One way to resolve the perceived "midget problem"
in [Racing]
|
From: Mark N on 11 Oct 2007 03:53 Alexey wrote: > Mark N wrote: >> No, I think I just see it without blinders on. The Euros in MotoGP are >> smaller because they came up through the filter of 125 and 250, not >> because those people are generally smaller (although they might be to >> some degree). But once there, they have an effect on the equipment - >> Honda's "more compact riders for the compact bikes of the future", or >> was it the other way around? And on the mentality of it all - people >> think 125s are God's gift to rider development today, but is that really >> the product of anything beyond GP EuroMed bias and favoritism and >> propaganda? Why did Elias and Pedrosa and Lorenzo come to MotoGP from >> 125 and 250, while Xaus came through WSS and WSB? You don't think size >> had something to do with it? >> >> American racers come up racing street stuff, so there's nothing that >> filters out size nearly to the extent 125s do. Our best guys are that >> because of talent and desire, not because of small size. So should that >> disqualify them? The Aussies and Brits are mostly in the same boat. >> >> The Japanese presence in world racing is almost entirely controlled by >> their factories - how many Japanese riders head out into the world on >> their own like the Aussies do? It almost seems like a big deal when one >> switches to an Italian factory, like Harada and Haga did, after being >> out there. So why did they stop exporting? Who knows, maybe it was >> embarrassment over ten years of abysmal performances. >> >> It's not all that complicated, but if you don't buy into it or even >> understand it at this point, you probably never will... > Mark, last year Hayden won. This year, it's Stoner. You're > complaining about European domination of the series through size. No, that's NOT what I'm saying. I'm saying Europeans and Japanese and to some extent the few others who come up through the GP support classes are favored because of politics and economics, and one of the byproducts of that is now the reduction in rider size. You > think it should all be fair and politics not interfere with how riders > get hired? Please. It will never happen. It's never been that way > to begin with. Last I checked, it takes money and dedication from > your parents to get a kid into racing early on. So that means all the > kids in big cities are cut off. All the kids that aren't in solid > middle-class families are cut off. What do you expect? I'm not expecting that the best theoretical talent will all emerge somehow, what I'm saying is that the talent that does emerge, and reasonably mature talent (meaning guys 18 or older), should have a reasonable chance to show that in the top series in the world, if it's sufficient to earn that. Once a series cuts that off to a significant degree, as GP did in the mid-late '90s, it ceases to be the true world championship. I don't want to see GP slip back that way again. It's not > chess. It's not basketball. This sport takes significant resources. > You'll never see "the best" meeting "the best". You don't think that was the case prior to the commercialization of GP racing in the early '90s? Tell me how 500 was materially excluding top racers in the period immediately preceding that. Tell me who those guys were. You'll only see "the > best of the lucky". Saying they shouldn't be too small to allow other > people into the game is not really gonna make it any more fair by > ballasting small riders with heavier machines will not work. I don't believe that's really true. Yes, larger riders will do relatively better on larger, more powerful machines, and smaller riders will do better on smaller, less powerful machines. But that's in part because the weight differences aren't dealt with in the rules, and a MotoGP machine is hardly a smaller, less powerful bike. I have little doubt that if GP established a rider minimum weight of 65k for 125 and 250 and ballasted below that, after a time we'd see the riders getting bigger in those classes. The little guys would still have aerodynamic advantages, but talent would rule out anyway, and a lot of that talent is in larger bodies. And I think it will work, at least to the extent that it would do enough to stop the series slipping into a freak show and would lend some credibility to any successful smaller rider that they never will have if everyone ends up very small and the clear perception is that size really matters, trumps skill. It wouldn't be perfect, but it definitely would be better. You'd > have to have a choice of small machines and big ones. But then you're > getting into the situation I described about mixing bikes with similar > laptimes but different strengths and weaknesses on the same lap. > Might not be good watching. So the answer I think is to have > different career paths for riders of different stature. I don't follow you at all there. Ballasting a bike to equalize rider weight isn't going to materially change the machine's character.
From: sturd on 11 Oct 2007 08:00 Mark N spews: > Ballasting a bike to equalize rider > weight isn't going to materially change the machine's character. Then why would you advocate doing it? Of course it's going to change the machine's character, that's why you suggest doing it. You need to face the facts - you're pissing in the wind. Whine all you want, it won't change the rules. Go fast. Take chances. Mike S.
From: Julian Bond on 11 Oct 2007 08:35 sturd <mikesturdevant127(a)hotmail.com> Thu, 11 Oct 2007 05:00:21 >You need to face the facts - you're pissing in the wind. >Whine all you want, it won't change the rules. The thing that is still up in the air is MotoGP-2 and MotoGP-3 or whatever the replacement for 250GP and 125GP turns out to be. Imagine for a moment that World Supers can be sorted out and GP can run a 600 production based formula. What we might have is something similar to AMA FX but taken a little further. - 600-4, 675-3, 750-2 production engines in a WSS/FX tune - Prototype frames - Unlimited suspension, wheels, brakes but steel disks - Unlimited bodywork (eg no silhouette requirements) - Unlimited gearing but with a maximum of 6 gears. - And the big question. How much electronics, traction control, launch control, wheelie control? - All the Japanese, Ducati and Aprilia have suitable engines. - In the timescales involved it's conceivable that KTM could have a suitable engine and even BMW. - Teams like Ten Kate, or Yamaha Italia and Germany could quite easily get involved as they already have the engine knowledge. - The advantage to the factories would be time and effort but not necessarily technology. Meaning that a private team (like TenKate) with a good engine tuner should be able to be competitive. - Riders could be drawn from National 600 formulae as well as WSS. They'd have to cope with radically more tuneable chassis and setup but would be familiar with the basic feel. There's a lot to be said for this. But it doesn't make it any easier to work out what MotoGP-3 should be. These days there really are no road engines of < 600cc that are directly suitable for racing. Nobody makes a 400-4 or a 500-2 sports bike any more. Even the MX motors are questionable if you need a new crank and rod to survive and a new gearbox possibly with extra gears to suit road racing. -- 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 ***
From: Alexey on 11 Oct 2007 10:34 On Oct 11, 3:23 am, Mark N <menusb...(a)NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote: > Alexey wrote: > > Mark N wrote: > >> Alexey wrote: > >>> A 15 or 16 year old could easily fit that physical criterion of being > >>> small and fit. To me, that's the point of having 125's or whatever > >>> they might get replaced with in the context of GP's. It makes for a > >>> good stepping stone into the series for young talent coming from all > >>> over the world, provided there are similar machines being raced all > >>> over the world. If we go to 450 4-stroke singles, that may very well > >>> take off in places, where 125 racing is stagnant or dying now, such as > >>> the US. As to the question of cost, a used 125 RS or TZ is on par > >>> with cost with a used 250 4-stroke dirtbike. What we need here is > >>> more tracks and more accessible parts (4-strokes would certainly fit > >>> the bill). > >>>> If you worship at the knee of Alberto Puig, it is... > >>> I don't worship anyone. If you disagree with my point without giving > >>> a reason why, that's fine. > >> Okay, I'll tell you why. If you look at the historical picture, 125s > >> hardly have a legacy of being a development tool for great riders. I > >> don't think the AMA has ever had a 125 class, yet probably more SB and > >> GP world champions have come from the US than anywhere, at least over > >> the last 30, 35 years. Even among Europeans 125 wasn't viewed as a > >> development class for GP, rather it was more of the premier tiddler > >> class, the top rung for a very different sort of breed of rider. Then > >> things changed shortly after Dorna took over commercial rights to the > >> series in the early '90s. At the same time that the series seemed to be > >> hugely focused on getting EuroMed and Japanese riders into 500, driven > >> largely by commercial interests, Dorna also decided to make 125 a > >> development class, first establishing a maximum number of seasons riders > >> could compete there, and now having an age limit instead. At the same > >> time we saw Criville and Capirossi move from 125 championships to 250 > >> and on to 500, and when Criville won the 500 championship in 1999, he > >> became only the second 125 champion to go on to win in 500 (Read, the > >> '68 125 champ, was the first). Two years later Rossi became the third, > >> and also the first 250 champion to go on to win in 500 since Read, who > >> also won the 250 championship, in '71. > > >> So was there something about the 125 and 250 route that best prepared > >> riders for 500? I seriously doubt it, rather that's where the European > >> riders (and later Japanese) were dominating, and that route gave them a > >> big track experience advantage. In many cases they moved up on the same > >> teams they raced on in the lower classes, by the '90s the non-factory > >> teams were leasing near-factory bikes, and most of those teams had moved > >> up from the lower classes. To my view this wasn't about superior > >> training, it was about "re-Europeanizing" GP, after 20 years of American > >> and Australian champions who came into 500 from outside the series. It > >> doesn't take any brilliance to figure out why the business end of GP > >> would want to see this, and the timing was much more than coincidental. > > >> So Puig comes along and institutionalizes all this, developing his > >> "underground railroad" through 125 and 250, all paid for by Telefonica, > >> and starts his training academy using 125s, and that all this was > >> centered in Spain, the home of Dorna, the center of the old tiddler > >> class, also the new center of GP popularity, is not coincidental. So now > >> he has kids on GP tracks as young as 13, can claim at least some > >> responsibility for many of the new breed, and is now viewed as the pied > >> piper of GP mentorship (and the Svengali of midgetry, btw). In the > >> process he has built a huge power base, but also continues to > >> Europeanize GP in the process, and that was the real desire of Dorna. > > >> Now, instead of watching outsiders dominate their premier championship > >> and their own boys fail miserably, Dorna can pull the strings and > >> effectively have now put a near-monopoly stamp on the top championship > >> in the world. And everyone seems to buy into it, you have to ride a 125 > >> as a teenager or you'll never develop the skills to be MotoGP world > >> champion. But that's only really true from a systemic standpoint, it > >> probably has very little to do with actual skill development found on a > >> 125. I think a top kid could ride 125s in this country for years, but > >> he'd never get anywhere unless someone lets him in the door in the GP > >> power structure. And they probably won't do that just because he's got > >> talent, they will only do that if it supports other desires, if it > >> enhances their control and income. > > I don't understand what your point is. Puig is training kids on > > 125's. Some of them go on to have careers in the series. Okay. What > > about any of this makes it unfair? > > My point is that Puig is the figurehead for 125 racing as a rider > development program, and I don't accept that this is the best way to > develop MotoGP riders, nor do I think it works for the best long-range > interest of the series. Part of what you said was this: "A 15 or 16 year > old could easily fit that physical criterion of being small and fit... > It makes for a good stepping stone into the series for young talent > coming from all over the world, provided there are similar machines > being raced all over the world." What you seem to be promoting is the > development of tiny riders on tiny bikes, starting when they are very > young. I don't think that operates in the overall interest of racing, I > think racing is better off with bikes that don't put a significant > segment of the riders out there at a physical disadvantage, meaning they > are just too big to succeed on them. I absolutely believe that's what > 125s do, and that's a big part of why the rider pool in 250 and MotoGP > has shrunk so much in recent years. And that's happened not because the > riders coming out of that are simply better, but rather because the > economic forces of GP want the riders who come out of that, because they > are of nationalities that correspond to the largest segment of their fan > base. And now MotoGP bikes have evolved to be more friendly to them > (including Dorna's displacement reduction), allow them to take full > advantage of their smaller size even in that class, which means all this > could become institutionalized. > > It isn't about unfairness, it's about the series going in a direction I > just don't want to see, and that I don't think will be good for its future. I guess we'll just have to disagree. My point about 15 year olds is that both guys and girls that age will not have a problem fitting the small bike and being competitive on it without having to have abnormal genes. I'm 5'9", 160 lbs -- perhaps only slightly below average North American male size and I certainly was quite a bit lighter when I was in my mid teens. While I'd love to try a 125 now, such a bike would have been perfect for me and most kids I knew if they were to try their hand at racing. Another problem I have with starting road racing on bigger bikes is that it is particularly hard on women. I believe once they're more mature as riders, they're not necessarily at an great advantage or disadvantage, but early on, when they're still teenagers, putting a girl on a 600 is a mistake. A light- to middleweight 4-stroke, such as an SV or the Ninja, is sorta okay, but those bikes don't have nearly the right chassis for someone who wants to learn GP racing, which 125's and 250's most certainly teach.
From: Alexey on 11 Oct 2007 10:41
On Oct 11, 3:02 am, Mark N <menusb...(a)NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote: > Alexey wrote: > > On Oct 10, 3:06 am, Mark N <menusb...(a)NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote: > >> I do. The Red Bull series is a kiddies development exercise, but it's > >> hardly GP racing. Spec racing may be close and exciting, but it > >> ultimately leaves one flat, unfulfilled. In the end it always ends up a > >> contrivance. > > All that, just to say, "I don't like it." > > All what? No, I don't much like spec racing, and big-time racing is > uniformly not spec racing. Not F1, not MotoGP, not WSB, not CART, not > IRL, not NASCAR. When I think of spec racing I think of something like > IROC, and there was little of interest there. Yes, spec racing might > work for some sort of development series, in part because the monopoly > factory pays for the whole thing, but, then again, I really don't much > like the idea of a top professional series having a developmental class > for kids anyway. And as a replacement for 125? That would be very > disappointing, to say the least. First of all, NASCAR is going full speed towards becoming America's next top model... I mean, a spec series -- and nobody minds. Then look at A1GP, which is gaining popularity. As far as a spec class replacing 125's, I don't think it would be that terrible, especially considering the fact that 125's now are nearly that. Yes, there are different manufacturers, but the technology is virtually the same, tires are spec. And it produces a great show. It doesn't have to be a pure spec class. It doesn't have to be like Red Bull GP, where they go out of their way to show that the machines are identical. |