Jump to content
faffi

Style Comparison

Recommended Posts

I found some onborad videos. Could somebody tell us (or me, at least ;) ) more about what these men to right or wrong compared to the theoretical ideal from these footages? Or is there too little info to be read from them?

 

Personally, two things stand out for me; Mamola's (wide) lines and Lawson's smoothness. Then again, I honestly doesn't know what to look for.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf1snSxCH0Q

 

 

 

 

I tried to find more showing the use of throttle and brake, but I guess I didn't find the correct search words :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mate,

 

Not really sure what you're looking for to be honest. A critique of each of the riders, what's good, what's not?

 

The thing probably to consider is that the bikes, and styles have evolved so much, it's not desperately very fair to compare, as you're not comparing equals. First clip was very smooth, sily for sure, though body position was terrible, you could see the instability as he leaned off, and then leaned off some more, small shakes in the bars.

 

I'm no going to sit and try and pick holes in all those my friend, that's for sure. What I will say is that Rossi has a very good body position, and isn't a million miles from what we'd coach, I think I remember Andy Ibbot telling me Dani Pedrosa is closest in style to what we'd coach, though i could be mistaken.

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't exactly looking at you pulling them down or "apart" but perhaps comment on some good bits and perhaps if there is something that is obviously not good. Something we can learn from, not to degrade the riders. The little snippets you gave was a good start - I hope for more - although I cannot ask/demand it, of course. It is entirely up to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's not a whole lot you can tell from the onboard cameras. Maybe if you wanted to sit through it with the volume on, you could. But at these riders level, We wouldn't know what they're really wanting to do. If you look at the Edwards video, you'll see the guy in front of him. That was an acceptable BP for that time. Now it would really be picked out as bad BP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you compare the lap times from the 1990 Phillip Island race with that of the 2009 race, you will find that there has been a 4 second improvement. Considering the extra electronic aids, the improve power and tractability, the vastly improved tyres, chassis and suspension bits as well as the greater level of competition, I have serious trouble accepting the riding styles dating back 20 years or so as significantly flawed. More likely, riding positions etc. have evolved together with the machinery and their altered demands.

 

Still, 4 seconds in about 2 decades with billions invested seems like a pretty poor outcome, doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still, 4 seconds in about 2 decades with billions invested seems like a pretty poor outcome, doesn't it?

 

At that level 4 seconds a lap is massive, a huge improvement, imagine thinking that you have achieved the fastest posible time round a track and then someone comes along and knocks 4 seconds off it, at the very top of the game its the final 10ths that are hard to get, a racer a couple of tenths of the pace may run mid pack or towards the back, a racer that runs 4 seconds off the pace will be looking for a job!

 

Bobby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So how much do you reckon is down to correct riding position and how much down to improved material, then?

 

Very hard to say, but you'd have to suggest that 80-90% is probably equipment, the rest in ability/technique evolution.

 

The one thing to add, whilst 4 seconds really does't seem much, and it's not really, you'll be incredibly amazed how far a MotoGP bike goes in 4 seconds, and I'd say it's probably at least half of the start finish straight.

 

I guess what it does show, whilst the bikes are probably 60-70hp more powerful is that power isn't all that you need to go faster.

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so here's some interesting figures!

Portimao Lap Record:

 

Cal CrutchlowGBR Yamaha WSS R6 1min 44.781secs

 

Jonathan ReaGBR Ten Kate Honda CBR1000RR 1min 42.270s

 

As you said Bullet it is clearly not a horsepower thing, thats 2.5 seconds between the top 1000 and the top 600 bike, Cal's time was faster than alot of the 1000s!

 

Of course riding style comes into it, but thats been the case with the history of racing, bikes change in moto gp alone they have went from 500cc 2 strokes, to 990 4s to 800 4s with the same weight restrictions as the 990s, as the manufacturer's work hard to try to speed their bikes up the organisers keep changing the rules to try to slow them down for safety! As the bikes change the riders have to adjust their style in order to get the best out of the new package!

It was once said that sliding wasn't the fastest way to ride a bike then along came Gary Mcoy and annihilated the field (Rossi included) by riding with an impressive sideway style that obviously wouldn't work on today's high corner speed 800s!

 

I think as bikes evolve (roadbikes are even getting the electronics now) riding style will have to evolve with them, but the main area where bikes are improving is in cornering ability, (higher corner speeds and bigger lean angles)! The fundamentals taught in the twist books and at the CSS are the best way to improve cornering as a rider!

 

Bobby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to add to Bobbies well made points are that a bike with 220hp, goes very fast down the straights but needs to brake earlier than a bike with less power. Heavier bikes (which the 4 strokes are), go slower in the turns than lighter bikes, and so the accordian effect moves about.

 

This is the reason why a supersport bike which makes say 145bhp at the rear wheel is easier to ride than a MotoGP bike with 220hp a the rear wheel. Which of course is why the guys in MotoGP can ride and control and push the bikes to the limit, and those lesser riders who can probably go well on lesser bikes cannot touch the very best of the now, hence why riders like toseland, vermulen etc are great in wsb, but can't cut it at MotoGP at the very pointy end of the grid.

 

I guess it's about being able to adapt to the bikes as they are, and maximising the most you can from its component parts that's the real skill.

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of lap times and McCoy; McCoy's best race lap time on the Yamaha 500 in 2002 was 1'32.877. In 2009, Vermeulen's best race lap time on the Suzuki 800 was 1'32.815. OK, so Vermeulen set the slowest "best time" in that race and McCoy set the fastest ever race lap on a two-stroke, but perhaps there are more than one way to ride a bike fast :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Speaking of lap times and McCoy; McCoy's best race lap time on the Yamaha 500 in 2002 was 1'32.877. In 2009, Vermeulen's best race lap time on the Suzuki 800 was 1'32.815. OK, so Vermeulen set the slowest "best time" in that race and McCoy set the fastest ever race lap on a two-stroke, but perhaps there are more than one way to ride a bike fast :)

 

Different bikes, so your comparison isn't really fair, certainly not from an analytical point of view.

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We will however get to see how Mcoy rides an 800!

 

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/sport/sp...n-motogp-mccoy/

 

 

Bobby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Different bikes, so your comparison isn't really fair, certainly not from an analytical point of view.

 

Bullet

 

Still interesting to me ^_^ Then again, I'm easily amused :lol:

 

But you could say it would be similar to somebody of similar ability being as fast on the last generation of 750cc Superbikes as on the current litre bikes. By that I mean that perhaps if a bike/rider combination works very well the bike doesn't have to be the best, and if the bike/rider combination doesn't work properly, it will not help being on the bike considered to be the best. This again, to me, suggests that one style could work nicely on one machine but be wrong for another and that perhaps there isn't one way to ride that suits all. Or to put it a bit differently; different bikes may demand quite different ways of riding.

 

How's that for a challenge :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Different bikes, so your comparison isn't really fair, certainly not from an analytical point of view.

 

Bullet

 

Still interesting to me ^_^ Then again, I'm easily amused :lol:

 

But you could say it would be similar to somebody of similar ability being as fast on the last generation of 750cc Superbikes as on the current litre bikes. By that I mean that perhaps if a bike/rider combination works very well the bike doesn't have to be the best, and if the bike/rider combination doesn't work properly, it will not help being on the bike considered to be the best. This again, to me, suggests that one style could work nicely on one machine but be wrong for another and that perhaps there isn't one way to ride that suits all. Or to put it a bit differently; different bikes may demand quite different ways of riding.

 

How's that for a challenge :P

 

The best riders always win, but, they also tend to be on the best, or close to best bikes. No amount of rider ability overcomes a relatively moderate gap in bike performance.

 

There is undoubted differences with certain bikes as they all have their strengths, weaknesess, as to what they are at MotoGP level, well, guess you'd only know if you were close enough to it, but obvious examples in recent past are the Ducati over the Yamaha in horsepower and top speed differencial in first year of 800'cc's. No amount of rider ability could seemingly overcome that differencial.

 

I think all of the very best riders, the top 4/5 riders in the world are very similiar in style, a coincidence? I think not personally. Are they on the best bikes, yes, for sure they are, but Hayden for example hasn't been able to get close enough to Stoner by .7 of a second average, and that's the difference between winning and loosing. I guess that's either talent, feel, confidence, style, all of the above...? Who knows, I don't thats for sure.

 

I wonder whether you believe that rider coaching program is of any value to riders of this level, whether they could be improved, or whether there is nothing that even they could learn or improve?

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely believe coaching is vital even at this level, because even the best of the best can improve. And when you cannot improve on your own any longer, you need to get feedback from others. The coach can only suggest things, though; it will be up to the rider to put it to good use.

 

However, I do also believe that the coach will have to consider each rider as an individual. Height, weight, body composition (relatively long/short arms/legs/torso etc) and power as well as endurance will probably dictate minor changes in how the bike is operated. Furthermore, I would imagine that the lines and how the body is "tossed around" will vary between let's say a 125cc and a Superbike.

 

Still, as I said, if somebody wants to become the best and stay there, he will need to become a moving target. And he (or she) will then most likely need help/inputs/advice from others in order to continue to evolve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, I do also believe that the coach will have to consider each rider as an individual. Height, weight, body composition (relatively long/short arms/legs/torso etc) and power as well as endurance will probably dictate minor changes in how the bike is operated. Furthermore, I would imagine that the lines and how the body is "tossed around" will vary between let's say a 125cc and a Superbike.

 

The size, shape, and legs thing can, and is adjusted by bike settings on the whole, spring weight for sag, clipon and rearset changes for foot/let length, etc, etc. Fitness absolutley is a big thing for races of that length, I wouldn't be able to do one that long, is totally knackering riding flat out for lap after lap.

 

You talk about line differences in say a 125cc, and a Superbike. Why do you think that would be? What would be the major differences in your mind between those two types of bikes?

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, as per usual, I'm just thinking out loud from a very limited point of knowledge, so nobody should take anything I say for gospel ;) I just like to test my ideas and see what comes back - I find it's a quite fast way to expand my knowledge when people respond.

 

So, back to the question about 125 vs SBK. In my opinion, a 125 would be faster if the brakes are used as little as possible and by using wide lines to keep the cornering speeds high. As I understand it, no other class of bikes have a higher apex speed in world class racing than 125s. As a matter of fact, 125s go faster by not slowing down since they do not have tons of power to bring them back quickly to speed.

 

On a WSBK, it is my idea that you will go a little quicker by sort of squaring off the corner a little, making the corner shorter and the straights longer. This is because they have lots of power that will virtually instantly bring you back to speed. So being able to accelerate for longer and wait longer before the brakes are hit should, IMO, bring better lap times.

 

I also believe that you must be much gentler on a ultra-light 125 than on a Superbike. If you use the same amount of force or body movement, it would probably upset the little bike at best and just lift it off the ground at worst during violent changes of direction. So I would imagine less body movement is better on the 125 but that more body involvement is preferable on a larger machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, as per usual, I'm just thinking out loud from a very limited point of knowledge, so nobody should take anything I say for gospel ;) I just like to test my ideas and see what comes back - I find it's a quite fast way to expand my knowledge when people respond.

 

So, back to the question about 125 vs SBK. In my opinion, a 125 would be faster if the brakes are used as little as possible and by using wide lines to keep the cornering speeds high. As I understand it, no other class of bikes have a higher apex speed in world class racing than 125s. As a matter of fact, 125s go faster by not slowing down since they do not have tons of power to bring them back quickly to speed.

 

On a WSBK, it is my idea that you will go a little quicker by sort of squaring off the corner a little, making the corner shorter and the straights longer. This is because they have lots of power that will virtually instantly bring you back to speed. So being able to accelerate for longer and wait longer before the brakes are hit should, IMO, bring better lap times.

 

I also believe that you must be much gentler on a ultra-light 125 than on a Superbike. If you use the same amount of force or body movement, it would probably upset the little bike at best and just lift it off the ground at worst during violent changes of direction. So I would imagine less body movement is better on the 125 but that more body involvement is preferable on a larger machine.

 

125's are all about corner speed and maitaining momentum is very key to lap times, but it's nothing to power. Weight is much lower on a 125 bike than a MotoGP bike, so it can carry much bigger speed for the same lean angle. Conversely opposite to that is the WSBK bike, it's even higher weight, means its corner speed is lower again.

 

Power is a factor on control of the corner, but the reason they square corners of more is because of what perhaps? What do they need more of to be able to use all that power? How do they get it do you think?

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need more grip for acceleration, which comes with reduced lean angle, is my guess. So they need to reduce the time they are leaned over.

 

But why isn't it quicker to use the 125 style on the larger bikes - or is it? Do they have to compromise during a race?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They need more grip for acceleration, which comes with reduced lean angle, is my guess. So they need to reduce the time they are leaned over.

 

But why isn't it quicker to use the 125 style on the larger bikes - or is it? Do they have to compromise during a race?

 

Your first statement is correct in part, yeah more grip required, so they have to be leaned for as short a period of time as they can. hence the squaring affect makes better use of that kind of bikes attributes (i.e. power and speed).

 

125's have less weight, and less power. big bikes well is it easy to apply 220hp with the bike really leaned over? How compliant is a bike? What's the bike going to want to do if it starts to loose grip?

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will slide, which will reduce drive and at worst lead to a highsider, I presume. I like how we are moving towards different bikes needing different ways to be ridden :)

 

(I cannot answer how compliant the bike is, but my guess is not very, especially when leaned over. Which will further reduce grip if the road isn't prefectly smooth. )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It will slide, which will reduce drive and at worst lead to a highsider, I presume. I like how we are moving towards different bikes needing different ways to be ridden :)

 

(I cannot answer how compliant the bike is, but my guess is not very, especially when leaned over. Which will further reduce grip if the road isn't prefectly smooth. )

 

You're getting bloody great at this mate. Big Gold star! ;-)

 

Bullet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×