For me it's simple....the electronic aids are removing the need for a riders skill and ability & the need to be the best there is in the world at racing a motorbike. If it carries on with more & more electronics being added on the bikes (even if it's supposed to be for the so called safety of the rider) how long before there's a bloke stood on the pit wall using a remote control to get the bike around the track? MotoGP is getting more like racing Scalextrics by the day with these over used bike aids!

Yes we enjoy the show of the sport with all the riders sliding and backing it in around the corners....but that's not the only thing these aids are removing from this sport......the worst thing for me is the use of these electronic aids can actually replace the need for any real skill or ability to race one of these MotoGP monsters & win!

Yes the safety issue is a major factor in favour for these aids to keep being used, but surely that goes hand in hand with ability.....if you have a great ability at racing a MotoGP bike than why should safety aids be needed....surely it's better learning how best to ride a bike and stay safe rather than relying on electronics to do it for you, after all electronics can fail.....and if that happened, where would a rider be left then...especially if he's never had to deal without the use of them....surely that's more dangerous than anything???

Totally agree with that!

Totally agree with you Angela

yup, they should put a stop to all this artificial racing.


2008 - VALE WILL CONQUER

Yeah we want it like it use to be so we can enjoy it lik we use too

Yes, the latest GP bikes are easier to ride, but it has always been so. It's called development. In 1983, Matt Oxley raced a Rotax 250, a recalcitrant little disc-valve twin that would barely run below 8,000rpm. He used to spend whole afternoons just doing practice starts (it was dead-engine starts in those days). In 1998 Mick Doohan complained that 500s were getting too easy - via reed valves, big bang motors and unleaded fuel - after Max Biaggi won first time out. Mick was quoted as saying; "They're like big 250s now, anyone can ride them."

Race bikes always get easier to ride, because that's how you make them faster. But easier for you and me doesn't mean easier for pro-racers. The best riders quickly devour any expanded comfort zone and turn it into quicker lap times, so what we might call 'easier', MotoGP riders would call 'faster'. Stoner, Rossi, de Puniet, Hopkins et al don't ride around luxuriating in their bike's electronics, they exploit the new technology to extract a few extra tenths from the engine, the chassis and tyres to ride faster and faster, which is hellishly difficult.

In reality, traction control isn't the miracle fix it's made out to be. Riders who rely too much on electronics won't go fast enough to win. The real secret is backing off the nanny aids as far as you dare, then using the greater miracle of the human brain to make the difference. Modern computing power certainly narrows the gap between the genius rider, just as it does in other walks of life. Spell checkers allow more people to write better English, in theory at least, but Microsoft Word will never transform anyone into Hunter S Thompson and using Photoshop will never transform someone into Monet or Turner.

In other words, riding a GP bike fast enough to win isn't any easier now than it ever was. You could ask Colin Edwards with his 84 MotoGP starts and no wins or James Toseland, who says; "MotoGP bikes aren't easy by any means. The hard thing is their capabilities - the braking, cornering and acceleration. But the massive difficulty is going as fast as the top guys for 25 laps."

(mostly stolen from Matt Oxley)

^^ That sounds right to me.

I couldn't disagree more, it's a horrible generalisation.

On the other hand you'd never get me to sign a petition, it's just not up to fans.

Traction control and launch control shouldn't be viewed as systems that magically stop riders from crashing, they should be viewed as systems that reduces lap times. It's not a case of saying certain riders wouldn't be able to compete without traction or launch control systems. In fact, there was one rider in the 2006 season who had the launch control system completely disabled on his RC211V.

If you have the talent to push a bike to its limits without traction control, you have the ability to push a bike to its limits with traction control. Nothing changes. The argument that older riders aren't used to the system is a moot point. Every single rider on the grid got there because of their ability to adapt to and perform on a bike and each and every one of them had the testing periods to hone the settings and grow accustomed to it. MotoGP riders don't fumble where you and I would if we were to swap bikes, their learning curve is smooth and pliable and they have the ability to adapt and improve.

Before the 2007 season, yes, the experience of many riders with traction control was limited but then again, their experience of 800cc machines was absolutely zero. When thinking about the great traction control debate, you should take these kind of things into account.

Matt Oxley and Rawr make a valid point... especially the Mick Doohan quote... but what argument for traction control can be heartening if at the end of the day, it makes the racing boring?

Faster lap times, getting clocked in, all in single file, means nothing. As fans, we sit there in our rider's colours or whatever and think, "gee, they sure are going fast!" Is that meant to be enough?

The skill to push a bike to it's limit, and the skill to push a bike and yourself to the limit, and the skill to do both of those things IN A RACE, AGAINST OTHER RIDERS... well, that's racing. But just man and machine, alone... that's called practice sessions... not bad to check out everyone's times, but we're only interested because a race will follow.

And any argument that accepts traction control as just another fork in the road and standard development practice... when it actually starts to VOID rider talent... that's pretty crappy... Valentino Rossi, as documented somewhere in this forum, has to fight his electronics because he sees better ways of taking a line than what has been fed into the computer... his smarts and talent are being stymied... that just isn't interesting when someone is a phenomenal talent and it doesn't mean anything to racing... or even worse, becomes a hindrance...that's when it's time the robots really did step in.

Motorsport can't go down the same path as music or film or tv... mediocrity shouldn'tbe acceptable, it shouldn't be laudered... the singer who can't sing, the actor who can't act, the writer who can't write... talent and smarts have to be worth something, somewhere in this tedious world...

Maybe KC would have come through on the 990s and been WC... maybe underneath all the teeth there is a major talent (I'll concede, he's not bad, he doesn't suck, you can't win so many races and suck), but being inexperienced enough to adapt quicker to a new class and new electronics... I don't think that makes you talented.

I want talent to prevail... talent is exciting, exhilerating, wonderful stuff to watch... and that not all of us in this world have a talent for something (so many don't!), that's what makes someone compulsive watching...

Talented racers... let them prevail. Whomever they may be.