There's a surprise...

Heh. Next you're going to claim that I can't discuss thing civilly,
aren't you?

I can't believe that THIS is your defense of your insulting behavior.

Whew. What a piece of work you are. And you're so blind that you
can't even see it. That's rich.

I have been a licensed AMA pro racer. I am a licensed ASRA pro
racer. I do race in the Moto-ST series. I have not raced in a club
race - other than for requalifying for my pro license in Daytona in
March - since 2002.

I have no clue what your term "Harley guy" means. You probably mean
it with great "civility," though.

Never mind, Mark.

Unwarranted potshots, indeed. Thanks for getting my day off on a
good belly laugh.

 

Julian, debating and discussing the proposed changes (with civility,
which doesn't include insulting terms and insulting people, regardless
of Mark's incredible hypocrisy) is not what I characterized as
premature and myopic and biased.

What I think is premature and myopic and biased is condemning the
changes as abject failures before a single race is scheduled (let
alone actually RUN), or to term the transition as a failure before the
old organization has even finished the current racing season.

 

Mark, please grow up. Could you elaborate on why MotoST is a "shit"
series according to you? And try to keep it objective and away from
"taste" and pure "opinion".

 

Yeah, fair enough. But I was thinking in terms of at least one team
owner who said if they don't get it all firmed up soon, he'll have to
pull out of 2009 anyway because it takes considerable time to pull
everything together for the start of the season. Now I think that's
exaggeration, but there is a cut off point somewhere between now and the
new year and it's getting closer all the time. One example being given
was requests from Daytona for commitment now as to whether they'd be at
the tyre testing sessions at the end of the year. Obviously with the
rules still up in the air, that commitment is little hard to give.

 

Well, apparently you are, Mark. Thanks for the "civility."

For the record, I made no claims AT ALL, so there was nothing to be
"examined a bit more closely."

 

Actually, Mark, it is as simple as the fact that NASCAR, with two
exceptions, races oval track racing, and motorcycle roadracing is not
oval track racing.

But please, continue on with your self serving rationalizations of
your own petty behaviors.

It's all so "civil."

Heh.

 

I agree 100%. Teams (even little pissant privateers) need time to
get their plans, bikes, logistics, and finances in order, and their
sponsors on board.

If that were the hard core of the antipathy that I was decrying, I
wouldn't have disputed anything in the first place.

If DMG is unable to formulate their rules to the satisfaction of the
participants in time to ensure healthy participation, then whether the
fans, the media, and the money guys like the new series or not becomes
a moot point.

 

Right, I "started" "it" after reading your posts dripping disdain,
condescension, and disgust for months. I posted ONE civil dissension,
and you responded with vitriolic personal attacks and accuse me of not
being civil.

As I said, you really are a piece of hypocritical work, "pal."

Apparently,. I am not the only person who has seen this behavior of
yours for what it is.

Continue to have your "fun," Mark. I'm not going to waste my time
responding to you in the future.

 

I know, I apologize for that. I re-read my response to you and it was
both a cheap shot and uncalled for.

Tim

 

Yeah, I got that from IL4 as well - apparently we have a basic
maturity problem here at RMR! Although I don't know that I want to
"grow up"; rather "aging gracefully" seems a more attractive option at
this point. You, on the other hand, all broken up and lying in bed
after continuing to pursue a young man's game, might have more
difficulty pulling that one off...

 

I think you need to separate out what has gone back and forth between
Tom and I, because there is a mountain of history there on this very
general topic. That's assuming you find his behavior there equally
distasteful, of course. Beyond that, is it really more what I have
been saying than how I said it?

I posted ONE civil dissension,

YOU chose to go down that path, not me (as you admit here), and how I
responded was intended to reveal what sort of biases you might be
harboring (if any), so we could get to the meat of the matter and your
issues, and to address the specific points you were making (the claims
of differing approach to and opinion of this matter in the press, in
other forums, etc.). So what was my "vitriolic personal attack",
calling you a "Harley guy"?

And you try to fabricate some general acceptance of the DMG "vision"
as a way of defending your personal series and your disdain for anyone
who is critical of it in this context, and that's the real hypocracy
here...

I'm not having fun here, T2, what I enjoy is just discussing the
issues and events in racing. You're the "why can't we all just get
along and have fun" guy, right? But it seems you're not prepared to
discuss the issues you raised, you just wanted to take your shot at me
(and others, btw) and move on unchallenged. That's not the way it
works sometimes, but if you can't stand the heat, do get out of the
kitchen...

 

Making new friends are we? I'm happy for you, but you need to get one
thing straight first Sport Model, my behavior in this particular matter
was mandated by your over the top vicious name calling and obnoxious,
elitist, and extremely pompous bullshit. Back it off a notch or two and
I'll gladly reign mine in, however, until then...

Heh, it could been worse, I mean, you didn't call him a biker..

Huh? Too heavy for me I guess..

Wow!

 

Always...

I'm happy for you, but you need to get one

Chicken and egg time yet again, which came first, the name-calling or
the lies? Needless to say, I disagree, I'm pretty sure it was the
lies, but at this point I think we're better off just agreeing to
disagree. Again and again...

Hey, even I draw the line somewhere...

Gimme a second to reread this one, I'm sure I can figure out what I
was getting at...

Don't project, I did say "T2" and not "T3". But, yeah, it's nice to
trot out one of the old standards once in a while...

 

Champ says:

Good news. Keep at it (like you have a choice).


Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.

 

No, Mark, actually it's not about how the reader takes it. It's about
your intent when you use it as shown by the context that you use it
in, and you always use the term NASBike as a not-so-thinly veiled
derogatory remark. So do I, in fact. Although I don't use Moto-ShiT
which is clearly inflamatory. Or FLUB which despite being derogatory
is also rather funny.

 

I'll bite.

From a spectator point of view, endurance races are uninteresting,
specifically in motorcycle racing.

In the sprint race format, teams make their choices, roll their dice,
hit and the track and go for it, and riders make do. They deal with the
changing bike dynamics as rider gets fatigued, the tires go off, the
tank empties, the suspension overheats etc. The bike they start with is
not the bike they end with. And, all the riders know it, so, they give
it their all for the 1/2 hour they're on the track. Even then we see
them perhaps relax a bit in the middle, and then make their move later.
But what they don't have is, barring a red flag, a chance to make things
right if something goes wrong.

In a good Sprint race, you, as a fan, are stuck to the spectacle for the
entire race. You don't dare leave because you might miss whatever
deciding point there is in the race. Did you see any of the races at
Fontana? They were all spectacular. Despite his lead, at no time was
Matt victory certain. And in the end, it turned out he didn't prevail.

But the race is run in enough time to be able to focus on the entire race.

In an endurance race, that's not what happens. There are so many
variables, specifically pit stops, that you may as well not invest
anything in the race until after the final pit stops. At that point you
can know where your rider stands and how they may finish. Everything up
that is pure spectacle. After the beginning, when you get to see the
mass of riders all piling in to turn one, and all eventually sort
themselves out, the race becomes a parade.

Mix in multiple classes, with the fast guys lapping the slow guys (both
by skill and performance), and it takes little time to have absolutely
no idea who is where in the race. You certainly can't do it by looking
at the track. And, again, until the last pit stop, it really doesn't
matter where they are on the track. Ask Jake Zemke, or Steve Rapp.

Yea, the pit stop is "part of racing", everyone can suffer or benefit
from it, but that doesn't make it interesting. In a sprint race, the
team sets the bike up, and the rider makes it work. With pit stops,
that's out of the riders hands save for the shouting.

With a sprint race, the rider has 1 pit stop -- at the beginning. Many a
rider has gone out on the track with a messed up bike, and done poorly.

But as a fan, you know early. You know right away. "Gee he's not doing
to well". That's different from "he's going to win he's going to win
he's going to ...m..f...they dropped a wrench or whatever in the pit".

So, it's simply not worth it, to me, as a fan, to invest the time in to
watching a long event like that.

I've been to two endurance races, WERA, and I had a blast. But I had a
blast because I was there in the pits with a team running riders, and
basically BSing with them, focusing on their bike. If I was on my own,
in the stands, watching this parade? It would have been horrible. It's
not a spectator sport, it's a participants sport.

That doesn't even go in to the SPEC details, the slow bikes, etc.

Jimmy Felice and Doug Polen are in Moto-ST this year. Good for them,
nice they're on the track. But I don't want to see a series where these
guys, guys in the mid to late 40s, or even older, can do well.

If they're doing that good, the young guys aren't trying hard enough, or
are somehow curtailed to where their natural strength, stamina,
immortality, and ability can not show through. This is not an old mans
game.

Kudo's to Miguel for doing as well as he does, though he's having a
crummy season this year. I'm a die hard fan of Miguel, but he needs to
move on. I'm sure he's in great shape, better shape than me, but he's
not in Spies shape, and he's not in Mladins shape. Hell, I worry about
Mladin, and Ben Bostrom... I feel like a Jewish mother "You boys don't EAT!"

That's a complaint I have with SBK. To quote Will Smith in Men In Black:
"Hey, Old Guys!". Young racers work through, hopefully move in to
MotoGP, and then old racers come back in to SBK. "Wisdom and Treachery"
start to prevail. I'm all for the "W&T", but it just seems wrong that
these guys who "can't make it in MotoGP" can come back and prevail in SBK.

And, yes, I know it's not that cut and dried, I know that todays 50 is
yesterdays 40, I know we have better training, better nutrition, better
science. That's what makes it viable at all, but it's still a young mans
game, and I'd rather see a series that rewards the fitness of the riders
racing it, rather than somehow limits it.

Want to watch older guys race, go see a vintage event or car racing.

All of those things are what make MOTO-ST, to me, uninteresting as a
racing spectator.

Regards,

Will Hartung

 

I read the blog, sounds like you might recover fully so you CAN grow old
gracefully!

Best Wishes!

Regards,

Will Hartung

 

Frankly, in the one sense, it's a great opportunity for DMG to redo the
fan base for motorcycle racing.

With a weak economy, I know I don't mind an excuse to not spend hard
earned $$$ on something, so running a show I'm not interested in is in
my economic interest.

Next, they can promote the series differently. You know, with "SUNDAY!
SUNDAY! SUNDAY!" radio ads, "Bikini contest", "Cheap Date night", "Flame
breathing Bike-a-saurus" or whatever they need to get local, new, fans
to come in and see the spectacle. Folks new to the sport, who simply
"don't know better". Get the show on ESPN vs Speed, or even network.

Just take the opportunity to reboot the series and the fan base and
basically build it from scratch. Build new top racers. Let the old guard
go away, etc.

There will be no Old Days. Mladin who? Not important, he didn't race
DSB, so he can't really matter.

Those kinds of fans.

A slow economy is a good time to try that out, as the old guard will
just be too cheap to go to the new series and grouse to the newbies
about what they're missing, and how it Used To Be.

Regards,

Will Hartung

 

Let me see if I can summarize your points accurately. Your gripes
with Moto-ST racing are:
1. the duration of the race and disparity in bike performance creates
lots of lapped riders and with the mixing of the classes, it becomes
too hard to sort out what's going on
2. it seems to be a series that allows older riders to be competitive
with the younger riders

I don't really understand 2. You say it's a young man's game. Why?
Most amateur level sporting events that aren't extremely biased toward
athleticism will have a mix of ages, with older competitors relying on
their experience. As you get to the pro level, you see a more uniform
crowd. I suspect, Moto-ST currently features a broader age range than
you like because it's simply not a top level professional series. I
predict that as it gets taken over by DMG and becomes part of a pro
racing series trifecta, there will be an infusion of money and the
barrier to entry will rise.

As far as the confusion and boredom watching a long race with multiple
classes on track at once, I can certainly appreciate that sentiment.
However, there's a huge difference between watching racing in person
and watching it on TV. Televised coverages is tremendously helpful at
letting a viewer see action at all points on the circuit, follow
what's happening in the pits, monitor lap times, and so on. All those
things become more important to discerning an endurance race.
However, I'm betting that you've never watched a motorcycle endurance
race on TV. I've only seen highlights of some World Endurance
Championship events and I must say, it was a lot of fun, and no more
confusing than something like the Isle of Mann, where you really have
no idea as to the riders' positions visually. On the flip side, if
you watch even something like a real sprint race (15 min, ~6-8 laps)
in person, it can get really confusing after just 3 laps. Similarly,
it's very hard knowing what's happening if you're watching a regular
AMA 45 min race after the leaders get into lapped traffic. Face it,
road racing is almost always better on TV than from the side lines,
unless you're involved in some way. I don't see short endurance races
adding any significant confusion to what we already know how to
televise and take in.

 

Thanks for stating your views without resorting to derogatory,
disdainful, condescending insults.

Having never watched an entire Moto-ST race from beginning to end
without being a participant, I can't say whether I would enjoy
watching it as much, more, or less than a sprint race. I can say
that I love watching the Daytona 200 every year, in person, at
Daytona, as a spectator. I wish I had started racing in my teens or
twenties, instead of in my late 30's, so that I might have had the
opportunity to participate in that race. I like the strategy, the pit
stops, the opportunity for the riders (like Scott Russell, for
instance) to come back from what would have been a race-ending
calamity in any sprint race. I like seeing riders balance distance
and tire wear and stamina against outright speed.

I think watching Jay Springsteen and Jimmy Felice race (at 50; my age)
is just as exciting[1] as watching Spies and Mladin. That they are
beating top level regional guys like Kracget shows (to me, at least)
that they are certainly entertaining. Would they beat Spies or Mladin
on a 75hp Sport Twin? I don't think so. But then, unless Moto-ST
becomes big enough to ATTRACT an upcoming Spies or Mladin, we'll never
know. Perhaps in time it will.

I assume that not all guys in their teens, 20's, or 30's only want to
see young guys race. I remember watching racers who were well past
their prime when I was spectating as a 20-year-old, and actually
cheering the old guys on back then, wanting them to show the new young
Turks one more time that they could get it done.

I think Moto-ST will survive and prosper or wither and die based on
its ability to compete in the marketplace of spectator sports, not on
the basis of whether people are offended by the origins of its
organizers or the other organizing business principles that it is
founded on. Most people, including most enthusiasts, are not even
aware of those details, let alone living or dying, or choosing whether
to watch or not, by them.

There's a good reason that the series as televised last year was
shortened to one hour "episodes," and will be again, afaik, this
fall. There is also a reason there is always a huge crowd around the
Aprilia team and the Pair-a-Nines team (among others) during autograph
session, as well. I think that level of grass roots appreciation
bodes well for the series.

The fact that the bikes are slower, the riders are NOT Moto-GP, WSB,
or even AMA SB caliber is less important than whether fans enjoy
watching the racing.

I don't watch NASCAR because I don't find it entertaining, except at
Watkins Glen and Laguna Seca. I watch those two roadraces every year
and enjoy the hell out of them because they are HUGELY entertaining.
Doesn't matter a bit to me who puts them on. Ditto WSB, MotoGP, and
U.S. Superbike (to date). I don't watch 125GP or 250GP, and rarely
watch SuperSport or Formula Extreme simply because I get all the
excitement, enjoyment, and spend all the time I can afford to,
watching the other series. If I had the time, I would watch every
motorcycle roadrace televised. I assume that sort of decision
process or something similar is what every racing fan goes through.
If it leaves room and time, and Moto-ST is entertaining enough, there
will be viewers, thus advertisers, thus organizers and participants
for it.

Tim (my middle or second name, thus the 'T2' in my google profile;
pretty odd that someone would find that worthy of trying to use as an
insult)

[1] Watching Felice and Springsteen from the vantage point of the bike
behind them on the Daytona infield is also vastly entertaining, if not
a little deflating. How can guys that OLD go that FAST on a bike that
SLOW???