The great equaliser.

What would happen if in MGP all riders could choose wahtever bike they
wanted but all the bikes were the same from each factory (ie all Honda's
were exactly the same spec with the same spec tyres as were the Yams
etc) in other words no rider had any advantage with tyres or bikes (WRT
to the same manufacturer)or budget but had the choice of bike to ride.

Would Rossi continue to dominate or would things change? This is a
purely hypothetical scenario but interesting to see who people think
would shine and who would falter.

Paul

 

I think that's the scenario where Rossi would dominate the most. The other
riders need a bike/setup or any other type of tactical advantage to be able
to beat Rossi with any consistency.

....pablo

 

When I first read this, I thought the way pablo did. But it
is really hard to tell for sure. I mean, Rossi is not on the
same Yamaha that Max Biaggi was on a few years ago.
Yamaha did everthing Rossi and team asked of them,
and Rossi brought over most of his Honda team with
him to Yamaha. But still, I think what would help Rossi
is that he can do what Doohan always talked about, and
that is being able to ride a bike that is not perfect. Most
riders seem to be like Biaggia or Cadalora and if the
bike isn't perfect, they can't ride around it.

 

Which riders would fall into the two different categories: able to ride
non-perfect bikes and not able to ride non-perfect bikes? Would the factory
testers like Itoh be considered able to ride non perfect bikes? If so, what
keeps them from being in the big show? It shouldn't be consistency, because
how would a factory development group benefit from information from an
inconsistent test pilot?

 

I feel like a test rider is somebody that is consistent and
can ride anything, but may not be the fastest rider
in the world, even on a fast bike. Rossi and Schwantz
(and maybe doohan) are riders that seemed to be able
to (almost) push beyond what the bike was capable of
doing. But it is hard to tell with Rossi because for the
last several years he has had the best of everything
behind him. The Yamaha always seemed underpowered
compared to the Honda, but since Burgess & Rossi moved
over there, I have not noticed this at all.

 

I think early on in the last season, it was quite evident. Either Rossi
geared it to get quick traction off slow turn, in which case he'd get
overtaken later down the straight, or he geared it for top speed, in which
case he'd get left behind by the top Hondas after slow corner exits. Most of
the time he went for the latter to keep up at all, and the only response was
to go for very fast corner speeds. Remember hsi first victory on the yamaha.
To me it was pretty clear there that he had to compensate with corner speed
for Biaggi's superior ability to cataplult the bike off slow corners.

Definitely in '05 no power difference was visible between the Yamaha and the
Honda. But '04 was different, it was quite visible at times.

And the Yamaha is still the finickier bike of the two to set up according to
the word of the paddock, and the Yamaha power is peakier and harder to apply
according to Criville and Mamola, who have ridden all the bikes after the
season and published their opinions in Motociclismo.

....pablo

 

I would agree with your test rider characteristics, but I would think that
significant flaws in development bikes would still show up in that last 1-2
% of speed that the test rider can't bring out.

I'd also throw Hailwood and Rainey in the "able to ride non-perfect bikes"
category. But who could ride them that wasn't a champion?

 

I thought you meant water by the great equaliser. Come to think of it,
that'd be an interesting series in and of itself -- the whole
championship run in wet conditions. I think I like the concept.

Anyway, as far as Rossi and the gang, I don't think putting everyone on
the same bike would tell you much. The thing is there's no such thing
as a perfect bike anyhow. So if you were to give everyone a spec bike,
it may play into the hands of some people and not others. Of course,
those like Rossi, who can adapt better would also benefit from it, but
it may not be fair to those who shine on specific machinery. The main
example of that that comes to mind is Italians' general preference for
riding with wheels in line vs McCoy's, Rossi's (he's on his own level
anyway) and Americans' sideways riding. Say you build a bike that
suits one of the 2 styles, but not the other, no matter how much you
tinker with it. What then? The idea of MotoGP, like any prototype
race series is to let teams build machinery to complement riders or
find riders to compliment whatever they build. That's supposed to be
the difference between prototype racing and production based racing.

Arguably, in this day and age costs are a limiting factor even for
giants like Honda. Believe it or not, Kenny Roberts' efforts were
better backed in 2005 than Ducati's own team. You have to ask
yourself, what are you trying to find out or improve? If it's the
"Who's the best rider?" thing, let's not even go there. Bikes are now
equipped with traction control and all sorts of other aids. MotoGP is
not necessarily the place to look for the best road racer anymore --
only the best rider-bike-team package. The more I watch pro racing
nowadays, the more I'm convinced you gotta get to your local club races
if you're interested in the human factor. I am and that's why I'm
always in the best seat in the house at those races -- on my own bike.


But even if you don't race yourself, amature racing really is the
closest you can get to the level playing field in this sport today.
And that's fine. I remember when they interviewed Mladin the first
year Suzuki fielded their GSXR1000 when everyone else had 750 fours
(Kawasaki) and 1000 twins (Honda, Ducati). They asked him something to
the effect of "How do you feel about winning against a non-competitive
field?" and he said he was happy to take an easy season because being a
great sportsman is not his job; his job is to win and promote people
backing him. People have this illusion that big time racing is the
greatest show on earth, which it is if you've come to see trick bikes
and umbrella girls. Don't get me wrong, there's some amazing talents
in pro racing (that's why they're pro's). And I'd love to see Rossi do
his thing up close. But in my mind, the money and the tricked out
bikes detract from seeing these talents, not add to them in the long
term. But hey, who am I to be "yelling at the cloud"? I'll keep
racing against others with day jobs, the pro's will continue to do
their thing, and we'll all continue to watch them on TV and talk about
them on the net...