One way to resolve the perceived "midget problem"
in [Racing]
|
From: Julian Bond on 5 Oct 2007 15:42 Alexey <inline_four(a)yahoo.com> Fri, 5 Oct 2007 09:09:07 >Mark, what's the problem you're trying to solve? That rider weight is >becoming more of an issue? I don't think its about that at all. I think that's a symptom for what he sees as an artificial career path based on 125->250->MotoGP rather than Superports->Superbike->MotoGP. One which is biased towards 125,250 for all sorts of reasons. Let's imagine for a moment there were 24 seats on the MotoGP grid. (Honda 6, Ducati, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki 4, Roberts 2). Who in the current crop would you leave out, who else would you give a shot? De Angelis is the only one I'd leave out. Possibly Nakano. I'd add Spies. I have a real hard time thinking who else to add in. And finding 5 is really hard. I think it's actually easier with WSB and WSS. There's a whole bunch of riders currently in national championships that ought to get a shot at those championships. But that road is now being blocked by ex-MotoGP riders. -- 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: Mark N on 5 Oct 2007 16:36 Alexey wrote: > Mark, what's the problem you're trying to solve? That rider weight is > becoming more of an issue? It used to be an issue before too, just > not to the same extent perhaps. Not remotely as much. As I've said repeatedly, this is an entirely new phenomenon, as far as I know there's never been a premier class champion below about 65kg / 145lbs, until now with Stoner at 128lbs. And about two-thirds of next year's grid will be made up of riders lighter than that historical cutoff. So what? Physical attributes > (fitness, weight, height, etc.) are a major factor in virtually any > form of athleticism on a professional level and certainly motorcycle > racing is quite physical. Just because different racing series are > currently resulting in different average physiology of their riders > doesn't mean that one is more unfair or worse than the other. They're > just different. That depends on what is driving the boat, and it's not at all clear that what has happened here is that the bikes developed to a point where smaller, lighter riders were at some fundamental advantage, so they moved to the top of the class and teams responded by hiring more of them. In fact that's not at all what's happened here. What I see happening is that historically (meaning going back only 10-15 years) the teams hired from 250; in fact, in 2002 only one of the top 14 riders in points didn't come from 250 (Abe). There was in retrospect a very short period at the start of MotoGP that teams also hired from SB, but now that's reverting back to the way it was before. In the meantime, 250 started hiring from 125 almost exclusively, which wasn't really the case historically. What that means is riders coming into MotoGP today mostly have started in 125, and it seems to succeeed in that class you have to be very small, even with the bike-rider weight minimum. And 250 doesn't have that minimum, so size/weight continues to matter there. In theory it may not matter as much in MotoGP, but that almost doesn't matter if the only guys who can get in the door are under 60 kgs. Superbike and GP racing have demanded different > attributes for a long time. If I'm not mistaken, this large cross- > over trend of riders going between the series is a fairly recent > thing. Look at Rich Oliver -- the guy dominated 250's all his life, > but could never quite jell with a production bike. Not that long - if you look at the American-Australian dominance era from '78 through '98, most of the premier class championships were won by ex-SB riders, and only one was won by a guy from 250, Franco Uncini in '82. The flow from 250 to 500/MotoGP is a fairly recent phenomenon, and from 125 to 250 to MotoGP even more recent. And I think a large part of that is political - MotoGP and its teams want riders from the countries who support the sport the most, for financial reasons, and that has meant trying to find a way to get Spanish, Italian and Japanese riders into those seats. That way has mostly been through 250, which has been dominated by EuroMed and Japanese factories and teams, and 250 riders have a leg up when it comes to experience in the series. What these trends inevitably lead to are bikes that are shaped around the guys that ride them. So MotoGP bikes have been and will be developed with smaller riders with 125/250 skills in mind. Now we have bikes that have to be ridden with wheels in line and with high corner speed, and all that sliding around sems to be history. So who does that favor? And the racing has become relatively boring - do we blame that on electronics and 800cc bikes and the advanced state of the tires, or should we also be blaming that on the guys riding and developing the bikes? It's chicken-and-egg stuff, I think. > I don't quite get your earlier point about racial divide or > favoritism. Not all Europeans are smaller than Americans. And even > if they are smaller on average and that happens to be a good thing for > a racer, so what? Being small doesn't guarantee success. On a bike, > one has to also be strong. So while you can be light and compact, if > you don't step up your physical fitness program more than your bigger > oppenents, you won't last 5 laps at that pace. That as a general position makes sense, but it really doesn''t play in this real world. If you look at the AMA, it's fairly clear that these things matter, and we see guys at 145-170 pounds at the front, while the smallest guy, DiSalvo, can't seem to do much more than the odd fast lap and has been a big disappointment. But in GP today you don't see anything like that, and the average MotoGP rider in 2008 may well be smaller than the average rider in 250 only 8-10 years ago. Back then Harada and Capirossi were the midgets in 250; today they would be just part of the crowd, if not on the larger end. And as I agrued with Kveck the last couple weeks, I think when size starts to matter that much, we inevitably lose talent, the kind of talent that generated championships for the last 50-60 years, the kind of talent that comes in a 145-165 pound body. So the midgets roll in, but 160-pound Spies remains outside looking in, and it's not at all certain that he won't remain there forever. Probably not, because he rides for Suzuki and Dorna wants some Americans. Americans to create interest in the US that is, and perhaps to win the occasional GP here, but not to dominate they way they did in the '80s - the winning in Europe and the championships are to go to their home boys, because that's what pays off for them. It's not personal, it's business...
From: sturd on 6 Oct 2007 09:52 Mark N muses: >There's almost no good > way to make any sort of realistic judgment of anyone in 250 these > days, becaues there's no standard at all to measure them against. You really don't understand how racing works, do you? >. Or what Bayliss' might > have been, had Fogarty not gone down in 2000, Bostrom not stumbled out > of the gate, Bayliss not crashed at Daytona, Sears not been cancelled > and Kocinski not been available. Wow that's quite a list of 'what-if's' to get to some demon dream of yours. For the record, I think there's a fine list of guys that deserve a chance in MotoGP. To bad there aren't many spots open. Go fast. Take chances. Mike S.
From: sturd on 6 Oct 2007 17:29 Mark N asks: > And, for the record, who are those guys? Just saying "there's a fine > list" means nothing. Sofuoglu, Charpentier, Kallio, Spies, Dovisioso, Lorenzo. RL Hayden, Pitt, Rea. Those are the first ones that come to mind without really studying the issue. I'm sure there are others hiding in National series for instance that I'm unaware of. Guys that follow the Hopkins model and need somebody to take a big honking chance on them. But that's not going to happen this year - deserving a ride and having a ride available are two different things. Mark N's wishful dreaming notwithstanding. >what if Mike S. > claimed that little guys don't have any advantage in racing because of > size, Not what I claimed. I contend, and the ruling body and teams seem to agree with me, that in MotoGP class, smaller riders have advantages and disadvantages that in general even out so that larger (not Large but larger) riders are not at a disadvantage. No rule change is necessary as in this class, it's a non-issue. In other classes and forms of racing, maybe and maybe not an issue. In 125 roadracing, almost certainly an issue. In MX1, certainly not. MX2 probably not. Too bad there's not a game programmer handy. I guarantee this is all modeled, or could be, in some of the games my kid is playing these days. Go fast. Take chances. Mike S.
From: Mark N on 6 Oct 2007 21:28
sturd wrote: >> what if Mike S. >> claimed that little guys don't have any advantage in racing because of >> size, > > Not what I claimed. I contend, and the ruling body and teams > seem to agree with me, that in MotoGP class, smaller riders > have advantages and disadvantages that in general even out > so that larger (not Large but larger) riders are not at a > disadvantage. "SEEM to agree" with you is about as far as I would go. Yes, I do not think they believe the size thing is an issue, but for completely different reason than you suggest. I think it's because doing something about the problem would be making it tougher for EuroMeds to get into MotoGP and succeed there, and the same for riders in their own support classes (which really is the same thing, when you think about it). Why would they institute a rule based on fairness if it's contrary to their real interests? > No rule change is necessary as in this class, it's a non-issue. > In other classes and forms of racing, maybe and maybe not an > issue. In 125 roadracing, almost certainly an issue. In MX1, > certainly not. MX2 probably not. So why will next year's MotoGP class almost certainly be the smallest, lightest in the history of the sport, and smaller than any in AMA SB and WSB as well? There is a reason for that, right, it's not just some random occurrence? And what happened to your 160-pound optimum size? I know it slipped down to about 150 pounds at some point, but there's Pedrosa running at the front at 40 pounds less than that. So now there is no optimum size? While I grant a big part of the problem originates in 250, it doesn't quite seem that you're convinced that size matters even there. If not, then why have the class champions there been south of 150 pounds for as far back as I can remember? Not necessarily the 110-130 pound guys running at the front these days, but small guys none the less. But I think size does matter in GP today, because of the nature of the bikes. I seriously doubt that the rulemakers managed to stumble on the perfect formula that is completely size-independent, and remained so even with the change from 990s to 800s. It's obvious to me that 250s reward small size in a fairly serious way, and so do 125s even with a combined rider-bike minimum. [Which doesn't do much, btw, since the old bike minimum was 80kg and the combined minimum is 136kg, which means 56kg for a rider fully dressed in his gear. That means even Pedrosa wouldn't get ballasted, which to me is just nuts.] SBs may be a tough nut for the midgets to crack, given that they are probably a bit bigger, weigh about 35 pounds more, don't have the idealized geometry, and don't have the same level of electronic controls. And maybe not. But MotoGP bikes? I think they do favor smaller size, at least down to some baseline level. To this point it's not clear that anyone has hit that yet. In any case, I just can't fathom why someone would be entirely ambivalent about the notion of jockeys on bikes. Especially when something can be done about it, and rather easily. Me, I find it truly amazing that it's something that no one seems to talk about. Until I think about who that would be, that is - the status quo in MotoGP, from Dora down to the beat writers, seems to have a stake in the EuroMidgets and their success, so total silence would probably be the expectation. > Too bad there's not a game programmer handy. I guarantee this > is all modeled, or could be, in some of the games my kid is playing > these days. I seriously doubt it. Games model observed behaviors, and some of them do it very well (GPL comes to mind), but that doesn't mean they're really based on the actual physics at play. |