You are here

Bagnaia misses braking point: thoughts on being politically correct

Pecco goes back on his words: declarations taken out of context, but it's not true. What he said is correct. The point is something else: unless you consider the entire MotoGP grid as champions, there is a need to get back the value of the man rather than that of the means

Bagnaia misses braking point: thoughts on being politically correct

Share


As was to be expected, whenever a rider comes out with a slightly less obvious declaration than someone else, a controversy arises or rather: what has been said arouses a lot of discussion. And as always there are those who agree and those who disagree.

There would be nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately, the consequence of situations like this is the clear affirmation of having taken the declarations 'out of context' and therefore of having given them a different meaning.

Francesco Bagnaia is another who has not shied away from this little puppet show; after realizing that he had not respected the liturgy of political correctness, he tried to put things right and he did it with our cousins at Motorsport.com. But what did he say in the first place?

Here are the incriminating questions and answers, as we reported them:

The number of incidents is increasing, why do you think this is the case?

“For two years everyone has been trying to win on the first lap, even those who don't have the potential to do so try to overtake 6 riders in one lap. It doesn't work like that, we're all at the limit and we're all on track to reach the maximum goal, but if I'm already braking at the limit, it's wrong to try to do something more. Incidents happen more in the early stages of the race because there is too much agitation. We should think about it to improve the situation because this is not safe”.

What's your idea about this?

“By now everyone can win, there are no longer those 6 or 7 tenths of a difference that there were in the past between factory bikes and customer bikes, they helped to limit the incidents. The Fantastic 4 (Rossi, Stoner, Lorenzo and Pedros, ed.) were the strongest riders ever, but they also had the factory bikes, the others didn't even have the technical potential to stay ahead. Now the level is extreme, everything is pushed to the limit. Every rider has the chance to win, Augusto Fernandez finished 4th today, he's a world champion but he's also making his MotoGP debut. The race pace was certainly not very fast, apart from Bezzecchi, and this meant that the group was united. We need to go back to having a bit of a gap between the factory bikes and the customer ones or find a solution to avoid certain incidents".

Pecco then, in his own words, pointed out: “What was published was taken out of context due to the interpretation that some journalists have given. I was asked to talk about safety and the reasons for the increase in the number of incidents and I just tried to make an analogy, saying it didn't happen before. Years ago there were fewer contacts because there was a lot of difference between the first riders and the others. Now everything is much more compact. I myself, who arrived in MotoGP with a satellite team (Pramac), how can I suggest creating differences between the factory bikes and the satellite ones? The increase in the number of crashes is due to the great parity in the World Championship. We are all closer and we all brake to the limit. Even when you start from the back and you know you don't have the pace to stay in front, you try to gain as many positions as possible at the start to make the most of the new tyres. That's why there are so many crashes in the first part of the race."

At this point we are the ones who are a bit confused: in what way was Pecco's statement misinterpreted?

We read on Motorsport: "We have to get back some of that difference between the factory bikes and those of the customers, or find a solution to avoid certain situations". Or, for example, on GPOne: "In my opinion we should go back to having a bit of a gap between the factory bikes and the customer ones, or find a solution to avoid certain incidents".

Slightly different phrase, same meaning. We have to get back some of that difference between the factory bikes and those of the customers. Or: we should go back to having a bit of a gap between the factory bikes and the customer ones.

So where is the scandal? Moreover: there is always a bit of a difference between the factory bikes and customer ones, even today, albeit minimal. For example, last year in the first part of the championship Bastianini's Desmosedici GP21 was more fine-tuned than Bagnaia's GP22, then in the second half of the season the things were reversed.

Of course, today is not like in 1980 when, with a private Suzuki RG 500, Franco Uncini finished fourth overall, becoming the fastest privateer in the world. At the time there was a big difference between privateers and factory riders, but there were few factory riders and many privateers. And then: at the time you bought the Suzuki RG - I repeat you bought - from the local importer. Leasing didn't even exist.

Current history instead says that the factory riders, in our case from Ducati, Bagnaia and Bastianini, have a sort of ius primae noctis (right of the first night) on evolutions, while Pramac, VR46 and Gresini receive updates based on the results of the individual riders.

But this isn't always true because, in the case of Pramac for example, Johann Zarco sometimes undertakes the development work after Michele Pirro precisely so as not to make the factory riders risk anything.

So: it's not really that Pecco said bullshit, as Hervé Poncharal of Tech3 stigmatized, someone who as he has been around for a long time as owner of a private team, wouldn't want to be found again deep down in the Bronx of the satellite teams, or rather of the private ones like Uncini in 1980. But that is something that will never return.

So, for the second time: it wasn’t bullshit from Pecco, rather the obvious because if there were a bigger difference between the factory and satellite teams, probably, as Bagnaia said, "there would be fewer contacts because there was a lot of difference between the first riders and the others.”

The rider from Piedmont continues to maintain that: “the increase in the number of crashes is due to the great parity in the World Championship. We are all closer and we all brake to the limit. Even when you start from the back and you know you don't have the pace to stay in front, you try to gain as many positions as possible at the start to make the most of the new tyres. That's why there are so many crashes in the first part of the race."

As he is young, Pecco forgets another huge variable: the tyres. In the past private and factory did not have the same compounds and casings as the superstars. And the tyres make the difference, as Simon Crafar, the current Dorna TV commentator will agree, the man who in 1998, at Donington, inflicted an abyss of a gap - 11 seconds! - on none other than Mick Doohan by putting his hands on the right pair of super performing Dunlop tyres.

So Bagnaia does not need to come up with the classic "something that I said was taken out of context". His declaration was exactly that, give or take a word. The meaning is unequivocal: if there was a bigger difference between factory and private bikes, there would be less of a risk and there wouldn’t be any ‘trains’ of bikes.

Too bad there's no turning back now. Somewhere, on the other hand, where some progress can be made is in the management of these rocket-ships called MotoGP. Super-powerful bikes but which, let's say, allow all the riders who arrive in the premier class, guys with great experience, to get the best out of them, let's say, to 90/95% of their possibilities.

This minimizes the difference between world-beaters and mere champions (in MotoGP there are no tossers) leading to the type of races we've been seeing for a few years now, with many different winners in a season.

But whether or not this helps to improve the show, if you don’t mind me saying, remains to be seen. Of course, it helps to please the sponsors of the satellite teams: there is no denying that Fabio Di Giannantonio's pole position at Mugello last year helped the Gresini team. But that's all.

The fans love serial winners, that’s the bottom line and they expect winners to confirm their wins. When this doesn't arrive, disappointment sets in. But if the entire MotoGP apparatus has been led by the ears to reduce the performance differential between the bikes - starting with the single control unit – then what’s this all about? Nothing.

Pecco, you don't have to apologize for what you said, nor correct it. You said what you said, you weren't misunderstood, you stated the plain and simple truth. MotoGP bikes, some MotoGP bikes, are all the same and this is particularly true with regard to the Ducatis.

Obviously, if Bezzecchi didn't have a Desmosedici so close in performance to yours, another brand would probably have won instead of him. Perhaps, without so many strong Ducatis on the starting grid, including Martin and Zarco, Fernandez would have won. Is that what we want?

No. What the public expects is a clash of the titans. The usual suspects. MotoGP heavyweights, not unknowns. And unless you consider that the entire MotoGP grid is made up of champions, there is a need to get back the value of the man over that of the means. Because the rider, if he is a champion, makes a difference. And here I rest my case.

 

Related articles