One way to resolve the perceived "midget problem"

It may be that the rules have changed somewhat. I'm trying to locate
the whole rulebook. I submit I may have only seen those rules in
other series and figured they were universal. That said, there has
been a move in motorcycle racing in general toward outlawing virtually
any significant aerodynamic surfaces and drag reducers, such as
dustbin fairings. Note the clause about moving devices. Due to the
nature of how bikes move, any potential surface used for generating
forces would have to be dynamic to accommodate a bike's changing
attitude. This is of course expressly forbidden. It's interesting to
think whether a device mounted on the rider would fall under the same
rule or if it would be viewed under the gear rules only.

 

The statement is quite clear, but the logic behind it is hardly
apparent. Just looking at braking again, if the difference in mass is
the critical difference in braking performance, then equalizing that
should bring performance to a closer point. The larger rider still has
somewhat different capabilities through his larger size and ability to
move more of that mass, but the smaller rider will likely have more of
the mass down lower, in a better position overall. Same, but not same-
same. Or at least better...

 

First off, it's all legit. Second, smoothing air flow over and around
the rider's helmet is "doing something with it". Now, if you are
making a distinction between creating a more aerodynamic shape for
passing through it and using air to create a downforce effect, yes,
those things are different. But neither is outside of the rules in GP,
so I don't see the point of that distinction.

 

Right, and since mass is not the only factor, just ballasting the mass
even does not automatically make it fairer. You are of the opinion
that other factors mentioned in this thread are not sufficiently
important and I disagree. Is that a good enough recap of where we
stand?

 

Where it seems like we are is that you think that a large rider (at
least 145 pounds) and a small rider (say, 125 pounds) on the same bike
of the same weight is more "equal" or "fair" than the same large rider
scenario but the smaller rider with 20 pounds of static weight added
to his bike, wherever his team chooses to put it. Or rather, if the
riders have similar styles, the two bikes will perform more or less
similarly in terms of their progress around the track, you believing
they will not converge in performance when that weight is added and me
believing they will. Does that sound right?

If so, I am no closer to understanding why you think that. I
understand that the bikes won't operate identically, but not more
similarly at all?

 

I think it largely comes down to each rider's style, physiology and
adaptability.

 

Not following that at all, so let me try this approach to the big
issue here. It appears you're opinion is that you are opposed to the
establishement of a minimum weight in MotoGP, as are a number of
others here. The reasons for that seem to vary, and are not all
entirely clear to me. I've been pretty specific on what I think is a
problem, why I think it's a problem, why it's happening, and what
should be done about it. So here are two questions that I'd like
answered, and with fairly specific answers:

1) Assume MotoGP proposes to do what I have suggested, equalizing
rider weight with ballast, kilo for kilo, for any rider less than
65kg. If you are not in favor of that, why not?

2) Assume MotoGP adopts this rule. What would you predict the
consequences would be, both the short-term specific impact on the
smaller riders now in the class and the longer-term impact on the
class as a whole?

 

isn't there are formula for this for the 125 GP class already?

 

I'd like to know how many top class riders miss out because of their
height?
I'm "only" 1.85 (6"1') and look like I'm HIV+ when I fall below 80kg;
what about someone super-talented who is 2.0 (6"6')?

no need to slate the talent of the current pool of riders, but power
to weight is everything ? (all other things being almost equal)?

 

didn't the factories stop developing 2-strokes ?

 

What's your definition of "look like I'm HIV+"?

At 185 cm / 80 kg, your BMI is 23.4. The "overweight" classification starts
at 25.

Carl
Just blew my TI

 

Not quite the point. Someone who is 1.50 can still play top basketball
but there are 0 tall (2.0+) top racers (that I've seen)

 

No I understand (and agree with) your point regarding size and racers. If
Dorna is to implement a weight minimum, we might as well call the series the
"MotoGP Handicapper's Race".

My previous post simply questioned your claim of looking HIV+, given your
physical dimensions.

 

I think I'm getting the wrong end of the stick.
"all things being equal" never is.
But, I would like the MotoGP class to have what I believe is the same
rule as the 125 GP class, a bike+rider weight limit seems fairer?
If I want to be a fat, pie-eating, lager lout, why can't I have a
lighter bike.
If there was a 250kg lower limit; wow!
How would that effect the design and build.
100 kg rider on 150kg bike would be vastly different to 60kg rider on
190kg bike ?

 

How can you qualitatively penalize (an assumed lack of) talent with a
quantitative weight penalty?

 

there have been some sub-6' NBA stars, and 0 7'+ motor racing world
champions

 

Hey Mark,

Of all the things you've accused Rossi of doing or having complicity in to
leverage back (or keep) his title, I haven't seen you show that he's ever
said there should be ballasting?

I wonder why?

BTW, I haven't heard of any comments that the smaller riders in MGP are
unhealthily thin. Since one of your justifications for ballasting the riders
is your claim that ballasting 125 riders was done to prevent them from being
them from becoming unhealthily thin, you can scratch that excuse off your
list.

Carl
Writing slightly more than a quip because Mark needs the help.

P.S. Only about two more weeks 'til Mark crawls back under his rock for the
off season!!

 

Now, now, don't talk about the U of Miami like that, they've "changed,"
not all their players are on work release anymore..

Heh, or even worse, a team "mate"..

Like the AMA suksass, 'Guna's just a sandpit, the center of 'Merkan
racing *ISN'T* in Californicate and the OEM's dominate racing here only
to sell their shit? Oh, that's right, those aren't alternative notion's
they're pretty much facts..

As far as midget's and MGP go, sure they have some advantage's, just
not all of 'um. Has, or does Dorna run the "support" classes as gnome
farm teams? Pretty much. Though I still believe the most interesting
thing happening these days is watching how far they are willing to bend
over to insure their boi Ro$$i returns to his rightful place,(with them
at the bank!)though, at some point you'd think other OEM's might have
something to say on just how far that will actually be. All this makes
me wonder about his foray into F1 a while back, was that some kind of
play to get something? If so, obviously whatever it was, wasn't quite
enough...

 

Quite true. Look how many people were fighting to be the first to reply to
your "group poll" last week.

I hope saving this NG from drying up and blowing away is not your mission in
life.

 

So based on everything you've said on the subject, the most "talented"
riders are "of a relatively narrow band of size".

Incredible.