MotoGP - Le Mans ***SPOILER ALERT***

[emptysea]

So, that begs the question: why was Rossi's choice better than that of the other two?

[Ulvetanna_imp]

So, that begs the question: why was Rossi's choice better than that of the other two?

Couldn't watch the whole video again but when I do I'll try to confirm Rossi's tire choice. Think it was medium/soft.

The hard front just does not give the grip; as we know the hard compound will theoretically last longer and give better grip at the end of the race but not as much at the beginning. As rubber wears away the tread becomes lighter and the temperature goes up, gives the rider an edge IF he rides a certain way the first half or 2/3 of the race. A difference of even 0.2 to 0.3 seconds a lap over a period of laps will result in different wear so if the rider doesn't ride hard enough, and the crew has not set the pressure exactly right, that tire will not perform as expected and will let go more suddenly. Especially true early in the race.

The medium or soft front choice will give better grip out of the gate, if a rider expects to need to be aggressive, but won't last as well. So the strategy is, get on it, get aggressive, pass who you need to pass, and then settle in, ease off a bit after finding the position you can hold.

Rossi cut the fastest lap of the race on his setup, faster than Lorenzo, and then was able to ease off and have some margin. He was under the gun until Marquez and Dovizioso were out.

[emptysea]

I guess I'm not convinced that tire choice had much to do with the outcome. I see your point that Rossi had the right set up and rode within the parameters that the set up gave him, but I'm not at all sure that the other two didn't have the right set up for the race they were running. Marquez seemed to be getting locked in to his harder front when the crash happened and it happened well into the race. Dovizioso had, I guess, the same set up as Rossi and Lorenzo and he bought it, too. Obviously, lack of traction caused both crashes, but I'm not sure that each racer's tire choice was the determining factor in their crashes. Maybe, but seems more likely that they hit that little patch of replaced asphalt at a higher speed and/or with more lean angle than anyone else had in the field. Just not sure that the harder compound was making a huge difference in traction at that point in the race. I certainly don't know enough about the conditions on the track at race time to make a definitive statement that Rosdi made a better tire choice. Seriously doubt anyone reading this would, either, unless they were repeating a statement from the teams saying as much.

[CB4ME_imp]

I guess I'm not convinced that tire choice had much to do with the outcome. I see your point that Rossi had the right set up and rode within the parameters that the set up gave him, but I'm not at all sure that the other two didn't have the right set up for the race they were running. Marquez seemed to be getting locked in to his harder front when the crash happened and it happened well into the race. Dovizioso had, I guess, the same set up as Rossi and Lorenzo and he bought it, too. Obviously, lack of traction caused both crashes, but I'm not sure that each racer's tire choice was the determining factor in their crashes. Maybe, but seems more likely that they hit that little patch of replaced asphalt at a higher speed and/or with more lean angle than anyone else had in the field. Just not sure that the harder compound was making a huge difference in traction at that point in the race. I certainly don't know enough about the conditions on the track at race time to make a definitive statement that Rosdi made a better tire choice. Seriously doubt anyone reading this would, either, unless they were repeating a statement from the teams saying as much.

Agreed!!

All 3 races were great to watch. No one suffered from MM's gravel spreader and it was nice to see him pickup 3 points. (note: Big MM fan here)/

[Ulvetanna_imp]

I guess I'm not convinced that tire choice had much to do with the outcome. I see your point that Rossi had the right set up and rode within the parameters that the set up gave him, but I'm not at all sure that the other two didn't have the right set up for the race they were running. Marquez seemed to be getting locked in to his harder front when the crash happened and it happened well into the race. Dovizioso had, I guess, the same set up as Rossi and Lorenzo and he bought it, too. Obviously, lack of traction caused both crashes, but I'm not sure that each racer's tire choice was the determining factor in their crashes. Maybe, but seems more likely that they hit that little patch of replaced asphalt at a higher speed and/or with more lean angle than anyone else had in the field. Just not sure that the harder compound was making a huge difference in traction at that point in the race. I certainly don't know enough about the conditions on the track at race time to make a definitive statement that Rosdi made a better tire choice. Seriously doubt anyone reading this would, either, unless they were repeating a statement from the teams saying as much.

If you had a Videopass and were following this closely you would know that tire choice is the most critical decision the rider and team can make. Otherwise they would just put everyone on the same tire.

Michelin supplies a new tire design almost every race event. Riders and teams have to assess the choices they are give and make the best decision. Those who do are usually rewarded.

The average race fan just does not understand the punishment that is doled out to tires and how critical even a difference of one half pound can make, along with the choice of carcase and compound.

Who is aware of the the catastrophic rear tire failures of the past few months? What kind of tire pressure do the teams run in the rear tires and what temperatures do they reach during the race? What temperatures are the tire warmers set to? Tire design is a very exacting science, no different than designing a wing for an airplane. Think of the tire as the wing, the planform and airfoil choice are critical. If a wing stalls, the plane may crash. A tire stalling is the same, it loses grip (lift). Dovi and Marquez showed this pretty dramatically.
http://www.cycleworld.com/2014/10/17/mot...der-skill/

http://www.sportrider.com/michelin-challenge-for-motogp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFnM8UsMH1s

http://www.gizmag.com/2016-motogp-tech/42617/

[emptysea]

So...you missed my point. I never said that tire choice isn't critical. However, I don't think that any of the four riders mentioned made poor tire choices in this race. I also added that, even if they had made bad choices, neither you nor I have enough information at our disposal at this point to make the definitive statement you made that Rossi "made a better tire choice" than the others.

By the way, when you said (about Rossi), "Rather than try to qualify on the front row he rode his bike within its limits..", did you mean that he set out with a strategy not to qualify #1?

[Ulvetanna_imp]

So...you missed my point. I never said that tire choice isn't critical. However, I don't think that any of the four riders mentioned made poor tire choices in this race. I also added that, even if they had made bad choices, neither you nor I have enough information at our disposal at this point to make the definitive statement you made that Rossi "made a better tire choice" than the others.

By the way, when you said (about Rossi), "Rather than try to qualify on the front row he rode his bike within its limits..", did you mean that he set out with a strategy not to qualify #1?

That is exactly what I meant. One can only qualify within the limts of the motorcycle and track. Not everyone can get on pole. It's nice to be on the front row, but clearly Rossi did not have the setup to get there and knew enough to refrain from pushing which could have caused a crash. Riders don't always walk away from an accident although most of the time they do, thanks to safety features of the track and suit.

A lot of guys don't see what Rossi is doing. They think it's always about being in front or getting the pole position. It's a championship and you have got to keep the bike on the rubber to win.

Give you an example, in Argentina there was a bike switch. Rossi and Marquez were running 1-2, and as we know, Rossi caught Marquez and passed him pretty handily. It was clear to the educated eye that Rossi's setup was better, tires, suspension, electronics.

When the riders made the mandatory bike switch, the situation was reversed. Marquez' bike was clearly, to the trained eye, working beautifully, just gobbling up the track. Rossi's 2nd bike was not quite as good as his first bike and he eventually dropped back to fourth. However, he was dogging the two Ducatis and Iannone took out Dovi on the last lap, leaving Rossi with a nice second place. It was all about setup. On their first bikes, Rossi was able to make time on Marquez. Second bikes, situation was reversed. Setup. The post-race video interviews have both riders explaining that this was exactly the issue, setup.

Here again we see Rossi's strategy. Iannone and Dovi became desperate on the last lap at Argentina and crashed out, being severely harrassed by Rossi.

In France, Marquez and Dovi crashed themselves out trying to catch Rossi. There is some very effective psychological warfare going on there to the trained eye.

Pole position can be important but as we just saw, it is far from being all-important. Bike setup is completely different for qualifying. A lot can happen in a long race and Rossi just showed us how it is done.

I don't know if you have Videopass but much of the information you may be missing is provided during the commentary and in the pre/post race interviews. Also twenty years of watching and participating in motorcycle racing and track events also gives me a practiced eye.

Another very important feature of Videopass are the multiple camera angles that show how the bike is behaving and what the telemetry is reporting.

[emptysea]

I only skimmed your Argentinian example because I already have a pretty good grasp of how racers qualify and why they may not need to qualify on the pole.

The reason that I asked the question is because you seem to contend that Rossi successfully implemented a particular strategy (let's call it the "Prudence Strategy") in qualifying at LeMans. However, I disagree and more important than that, Rossi disagrees. Yes, he was not necessarily interested in the pole, but he was intensely interested in being in the top 5 because he knew he didn't have much of a chance to win if he was further back. His strategy for qualifying (distinctly different than that he used in the actual race) was the wrong strategy and not properly executed at that. In an interview, he said “We did a wrong strategy, and unfortunately I was stuck in traffic, I lose a lot of time. But at the end, I had another chance to make a good lap, and I was not so bad, but I made a mistake in sector three, and I lose a lot unfortunately. If not, I think my potential is to start in the top five, but I have to start from the third row, from seventh, so for sure is more difficult." Sounds like Rossi screwed up, by his own admission.

Now, in the race, he seems to have employed a strategy that I will call the "Resignation Strategy" wherein he knew that he could not win unless the leaders crashed or broke, so he did not really need to ride the rubber off his tires to catch the leaders. Instead, he probably picked off the low hanging fruit - the riders immediately ahead of him - and waited for an opportunity. Marquez and Dovi tossed up two synchroed low-sides to give him that opportunity and he walked through the door. Smart. That Rossi was smart does not mean that the others were not. I still cannot find an interview with anyone involved that says that either of the crashers had the wrong tires or the wrong race strategy.

Very impressed with your racing pedigree, though. Thank you for sharing that.