AMA class structure

 http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/article/?lnk=rss&article (545
"AMA Superbike will remain the series’ leading class and continue to
be based primarily on 1000cc equipment. In its new iteration, AMA
Superbike pulls from existing Superbike and Superstock rules resulting
in an all-new premier class. Supersport and Formula Xtreme will remain
similar to their existing structure but will also be refined."
...
"Dingman said World Superbike as well as leading national series like
British Superbike, German Superbike and Australian Superbike were
examined."

So the AMA is going
- Superbike-Lite. Somewhere between the current Superbike and Superstock
1000
- FX
- Supersports

Compared with elsewhere in the world
- Superbike
- 600SS
- Superstock 1000(ish)

So here's the troll. Are they right?

--
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 ***

 Julian Bond wrote:

The positives:
1) Reduces the number of support classes the factories can exploit
from three to two.
2) Reduces the number of support classes the factories can cheaply
exploit from two to one.
3) Removes the problem of factory SStock machines with factory riders
being faster than privateer SBs and even some factory SBs. SB will now
be the fastest class, no question.
4) Condenses the fast guys and bikes into fewer classes, likely to
make the fields faster and deeper.
5) Depending on the eventual rules, probably makes SB a bit cheaper
and perhaps allows non-factory SBs to be closer to factory tackle.
6) Probably allows an opening for the addition of 1200cc twins, and at
more limited rules that will likely cut into any edge Ducati might
have had under the current 1000-4 rules.

The negatives:
1) Could increase the gap between AMA and WSB rules, but does that
matter? The only true factory SB in the AMA now is the Suzuki, I
suspect.
2) Fewer classes to watch over a weekend and one fewer race, but does
that matter? GP and WSB usually do three.
3) Will this mean even more traffic, everyone who wants to race now
packed into three grids?
4) Will less modification in SB, if that's the way they go, increase
the performance gap between brands? Could be the other way around,
looking at SStock the last few years.

To my mind it makes more sense than the world structure, which has
1000cc as the lowest, entry class, and a SSport class that combines a
near-stock chassis with a rather heavily-modified motor. The SB rules?
Who knows, but cheaper at a national level makes a lot of sense, if
you want competitive independent teams. I hate to see the AMA drop a
class, but it almost can't help but make the other classes better.
Thumbs up overall, pending the actual rules decisions.

 

About time!


Hopefully that will change as well, though I would not count on it..


Ends confusion among new fans too..


Again, hopefully..



I would not count on that either, even though it's a good idea..


Doubtful at best. If that does happen the Nips may just say sayonara..


Who cares?


More track time!


Tighten the + times?


That  might be the biggy, we'll see..


Implementation is the key, i.e. talk is cheap, show us actual rules...

Btw, say goodnight SStock, toldya...

 T3 wrote:

If new fans were truly confused about that, then bike racing has some
fans that are too stupid to live...


How would it make the classes slower and shallower?


I think you're mostly right there, but the devil is in the details. For
instance, will they pull traction control so soon after allowing it in
across the board?


No way. The Japs have had very little problem with AMA SB regarding
twins, nothing like WSB. The only reason they've bugged out since the
'80s was the cheap alternatives here when they pulled out of WSB to
concentrate on MotoGP. A 20% displacement advantage for twins under
otherwise identical rules is a fair compensation, much better than the
old 33% that really wasn't that much of a problem over here. And we KNOW
ESB is headed that route...


Absolutely, screw ESB and the tires they rode in on...


For what purpose? Frankly, I'd almost put my money on two-day race
weekends, at least eventually. There's your ream money-saver...


Maybe. The problem I forgot to mention is that this significantly
reduces the options and grid spots for teams running on the cheap or
without real shop talent. So do we just end up with more SS bikes at the
back of the SB/FX grids? Hard to say what might happen.


Yep. that will be interesting to see, although my bet is that it will
lean closer to SB than SS. And my guess is that we'll be waiting a while
to hear...

 

Whether you believe it or not, it happens, especially now that the SStock
equipment is so good and the times are so close..(btw, they're called
"casual" fans and most times they're also the profit margin!)

$$$, but as you say, the devil's in the details..(see #5)

The Nips just got back in and as we know those most honorable mf'erz don't
like surprises. If ProRacing hasn't ran the 200cc thing by them they *will*
be pissed, especially now that the SStock playground is closing..

Here, here!!

More Ptime, a little more leisurely pace on race days, 3 races will add
redundancy to the clock, the promotors and venders will prolly love it too,
more time for folks to shop, eat and drink(piss) without missing something
important..

Ayup, bigtime caveat..

I just hope they think it thru a little more than they did the Mid-Ohio
thing. It would appear that ProRacing is trying to shed it's club racing
past, IMO it's long overdue.. (we should always lead, not follow, though
hopefully this time it won't be off a cliff;)

My overall take on this deal is ProRacing did the right thing,(for once)
they've finally taken the lead on a touchy issue, but that's sort of
uncharted waters for these guys. I honestly hope they don't somehow find a
way to screw it up, as this may well be their last shot at running MC
racing. Bottom line? We'll see...