Watching Casey Stoner bring his Ducati across the finish line for yet another win makes me wonder once again, why do we focus on the racer almost to the exclusion of the bike and the team? Stoner is an extremely talented and skilled rider, no doubt about it but without the Ducati the factory produced this year and the team that sets it up and the tires that stick so well, Stoner would be somewhere lost in the pack. Tires were a big deal this year but the 800cc machines were all over in their capabilities, too. The rider is the public face of a huge effort, yet sometimes the rider is all anyone talks about.
When riders are interviewed, they always give credit to their team, they know how much is involved but the award is MotoGP or Superbike champion not a MotoGP team champion. If a football team wins the Super Bowl, the quarterback isn’t the champion, the whole team is. If a marathon runner or weight lifter wins a contest there’s no question who made it happen, a coach might help but the performance was up to the athlete. In any motor driven vehicle race, the rider or driver is only one piece of many.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to occasionally see all of these riders race identical motorcycles none of them were familiar with?
Is it just our human nature that wants to attach a single person to the win for all of the glory? Just curious.
Photo credit: MotoGP.com
Tanshanomi says
“Wouldn’t it be interesting to occasionally see all of these riders race identical motorcycles none of them were familiar with?”
Um, no. Not for me, anyway. Restrictive formulae that lead to cookie-cutter machines (in any motorsport) are boring. I’m a nuts-and-bolts guy; I enjoy mechanical ingenuity just as much as riding talent. My grandest memory is the Kenny-Freddie battle in ’83, specifically BECAUSE the machines were so different in capability, yet ended up being so well matched because because each bike was so well suited to each racer’s riding style.
kneeslider says
Well, actually I agree. I’m far more interested in the machines but the hypothetical matchup on identical machines might sort out rider skill from machine or tire advantage, … for those who are more interested in the riders.
RH says
The only way to make racing equal is to take ALL the equipment away.
I really don’t want to see Stoner, Rossi, et. al. running barefoot and naked. No, I don’t!!!!!!!
Prester John says
NASCAR became huge after they shifted the focus from the cars to the personalities. How many NASCAR fans cared – or noticed! – when they put all the racers in the same chassis this year?
Tom
coho says
I think that in the minds of most, “Casey Stoner” is simply verbal shorthand for “Casey Stoner, Australian rider for the Ducati-Marlboro-Bridgestone-SanDisk-ItalianGovernment-ShellOil MotoGP Racing Team.”
Like saying “Harley” when you really mean “The Harley-Davidson Motor Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin” or “Gordon Brown” instead of “Her Majesty’s Prime Minister for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.”
It could be a need for a recognizable, nameable human face on which the fans and press can focus, or it may be that in this go go high speed, high tech world of ours there just isn’t time to say every word out loud.
At least it hasn’t become “KcStnR” (yet).
PigIron says
MotoGP is absolutely terrific precisely because of the complex interplay of rider, mechanics, tires, engineering, tracks, weather, manufacturer (internal and external) politics, sponsorship, etc., etc., etc. It took Ducati 30 years to get the right combination to win the championship. Last year Nicky won on a Honda with pure grit and determination. The year before Rossi won on a Yamaha with sheer brilliance. There was a race this year where the the top five finishers were all on a different brand of bike.
MotoGP is great in the same way that Formula 1 used to be great in its glory days years ago. The LAST thing I want to see is spec bikes. That’s one of the reasons that NASCAR sucks so badly nowadays compared to the 1960’s.
The rumored move to a single spec tire next year would be the beginning of the end to MotoGP. Maybe they could then go to AMA type point awards where there is almost no difference in points given to the first, second, and third place finishers in the pursuit of the goal of more “competitiveness” in the championship. They could also wave yellow flags every time anyone sneezes too and therefore essentially re-starting the race a dozen times per race.
I say NO!!! Keep MotoGP the way it is, as anarchic, open, and freewheeling as possible.
P.T. Anderson says
What I would like to see is something like what the racers were doing when I was a kid. They did a bit of everything. I’m not suggesting they do what they did then because motorsport has changed so much. Wouldn’t it be interesting to put stuff like the Paris-Dakar on as a significant points paying event on the Moto GP calendar? At least something on a different surface, maybe a few Supermotard events thrown in? I think then we could all see the riders skills shine through, not to mention some amazing races.
Gotta keep the diversity in the technology though. To me that’s a big part of the show because I do think of the whole Ducati team when I hear the name Casey Stoner.
aaron says
I think the rider deserves the credit because this year we saw stoner beat capirossi and barros by a huge margin (both on ducati’s). I think capirossi only lost out on last years world championship due to a dnf and several races missed/compromised by injury (all due to a massive accident caused by gibernau mid season)… and barros was capable of beating rossi when he was on equal machinery (can’t remember the year – late 2002?)
I find myself suprised to be typing this as I am a fan of ducati, but not stoner!
speaking of the machines – was anyone else as suprised as I was at kawasaki’s huge improvement this year, or at suzuki’s race win? if the trend continues, we could be looking at 5 potential race winning machines next year!
aaron says
oh – one more thing… I’d have to disagree about the importance of a trainer to the athlete (but not the football thing). in sports like sprinting the margin of victory is often thousandths of a second. an athlete may be fast, but his (or her) potential in only unlocked by proper program design, optimumal form, etc.
MotoWebbi says
There is a reason for “one make” racing and there is a reason for “prototype” racing.
One is for the amusement of illiterate, slack-jawed rednecks and the other is for the enjoyment of the technically appreciative.
PigIron says
The idea of returning to a multi-discipline approach is a good one. The US championship used to include races on dirt ovals, road courses, and “TT” (think jumps.)
Of course in order to do that the AMA would have to stop fixing the rules to favor Harley-Davidson in dirt track, decide they wanted quality over quantity in Superbike qualifying fields, and stop holding Super Moto races in parking lots.
chris says
i absolutely agree that the rider doesn’t do it by themselves. however, the championship RIDER is the one who made the total package work the best. Stoner is not the only one with a Bridgestone shod Ducati. He’s not even the only one with the Ducati Factory team backing him up. he IS the only one who used all of those things to the best advantage. his team may have helped him win, but he did the actual winning himself.
RH says
Single make/spec racer/Mfr’s cup classes are where a LOT of champions got their start by standing out from the rest. But that’s not where they stay.
The Red Bull junior GP class – forgot what it’s called – is getting a LOT of attention. It is using one make spec bikes. Again, it’s a starting point to find riding talent.
Ever here of the Rotax Max karts? I’ve often wondered what a motorcycle class done that way would be like. Or are karters a lot more interested in racing than arguing about hardware?
Disclaimer – I have only a distant and casual view of the kart world – for all I know, they bicker & whine more and are more against progress than motorcycle racers……
Hawk says
Run a couple of MotoGP events over the IOM circuit!
F1, except for 2007, has become somewhat boring. They have “ruled” themselves into such identical performance cars that cannot pass each other. Far too many “contests” are being fought in a courtroom rather than on the track.
Since nobody has figured out how to make a motorcycle into a replica of an upsidedown airplane, we still have “on track” battles that are interesting.
But, to the point …. Yes, the team effort should be recognised to a greater degree. Not just the manufacturer either. When we have “Honda” motorcycles running with reworked engines (remade in Holland) to produce “big bang” and revised firing order, valve gear that Honda has never seen …. well, other than the money, where does the factory come in?
A successful team is everybody from the rider to the transport driver, with a few engineers in the middle.
OMMAG says
No I don’t think it would be interesting.
There already are lot’s of cookie cutter racing classes that make great opportunities for competitors on smaller budgets but do not draw fans.
todd says
let all the riders trade bikes and you’d still come out with the same person on top. The bikes are all so closely matched it really does come down to the rider and his/her skill.
When this guy Casey Stoner wins (to be honest, it’s the first time I ever heard his name) people don’t go out on monday and buy a Stoner, they buy a Ducati.
-todd
PigIron says
Good news! MotoGP just dropped the idea of going to spec tires next year.