Pedrosa's advantage over
> Hayden for example. Not all of it or anywhere near but the
> point is that Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
> and a disadvantage in others. His biggest advantage is that
> he's a damn good racer, nothing to do with weight.
Of course he's a damned good racer. But that doesn't mean his weight
isn't a material advantage. By your logic and through extrapolation, the
larger a rider is, the bigger the advantage. Of course that's not true,
and there is at minimum a point of diminishing returns. But, as Pablo
endlessly points out, the best riders in the world are and have been on
average smaller people. That in itself strongly suggests that small size
is an advantage and not a disadvantage. Extrapolate from that and you
get to the conclusion that a very small rider with equal talent is going
to have an advantage. That's where we are with Dani.
>> I really have no answer,
>> but my guess is that in lieu of anything else they probably should be
>> considered to be a wash.
> So you agree weight rules for rider/bike combo, like in 125,
> is not merited?
No, I don't. What I am saying is that, outside of the effect of weight
on the motorcycle, at this point in MotoGP the advantages of being
larger cannot be found to be greater or lesser than the advantages of
being smaller. So the weight should be balanced through some sort of
formula, and the riders put on equal footing in terms of what the motor
has to accelerate, the brakes have to stop, the mass the tires have to
fight, etc. If Dani weighs 40lbs. less than Rossi, who I would consider
to be a rider of average weight, then put 40lbs. of weight on Dani's
bike, wherever his team wants to put it.
sturd
>By your logic
my logical conclusion was:
>>Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
>> and a disadvantage in others
Mark continues:
>and through extrapolation,
*You* especially shouldn't extrapolate.
> What I am saying is that, outside of the effect of weight
> on the motorcycle, at this point in MotoGP the advantages of being
> larger cannot be found to be greater or lesser than the advantages of
> being smaller.
If I read that correctly, you don't think size can be proven
to be an advantage or a disadvantage.
But:
>So the weight should be balanced through some sort of
> formula
OK, so somehow you've disconnected size from weight.
I could agree that smaller cross sectional area is almost
always an advantage. However, I can also tell you one situation
that it is not - braking from high speed.
On current MotoGP machines which are limited by traction
more than HP on 80% of the track, I don't think you can make
an accurate prediction on whether weight is an advantage or
disadvantage. At least not on a usenet newsgroup.
Mark N
> Mark N is missing something:
>
>> By your logic
>
> my logical conclusion was:
>
>>> Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
>>> and a disadvantage in others
But you also seem to be arguing that his size is enough of a
disadvantage that his bike/rider package should continue to be given the
current 30-40-50lb advantage.
> Mark continues:
>
>> and through extrapolation,
>
> *You* especially shouldn't extrapolate.
It's just what I do...
>> What I am saying is that, outside of the effect of weight
>> on the motorcycle, at this point in MotoGP the advantages of being
>> larger cannot be found to be greater or lesser than the advantages of
>> being smaller.
> If I read that correctly, you don't think size can be proven
> to be an advantage or a disadvantage.
Are we still talking about riders here, or the more generic "size
matters" discussion? ;) If riders, I'm talking about all aspects of the
riders except weight - strength, the ability to move mass around, wind
resistance, etc.
> But:
>
>> So the weight should be balanced through some sort of
>> formula
Right.
> OK, so somehow you've disconnected size from weight.
Not really, in the way you're thinking - would Pedrosa still have
advantages over a larger, heavier rider even if his bike/rider package
weighed the same as that larger, heavier rider's? That's what I'm
driving at.
> I could agree that smaller cross sectional area is almost
> always an advantage. However, I can also tell you one situation
> that it is not - braking from high speed.
If wind resistance matters more than having to slow that additional
weight. I would argue it doesn't, and by quite some measure, at least
deeper into a corner.
> On current MotoGP machines which are limited by traction
> more than HP on 80% of the track, I don't think you can make
> an accurate prediction on whether weight is an advantage or
> disadvantage. At least not on a usenet newsgroup.
I would argue that you can. The smaller classes can have higher
cornering speeds, and it's not all down to chassis geometry. The tires'
grip is fighting the momentum of the bike in cornering, and that
momentum is a product of mass and speed. So the heavier the bike is, the
harder the tires have to work to turn the thing at any given speed. And
the additional weight doesn't do nearly enough in keeping the bike
planted to offset that in any material way.
Morten Becker-Eriksen
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
> Morten Becker-Eriksen wrote:
>> "Mark N" wrote in message
>
>>> And note that previously-dominant Rossi, the "best rider ever",
>>> currently trails rookie Pedrosa in points. Again, hardly all because of
>>> weight and size differential,
>
>> Are you suggesting that it has anyting what so ever to do with weight and
>> size?
>> If that's the case Rossi must have fallen far since his 125 and 250
>> championships.
>
> Pedrosa has, what, a nine-point advantage over Rossi now? Do I think that
> can be attributed to weight? Sure it can. If you put 40 lbs. on Dani's
> bike, does he beat Nicky in China? I kind of doubt it, and you're halfway
> there just with that one result.
I am suggesting that if weight is so important in MotoGp Rossi must have
been pure genius, pure god, when the realtivly big boy could win the 125 and
250 titles because there has allways been small guys there. If he is nothing
more than the best out there today, or ever, that still wouldn't make up the
realtive enormous difference it had to be on those powerless bikes compared
to the 990.
BTW.
>>> but what will we see down the road? If Pedrosa starts beating Rossi
>>> regularly, will it really be superior talent? And if that is the case,
>>> what's wrong with finding out for sure?
>
>> It's not that a discussion about weight is wrong, I might even agree that
>> it would be fair, but from there to your and toms argumentation!
>
>> In a few posts you to make this into a complete circus. You both must be
>> on drugs or somthing, I have no other rational explanation.
>> - this a Euro - US thing <sigh, get a life>,
>
> YOU are making it a US-Euro thing, not me. But there's no getting around
> the fact that if very small riders have a notable advantage with the new
> bikes, then riders from countries where people are generally smaller, and
> where the bikes that riders start out on are generally smaller (125s
> instead of 600s), the riders that rise to the top will generally be
> smaller. That means Japan, Italy, Spain will have another advantage over
> the US, Australia, the UK.
Now, that's interesting, what make you think US, Autralia and UK youngsters
are anyting but marginally higher than Italians and Spanish youngsters?
Things change, these countries are growing oversized people just like in US.
If you look at the whole population there sure will be a difference, but if
you look at people below 30 I bet the difference are neglectable. So, I'm
sorry, you have to adjust your cospiracy.
>> - the racese could develop into a freak show. They havent so far,
>
> Dani is pretty damned close, and a lot of people are talking about him and
> the new 250 imports in terms of size. Mat Oxley wrote an editorial on this
> topic earlier in the season, saying something needs to be done about this
> size/weight issue. It is real, Mort.
What is real is that we have one talented rider that are very small. In his
250 days he had an advantage when body weight were a much larger % of the
total weight and the wight/power ratio were much more influenced by the
relative low power. Even so most seems to think he won the WC more out of
talent and skill. Most of you seriosly doubted that he could make it into
MotoGp. Up to now rider-weight has been a complete non issue in MotoGP while
it has been a constant issue in 250. The only reason it came up now are the
current standings in MotoGP and some americans need all kind of excuses for
why Hayden might fail to win the WC, or out of a huge matrix of advantages
and disadvantages take away as many advantages from the no. 2 in the
standings to make sure he doesn't make it.
> and for
>> your information, the journos found the last HRC 500 to be real easy to
>> ride.
>
> "Real easy"? I doubt that, but easier than the earlier 500s, for sure.
In their own words, more like an R6 with much more power. Even the riding
position wasn't that bad.
> And they were that way in the end in part because the factories were
> trying to make them more accessible to ex-250 riders to ride - the Euros
> who were doing almost nothing in 500 and the Japanese homeboys.
>> - Pablo pointed out to very valid points. Pedrosa seems to suffer in top
>> speed, you all thought his size and weight would give him a disadvantage.
>> And now you scream out for justice? You fucking increidible.
>
> That is absolutely false, and anyone who takes that position without even
> looking at an adequate sample of trap speeds is just hiding their head in
> the sand. In the nine races this year, Pedrosa has posted the fastest
> event top speed in six of them, according to the official MotoGP stats.
> And have you ever seen anyone just power by Dani along a straight this
> year, the poor boy suffering with his slower bike?
Now I havn't seen that, on the other hand I never saw that when Rossi were
on a honda either. Coinsidence?
>>> Looking at the races this year overall, what you would see is the Honda
>>> midgets at the top of the board almost every time out; Pedrosa had the
>>> top trap speed at Donington, followed by Melandri; Stoner was unusually
>>> far down, in 5th, while Hayden was 10th. That's almost certainly due to
>>> a number of factors, but weight and small size is likely part of it. And
>>> we have seen Pedrosa pass more guys under power along straights than
>>> anyone else this year, I think - if you compared his passing to Hayden's
>>> over the year I think you'd see a marked difference.
>
>> If we compare those two, lets consider a few more things:
>> - Hayden is probably the one that slides the bike the most, both in and
>> out of the turns. Could that matter?
>
> As I said, there are a lot of factors, but it doesn't do a rider any good
> to reduce his speed along a straight unless he's created a greater
> advantage elsewhere. The advantage of sliding the bike out of a turn is to
> get it turned and straight up more quickly, allowing him to get on the gas
> earlier, which should mean getting to a higher top speed or to top speed
> more quickly.
Unless of cource if one starts that slide way to late and slides it more or
less all the way to the very end of the turn. Then one would produce higher
tire wear and lower exit speed.
>> - Hayden is in his 4th year in a _the_ top team of MGP, Pedrosa the
>> first, what do that tell us?
>
> And Dani is in his 5th year in GP overall. What does that tell us?
They are about equal when it come to track knowledge.
>> - Hayden is now the no1 rider at HRC and are the one who gets the new
>> stuff first, you remember, up to now that was the one with the "huge"
>> advantage, now it is, according to you, a disadvantage, suddenly HRC are
>> doing a number of faults, or is it their no. 1 guy who cant tell them
>> what he need?
>
> Ah, the other Pablo position. Sure, let's just ignore that fact that
> Hayden's bike represents the first whole-cloth redesign of the RCV since
> the start of MotoGP, it's had problems from the start, he's the only one
> riding and developing it, the bike has had some fairly serious problems
> during the season, HRC has supplied very few new parts to them, all of
> this well-documented...
I'm not ignoring it, I'm wondering why it fails right now, with him.
>> - On a track like Donington with realative low top speed, and short
>> straight, the corner speed and exit count for quite a lot I guess, none
>> of those have to do with power as far as I know.
>
> Again, look at a larger sample and see what you find.
Oh, sorry for just replying to your arguments. Besides, top speed allways
depend on exit speed on any track in MotoGP.
>> Back to the real world:
>> How much does the weight count on a 250hp bike? When traction seems to be
>> a major issue everywhere but on the main straights, how can we calculate
>> the weight advantage?
>> If it is as big as it sound like you two argue I probaly should have a
>> MGP ride as well as I took third in Thai National Championship round
>> competing with Thais wheighing at least 30kg less than me on 400cc stock
>> bikes. Beaten by two English residents weighing about the same as me. We
>> probably earn an MGP ride all three of us?
>
> Don't be an idiot, Mort, we're not talking about clubracing here.
Well, it was a national race, but I agree, it's more like club racing, but
even so, this was actually in my first year of racing, I was a rookie, with
three races under the belt, as a farang in Thailand I was by defenition an A
rider and competed with national A riders with much more experience, not to
mention knowledge of the track. I'm not saying that I'm a fantastic rider
but strongly suggest that your "huge" weight advantage are blown up totally
out of proportions.
> You might as well be talking about playing as Hayden and winning in a
> MotoGP video game...
>
>> Will not a kg by kg weight increase on the bike give Pedrosa and the
>> other "midgets" a disadvantage? I mean, how can you compare a dynamic,
>> suspended mass as a human are, compared to dead wheight on the bike? In
>> my opion that would substitute an inherited advantage with a constructed
>> disadvantage. Fair?
>
> That's the issue, how much weight do you add? It seems like most racing
> people think centralizing mass is an advantage,
When you _have_ to add that weight to the bike you put it as low as
possible, yes.
> and having that mass be predictable in effect is another advantage (a
> rider has to "manage" his mass all the time).
Now thats where I doubt there has been enough research. While there are a
few situations where body mass work against you, mostly when things go
wrong, many others situations the body mass have a minimal impact on the
bike handling because we suspend that weight much better than what the bike
would do alone with a centralized weight addition.
Add to that a constant change of tire development. The wheight advantage has
become a mantra that few question or look beyond. With out overloading the
the tires and other components there is no actual advantage in lower weight
when it come to braking and turning. There is more energy to absorb, yes,
but if the surrondings could absorb that energy without changing grip
properties the friction would follow the weight in a linear way. I suspect
tire design today are so good that the overload have less impact than it
used to have. That's why they can do those huge slides without seriously
slowing you down.
> And not having it creating wind resistance is another advantage, of
> course. So the issue is what advantages does a larger, stronger rider have
> that should be factored into any such formula,
What advantage they would have in general, and what advantage they would
have compared to light guys with heavy bikes.
/MBE
Morten Becker-Eriksen
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
> sturd wrote:
>> Mark N is missing something:
>>
>>> By your logic
>>
>> my logical conclusion was:
>>
>>>> Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
>>>> and a disadvantage in others
>
> But you also seem to be arguing that his size is enough of a disadvantage
> that his bike/rider package should continue to be given the current
> 30-40-50lb advantage.
Or disadvantage, depending on the situation. And Yes, why should Dorna
change that now. The impact of rider weight have never been smaller than
now.
Mark N
> "Mark N" wrote
>>>>> Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
>>>>> and a disadvantage in others
>> But you also seem to be arguing that his size is enough of a disadvantage
>> that his bike/rider package should continue to be given the current
>> 30-40-50lb advantage.
> Or disadvantage, depending on the situation. And Yes, why should Dorna
> change that now. The impact of rider weight have never been smaller than
> now.
Based solely on the power and weight of MotoGP bikes, yes. But the issue
now is that perhaps smaller riders can ride these things more
effectively than they could the previous bikes, because of all the
electronic engine management, edge grip of the tires, etc. So the
advantages that larger riders had are mostly gone, and that weight
disadvantage is what's left. So the machine is the real performer, and
the rider just becomes something of a jockey, relatively speaking.
And it's not just about Pedrosa, he's just the poster child for this
issue. The problem for Pedrosa is, if they don't do anything about the
rules, any championships he wins will be at least slightly tainted by
this issue, particularly if the current trend toward smaller
125/250-bred riders continues.
pablo
"Morten Becker-Eriksen" <m...@c2i.net> wrote in message
news:EPydnfuLKqz...@telenor.com...
>
> What is real is that we have one talented rider that are very small. ...
What we have is a rider that happens to be winning in his first year in
MotoGP. he wasn't supposed to be this good, so MN of course is fishing for
anything that justifies DP having an unfair advantage. Not only is he
Spanish and made it thus far just by passport draw, but now all of a sudden
his size -which as of last year eliminated him a serious MotoGP candidate in
MN's mind, mind you- is a huge advantage. Odd I can't recall Katoh, who
weighted as much as Pedrosa -go check- making similar impact from the get go
if size is the reason for everything.
I mean, please do shut up already with this size thing. Give it up. Rogers
was as tall al Pedrosa according to the record books. No one complained.
Katoh weighted exactly the same. If it was such an advantage, it didn't show
back then.
...pablo
Morten Becker-Eriksen
"Mark N" <menu...@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
> Morten Becker-Eriksen wrote:
>> "Mark N" wrote
>>> sturd wrote:
>
>>>>>> Pedrosa's size is an advantage in some ways
>>>>>> and a disadvantage in others
>
>>> But you also seem to be arguing that his size is enough of a
>>> disadvantage that his bike/rider package should continue to be given the
>>> current 30-40-50lb advantage.
>
>> Or disadvantage, depending on the situation. And Yes, why should Dorna
>> change that now. The impact of rider weight have never been smaller than
>> now.
>
> Based solely on the power and weight of MotoGP bikes, yes. But the issue
> now is that perhaps smaller riders can ride these things more effectively
> than they could the previous bikes, because of all the electronic engine
> management, edge grip of the tires, etc. So the advantages that larger
> riders had are mostly gone, and that weight disadvantage is what's left.
> So the machine is the real performer, and the rider just becomes something
> of a jockey, relatively speaking.
If so I'm sure you can come up with all the briliant 250 riders that failed
in 500 in the past due to small size.
Besides, I have realy a huge problem to think this is for real. In a sport
that only the last 20 years has become increasingly serious regarding riders
physical condition. The gp races 20 years ago looked more like club races of
today than a world championship fight. All a determined serious tiny
midget-like guy would have to do was to do some serious fitness training and
he would be stronger and much more fit than the average GP rider. It
wouldn't surprice me if that was true 10 years ago as well.
> And it's not just about Pedrosa, he's just the poster child for this
> issue. The problem for Pedrosa is, if they don't do anything about the
> rules, any championships he wins will be at least slightly tainted by this
> issue, particularly if the current trend toward smaller 125/250-bred
> riders continues.
Do we have a trend? Show me.
/MBE
Mark N
> If so I'm sure you can come up with all the briliant 250 riders that failed
> in 500 in the past due to small size.
How many "brilliant 250 riders" won 500 championships between, say, 1983
and 1998?
> Besides, I have realy a huge problem to think this is for real. In a sport
> that only the last 20 years has become increasingly serious regarding riders
> physical condition. The gp races 20 years ago looked more like club races of
> today than a world championship fight. All a determined serious tiny
> midget-like guy would have to do was to do some serious fitness training and
> he would be stronger and much more fit than the average GP rider. It
> wouldn't surprice me if that was true 10 years ago as well.
I only think that's partially true. Fitness was something at least the
Americans in GP in the '80as and early '90s were quite conscious of, and
everything about Doohan I've read indicated that he was very fit. I
can't comment on the Euros too much, though.
> Do we have a trend? Show me.
If you can't see it, that's not my problem. Even if I laid out all kinds
of evidence, you wouldn't accept it. You think Pedrosa's size actually
creates a disadvantage in top speed, I let you know he's been the top
guy in trap speed times all year, so you imply that's because of his
superior talent, and also that Hayden is too stupid to realize spinning
the tire up to corner exit is slowing him down. Your belief structure is
firmly rooted in your desire to see European and career GP riders as
simply best, and nothing anyone says is going to change that at all. So
I'm done trying.