Single tyre rule??

[Ranger]

http://www.motogp.com/en/motogp/motogp_news.htm?menu=news&news_id=21052&championship_id=3&section=1

Crap idea IMO. Also, its funny how its only when Michelin have their arses handed to them that this comes up. :\ :down:

[fatman]

I don't really see any sign that using a control tire has had any negative impact on WSB or F1, so I don't see why it's a bad idea for MotoGP. That said I also don't see whats wrong with the current situation.

By the looks of qualifying in Japan, Michelin are getting their act back together. If the rules stay the same next year I would be surprised to see either tire manufacture dominate the way Bridgestone 'seemingly' has done this year.

Part of me thinks the competition is good and the other part of me thinks a control tire will eliminate on common excuse for poor performances.

[Mach24]

I don't really see any sign that using a control tire has had any negative impact on WSB or F1, so I don't see why it's a bad idea for MotoGP. That said I also don't see whats wrong with the current situation.

By the looks of qualifying in Japan, Michelin are getting their act back together. If the rules stay the same next year I would be surprised to see either tire manufacture dominate the way Bridgestone 'seemingly' has done this year.

Part of me thinks the competition is good and the other part of me thinks a control tire will eliminate on common excuse for poor performances.
Fatty I agree with what you are saying.

I beleive it is too early to go to a control tyre, give it at minimum one more season.

The downside to having multiple tyre suppliers is that one supplier normally dominates, its the way the world works!

I am not against a control tyre but I am against eliminating competition and progress amongst suppliers.

Dunlop must be questioning why they bothered to spend the development/sponsorship dollars to this point to only find they may not be allowed to compete.

[Ranger]

Rossi hopes it is adopted.


Rossi hopes control tyre is adopted

By Matt Beer Saturday, September 22nd 2007, 13:21 GMT


Valentino Rossi has come out in favour of MotoGP's proposed switch to a single tyre supplier for the 2008 season.

Dorna CEO Carmelo Ezpeleta revealed earlier today that the move to control tyres had been tabled at the Grand Prix Commission meeting at Motegi, and that a decision would be taken by next month's Malaysian Grand Prix.

Rossi has been outspoken in his frustration at the tyre situation in recent months, having struggled to compete with the Bridgestone-shod bikes for several races in the middle of the season.

"For me, it's good," Rossi told the official MotoGP website.

"Because I think, especially this year, the tyres have too much importance.

"Sometimes Michelin was better, a lot of times Bridgestone was better, but it was like two different championships.

"For me, it's better to start everybody from the same place."

There was widespread debate about the effect that tyre inequalities were having on the quality of the show in MotoGP after a string of uneventful races during the summer.

But these concerns were largely alleviated by last week's close-fought Portuguese Grand Prix, in which progress by Michelin allowed Rossi and Dani Pedrosa to battle with Stoner and eventually finish first and second. Michelin has also taken all three front row positions at Motegi today.

Michelin Sport boss Frederic-Henri Biabaud has openly suggested that the control tyre proposal is being pushed by influential riders rather than a tyre manufacturer or team.

He admitted that some riders were not in favour of open tyre competition, and that it might be impossible to persuade them otherwise.

"Obviously they seem to be difficult to convince, it is strange," Biabaud said.


I agree with Stoner in that these guys (Rossi in particular) shouldn't forget which tyres they've been riding with for the past few seasons and the results they have acheived from them. :\

[osg]

^^^^^ What he said. Spot on assessment.

[fatman]

I really don't see Rossi's comments as being motivated by the fact that he isn't winning as many races this season. If you compare how close the racing is in WSB and MotoGP this season, I think you'll find that WSB is much closer.

Rossi's point seems to be that tires now make up too much of the equation. If it's 40% rider, 30% bike and 20% tire, then there are too many elements coming into play. A control tire ensures without any shred of doubt that the series is all about bikes and riders and nothing else.

[VS]

You're right. Rossi should only ask him self what's wrong with him. We does unacceptable starts, losing several positions. He DNF 2 times and in those 2 races Michelin best rider scored a total of 35 point (Pedrosa - 25 points in Sachsenring and CCheca 10 points Misano). That would have put Rossi at only 41 points behind Stoner with still 100 points to dispute.
If Rossi had finish all races so far as the 1st Michelin rider he would be now 32 points behind Stoner. This would be a different Championship.
He lost another 10 points to Stone, in Shanghai and Losail, and that had nothing to do with tyres.
Talk about tyres is a good way to divert attention from more real issues.

Before I finish just a short comment to Fatman post, have you ever compare lap times and race times in WSB before and after the single tyre rule? You do that.
This is MotoGP and WSB no Motorcycle Formula.

[VS]

Why not a controlled engine and a controlled chassis? Like that we guaranty it is all about ridding.

[ChrisS]

how do you use the quotes that point to the original poster?

anyway I agree with fatman that the control tyre has produced better racing this season. still as a racing competition I believe tyre companies should be allowed to compete.

Also for the people that are asking why werent the rules changed when Michelin was winning and seem to think Michelin is the one pushing the rule change. Michelin and Bridgestone are against control tyres. They have nothing to gain. Michelin pulled out of F1 because they had no interest in a series without competition and Bridgestone admitted that no-one is paying much attention in tyres at F1 no more (the 2 tyre types, white line thing in F1 is to give Bridgestone at least some attention)

[Wim_Impreza]

I am hoping for the same tire rules as this season. Bridgestone was far behind, but in Portugal and now in Japan, Michelin was probably even better then Bridgestone. Dunlop and Sylvain Guintoli did a good job too this whole weekend.

[jonny hurlock]

keep the tyre rules as the same, I do not want to see a control tyre like every other series thats (f1, gp2, wrc,), if its not broken, DON'T FIX IT

[AndyRAC]

Single tyre, oh no please. Single tyres should really only be for the junior formula. The reason F1 and WRC are is a political decision, the ruling body doesn't like Michelin. Anyway, the current tyre rules are fair, what is fair about Michelin flying in a specific tyre for a circuit when Bridgestone can't. Leave he rules as they are and let Michelin catch up. If we have one tyre why not have one engine or one bike. This is Moto GP, not WSBK or WSS, the championship for prototypes, that means eveything, tyres as well.

[Corny]

the reason that the new tyre rule came, was for reducing the costs, right? Will it get cheaper when one tyre rule?

[ChrisS]

@Corny, yes one tyre supplier is going to be cheaper, competition always drives the cost up, its inevitable. But the reason Dorna asked for one tyre wasnt to reduce costs

[ChrisS]

some of the background and politics of the tyre situation from what I gathered.

HRC asked Bridgestone to supply them with tyres from 2008. Bridgestone turned them down. Michelin said they would leave if they lost their factory teams. Bridgestone knows that and wants to keep Michelin in MotoGP. Its better for them to beat HRC on Michelins than to win with HRC against other Bridgestone teams.

Another thing I heard is that part of the contract between Ducati and Bridgestone is that they don't supply the factory Honda or the factory Yamaha. Why would Bridgestone sign such a contract I dont know but maybe they did.

Dorna is trying to stay in control, past mistakes made Dorna the manufacturers' bitch, they don't want to become the tyre suppliers' bitch too

[The Phantom]

A control tyre will take some of the magic away.

Lose traction control, increase the number of available tyres from 31 per round to 50 per round (still vastly less than what it used to be!), and change the points system so that each rider can dump his worst point-scoring round. That'll do it.

[MrJan]

The reason F1 and WRC are is a political decision, the ruling body doesn't like Michelin.

BF Goodrich is a subsidary of Michelin so the WRC argument doesn't hold up. While I enjoy the competition of two manufacturers surely you can all agree that it's a shame to see good riders being disadvantaged by poor rubber. Last season we'd watch the Suzooks get great starts but fade towards the end, same with Ducati and it was a shame. Not saying we need to switch but you can see why some people want to.

I'm sure that if we have a reverse next year and the 'stones are poor then Casey will be doing exactly the same as Rossi is now.

[AndyRAC]

BF Goodrich is a subsidary of Michelin so the WRC argument doesn't hold up. While I enjoy the competition of two manufacturers surely you can all agree that it's a shame to see good riders being disadvantaged by poor rubber. Last season we'd watch the Suzooks get great starts but fade towards the end, same with Ducati and it was a shame. Not saying we need to switch but you can see why some people want to.

I'm sure that if we have a reverse next year and the 'stones are poor then Casey will be doing exactly the same as Rossi is now.

Sorry, but I disagree about BF Goodrich, yes they are owned by Michelin, and the F1A haven't forgiven Michelin for Indy 2005. Michelin/BF Goodrich tyres are superior to Pirelli, yet Pirelli got the contract.It doesn't take a genius to work out why Pirelli got the contract.

[ChrisS]

BF Goodrich is a subsidary of Michelin so the WRC argument doesn't hold up. While I enjoy the competition of two manufacturers surely you can all agree that it's a shame to see good riders being disadvantaged by poor rubber. Last season we'd watch the Suzooks get great starts but fade towards the end, same with Ducati and it was a shame. Not saying we need to switch but you can see why some people want to.

I'm sure that if we have a reverse next year and the 'stones are poor then Casey will be doing exactly the same as Rossi is now.

The reason WRC teams are on BF Goodrich this season isn't because its a control tyre its because no-one wanted to be on Pirelli. Even so FIA choose Pirelli as the control tyre supplier for 2008 onwards.

[ArmchairBikeFan]

I wasn't happy with the Michelin dominance over Bridgestone last year and I'm not happy now it's the other way round. I hate it when races are dominated by one tyre company because the rider can't make the difference. As fatman said, one of the great strengths of MotoGP is that the man makes more difference than the bike, hence Rossi's world title on the inferior Yamaha.
Yeah, in an ideal world there would be a lovely tyre war where the companies were pretty equal. Unfortunately we live on planet earth. One tyre company is generally going to have a big advantage. It ruins the racing. I believe that racing should come first. Keeping a lopsided tyre war that spoils races because it's theoretically pure racing is just cutting off your nose to spite your face.
MotoGP is in a sponsorship crisis. You don't increase TV ratings and attract sponsors by having one-sided championships that leave casual fans switching off. The racing had better be outstanding when Rossi has retired, or millions will switch off and it will damage the sport.

[leopard]

Why would Rossi damage the sport, he as mostly riders has the same right taking part in the motogp, he has the same possibility on win or lose, this season he lose and Stoner win, quite fair ;)

[neninja]

As a true prototype series it should be open to all tyre manufacturers to produce prototype tyres to compete.

WSB has benefited from the single tyre rule but it's a production based series as has been suggested the lap times have suffered as a result of using mass produced Pirellis.

If Michelin had been dominant from day 1 this year and Ducati, Kawasaki and Suzuki had suffered poor performances with Rossi walking away with the championship I doubt that rule changes would have been considered.

It's up to Michelin to improve next year

[MrJan]

Sorry, but I disagree about BF Goodrich, yes they are owned by Michelin, and the F1A haven't forgiven Michelin for Indy 2005. Michelin/BF Goodrich tyres are superior to Pirelli, yet Pirelli got the contract.It doesn't take a genius to work out why Pirelli got the contract.

Sorry, been out of the WRC loop for a while and didn't realise Pirelli had next years contract. Is it because they let the lokes at the FIA go to a photoshoot for their calendar ;) :cheese:

[maxu05]

Stupid, stupid, stupid idea. Leave the bloody tyres as they are. Michelin has had a great run for the last decade or more and Bridgestone has struggled for nearly as long. I think Bridgestone deserves their moment in the sun. If Michelin can't handle the pressure, then they should give up racing. What's next, a single manufacturer ?

[rah]

I think riders like Rossi like the idea of a single tyre as it will show of the true skill of the rider, but where do you stop?

Keep it as it is. It will be a bit more even next year.

[ChrisS]

If Michelin can't handle the pressure, then they should give up racing.

Wouldn't that leave motoGP with a single tyre? ;)

[Mach24]

Dunlop!

[leopard]

GTradial from gajah tunggal is better :( :)

[patnicholls]

Tough call, this one.

On one hand, yes races being decided by tyres is silly, absolutely. But then again, if you think Bridgestone are clearly ahead - how many non-Casey Bridgestone victories have there been in the dry this year?

Admittedly, Valentino (and Dani) would have been in with a better chance this year on a control tyre. Motor racing is full of 'what ifs' and other complications (such as brand loyalty - Michelin have won the title for each of the 15 years prior to this) of course.

A comment on Eurosport's Motegi coverage said that Bridgestone would prefer competition - as when there's only one tyre company no-one mentions the tyres. I hadn't thought of that before.

Money may come into it too, etc. I don't know, in short :)

(and let's not forget, for all the slating I and others have given them, Dunlop are only two years into their MotoGP program - they've had some shockers but also some encouraging moments)

[NinjaMaster]

In the current climate of struggling to find sponsors, I don't see how booting massive dollars in the form of tyre companies can be even considered. Dunlop propped up a team this year and like Pat said, have made steady progress in only their second year. Michelin have been caught napping for one year, so any reaction to this is purely panic driven, not calmly considered.
And to be honest, WSB is the platform that everyone uses as the example of a control tyre but the racing in that series has been less than stellar I would have thought. And their rules were brought in because the Honda and Ducati factory teams could get a spec of tyre not available to anyone else, not due to unevenness of manufacturers.

[NinjaMaster]

Bridgestone aren't happy with Vale.

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/sport/sportresults/mcn/2007/october/oct1-7/oct0307motogpbridgestoneblamevalentinorossiforonem aketyre/?&R=EPI-95111

Surely if the manufacturers are in agreeance that there shouldn't be a single tyre supplier, the easy way to railroad such a decision would be to announce that none of them would tender for the supply contract. A bit difficult to have a control tyre if no-one is willing to supply the whole field.

[JETFX...]

Take Casey out of the equation and Ducati for that matter and Bridgestone dont look so far ahead of Michelin etc...

Funny how when the competition hots up the weaker teams/riders look to blame their own tools over their lack of ability to rise to the occasion. Remember the rules are the same for all to play by... ;)

I just wonder what the excuses will be in 08 if Casey and Ducati kick butt yet again... :rotflmao:

[ChrisS]

Remember the rules are the same for all to play by... ;)

Thats relative, rules are the same the tyres arent ;) , ie dont expect Kurtis to get tyres anywhere near as good as Vale. Same with Bridgestone, I don't know their hierarchy exactly but I expect Ducati/Stoner is their no 1 priority while d'Antin gets whatever is left

[JETFX...]

Thats relative, rules are the same the tyres arent ;) , ie dont expect Kurtis to get tyres anywhere near as good as Vale. Same with Bridgestone, I don't know their hierarchy exactly but I expect Ducati/Stoner is their no 1 priority while d'Antin gets whatever is left

True, but to clarify my remark... the Moto GP class rules are the same for all weather factory or privateer, of course that being said the leading factory teams all regardless will make their tyre deals each season based primarily on the greater global marketing potential through mutual exposure and they do invest major $$ with their chosen tyre companies usually based on long term mutual support guarantees....

The bike manufacturers work closely with their chosen tyre manufacturers so as to produce the best tyre compounds and that suits 'their' brands chassis. Hence my reference that 'ALL' play by the same rules (in principal).

Yes who ever is winning per say will of course always take priority for any said tyre manufacturer supplier thats just natural selection in nearly all motorsport.

I dont think control tyres is the answer for Moto GP, maybe more appropriate for Super Bike SBK. Some think F-1 and Aussie Super Cars are good examples of closer racing with control tyre??? personally I reckon both are pretty boring in recent years due partially to control tyres and with bugger all overtaking with only pitstops truly offering a chance to overtake more often than not.

Bottom line I reckon is to invite even more tyre manufacturers into the foray NOT less afterall variety is a good thing dont you think... probably then you would see the smaller budgeted teams get a much better 'chance' of a good showing at the pointy end.