estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to ..

Howard Kveck wrote:

>> So is your position that it's not true unless Hayden publicly states
>> it's true? Because Hayden is less of a complainer than any rider in that
>> paddock from what I've seen. But when GP reporters talk about parts
>> Pedrosa has and Hayden apparently doesn't, that's not good enough for
>> you? On top of the minimal effort Honda made last year to fix his
>> problematic bike, including that chronic clutch problem? And the
>> non-issue that Pedrosa's world record bonehead move at Estoril was to
>> Honda? And the minibike they trotted out for '07 at that time? What sort
>> of evidence registers on your rusted-solid meter?

> Hmm, talk about rusted-solid meters. Things I recall would be Pedrosa saying that
> the bike was too loud and Honda making him a new set of pipes. Since no one else
> seemed to be complaining about that, perhaps Honda thought that was good enough? Of
> course, I'm not surprised that you'd bring up the Pedrosa-Hayden crash, since it has
> so much to do with the sequence riders get parts. As for the 'minibike', what's that
> got to do with parts going to what rider first? I'd bet that Honda had an idea for
> the bike they wanted to race as an 800 quite some time ago and over the years they've
> proven to be reluctant to change courses once they get an idea in their heads.

Right, and that idea was built around the notion of, as stated by senior
HRC people, "compact riders for the compact bikes of the future". The
Brno bike story, the lead-up and reaction to Estoril, the design of the
new bike, Hayden's problem fitting into it, all have to do with Honda's
priorities, and I think that's pretty obvious. Given all that, it would
be expected that Pedrosa would get development priority, and that's
consistent with everything I've read regarding parts upgrades reported
this year. Pedrosa doesn't always get things before Hayden, and Hayden
does get some stuff Pedrosa doesn't (like is slightly larger fairing
pieces that took forever to produce), but I have not once heard of
Hayden getting a general performance-enhancing upgrade that wasn't also
available to Pedrosa, whereas the opposite has been reported repeatedly.

> I can't help thinking that much of the stuff that you trot out as evidence of this
> anti-Hayden cabal is more a matter of your perceptions of things. You really seem to
> need to work up this mythological "a poor lad from ol' Kentucky against the might of
> the heartless corporation and the midget hoards, led by the evil Ming the Merciless,
> er, Puig" [1] and can cite chapter and verse on all the slights that you think
> Hayden's been on the receiving end of. Well, I shouldn't restrict it to just Hayden -
> that seems to be a small part of the recurring theme of victimization, of which JIS!
> JIS! JIS!, EuroMed 250/125 promotions, "minibikes/Super 250s" and the "EuroGod" are
> part of (that stuff about Dorna trying to make sure that Rossi wins because he's a
> Euro is a lot like Limbaugh's comments about "The media has been very desirous that a
> black quarterback do well"). It seems like Spies is the next appointed victim. You've
> asserted that the 250 promotees are "less skilled" as a blanket statement, the best
> praise for them that can be mustered being that, "they're skilled 250 riders" and
> dismissing the Championships of the smaller classes (you may not like it but the FIM
> takes those titles seriously, as do the manufacturers and riders). Is now a good time
> to mention that whether Stoner is the lightest (possible) winner of a World
> Championship, he still has to ride damn bike and has done a great job of doing just
> that?

And that little blast sums up your worldview, which is so grounded in
the bikes you love, 125 and 250 two strokes, that you just can't see
straight. If you can't see why Dorna would want their mega-star to be
out front and winning, if you can't see the general impact of the biases
of manufacturers, teams and sponsors on the rider pool over the last 15
years, if you see nothing wrong with the ever-shrinking rider profile in
MotoGP, if it seems fine to you that the system means guys like de
Puniet, Dovisioso and de Angelis move right down the production line to
their appointed seats in MotoGP while a guy real accomplishment like
Spies remains outside looking in (Gresini's comment on his signing: "For
us is very important to have another young Italian rider making his
debut in MotoGP with us", which, among other things, confirms that even
they think of people from San Marino as Italian), then you are blind.

Regarding your comment about the skill level of 250 riders, I don't
think I have ever said they are less skilled. What I have said is the
best of them from a results standpoint have only proven to be the best
given the playing field - riders sourced from a limited pool, JIS riders
given team/bike preferences within that pool, very small size and light
weight being an obviously material consideration in their success (is
there even one rider at 150 pounds or more of any consequence in 125 or
250 today?). But that seems to offend you, because no doubt you believe
that racing on small two strokes is clearly the best route to skill
development (maybe the only one?), therefore 250 riders are the
most-skilled and naturally deserve to have the path cleared for them to
make their way into MotoGP over all the others.

But feel free to go ahead and mock anyone who feels differently (and
accuse them of being racists). After all, mocking seems to be pretty
much the sum total of your defense of your position...
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

Julian Bond wrote:
> Howard Kveck
>> Mark N wrote:
>>> But that seems to offend you, because no doubt you believe
>>> that racing on small two strokes is clearly the best route to skill
>>> development (maybe the only one?), therefore 250 riders are the
>>> most-skilled and naturally deserve to have the path cleared for them to
>>> make their way into MotoGP over all the others.
>>
>> Who says I'm offended? "No doubt [I] believe etc..." You're
>> assuming. I do think
>> that the 125 to 250 to open class progression is a good one, but
>> hardly the only one.
>> The people who pick riders for the top class seem to like it for
>> reasons that you
>> always dismiss. See, heres' something that you will always miss: I
>> recognize that
>> Hayden is a very good, skilled racer, while you can't recognize the
>> skills and
>> talents of guys who come up through a path that you don't approve of
>> and who don't
>> fit this idea that you're fixated on about "optimal size" (and who may
>> have a
>> passport that you don't approve of).
>
> If someone never watched 125 or 250 and didn't follow the racing in
> those classes, what would they base their opinion on as to how good they
> were? How do you judge if Dovizioso or Lorenzo (or in the past, Pedrosa
> or Stoner) are any good and deserve a ride in MotoGP if you never pay
> any attention to how well they're riding? Oh, right. You read the stats.
> What's curious about this is the view that someone who wins a national
> championship is more deserving than someone who consistently comes
> second in a championship in the same paddock, on a clearly inferior
> bike, way ahead of the nearest person on the same bike and beating all
> the other riders of the superior bike. Does Spies deserve a MotoGP ride
> more than Dovizioso or Lorenzo? Why?

It's all opinion and speculation, of course, there's no way to determine
any of this absolutely. What one bases this one is what connections
there are. In Spies' case, you have a young guy who has now beaten the
all-time win and championship leader in AMA SB history two years in a
row, who crushes everyone else, who has been amazingly consistent
(finished 1st or 2nd in every race this year), who has shown a mature
racing intelligence of the sort that it takes to win a MotoGP
championship. Looking at Dovisioso and de Angelis, you have two guys on
factory bikes who finish near the front a lot, but who win races very
rarely, who haven't shown quite that much consistency, who exhibit some
of that emotional wild style that is typical in the smaller classes. But
of course you love that, so it's a plus and not a minus to you.

And who are they racing? Each other, there are no veterans on fast bikes
in the series who set the standard, it's just this year's crop of kids,
and that's the way it's been in 250 for almost a decade, since Capirossi
and Harada moved out of the class. In Spies case, one can compare him to
Mladin because we've seen Mladin up against guys like Duhamel in his
prime, Chandler, Gobert, Hayden, et al, and his occasional WSB wildcard
forays. Nothing like that in 250, because the Rossis, Melandris,
Pedrosas have all moved on, and failed MotoGP guys like Ukawa and Jacque
never go back. Next year when these three are gone someone else
(assumedly under age 25 and under 130 pounds) will be doing the winning,
and they will be the new flavor of the month, inevitably headed for MotoGP.

I assume you're talking about Dovi regarding the inferior bike thing,
but what is that based on? In yesterday's qualifying practice I see his
bike being a whopping 2kph off the top speed of the fastest KTM (and
10kph up on Laverty's Honda). The other guys on Hondas are Aoyama,
Simon, Takahashi, other kids who haven't proven much at all. That's the
fundamental problem with 250 today, it's a development series at the
front contested between a bunch of ex-125 kids with no point of
comparison, no standard to be measured against. The best of them (or is
it most successful?) move up as on a production line, and we don't
necessarily see tremendous accomplishment from them once they arrive -
Rossi remains the only 250 champion in decades to go on to win the
premier class championship, Pedrosa was declared the best since Rossi,
was given the best ride in the paddock and hasn't yet quite delivered,
Melandri struggles on the best tires of the year, Jacque and Harada and
Ukawa and Elias and de Puniet and others have done little, etc. West
doesn't fit the mold, has little success, drops out in frustration, gets
a major break, and now he's showing his stuff. It's a system that
doesn't show much sign of really working, given the level of advantage
these guys have.

And I suspect I've seen much more of Lorenzo, et al, than you have of
Spies...
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

Howard Kveck <YOURhoward.RemoveThis@h-SHOESbomb.com> Sat, 22 Sep 2007 00:12:58
>In article <13f7m1kblhg7u9c.RemoveThis@corp.supernews.com>,
> Mark N <menusbaum.RemoveThis@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote:

>> But that seems to offend you, because no doubt you believe
>> that racing on small two strokes is clearly the best route to skill
>> development (maybe the only one?), therefore 250 riders are the
>> most-skilled and naturally deserve to have the path cleared for them to
>> make their way into MotoGP over all the others.
>
> Who says I'm offended? "No doubt [I] believe etc..." You're
>assuming. I do think
>that the 125 to 250 to open class progression is a good one, but hardly
>the only one.
>The people who pick riders for the top class seem to like it for
>reasons that you
>always dismiss. See, heres' something that you will always miss: I
>recognize that
>Hayden is a very good, skilled racer, while you can't recognize the skills and
>talents of guys who come up through a path that you don't approve of
>and who don't
>fit this idea that you're fixated on about "optimal size" (and who may have a
>passport that you don't approve of).

If someone never watched 125 or 250 and didn't follow the racing in
those classes, what would they base their opinion on as to how good they
were? How do you judge if Dovizioso or Lorenzo (or in the past, Pedrosa
or Stoner) are any good and deserve a ride in MotoGP if you never pay
any attention to how well they're riding? Oh, right. You read the stats.
What's curious about this is the view that someone who wins a national
championship is more deserving than someone who consistently comes
second in a championship in the same paddock, on a clearly inferior
bike, way ahead of the nearest person on the same bike and beating all
the other riders of the superior bike. Does Spies deserve a MotoGP ride
more than Dovizioso or Lorenzo? Why?

--
Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
*** Just Say No To DRM ***
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

"Mark N" <menusbaum.DeleteThis@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:13fh4ggdcrfg151@corp.supernews.com...

<< gigantic snip >>
>
> An eye for an eye, my son...
>

Mark,

Have you ever considered writing filibuster speeches?
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

Carl Sundquist wrote:
>
> "Mark N" wrote
>
> << gigantic snip >>
>>
>> An eye for an eye, my son...
>>
>
> Mark,
>
> Have you ever considered writing filibuster speeches?

Carl, have you ever considered actually contributing something about
racing to this group?
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 07:38:47 -0500, "Carl Sundquist" <carlsun RemoveThis @cox.net>
wrote:

><< gigantic snip >>
>>
>> An eye for an eye, my son...
>>
>
>Mark,
>
>Have you ever considered writing filibuster speeches?

heh. I was wondering how long the multiply quoted posts were going to
get - we could get to over 1000 lines at this rate!
--
Champ
neal at champ dot org dot uk
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

"Mark N" <menusbaum.TakeThisOut@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
news:13fi4v23k04s61f@corp.supernews.com...
> Carl Sundquist wrote:
>>
>> "Mark N" wrote << gigantic snip >>
>>>
>>> An eye for an eye, my son...
>>>
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> Have you ever considered writing filibuster speeches?
>
> Carl, have you ever considered actually contributing something about
> racing to this group?

You mean like when I ask you why an archaic 20-25 year old model of an
optimal rider should still be considered optimal and you dance around the
question?

Too bad your skin isn't thicker as your head.
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

Carl Sundquist wrote:
>
> "Mark N" wrote
>> Carl Sundquist wrote:

>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> Have you ever considered writing filibuster speeches?
>>
>> Carl, have you ever considered actually contributing something about
>> racing to this group?
>
> You mean like when I ask you why an archaic 20-25 year old model of an
> optimal rider should still be considered optimal and you dance around
> the question?

By "optimal rider" I assume you're talking about rider size, yes? Okay,
if I say last year's MotoGP champion weighed 150 pounds, that's too
small of a sample, obviously. If I add that the guy who won the previous
five championships weighs 148 pounds, and the current AMA and WSB
champions weigh 160 and 148 pounds, and the WSB champion-elect weighs
165 pounds, that's still not enough. But when I go back 20-25 years and
say all champions in these series weighed between 145 and 165 pounds,
then my evidence is too archaic? Well, okay...

> Too bad your skin isn't thicker as your head.

This from the most thin-skinned "contributor" in this group. Maybe the
subject of size shrinkage hits a little too close to home? Maybe you
should just stick to the racing, Carl. That way we'll never hear from
you again...
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

Howard Kveck <YOURhoward RemoveThis @h-SHOESbomb.com> Tue, 25 Sep 2007 23:35:56
> Not typical, but hardly uncommon with Honda. The minimal bodywork
>may indeed help
>"smaller, weaker" riders but it sure doesn't hurt bigger riders. I
>think a certain
>amount of that concept revolves (so to speak) around Honda's "Mass
>Centralization"
>concept. Weight transfer can be reduced because of MC, hence making the
>bike easier
>to tip in would be a plus. As for the excessively small front
>protection, I think
>Honda just underestimated the gains they thought they'd get from a
>seemingly more
>maneuverable bike. I think they expected to gain more in the twisty
>bits than on the
>straights. Ducati, unfortunately, spoiled that plan.

Two points to note here. Burgess commented on the Hondas that it looked
like they had their (centralised) mass too high. This caused too much
pitching as the riders got on the brakes making it hard to control and
out brake people. This would explain Dani's braking problems in
particular early in the year. The latest frame seems to have helped this
as both Dani and Nicky have been much better on corner entry in recent
races.

The other point is about fairings. Ducati had some problems earlier with
changes of direction and side winds. Much wind tunnel work led to subtle
changes that have resolved that. They've managed to get the best of both
worlds of good streamlining without too much downside from an aero
design that just wants to go straight.[1]

Which just suggests that Honda tried to have too much of a good thing
initially following their design route. But R&D has now largely solved
the problems that brought.

[1] The Ducati Desmosedici launch showed the bike next to last year's
race bike. Funny to see a bigger screen and bigger fairing on the race
bike. I guess one is designed to work at circuits and the other to look
good on a stand in the sitting room.

--
Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
*** Just Say No To DRM ***
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

In article <NdAm$1IvOi+GFAC7@jblaptop.voidstar.com>,
Julian Bond <julian_bond.TakeThisOut@voidstar.com> wrote:

> Howard Kveck <YOURhoward.TakeThisOut@h-SHOESbomb.com> Tue, 25 Sep 2007 23:35:56
> > Not typical, but hardly uncommon with Honda. The minimal bodywork
> > may indeed help "smaller, weaker" riders but it sure doesn't hurt bigger
> > riders. I think a certain amount of that concept revolves (so to speak)
> > around Honda's "Mass Centralization" concept. Weight transfer can be reduced
> > because of MC, hence making the bike easier to tip in would be a plus. As
> > for the excessively small front protection, I think Honda just underestimated
> > the gains they thought they'd get from a seemingly more maneuverable bike. I
> > think they expected to gain more in the twisty bits than on the straights.
> > Ducati, unfortunately, spoiled that plan.
>
> Two points to note here. Burgess commented on the Hondas that it looked
> like they had their (centralised) mass too high. This caused too much
> pitching as the riders got on the brakes making it hard to control and
> out brake people. This would explain Dani's braking problems in
> particular early in the year. The latest frame seems to have helped this
> as both Dani and Nicky have been much better on corner entry in recent
> races.

I'd read (can't recall where, it was a while back) that the Honda had weight
transfer issues but the Burgess comment is a different angle on it. Very interesting
but probably pretty logical.

> The other point is about fairings. Ducati had some problems earlier with
> changes of direction and side winds. Much wind tunnel work led to subtle
> changes that have resolved that. They've managed to get the best of both
> worlds of good streamlining without too much downside from an aero
> design that just wants to go straight.[1]

Yeah, the Ducatis are not anywhere near as minimal as the Hondas. Especially down
and back by the rear tire - it's distinctly wider and covers more than either the
Honda or the Yamaha. There is more coverage around the handlebar area as well. One
observation: the Honda and Yamaha have more of an angle to the nose area, where the
Ducati is somewhat blunt, rolling back pretty fast, with a distinctly separate
screen. I wonder if the idea is to help direct the wind around the rider, rather than
over him.

> Which just suggests that Honda tried to have too much of a good thing
> initially following their design route. But R&D has now largely solved
> the problems that brought.
>
> [1] The Ducati Desmosedici launch showed the bike next to last year's
> race bike. Funny to see a bigger screen and bigger fairing on the race
> bike. I guess one is designed to work at circuits and the other to look
> good on a stand in the sitting room.

Many of the aftermarket windscreens that are race-specific are taller than the
stock ones. But a low screen looks racier to the average guy, apparently.

--
tanx,
Howard

Faberge eggs are elegant but I prefer Faberge bacon.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to .. 

On Sep 25, 7:38 am, "Carl Sundquist" <carl....TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:
> "Mark N" <menusb....TakeThisOut@NYETSPAMearthlink.net> wrote in message
>
> news:13fh4ggdcrfg151@corp.supernews.com...
>
> << gigantic snip >>
>
>
>
> > An eye for an eye, my son...
>
> Mark,
>
> Have you ever considered writing filibuster speeches?

HAHAHA
 >> Stay informed about: estoril: thank you michelin, yamaha, honda...and kudos to ..