The MotoGP Thread

[bmart]

There is competition today, just not between all of the manufacturers. That has frequently been true for many years with only Honda and Yamaha consistently up front. Concessions artificially create competition between all manufacturers by changing the rules (to keep it interesting and be able to collect the maximum profit). Personally, I'm not a fan of that, but I love most of the coming changes. Especially "all ride-height and holeshot devices will be banned"

I grump about F1, but my F1 buddy set me straight over eggs, hashbrowns and biscuits today. He tells me "ABS was banned in 1993, traction control was banned in 2008. They do have active aero that allows drivers to open the rear wing when within 1 second of the car ahead, and can adjust things like brake bias. But...no abs, no TC, no launch control. But Civics have all that stuff." Much of what they do is aero...

 

[motopreserve]

I agree it’s an artificial sense of competition….but hopefully it’s just temporary. I remember when the claiming rules came into play - so many thought it was the end of competition, innovation etc. but slowly it brought the races tighter - and for the first time in a while, we really could not assume who was going to win on Sunday.

I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for now. I don’t mind the profit motive, because without it we might not have a championship at all. The manufacturers need to remain interested, and I assume they too recognize that the show must be exciting in order to keep the circus rolling.

I’m also with you in terms of which things they are limiting/eliminating. I’m happy to never see a debrief again where a rider had to complete the entire race with his bike in a squat position.

 

[bmart]

 

[NothingClever]

I’m not against concessions and their purpose, it’s just that the current set seem like a sharper reaction (far more generous) than what I would’ve expected. A more moderate set of concessions would seem appropriate to me to give the turtles a chance to catch up without completely punishing those who sunk a lot of treasure into their R&D programs. When thinking about HRC, I had a longer time horizon in mind than Dovi to present; I was thinking about the past 30 or so years.

Somewhat ashamed I’m using Wikipedia to quote HRC statistics but it is what it is. When HRC was dominating, were the same level of concessions rolled out for others? It’s a sincere historical question. Wish I could phone Nick Harris…he’d know for sure!

 

[ctk62]

I agree it’s an artificial sense of competition….but hopefully it’s just temporary. I remember when the claiming rules came into play - so many thought it was the end of competition, innovation etc. but slowly it brought the races tighter - and for the first time in a while, we really could not assume who was going to win on Sunday.

From what I remember, CRT bikes were awful and uncompetitive- basically street bike engines in prototype chassis- which is why they got rid of them and went back to prototypes only.

Recall that Ducati got its huge head start by hiring Gigi and taking advantage of the "Open Class" category that replaced CRTs, which enabled much of the development that enabled the Duc to get out of the shitter. Those regs were actually way more accommodating than what Honda/Yamaha is getting now:

MotoGP Rules Primer: Open vs Factory, The Short Version | MotoMatters.com | Kropotkin Thinks

motomatters.com

Open: Open class bikes can use 24 liters of fuel, and can use 12 engines throughout the season. There are no restrictions on engine development, each of the 12 engines can be completely different, and engines can be different between teammates.

Testing is limited only by the tire allowance (120 tires per season per contracted rider). Riders can test when and where they want, although not on a circuit where a race is to be held within 15 days.

Open teams must use the spec Magneti Marelli ECU package, including datalogger, sensor package and software.

Open teams have an extra option tire, of softer compound.

More engines, more fuel, more testing I think, more tire choices. Suzuki, KTM and Aprilia also benefited from more generous concessions for new factories I think.

In theory I would love "pure" competition as well, but in practice I want to be entertained. Keeping rules static and enabling one factory to completely dominate is not entertaining. I don't fault Dorna at all for throwing the bottom factories a lifeline. And I feel like their current concession system is pretty solid.

 

[motopreserve]

For sure it’s a complicated issue, and I don’t know that any concession system could ever make every manufacturer (or fan) happy. But striving for closer competition seems a worthy endeavor. I think Dorna have also agreed to revisit the specific rules in case their intentions veer off course.

Previous concession schemes were primarily aimed at keeping costs down so that more teams could compete against the massive money Honda and Yamaha were dumping into their programs. But the performance gap at this point is so vast, I’m willing to be open minded toward ‘desperate times, desperate measures…’

@NothingClever i take your point. I guess I’m more focused on the idea of how far away from the dominant team is/was the chasing pack. Despite being incredibly dominant for a long time, often (but not always) Honda had a competitor(s) that could keep it spicy.

At the end of the day, like @ctk62 i want to be entertained. If these concessions help us get there - I’m ok with that. I’m just glad that there are currently enough talented riders on Ducatis - so despite being fairly certain which manufacturer will win, we might not know which rider will rule the weekend.

 

[NothingClever]

Gentlemen, excellent insight and useful perspective. I greatly appreciate the education!