Riders? Who needs them?

Originally Posted by flymo

MotoGP, like F1, isn't about just driver or rider skill, it's about developing an entire package within the rules to win. The rules will constantly be adjusted to keep things sensible and engineers will develop equipment to balance that, that's part of the game.

To add, that isn't exclusive to F1 or MotoGP - but pretty much every form of racing from club level -> world level! Even single make series, people will be trying stuff to get a slightly better package than the next guy within the scope of the rules!

Also, if it was so easy to hop on GP bike and be competitive because of the aids, then why is it that whenever they let the journos have a play at the end of the season, they are a country mile off the times that the racers put down!?

[Red Herring]

There's also a fairly long list of top notch Superbike riders that have arrived in Moto GP and not exactly shone..... even Spies who has got to be one of the quickest learners out there has taken his time to get dialed in.

Originally Posted by lukemillar

Also, if it was so easy to hop on GP bike and be competitive because of the aids, then why is it that whenever they let the journos have a play at the end of the season, they are a country mile off the times that the racers put down!?

Because the journos are using their own input. If they used Rossi's input they would be on the pace. So The race engineers use Rossi's input as a starting point (they can get it from the little box that they show on the TV that shows comparable breaking and throttle position etc) and then close the system to let the system improve itself.

As I said earlier, the rider is now the weak point and that is highlighted by the face a journo can't do it. On its own the bike could outride a journo.

C

[flymo]

Originally Posted by Berlin

Because the journos are using their own input. If they used Rossi's input they would be on the pace.

Doesnt this basically prove the point? The rider makes the difference. Sure, its possible to send a bike out that could pilot itself and run a fast lap time but what would be the point of that? Come to think of it, why have a bike at all when it could be a simulated software race in a computer system......

The rider is part of the equation, not an optional component. Its the essence of motorcycle racing.

At some point the level of rider aids will be pegged back again, thats just part of the cycle (no pun intended ). Its funny though, no matter what they seem to do, the best riders always seem to be at or near the front.

[_Stretchie_]

Bang them all on 20 year old 400cc screamers for a 10 lap race.. I'd love to see that

Can't do that Stretchie. that would be called "Racing".

People might PASS each other! There might be Elbow to Elbow dicing and Exciting action.

I can't see anyone going for that when we have it so good now

Whatever the electronics are like at the moment, it doesn't change the fact that you still have to be an exceptional rider to ride one properly fast.

I do agree that it would be more entertaining without, and with tyres that liked being spun a bit more too, but I think the same people would be at the front.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Speaking of forced induction and randomness with small and somewhat inappropriate bikes

http://www.feralinjection.com/gri.html

Have a read of that whole site, it's funny as ****!

Grade A - loving "May the rats of a thousand airboxes **** in your sake." as an insult to the Suzuki R&D department, and will have to keep an eye on it in case they get the Turbo EFi CBR 250 working...

Originally Posted by orose

Grade A - loving "May the rats of a thousand airboxes **** in your sake." as an insult to the Suzuki R&D department, and will have to keep an eye on it in case they get the Turbo EFi CBR 250 working...

My new favourite phrase is "Purring like a blender with a kitten in it"