MotoMatters.com | Kropotkin Thinks

Imagine, that by design or by accident, you end up with both Infront and Dorna. You take no immediate action, you sit back and watch how they conduct themselves. And then, when there is an area of conflict (CRT) one group is publicly belligerent and threatens legal action against the other. Are Infront's management so poorly versed in corporate politics that they thought that was going to go over well?

I have no idea how this will pan out, but I'm hopeful. I hope that we end up with two separate series, one production-based and one less restricted, and that there are less calendar and technology overlaps.

Yet again the rules are paramount. Within the parrallel universe,SBK should be reduced to current STK regulations. The money saved can put GP premier back on the track of true prototype with the consumate rewards. Financial,competitive and spectatorial.
Watch this space. CRT sucks as grid filler.
Someone at Bridgepoint has slammed his fist on the desk and its high time.
As usual,I'll wait and watch.

My point exactly.

re: "Bridgepoint has announced that Dorna Sports and Infront Sports & Media have reached agreement to bring both their motorcycle racing interests under a single umbrella organisation."

oh that's right it was ME...!!! :) although, i never okay'd DORNA calling the shots. something's gone terribly amiss. >:( the NWO, new world order (for racing) is coming whether we're prepared or not.

I am sure that current CRT bikes would be faster on SBK Pirelli tires. CRT is much closer to SBK bikes then MotoGP bikes. Bridgestone design their tires for MotoGP. CRT teams have big problems with that. This just don`t work.

Maybe this can go one step further.

I know, I know... wishful thinking.

I hope this results in me being able to watch WSBK online, preferably in a package deal with motoGP.

It would be nice to see WSBK dumbed down to stock with sealed engines and MotoGP allowed to modify internals as much as they like. What is developed in MotoGP could trickle down to WSBK. Should be no manufacturer teams in WSBK with all factories running teams in MotoGP. But maybe I am crazy.

Just how are MotGP and WSBK rivals? They are two different types of motorbike roadracing. Their only point of conflict is interpretation of the tech rules governing the two series and that isn't much of a conflict although the media feast on it regularly. WSBK is a well-managed series that has good manufacturer support presently and brilliant racing. MotoGP is a mismanaged series in dire straits. Why Dorna was chosen to take over WSBK management with their performance in MotoGP is surprising, to say the least. And what has become of the Flammini's, I thought they controlled WSBK? Did they sell out? Methinks the loser out of this deal will be WSBK.

Cant disagree with the rhetoric above regarding the differences between the series and that the prototype classes should be the premier championship.

A few things I'd like to see;
Moto2 opened up similar to Moto3, the time is right to allow more than one engine manufacturer with similar rules & constraints to Moto 3.

Make CRT's more prototype based - the 4 bike rule for factories doesn't really worry me but I'd like the Manufacturers be committed to selling prototype style engines at sensible fixed prices to CRT teams which by consequence make CRT's very special desirable motorcycles in their own right.

Open up the technical interest and make all the bikes prototypes. Sounds expensive I know, but making the teams more like F1 teams all with custom designed chassis and various different engines I find a stimulating prospect.

DORNA was facing a serious problem trying to implement the spec ECU and rev limits, they would have seen WorldSBK with its unlimited electronics become the clear technological leader.

Now they can dumb down WorldSBK with rules designed to make it slower, lower budget and much less of a development class, no longer any threat to MotoGP.

There was a story a week ago about how FIM, AMA, BSB and WorldSBK are going to be meeting this fall to develop a common rule based on the BSB model... basically superstock spec bikes with a spec ECU, no traction or launch control.

This will eliminate any rationale for the manufacturers to run factory teams in WorldSBK, they won't get any R&D benefit from developing and racing bikes that are actually dumbed down from the stock street bikes.

Choke on it Nakamoto! Haha!

Just keep that shitfinger, Ezpeleta, away from SBK. He is a failure.

Personally, I think WSB needs to be "dumbed down" a bit. In the US DMG took over AMA and changed the rules quite a bit. The bikes were "dumbed down" as some might say, but the racing is getting better. Not only that, but they had a rule stating that anything you put on your bike has to be something anyone can buy to put on their bike. I think it was the first time I had seen anything other than exhaust systems advertised by Yoshimura. If they weren't selling it to other racers, they couldn't run it on their bikes. All of a sudden the Jordan boys are fighting it out with Young and the Buell guys are stealing podiums.
There are ways to write technical regulations that limit cost and performance while still keeping the bikes pretty close together. Right now WSBK does a good job of keeping the bikes close together (the factory teams anyway), but you'd be hard pressed to say they are keeping it affordable.

I never thought that this might happen, but now that WSBK and MotoGP are linked, maybe the rules can be linked as well

If MotoGP is to continue as a prototype series (which is the only way to differentiate it from WSBK) then there needs to be a source of income to pay for the development, either through sponsorship, or selling the technology.

Being that only manufacturers can supply bikes to race in WSBK due to the homogation rules, then they are a potential buyer/user of technology developed by MotoGP teams. So that this can happen there needs to be a link in rules between them.

My personal preference is that MotoGP comes up with a fairly open set of rules which reflect the direction that motorcycle developement needs to head, and also the prototype nature of the series, ie. Fuel limit (or equivalency requirement), no spec tire (but all tires available to all teams), and no homogation rules, no factory teams (they can supply chassis or engine to a team, but not both maybe?), the success of the series will dictate how much money is spent on development. To link it to WSBK, they use the same rules as MotoGP, but with a lag time of say 5yrs (development time for a new production motorbike) and a homogation requirement.

For example, year one of the new rules, there are some safety requirements, and teams are allowed to use 21L of fuel, or the equivalent energy in diesel, electricity, etc, the teams to select what tires they want to use for a weekend on the Thursday before the race, these tires to be supplied to Dorna by the manufactures for distribution (would stop a manufacture giving a special tire to any rider with an identical appearance)

5yrs later, WSBK has the same rules as year 1 in MotoGP, but with a homogation requirement and factory teams.

so, honda will LEAVE motogp IF a spec ECU is brought in: BOGUS! now we all know why they were 'threatening' to leave - because they were not REALLY leaving!

balony!

Bad news.
I don't see how two series, run by organisers almost equally inept at making and enforcing rules, together will do any better.

Dorna have fiddled with MotoGP rules from the start. Here's the record;
1. 990s were a Honda benefit
2. 800s (unsurprisingly a Honda V5 with a cylinder lopped off), processional racing, an escalating costs, hard to ride except for select riders, control tyres that made the difficulty to ride even more difficult, stupid fuel limits, a walkout of manufacters, Rookie rule
3. 1000s that have continued the saga of the 800s
4. Depleted grids and CRTs
5. Moto2 and Moto3 that have followed on from 250s and 125s, great racing, however success comes down to just a few teams, a few chassis and in Moto3 the motor (just 2x makers). Marquez' almost limitless testing will garner him a World Championship

Infront with WSBK have done better, however;
1. RSV4 won series with gear driven cams. Aprilia got away with it as no one inspected the engines
2. Aprilia using 28 engines per season is not sustainable
3. Years upon years of a Ducati benefit and special rules for them, $60k Ducati 1098R special vs $18k production Japanese bikes
4. Arms race leading to production bikes becoming less suited for road use

WSBK has done better in enticing the manufacturers and managed control tyres better than MotoGP. What is odd is that the control tyres in Moto2/3 is done well (whilst MotoGP 1000s is mismanaged).

We're going to end up with 1000cc roadbikes with 81mm bores that are all top end (poor mid range) and unsuitable for road use.

All of this just so Dorna can save face when they dumb down MotoGP to contain costs. This leads to dumbing down WSBK. So where does SuperStock go?

There is something clearly wrong with MotoGP/CRT rules when +120hp Moto2 bikes are nipping at their heels.

MotoGP:

Moto1 (Heavyweight Prototype)-
Highly modified prototype or production engines
Prototype chassis
rev limit, 81mm max bore, max of 4 cylinders, 1000cc max, spec ecu, spec tires, max of 12 engines per season, 24l of fuel.

Moto2 (Middleweight Prototype)-
Highly modified prototype or production engines
Prototype chassis
rev limit 81mm max bore, max of 4 cylinders, 600cc max, spec ecu, spec tires, max of 12 engines per season, 24l of fuel.

Moto3 (lightweight Prototype)
Highly modified prototype or production engines
Prototype chassis
rev limit 81mm max bore, max of 1 cylinder, 250cc max, spec ecu, spec tires, max of 12 engines per season, 24l of fuel.

WSBK:

Superbike (Heavyweight production sportbike)-
Moderately modified production engines i.e. [BSB or WSS rules...top end mods only]
Lightly modified chassis i.e. [AMA PRO rules...lighter 17 inch wheels, adj tripleclamps, fork internals, brake lines/rotors/resevoirs, rear shock & linkage, hand and foot controls, levers]
1200cc twins - 1000cc fours, 500-750 over rev, spec ecu, spec tires, max of 12 engines per season

Supersport (Middleweight production sportbike)-
Moderately modified production engines i.e. [BSB or WSS rules...top end mods only]
Lightly modified chassis i.e. [AMA PRO rules...lighter 17 inch wheels, adj tripleclamps, fork internals, brake lines/rotors/resevoirs, rear shock & linkage, hand and foot controls, levers]
850cc twins - 600cc fours, 500-750 over rev, spec ecu, spec tires, max of 12 engines per season

Sportbike (Lightweight production sportbike)-
Moderately modified production engines i.e. [BSB or WSS rules...top end mods only]
Lightly modified chassis i.e. [AMA PRO rules...lighter 17 inch wheels, adj tripleclamps, fork internals, brake lines/rotors/resevoirs, rear shock & linkage, hand and foot controls, levers]
250cc singles, 500-750 over rev, spec ecu, spec tires, max of 12 engines per season

and leave superstock classes as a national level support series
Now every major national motorcycle racing series can adopt the rules and everyones happy (FIM)

Weird how Dorna failing completely at increasing MotoGP's marketability and sponsorship efforts results in in their being rewarded with control of a series that is healthy due to the successful efforts of its promoters. I wonder if the Flammini brothers are happy with whatever they ended up with after getting pushed out of the drivers seat.

This is truly a horrible day for motorsports, the control of both premier series being put in the hands of a marketing company primarily concerned with TV sponsorship deals is the beginning of the end of true competition as we knew it. I guess the world really is changing and the idea of entertaining people with a contrived show is more important than true skill and accomplishment.

Chris
http://moto2-usa.blogspot.com/

Whether it's racing beat-up old cars or MotoGP bikes the guy crossing the line first will 'punch the air' or whatever in a similar way.
Sure ,the likes of top MGP riders want stuff to test themselves against, gain an edge on the competition, or anything else that makes them go faster/enjoy what they are doing (such as the relaxing/energising comfort of a $150k motorhome, a helicopter, or aeroplane etc.).
The fact is there is no point (from my perspective) having someone like Stoner tear around a circuit on his own, however spectacular and awe inspring he may be. Sure, some people will love that, but millions will not.
The trick Dorna/BP need to conjure is the logical progression/separation of series to provide 'feeder' series to MGP/WSB.
BSB has already proven (after much doomsaying) that 'dumbing down'
produces larger grids, greater competition that is less dependant upon the size of the bank balance, and some of the best racing - through the field - that we have seen for years in a series that had already been very successful.
MGP is not F1 - it has a long way to go. The way to get there is to draw larger audiences, and that is going to need an AFFORDABLE recipe of bikes and technology.
The only dumb thing here is to try and kid yourself that the past was better and if you make the series as expensive as possible more people will come and race.
That particular theory has been shown to be well and truly failed.
I have no wish to see 'heroes' killing and maiming themselves every weekend either.Calculated risk is OK as long as the person carrying the risk can make their own decision.

Perhaps a more equal technical specification in each class would also see good riders more valued and paid accordingly.

For me, variety is also important. Ducati bring much to the series they race in and the sound of those twins in WSB/BSB etc is a sound I wouldn't wish to lose.Rules that encourage and support those differences are important. At least until the roar becomes a whir and we go electric......and that will be great racing too.

that those 'European' engines are designed and built in the UK too.

F1 is a good of example of where most do not want MGP to go. It's simply not affordable either.

Learning from the past is what is needed, not going back to it.However, if 2 strokes become viable machines that aren't going to poison the planet (e.g. Lotus) then bring it back. MGP should allow that.

Changing rules 3 times in 7 years doesn't sound much like a 'space race' to me though, if that's correct.Todays world runs faster than that. The racing must reflect reality, and engineering is more about learning from mistakes than knowing how to get it right all the time. If that was remembered by more people there would be less moaning and more encouragement/acceptance.

As the saying goes - the guy who never made a mistake never did anything.

If we celebrated people who learnt lessons and moved on, rather than not making mistakes or giving up, a whole lot else in this world would be better too.

It was about 12 years ago that Warren Willing was saying, you think racing two-strokes is expensive, wait until everyone shifts to four-strokes. The shift to 800s isn't to blame for increased costs. I think it's more accurate to view the perceived problem as a disparity between the profitability of companies and the cost of GP racing. What was acceptable a decade ago is unacceptable now.

I'll agree that I'd hate to see MotoGP follow the F1 route. It still saddens me to see that stupid DRS thing; Lauda must gag every time he hears that acronym. But Cos is spot-on about the tech factor: F1 still allows a remarkable amount of innovation. Cars have new bits every friggin' race. Overall, there's a lot of room for new ideas to be tried in F1, from aero to energy recovery systems - and that's technology that moves straight to even the humblest production cars.

For me, the spectacle of the race isn't the entire enchilada at the GP level. I can watch better racing at any of my local tracks; every weekend, I can see 16-year-olds on 600s engage in battles that look just like the fight in Moto2. But I love MotoGP not for just what happens between the green and checkered flags, but because I can appreciate everything that goes on before and after.

As someone once said, the race starts once you open the rulebook. Auto-race in Japan is racing spectacle. I have no desire to watch it. I lost all interest in IndyCar racing when the series was left with a spec engine supplier. NASCAR lost me when they put fences on the roof of the cars to - shit, I can't even remember why they did that.

MotoGP isn't just a battle between riders; right now, we're seeing two major manufacturers in an all-out war for supremacy, and the result is the most amazing racing motorcycles ever built. That's what gets lost when you "dumb down" the machines. There are plenty of other ways to slow the machines or reduce their cost or build a grid.

Back in the early 1970s, almost by accident, the FIA issued a set of rules that led Porsche and Ferrari to build stacks of their front-line sports cars. The two companies would grid 15 cars between themselves at Le Mans. They were the most technically advanced racing cars on the planet, as fast or faster than F1 cars. In their wisdom, the FIA banned the 917s and 512s. And honestly, sports car racing never has been the same. I'd hate to see that happen with MotoGP.

p.s. Not to be a smart-ass, but it's worth noting that in this third year of Moto2, with spec engines, spec electronics, and dramatically lower costs than in MotoGP, there have been four race winners - exactly one more than in MotoGP.

... sayonara HRC?

2014 is shaping up to look a lot like 1968.

Sad.