MotoGP: Single Tyre
Discussion
Chilli said:
Yeah, good man...didn't want to myself!
A)Why is such a bad idea
B) Why has it been introduced?
Cheers.
I think there's a compromising point. If I thought Bridgestone would tender on it and win (they've already said they can't support a full grid) then it probably wouldn't be so bad. If Michelin run it, we may see more consistent racing on a per race basis but on a race-to-race basis, from what we've seen in previous years, there will be massive inconsistencies.A)Why is such a bad idea
B) Why has it been introduced?
Cheers.
Pirelli and Dunlop? Who knows. For clean sheet racing these seem like the most likely, sensible options but with Dunlop already supporting full 125 and 250 grids, this may pose some questions on suitability for them to support a full GP grid.
That leaves Pirelli who are a completely unknown quantity.
It's going to slow down the racing, at least for the 2009 season, arguably making it more dangerous, and I don't want to see that. The whole purpose of the one tyre ruling is not for advantages and disadvantages of a particular manufacturer anymore, it's about slowing the bikes down, which I don't doubt it will do, but I don't think slowing down GP bikes by dicking about with their tyres is the greatest idea ever.
MotoGP is prototype racing. Now we've moved to single tyre, how about we move to single ECU? Single shocks? Single engine?
Rawwr said:
If you want to watch racing like that, there's always the Red Bull Rookies or R6 Cup 
Yeah, but not the best riders in the world. I know it wouldn't work as a lot of bike tech is driven by MGP and WSB, and the arguments over which bike to use etc would kill it, but just once...Add an extra date to the calender and get them all on the same bike for a non-championship, big cash prize race. You have to agree that would be a huge draw to fans.
rhinochopig said:
Add an extra date to the calender and get them all on the same bike for a non-championship, big cash prize race. You have to agree that would be a huge draw to fans.
Oh, definitely and I would pay to see it! 
But this it MotoGP. If they stopped dicking with it, everything would even out.
Rawwr said:
It's balls. Single tyre restrictions should not be used on any prototype series.
Thats how I see it too, its a disgrace for the icon of motorcycle racing to be blighted with such a rule .What will they do , throw all the tyres in a lock up and let the guys go get them for themselves ? I just dont see that some teams wont have different quality back up from the supplying factory .
For safety sake , the one tyre supplier must be either Michelin or Bridgestone , other companies will be just so far behind the technology for GP bike requirements that it is likely there would be a large number of tyre failures .
Bad rule all round imho
rhinochopig said:
Rawwr said:
If you want to watch racing like that, there's always the Red Bull Rookies or R6 Cup
Add an extra date to the calender and get them all on the same bike for a non-championship, big cash prize race. You have to agree that would be a huge draw to fans.MGP will never be equal, no matter what rules they come up with, as someone else said, (pardon the plagarism) if Showa come up with a shock that gives the Ducati a 1.3 sec advantage / lap should we then bring out a 1 shock rule?
Bad Bad idea.
I disagree with both points completely.
All on the same tyre eliminates an advantage of the best bike or best rider, or combination of both, being beaten by a superior tyre, as was witnessed with Stoner last season. I don't wish to spend years enjoying the pastime of motorcycle racing only to be watching a tyre racing series instead.
As for slowing down. It won't happen. The supply deal will most likely go to the manufacturer with the highest cornering speed already in Moto GP. Or it will go elsewhere to slow all bikes down, until which time the tyre manufacturer gets up to speed.
If you really want to make tyres the defining factor in slowing down the series, easiest way is to make the tyres thinner giving a smaller footprint or more correctly 'contact patch area'.
All on the same tyre eliminates an advantage of the best bike or best rider, or combination of both, being beaten by a superior tyre, as was witnessed with Stoner last season. I don't wish to spend years enjoying the pastime of motorcycle racing only to be watching a tyre racing series instead.
As for slowing down. It won't happen. The supply deal will most likely go to the manufacturer with the highest cornering speed already in Moto GP. Or it will go elsewhere to slow all bikes down, until which time the tyre manufacturer gets up to speed.
If you really want to make tyres the defining factor in slowing down the series, easiest way is to make the tyres thinner giving a smaller footprint or more correctly 'contact patch area'.
castrolcraig said:
trumpet600 said:
They should really have one at each end.
that are black, and round.Personally I think a stripey tyre would look really cool. Or one with green spots.
Did anybody hear that Ducati would 'prefer' michelin.... I remember somebody saying that during the last GP.. maybe they got it the wrong way round... why would Ducati of all teams want michelin?.. This year the michelin hasn't been up to the job on some occasions let alone able to compete against Bridgestone... remember Laguna where the michelin teams had to hand cut the fronts to get heat into them.
A one tyre rule will stablise the sport and balance out the performance. But that will take a season or so to happen as those that haven't run on the chosen rubber will no doubt take time to get to grips with the characteristics of the other tyre.
Dorna will be able to pick up a big cheque from the prospective supplier...
A one tyre rule will stablise the sport and balance out the performance. But that will take a season or so to happen as those that haven't run on the chosen rubber will no doubt take time to get to grips with the characteristics of the other tyre.
Dorna will be able to pick up a big cheque from the prospective supplier...
xspencex said:
Did anybody hear that Ducati would 'prefer' michelin.... I remember somebody saying that during the last GP.. maybe they got it the wrong way round... why would Ducati of all teams want michelin?.. This year the michelin hasn't been up to the job on some occasions let alone able to compete against Bridgestone... remember Laguna where the michelin teams had to hand cut the fronts to get heat into them.
A one tyre rule will stablise the sport and balance out the performance. But that will take a season or so to happen as those that haven't run on the chosen rubber will no doubt take time to get to grips with the characteristics of the other tyre.
Dorna will be able to pick up a big cheque from the prospective supplier...
Ducati chose to go against the grain and opted for Bridgestone over michelin, the idea was to beat their rivals on a toatlly different unfancied package, catch them off guard.A one tyre rule will stablise the sport and balance out the performance. But that will take a season or so to happen as those that haven't run on the chosen rubber will no doubt take time to get to grips with the characteristics of the other tyre.
Dorna will be able to pick up a big cheque from the prospective supplier...
Now their rivals have switched they wish to maintain the same approach and switch back. Another popular theory is that they oppose the one tyre rule and want to secure a deal before the ruling is made permanent.
It's interesting how the tyre situation has turned round in the last 2-3 years. It seems to me that when Ducati first went with Bridgestone, Michelin were more consistent everywhere, but there were a few tracks where Bridgestone were untouchable. Now it's Bridgestone that have the consistency, and on some tracks Michelin are nowhere.
Single supplier doesn't seem to have done WSB or BSB any harm. OK, MotoGP is supposed to be the technical peak, but what's the point if one manufacturer's tyres render half the grid uncompetitive at some tracks?
Single supplier doesn't seem to have done WSB or BSB any harm. OK, MotoGP is supposed to be the technical peak, but what's the point if one manufacturer's tyres render half the grid uncompetitive at some tracks?
cyberface said:
castrolcraig said:
trumpet600 said:
They should really have one at each end.
that are black, and round.Personally I think a stripey tyre would look really cool. Or one with green spots.
They could do different colours for different compounds.
But then you'd have the commentators saying "look at that he's left a big orangey out of that corner"
Edited by FourWheelDrift on Monday 29th September 22:59
Dorna aren't doing it to even out the competition, they're doing it to slow the bikes down. Listening to comments from Burgess was quite amusing:
"Idea is to slow the bikes down? Hah! Not relevant and the 250's corner speeds are already higher by 10mph, the head of DORNA needs a lesson in motorcycle physics"
"Idea is to slow the bikes down? Hah! Not relevant and the 250's corner speeds are already higher by 10mph, the head of DORNA needs a lesson in motorcycle physics"
robbo1 said:
It's interesting how the tyre situation has turned round in the last 2-3 years. It seems to me that when Ducati first went with Bridgestone, Michelin were more consistent everywhere, but there were a few tracks where Bridgestone were untouchable. Now it's Bridgestone that have the consistency, and on some tracks Michelin are nowhere.
Single supplier doesn't seem to have done WSB or BSB any harm. OK, MotoGP is supposed to be the technical peak, but what's the point if one manufacturer's tyres render half the grid uncompetitive at some tracks?
Very good point Single supplier doesn't seem to have done WSB or BSB any harm. OK, MotoGP is supposed to be the technical peak, but what's the point if one manufacturer's tyres render half the grid uncompetitive at some tracks?
After last year I (well I think we, really) thought that Michelin would sort themselves out, but for reasons best known to them don't seem to have. In a way one could argue that had Michelin pulled their finger out then we wouldn't have arrived at this situation...yet, anyway.
The WSB/BSB argument in favour . . .. . A single tyre rule has done nothing for the grids in BSB or WSB to condense the racing. In fact, if you look at the winning margin in BSB and BSB cup pre single tyre rule and post single tyre rule you will find the winning margin was in fact closer under the mixed tyre regulations previously run in the series.
Nominated test teams . . . .. Don't think for a second that teams at the back are going to be those selected to develop and continuously test these tyres, that will go to the leading teams.. Therefore allowing greater development of their bikes further diminishing the argument of close racing.
Changing the rules . . . . . History demonstrates that knee jerk rule changes in most formulas do nothing to improve the racing, but are commercially driven.
Michelin consistency . . .. The reason Michelin have been less consistent is because they used to ship tyres in overnight and this has been prevented for the previous 2 seasons due to the restricted tyre rule. I though this was a good move. The 2 manufacturers B&M have had differing philosophies driven by necessity. Michelin have had to change theirs and they are not being given enough time to catch up.
Safety . . .. utter rubbish, Espeletta finding a reason. Development of a single tyre will be rapid as teams demand the performance. 5 speed boxes would reduce the speed of these bikes and be more consistent - Listen to Jerry Burgess on this, he's made a number of statements critical of the safety argument.
Technical pinnacle . . . . This is GP racing, not the R1 cup or the MRO series. If a supplier becomes less competitive it is the time when they will make their greatest development steps striving to catch up. If Michelin loose the top team contracts they will be forced to give or invest in the lower order teams giving much needed investment at a time when sponsorship is harder to come by. Then they will start to become competitive again, this is how Bridgestone did it.
Bridgestone supply . . .. They have already stated they will struggle to supply the whole grid, the racing will be even more inconsistent if we get to Laguna and find there aren't enough tyres to go round the whole grid !
Performance . . . . A single tyre will not suit every bike/rider. Being the pinnacle of technology in terms of racing allowed development to be specific to each rider & bike, without this some are just not going to get on with the new tyres.
Closer racing . . . . Just look at this year. Especially those that claim it has been largely processional. Dominated by a single tyre manufacturer, namely Bridgestone. Isn't this what you are arguing for in the boring racing argument ? You're now going to get a single tyre manaufacturer and if you think it's going to make the racing closer you are sorely mistaken unfortunately.
End of tyre competition . . . . Dunlop has supplied the 125 and 250 grids solely for years, due to development and no other tyre manufacturers interest in the series. Why, mainly because to re-enter the series would take a huge amount of investment over several seasons to get a foothold again. This will become the case in MotoGP. Any supplier for the series is most likely to want at least a 2yr deal to start, short term enough to get out if it's not going well, but long enough to learn and then regain based on results. Any other supplier is going to give up trying to get in if the same supplier wins a second term, which they would likely wish to be 3yrs+ in length. This is what has happened elsewhere. This will restrict development and suppliers will walk away, the series could then be stuck with a single supplier for years, not necessarilly the best and we could see them get it wrong, badly wrong and where would they turn.
Money . . . Yes, that's what this is about, this is trying to ensure close racing through knee jerk rule changes that fly in the face of what the highest level of prototype racing is about.
If you ask any racer they will want the fastest bike, the quickest tyres, the best suspension or any other advantage they think will make them go faster. They are not the best people to ask always as they want to win, that selfishness is what often makes them great and why we like them. I fear the level of rider involvement in these decisions, they seem to drive Espeletta and rather than listening to the likes of Burgess he does the bidding of the riders.
If the continued rule philosophy remains to change the rules consistently seeking to deliver closer racing it will inevitably move the series towards other shared parts for the bikes, closer to an F1 style series and less like the racing of old.
In short, this a total load of bo11ox put together by a numpty trying to change the series to deliver commercial gain. Knob !
Gotta get on my plane now, but I could go on for hours. Well done if you managed to suffer my ramblings this far !
Nominated test teams . . . .. Don't think for a second that teams at the back are going to be those selected to develop and continuously test these tyres, that will go to the leading teams.. Therefore allowing greater development of their bikes further diminishing the argument of close racing.
Changing the rules . . . . . History demonstrates that knee jerk rule changes in most formulas do nothing to improve the racing, but are commercially driven.
Michelin consistency . . .. The reason Michelin have been less consistent is because they used to ship tyres in overnight and this has been prevented for the previous 2 seasons due to the restricted tyre rule. I though this was a good move. The 2 manufacturers B&M have had differing philosophies driven by necessity. Michelin have had to change theirs and they are not being given enough time to catch up.
Safety . . .. utter rubbish, Espeletta finding a reason. Development of a single tyre will be rapid as teams demand the performance. 5 speed boxes would reduce the speed of these bikes and be more consistent - Listen to Jerry Burgess on this, he's made a number of statements critical of the safety argument.
Technical pinnacle . . . . This is GP racing, not the R1 cup or the MRO series. If a supplier becomes less competitive it is the time when they will make their greatest development steps striving to catch up. If Michelin loose the top team contracts they will be forced to give or invest in the lower order teams giving much needed investment at a time when sponsorship is harder to come by. Then they will start to become competitive again, this is how Bridgestone did it.
Bridgestone supply . . .. They have already stated they will struggle to supply the whole grid, the racing will be even more inconsistent if we get to Laguna and find there aren't enough tyres to go round the whole grid !
Performance . . . . A single tyre will not suit every bike/rider. Being the pinnacle of technology in terms of racing allowed development to be specific to each rider & bike, without this some are just not going to get on with the new tyres.
Closer racing . . . . Just look at this year. Especially those that claim it has been largely processional. Dominated by a single tyre manufacturer, namely Bridgestone. Isn't this what you are arguing for in the boring racing argument ? You're now going to get a single tyre manaufacturer and if you think it's going to make the racing closer you are sorely mistaken unfortunately.
End of tyre competition . . . . Dunlop has supplied the 125 and 250 grids solely for years, due to development and no other tyre manufacturers interest in the series. Why, mainly because to re-enter the series would take a huge amount of investment over several seasons to get a foothold again. This will become the case in MotoGP. Any supplier for the series is most likely to want at least a 2yr deal to start, short term enough to get out if it's not going well, but long enough to learn and then regain based on results. Any other supplier is going to give up trying to get in if the same supplier wins a second term, which they would likely wish to be 3yrs+ in length. This is what has happened elsewhere. This will restrict development and suppliers will walk away, the series could then be stuck with a single supplier for years, not necessarilly the best and we could see them get it wrong, badly wrong and where would they turn.
Money . . . Yes, that's what this is about, this is trying to ensure close racing through knee jerk rule changes that fly in the face of what the highest level of prototype racing is about.
If you ask any racer they will want the fastest bike, the quickest tyres, the best suspension or any other advantage they think will make them go faster. They are not the best people to ask always as they want to win, that selfishness is what often makes them great and why we like them. I fear the level of rider involvement in these decisions, they seem to drive Espeletta and rather than listening to the likes of Burgess he does the bidding of the riders.
If the continued rule philosophy remains to change the rules consistently seeking to deliver closer racing it will inevitably move the series towards other shared parts for the bikes, closer to an F1 style series and less like the racing of old.
In short, this a total load of bo11ox put together by a numpty trying to change the series to deliver commercial gain. Knob !
Gotta get on my plane now, but I could go on for hours. Well done if you managed to suffer my ramblings this far !
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff