Discussion
Centurion07 said:
I'm happy to admit I'm one of those.
I'm over the moon he's doing well and we have a brit to cheer in Moto2, but, based on his performances in Moto2 preceding this season, there is no way he should've got that ride and anyone would be hard pushed to justify it.
He was throwing it down the road multiple times every weekend and you can perhaps blame that on having to override poor equipment, but once you've found the limit of your poor equipment there's nothing to be gained from continually stepping over that line is there?
I think he's been extremely lucky to have got the chance with VDS and thankfully for him and all of us he's doing a damn fine job of making the most of it.
I agree 100% I'm over the moon he's doing well and we have a brit to cheer in Moto2, but, based on his performances in Moto2 preceding this season, there is no way he should've got that ride and anyone would be hard pushed to justify it.
He was throwing it down the road multiple times every weekend and you can perhaps blame that on having to override poor equipment, but once you've found the limit of your poor equipment there's nothing to be gained from continually stepping over that line is there?
I think he's been extremely lucky to have got the chance with VDS and thankfully for him and all of us he's doing a damn fine job of making the most of it.
That said, the same logic would have stopped Dixon getting the PETRONAS ride.
The thing you need to remember here is that only the people who are providing the kit , know who is doing what , with what they have. As an outsider looking in, that's hard to grasp.
But Lowes has finally woke up to the fact he was doing it wrong, and now he isn't , he can win... who would have thought?
Centurion07 said:
I'm happy to admit I'm one of those.
I'm over the moon he's doing well and we have a brit to cheer in Moto2, but, based on his performances in Moto2 preceding this season, there is no way he should've got that ride and anyone would be hard pushed to justify it.
He was throwing it down the road multiple times every weekend and you can perhaps blame that on having to override poor equipment, but once you've found the limit of your poor equipment there's nothing to be gained from continually stepping over that line is there?
I think he's been extremely lucky to have got the chance with VDS and thankfully for him and all of us he's doing a damn fine job of making the most of it.
Think he said the main difference was that VDS had far more data, and people to understand it. I'm over the moon he's doing well and we have a brit to cheer in Moto2, but, based on his performances in Moto2 preceding this season, there is no way he should've got that ride and anyone would be hard pushed to justify it.
He was throwing it down the road multiple times every weekend and you can perhaps blame that on having to override poor equipment, but once you've found the limit of your poor equipment there's nothing to be gained from continually stepping over that line is there?
I think he's been extremely lucky to have got the chance with VDS and thankfully for him and all of us he's doing a damn fine job of making the most of it.
Having more data doesn't stop you crashing though, it just means you don't have to override it to make up the time, which is the point I just made about finding the limit and learning not to go over it.
If you have a crap bike and there's only so fast it will go, what's the point in crashing it all the time looking for tenths that aren't there?
He found that limit and went over it pretty much every single session.
As Cheeses said, the paddock will have an idea what the equipment is capable of so overriding it all the time achieves nothing.
That said, from what Huewen and Hodgson have said, Dixon's team only decided to listen to him after he banged his head leaving Pasini to have a go on his bike and found he couldn't do anything with it either. So there is also an element of "we know best" when it comes to trusting what a rider is telling you.
I mean, it's even happened with Rossi and Yamaha recently so if it can happen at that level you can be damn sure it happens the lower down you get.
If you have a crap bike and there's only so fast it will go, what's the point in crashing it all the time looking for tenths that aren't there?
He found that limit and went over it pretty much every single session.
As Cheeses said, the paddock will have an idea what the equipment is capable of so overriding it all the time achieves nothing.
That said, from what Huewen and Hodgson have said, Dixon's team only decided to listen to him after he banged his head leaving Pasini to have a go on his bike and found he couldn't do anything with it either. So there is also an element of "we know best" when it comes to trusting what a rider is telling you.
I mean, it's even happened with Rossi and Yamaha recently so if it can happen at that level you can be damn sure it happens the lower down you get.
Centurion07 said:
Having more data doesn't stop you crashing though, it just means you don't have to override it to make up the time, which is the point I just made about finding the limit and learning not to go over it.
If you have a crap bike and there's only so fast it will go, what's the point in crashing it all the time looking for tenths that aren't there?
He found that limit and went over it pretty much every single session.
As Cheeses said, the paddock will have an idea what the equipment is capable of so overriding it all the time achieves nothing.
That said, from what Huewen and Hodgson have said, Dixon's team only decided to listen to him after he banged his head leaving Pasini to have a go on his bike and found he couldn't do anything with it either. So there is also an element of "we know best" when it comes to trusting what a rider is telling you.
I mean, it's even happened with Rossi and Yamaha recently so if it can happen at that level you can be damn sure it happens the lower down you get.
But that is exactly what it does do. If you have great data, and people who understand it, you can set the bike to do what it needs to do. Otherwise you are leaving the rider to lob it at the scenery at will. which is what happens. If you have a crap bike and there's only so fast it will go, what's the point in crashing it all the time looking for tenths that aren't there?
He found that limit and went over it pretty much every single session.
As Cheeses said, the paddock will have an idea what the equipment is capable of so overriding it all the time achieves nothing.
That said, from what Huewen and Hodgson have said, Dixon's team only decided to listen to him after he banged his head leaving Pasini to have a go on his bike and found he couldn't do anything with it either. So there is also an element of "we know best" when it comes to trusting what a rider is telling you.
I mean, it's even happened with Rossi and Yamaha recently so if it can happen at that level you can be damn sure it happens the lower down you get.
So when you come in and the data guy says , ' you say you are doing this, buy the data says otherwise', they have to take that on board. That's why Sam doesn't ride like a supermoto guy any more because the data guy can go.. ' I don't care what you say, the data says its slower and this is why' .
So this is a common thing, You get teams that don't believe the rider ( see Dixon , and also Tom Booth Amos who said his bike was bent for 6 races before they finally went ' oh yeah its bent' ) , and make him look worse than he is , because they think they know best , then you get the teams that work the data with the rider, to show him what he has.
I will tell you now, the easiest race you ever have is the one you win, because that is the one where you got the set up, the tyre selection, and had your lucky pants on the right way round, and you cant understand why everyone else is so slow.
So Sam finally listened ( after how many years) and is now a force for the championship, He doesn't have to over ride the bike, because it works, because the data guy knows what he is doing.
Cheeses of Nazareth said:
And who is that exactly?
Tom Booth Amos got the flick for Max Kofler, who has done no better on the bike, probably for the same reasons .
When you have a class that is rev limited , as Moto3 is, this is what you get, a class where even being half a tenth off, is a disaster.
We have nobody for at least 3 years in Moto3 , the last bloke we had pissed it up the wall and is tugging around in superstock.
Quite so. Both Danny Webb and Danny Kent who came through at roughly the same time as McPhee to 125 / Moto3 have done nothing. Tom Booth Amos got the flick for Max Kofler, who has done no better on the bike, probably for the same reasons .
When you have a class that is rev limited , as Moto3 is, this is what you get, a class where even being half a tenth off, is a disaster.
We have nobody for at least 3 years in Moto3 , the last bloke we had pissed it up the wall and is tugging around in superstock.
Particularly in the smaller classes, the tracks in the UK don't lend themselves to being good training grounds for GP. The number where the wide sweeping lines of Moto3 can be taught, plus the dogfighting of slipstreaming, are few. Silverstone, Brands Hatch GP, Thruxton, Donington Park. Cadwell, Oulton Park, Croft and Knockhill really aren't. Not sure about Snetterton or Mallory Park
Cheeses of Nazareth said:
But that is exactly what it does do.
Yeah, I worded that badly. I know having better data analysis will obviously make you faster, what I meant was Sam had found the limit of that bike, with his style, and the set-up as best as they could make it with the limited personnel available, yet carried on binning it. He couldn't/wouldn't accept he was at the limit of all those factors.
I understand that Sam has also enlisted the services of a sports psychologist. I'm just really glad I can root for him now, I have to admit last year in particular I had him written off as a hopeless crasher but since the start of this year he's seemed really focussed, calm and determined.
k dad .
FourWheelDrift said:
He is the other official Aprilia test rider, maybe Smith's ankles need some time or they're just giving him a run out they promised, he was down to be a wildcard this year before the pandemic hit.
that is a shame, he is a great rider, he has spent too much time not quite on the right bike. He had a good chance at Tech3 , on the Yamaha, but I think that politics saw him out of there too early IMO.
Should go WSB and show them what he can do,
Cheeses of Nazareth said:
that is a shame, he is a great rider, he has spent too much time not quite on the right bike.
He had a good chance at Tech3 , on the Yamaha, but I think that politics saw him out of there too early IMO.
Should go WSB and show them what he can do,
Doubt he’d want to ride production bikes tbh. He had a good chance at Tech3 , on the Yamaha, but I think that politics saw him out of there too early IMO.
Should go WSB and show them what he can do,
Shame for Brad, but better a GP test ride and odd wild cars than WSB
ddom said:
Doubt he’d want to ride production bikes tbh.
Shame for Brad, but better a GP test ride and odd wild cars than WSB
Really?Shame for Brad, but better a GP test ride and odd wild cars than WSB
In what way?
He's a test rider for the crappiest manufacturer on the grid and, according to Redding, will be testing random new parts during races as well so has no opportunity to build on a known quantity therefore improving is almost impossible.
At this point I think he's better off going to WSB or even BSB for a regular ride. It did wonders for Redding (although I don't rate Brad anywhere near as good as Redding).
He's a racer at the end of the day and unless you're giving up or at the start of your career, test rider on an ever-changing bike is not something any racer truly wants.
Centurion07 said:
ddom said:
Doubt he’d want to ride production bikes tbh.
Shame for Brad, but better a GP test ride and odd wild cars than WSB
Really?Shame for Brad, but better a GP test ride and odd wild cars than WSB
In what way?
He's a test rider for the crappiest manufacturer on the grid and, according to Redding, will be testing random new parts during races as well so has no opportunity to build on a known quantity therefore improving is almost impossible.
At this point I think he's better off going to WSB or even BSB for a regular ride. It did wonders for Redding (although I don't rate Brad anywhere near as good as Redding).
He's a racer at the end of the day and unless you're giving up or at the start of your career, test rider on an ever-changing bike is not something any racer truly wants.
I think he could do the TV job quite well if required.
Turn7 said:
Agreed his competitive days in the top class are done.
Exactly. So why hang on as a test rider for Aprilia rather than look for a decent ride in WSB? Makes no sense to me.Much easier to go from GP's to SBK than the other way round as well and he's still young enough to make a good go of it.
Centurion07 said:
Turn7 said:
Agreed his competitive days in the top class are done.
Exactly. So why hang on as a test rider for Aprilia rather than look for a decent ride in WSB? Makes no sense to me.Much easier to go from GP's to SBK than the other way round as well and he's still young enough to make a good go of it.
I dont get why Aprilia are standing by Iannone so much, UNLESS he is bringing a big lump of cash ?
And even if he is, they will never be competitive against the Japs/Ducs.......
Centurion07 said:
Really?
In what way?
He's a test rider for the crappiest manufacturer on the grid and, according to Redding, will be testing random new parts during races as well so has no opportunity to build on a known quantity therefore improving is almost impossible.
At this point I think he's better off going to WSB or even BSB for a regular ride. It did wonders for Redding (although I don't rate Brad anywhere near as good as Redding).
He's a racer at the end of the day and unless you're giving up or at the start of your career, test rider on an ever-changing bike is not something any racer truly wants.
As someone who has worked with him I’m just saying a job involving prototype racing is far more interesting than production racing. You might not rate him, doesn’t matter, he has a lot of talent. BSB, why bother? The ‘crappest’ GP team makes BSB look very second hand tbh. In what way?
He's a test rider for the crappiest manufacturer on the grid and, according to Redding, will be testing random new parts during races as well so has no opportunity to build on a known quantity therefore improving is almost impossible.
At this point I think he's better off going to WSB or even BSB for a regular ride. It did wonders for Redding (although I don't rate Brad anywhere near as good as Redding).
He's a racer at the end of the day and unless you're giving up or at the start of your career, test rider on an ever-changing bike is not something any racer truly wants.
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff