Odds 'n' ends...

Look at it this way - when European riders were winning all the races in
the '60s and early '70s were people in GP saying, "We've got to find a
way to make Americans and Australians more competitive in GP, we need to
draw in riders from outside of Europe"? Were the bikes that these guys
won on starting with Roberts specifically designed for en ex-dirttracker
riding style? Did GP say they needed to build a dirttrack-superbike-500
GP promotional path to develop wanted riders? Did they bring in
13-to-16-year-old Americans and Aussies to groom them for GP?

>> Me, I think there was almost certainly a degree of resentment in Europe

>> that "their" championship was being dominated by Americans and Aussies

>> (although that might have largely been an older crowd - kids like you

>> and Pablo probably didn't have those well-honed biases at that time)

> I'm 45 years old, so who were these older guys who resented it? Your

> just making this stuff up, and it's making you look stupid.

If you're 45 now you were only 20 when Roberts battled Spencer for the
'83 championship. Surely there were 40-50-year-old fans out there at the
time who were raised on Duke and Surtees and Hailwood? Making statements
about Euros loving Lawson and Rainey and Schwantz and Doohan is utterly
meaningless, they won all the races and took most of the podium spots,
it's not like you could possibly ignore them. Unless you didn't watch GP
at all.

>> that's the basis of the "Europeanization" of GP that took place in the

>> early '90s, when the series became a commercial venture run by Dorna.

>> Shit, it was openly stated at that time that the series had to find a

>> way to get European riders up out of 250 and into 500, it's not like it

>> was some kind of secret conspiracy. What changed over time was that

>> Euros actually started to believe it, that their guys are simply and

>> fundamentally better...

> Christ but that's a chip on your shoulder. A decent analyst could

> make a career out of you.

But no denial on your part, eh? Resorting to insults at this point? Did
I hit too close to home?

Posted by Alexey on June 13, 2008, 11:27 am

> Champ wrote:

> > Mark N wrote:

> >> Maybe because they totally embarrassed every European rider out there in

> >> their era, that it would be the height of absurdity to claim that the

> >> Euros were as good? That they rode the bikes in a manner never seen

> >> before in Europe?

> > Ah, so when the Americans are winning then it's because they were just

> > obviously better, but when they're not it's because there's a

> > political conspiracy against them?

> Look at it this way - when European riders were winning all the races in

> the '60s and early '70s were people in GP saying, "We've got to find a

> way to make Americans and Australians more competitive in GP, we need to

> draw in riders from outside of Europe"? Were the bikes that these guys

> won on starting with Roberts specifically designed for en ex-dirttracker

> riding style? Did GP say they needed to build a dirttrack-superbike-500

> GP promotional path to develop wanted riders? Did they bring in

> 13-to-16-year-old Americans and Aussies to groom them for GP?

What exactly is it about a GP bike now that makes it designed to be
like a 250? Slipper clutches and engine management that makes it go
faster without sliding the rear? Well, in case you weren't paying
attention, these bikes are also faster than the bikes of yesteryear,
which had additional displacement on tap. The reason they're designed
this way is in the name of progress, not to favor one style or
another. Riding styles change all the time because of technology.
I'm sorry if you don't like where we are at the moment. Also, please
note that slipper clutches and more sophisticated engine management is
already in use in all national superbike series and is knocking on the
door of showrooms.

Unless you think it's a conspiracy by the Japanese and Ducati to
transform all sport riding and racing into something that will play in
the hands of tiny lilliputian Europeans, where it's mandatory to start
riding a 125 at the age of 10 and begin plucking eyebrows at 11. BTW,
the fact that the Spanish and Italians are crazy about bikes and put
their kids on them, while the folks at the good old USA get them a
football uniform is nobody's fault. Life is unfair. How many natural
Valentino Rossi's do you suppose are dutifully taking their piano
lessons now instead of ripping it up on a road course like they
clearly should? Or better yet, how many of them are stuck in a
refugee camp in central Africa without so much as a soccer ball?

Posted by RealMart on June 13, 2008, 12:03 pm

> Unless you think it's a conspiracy by the Japanese and Ducati to

> transform all sport riding and racing into something that will play in

> the hands of tiny lilliputian Europeans, where it's mandatory to start

> riding a 125 at the age of 10 and begin plucking eyebrows at 11...

That's exactly what some do seem to thnk....

Posted by Mark N on June 13, 2008, 3:47 pm

Alexey wrote:

> Mark N wrote:

> > Champ wrote:

> > > Ah, so when the Americans are winning then it's because they were just=

> > > obviously better, but when they're not it's because there's a

> > > political conspiracy against them?

> > Look at it this way - when European riders were winning all the races in=

> > the '60s and early '70s were people in GP saying, "We've got to find a

> > way to make Americans and Australians more competitive in GP, we need to=

> > draw in riders from outside of Europe"? Were the bikes that these guys

> > won on starting with Roberts specifically designed for en ex-dirttracker=

> > riding style? Did GP say they needed to build a dirttrack-superbike-500

> > GP promotional path to develop wanted riders? Did they bring in

> > 13-to-16-year-old Americans and Aussies to groom them for GP?

> What exactly is it about a GP bike now that makes it designed to be

> like a 250?

You tell me. All I know is that pretty much every rider who once rode
a SB or 500 says you have to ride them like a 250 and the guys coming
directly off of 250s seem tio adapt incredibly quickly to them,
nothing like the past transitions to 500s or early 990s.

=A0Slipper clutches and engine management that makes it go

> faster without sliding the rear? =A0Well, in case you weren't paying

> attention, these bikes are also faster than the bikes of yesteryear,

> which had additional displacement on tap. =A0

Bikes are always getting faster, but that doesn't mean the particular
one chosen by the factories is the only one, or the best one, it just
means it was a successful one. Given the role that tires play,
sometimes bikes probably aren't better but times drop anyway. But you
mention slipper clutches and that's a good point - in the early days
they were a big issue in MotoGP, and that's because the guys coming
off two strokes couldn't deal with engine braking, while SB guys
didn't seem to be having big problems. So the factories seemed to pay
an awful lot of attention to dealing with an ex-250 rider (or 500)
issue, which is the kind of thing I'm talking about.

The reason they're designed

> this way is in the name of progress, not to favor one style or

> another. =A0Riding styles change all the time because of technology.

I don't believe that. I don't think there's any question that machine
development is based in part on rider feedback and demands, and that
is entirely based on their preferences. If ex-125/250 riders are the
principal suppliers of that feedback, and they have been for the last
decade at least, the results will be bikes that are friendlier for
riders with that style. If you look at Honda's "compact bike / compact
rider" thing the last three or four years, that wasn't created in a
vacuum, that is the result of the physical characteristics of riders
coming up out of 125 and 250 and that Honda thinks they can use that
as an advantage, whether it's because an overall compact package is
better or because that package will be materially lighter under the
current rules.

> I'm sorry if you don't like where we are at the moment. =A0Also, please

> note that slipper clutches and more sophisticated engine management is

> already in use in all national superbike series and is knocking on the

> door of showrooms.

That doesn't mean much. Those things are good in isolation and are
likely things the factories would want to R&D for street use, but they
might not have gone in that direction as quickly or in the same amnner
if other rider issues were the foundation of that develiopment. An
example of how the direction of things doesn't always progress on some
predetermined absolute development model as you suggest might be the
twins thing in WSB in the '90s. In my opinion FGSport favored twins
under the WSB rules for commercial reasons, they felt a successful
Ducati would be an asset to their business model. So that led to
significant success for Ducati, which led to a general notion that V-
twins were inherently superior. By 1998 half of the 16 factory riders
in AMA SB were on twins, and the Japanese factories were testing the
waters on the street. But today that's all gone and an inline four is
the best bike in MotoGP (remember when people were saying V-fours are
inherently superior?) and all the Japanese are running inline fours in
SB. To me that was a detour from the best path, but did everyone
accept that at the time? Or even today?

> Unless you think it's a conspiracy by the Japanese and Ducati to

> transform all sport riding and racing into something that will play in

> the hands of tiny lilliputian Europeans, where it's mandatory to start

> riding a 125 at the age of 10 and begin plucking eyebrows at 11. =A0BTW,

> the fact that the Spanish and Italians are crazy about bikes and put

> their kids on them, while the folks at the good old USA get them a

> football uniform is nobody's fault. =A0Life is unfair. =A0How many natural=

> Valentino Rossi's do you suppose are dutifully taking their piano

> lessons now instead of ripping it up on a road course like they

> clearly should? =A0Or better yet, how many of them are stuck in a

> refugee camp in central Africa without so much as a soccer ball?

I think you're drifting from my point pretty badly there, IL4. Did I
say anything about the factories? The factories use racing for R&D
purposes, to promote their products, and to some extent to create
internal positive morale. If Dorna or the sponsors who support their
teams believe a given series' best interest is to focus on a certain
fan base, it's not necessarily a big problem for them. They have other
series that they support which might serve their purposes in other
markets. That's why the Japanese factories have generally discouraged
the movement of riders in the AMA to the world championships, they
think it serves their purposes more to have their guys winning here
than to have them racing in Europe. American Honda didn't want Hayden
to leave the AMA and only pushed the Repsol thing after he'd come to
some agreement with Yamaha in GP, Honda didn't want Vermeulen or
Toseland to leave Ten Kate for GP either. But they certainly have
groomed Pedrosa and Dovizioso to race for them in MotoGP. That kind of
thing again suggest they'd develop bikes for guys from 125 and 250.

Your point on European talent rings false as well. My guess is what
you are saying has always been the case, a much higher percentage of
Italian kids are exposed to bikes than American kids, but that didn't
make them more successful in the late '70s, '80s and early '90s, did
it? From my view the biggest watershed in GP is 1992, which is when
the series went from being an FIM-sanctioned organization to a Dorna-
owned commercial model. Almost immediately the transition from
American-Australian dominance to a European rider pool started, and it
was nothing like that start of the previous change in the late '70s.
Then Roberts came over, kicked the doors down and won three straight
championships, changing GP forever. But nothing like that happened in
the '90s, there was no European rider who came in and changed things
through dominance, it wasn't until 1999 that any European rider even
won more than two 500 GPs in a season. But by 1995 the rider pool had
changed significantly, with guys like Checa, Capirossi and Abe coming
into 500 and guys like Edwards, Gobert and Corser landing in WSB
instead. And at the same time there was a stagnation in lap times,
some of Schwatz' records lasting for years, which also speaks to a
degrading of the overall talent in the class, the exact opposite of
what a talent-based revolution would be expected to bring. Rossi might
have been the guy who could have done what Roberts did, but he showed
up a decade too late, after the revolution was over.

On nationality in general, you'd have to be living in a cave not to
know the role it plays in rider selection. Teams openly make
statements about rider nationality and how that impacts hiring
decisions, including what Gresini said about bringing de Angelis in
last year, and the efforts Dorna has been making in this area are
entirely based on rider nationality, most visibly trying to bring in
British riders in recent years. Look at what Batta said in the recent
Soup interview:

Soup: There are rumors that there will be three Suzuki riders in
MotoGP next year...

Batta: No. For me, this is not possible. Because the race department
in Suzuki is not big. For me, the good news is the new AMA rules in
America, because that means no Superbike in America. So resources
would be diverted to Alstare. From the Japanese, the budget is for
America and Alstare, America and Europe. For three riders in Alstare,
the ideal composition would be: one rider, Japanese; one rider,
American; and one rider, European - Max Neukirchner. Because an
American rider in World Superbike is very good publicity from Suzuki
America. It's possible that the return in terms of press for a US
rider in WSBK would be the same or better for the rider if he stays in
AMA. So this is my ideal.

Soup: Do you think you could see an American rider in Alstare in the
near future?

Batta: (laughing) Yes, there is only one that we would like. Spies.
The problem is that Spies's motivation is only for MotoGP. It's
possible that next year, (current Suzuki MotoGP rider) Chris Vermuelen
will be out. Capirossi is OK, Vermuelen, I don't know.

Soup: This is an ironic conversation, because we recently did a
Soupkast where we pondered why Ben Spies would go to MotoGP, where it
will be very difficult to win on that equipment, instead of going to
WSBK, to a nearly identical bike, where he could quite possibly win
the Championship within 2 years, and have more opportunities.....

Batta: Spies will find MotoGP very difficult because the bike is very
different, he's not seen the bike, the tires, and Suzuki is not the
biggest in MotoGP, they're not #1.

Soup: Yes and Vermuelen did quite well in Superbike, won races and
nearly the Championship, went to MotoGP and may now be sacked.

Batta: Spies in my team, on the official Suzuki bike, it's possible to
make very good results. Maybe learn the tracks and win some races the
first year, and the Championship in the 2nd year. In MotoGP, you get 3
maybe 4 years, do nothing and you're out. It's very difficult because
the mentality of the (MotoGP) team, many many situations are different
than in Superbike. In the Alstare team, for the rider, there is more
facility for adaptation. For Superbike, it is essential - an American
rider. It's crazy in SBK right now, no American rider, no English
rider. It's incredible.

Soup: So, do you think there's any possibility that Spies might change
his mind and choose to ride in World Superbike, or that he'll be told
to go to SBK?

Batta: I'll be speaking with the Japanese after the Misano WSBK round.
The problem is Spies is convinced that MotoGP is the right solution
for him. But the bike is very different, and he will find it very
difficult.

I think that speaks to a lot of what we are discussing, both the
nationality thing and the nature of bikes in MotoGP. And if teams in
WSB are thinking and acting that way, then it's certainly worse in GP.
Finally, on the evolution of this discussion, you should go back and
see where this started - it was Champ's incredulous reaction to Tom's
notion that things aren't even-handed or fair in GP. They aren't fair,
life isn't fair, as you say. What "Europe" is trying to say here is
that it is a level playing field, it is fair, and your guys are the
losers in that competition, they aren't good enough, so just shut up.
I don't agree, I think there are a lot of folks who are fighting more
than the other riders on the track in GP, and that includes Americans
but also Australians and even guys like Kallio and Talmacsi, who are
from the wrong part of Europe.

Posted by Champ on June 13, 2008, 4:57 pm

On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:47:49 -0700 (PDT), Mark N

<snip>

You know that there's nothing at all in that Batta interview that
supports your point of view?
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk

Page 4 of 9 < 1 2 3 > last >>

Similar Threads	Posted
Odds 'n' ends	September 28, 2008, 12:04 pm
Re: Hayden's reality part II and other odds and ends	November 19, 2007, 4:44 pm
An era ends and another begins (spoiler)	March 10, 2008, 12:32 am
Odds on Estoril	October 9, 2006, 3:51 pm
Odds on for the last race??	October 19, 2006, 6:23 pm
Ladbroke's odds last race	October 24, 2006, 12:53 pm
Ladbroke's odds on Sepang	September 6, 2006, 1:54 pm
Latest betting odds US MotoGP	July 20, 2006, 10:44 pm
Raise the odds on Spies never going to MotoGP	November 3, 2006, 5:11 pm
betfair odds for MotoGP world champion	September 12, 2006, 3:29 pm

XML Sitemap