Jump to content

Talk:Grand Prix motorcycle racing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move

[edit]
  • Grand Prix motorcycle racing → ? —(Discuss)— This article is about the world championship. the FIM calls it Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix I think that's a good title. Grand Prix motorcycle racing is much more than the world championship, a lot of national series that have Grand Prix motorcycle racing classes (usually 125GP) —Chris Ssk talk 10:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason why the article wasn't simply called MotoGP? Roguegeek (talk) 23:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
MotoGP is only one of the 3 classes of the Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix. there is also 125cc and 250cc and the article is about all 3. Though the only info on the 125cc and 250cc classes is in the infobox. Chris Ssk talk 01:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are there good, reliable sources that state "Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix" is some kind of official name? Roguegeek (talk) 07:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did some further investigating and this is what I found. The name of the championship is called MotoGP. MotoGP consists of three different grand prix catagories; MotoGP, 250, and 125. The way MotoGP officially breaks this down can be found directly on the official site. To me, that's about the best resource you can find out there on a very non-subjective subject. I would suggest changing the name of this article to MotoGP. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 07:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to point out that the categories are now MotoGP, Moto2 and Moto3. What makes this really annoying is that MotoGP is both a class name and the series name. This should be taken into account whenever (re)structuring articles, adding redirects, etc. Someone looking for Moto2 or Moto3 information won't be happy being redirected to a MotoGP series page that has all sorts of MotoGP class specific information with no links to the class they're looking for and where the season information points to MotoGP class seasons with the same problem from which there may or may not be links to the class they're looking for. Pages should be either class or series. Even if they're both, the smaller classes should be prominently displayed and not forgotten or tucked in there as an afterthought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.192.19.110 (talk) 11:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The FIM, the governing body of motorcycle racing calls the championship Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix. I think the most reliable source is the championship's rule book (classes are listed in page 13 of the rule book (17 of the pdf)) . Also other press releases about GP [23] (I can't get my search results to show in the link but if you select GP as Subject and search, all the press releases will have "FIM Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix" as a subject). Chris Ssk talk 11:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Chris, I understand that the official FIM documentation says one thing, but universal usage among teams, riders, fans and the official site itself prominently go with "MotoGP". Absolutely no one searching for information about MotoGP is going to Google "Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix". I think this is a case where universal usage trumps an obscure reference, and anyone looking for info about 125 and 250 racing will know to look in MotoGP because those classes are subsets of the whole series, universally known as MotoGP. I realize the number of Google hits is not a final arbiter, but "RRWCGP" gets 727 hits to MotoGP's 13,900,000, about a 20,000-to-1 ratio. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't think it should have been changed from Grand Prix motorcycle racing. Being a "generic" name, it encompassed the old racing series' with the new. Season reviews used to be called 1993 Grand Prix motorcycle racing season. You can't say 1993 MotoGP season because it wasn't called MotoGP back then. Now we'll have to differentiate season article syntax depending on what year it was. Not ideal in my opinion. ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wadems, good point. Ultimately, I'd vote in order of preference to: 1) Change this article title to "MotoGP", and go back and change the relevant seasons (I'm pretty sure 2000 was when the use of "MotoGP" started by Dorna); 2) Change the title back to "Grand Prix motorcycle racing".
Chris, I like that you're going by official documentation, but Dorna's role as owner of commercial rights to the series might also give them a semi-official role in giving the series its public name. The prominent "MotoGP" logo in the article is testament to its recognition. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not the one that made the move I put the request up and it went unopposed so someone else made the move. I didn't request a move to Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix, I only suggested it as a possible title. MotoGP only came to be in the 2000s before that the championship was more commonly known as WGP and because Grand Prix motorcycle racing is more than the world championship. I had the intention of creating a separate Grand Prix motorcycle racing article about the racing discipline. Like there is an article about Motorcycle speedway and another about the Speedway World Championship, Superbike racing and Superbike World Championship, Enduro and World Enduro Championship
Also note that typing MotoGP either in Wikipedia's search or Google, Yahoo!, etc. finds the MotoGP redirect and automatically links to this page so I don't think it makes the page harder to find.Chris Ssk talk 21:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My experience with looking at the Google results was initially missing the Wikipedia link to the page because it had an unfamiliar name. Especially now that the new official site has been updated and just about ruined, the Wikipedia MotoGP pages are going to be that much more popular.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My vote is to, at the very least, change it back to Grand Prix motorcycle racing. Looks like enough editors here think it's a decent move. Ultimately, I'd like to see it simply called MotoGP because that's the name everyone knows it as and that's the name people are going to search under when requesting this specific article. So, change it back? Roguegeek (talk) 22:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, change it back to Grand Prix motorcycle racing, no matter what the FIM calls it, especially in case sponsors are added, as in Bridgestone Presents The Champ Car World Series Powered By Ford.-- Matthead  Discuß   23:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since we can't move on our own, I just sent in the request to have it moved by an administrator. Roguegeek (talk) 23:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What about renaming it to Motorcycle Grand Prix? Chris Ssk talk 23:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If we're going to go to the trouble to rename, I vote going with "MotoGP." It should have been done years ago, really.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble(s) I have with "MotoGP" are (1) there could be confusion between the MotoGP series and the specific class which used to be the 500s until it was changed in 2003. (2) Even if that confusion is overcome, a reader could think it is only about the series since 2003, and not all the way back to the old racing from the 1940s/'50s. I would be less opposed if the article was split; MotoGP for the modern series, Grand Prix motorcycle racing for the historical stuff.
The page should be moved though. The current title is definitely not what most people know the name as (it gets less than 700 hits in Google, compared with 13,000 for "Grand Prix motorcycle racing" and 1.1m for "MotoGP"). We do not use the "official" name, we use the common name. Previous move request was a bad one for an admin to have moved, especially since I cannot find the old discussion. It should have been marked as incomplete/contested. Welly bump fandango (talk) 21:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

[edit]

Now that the can of worms is open, let's use this section to vote on: 1) Keeping the name Grand Prix motorcycle racing, or 2) Changing to MotoGP. Let's also give the voting a decent amount of time, and not do anything until a few weeks have passed.

Grand Prix motorcycle racing

I agree with your rationale for this and would be fine with this article title as well. Roguegeek (talk) 21:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • As Wadems says, the generic name is better. It may be MotoGP now, but was not always named as such and so an article encompassing the history of the sport should be named accordingly. Cpl Syx (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MotoGP

Road Racing World Championship Grand Prix

  • This is all very useful information, but I'd like to help clarify the name issue with some verifiable facts. Having been involved in motorcycle racing since the early 1960's, both flat-track and road racing, I have fairly decent credentials on the subject.

First of all, the term MotoGP is specific to the Dorna-controlled Grand Prix motorcycle road-racing championships. The name was invented and copyrighted by Dorna. As others have mentioned, MotoGP does not, and can not, legally apply to any other motorcycle road-racing events, either current or historic.

The term Gran(d) Prix or GP, when applied to motorcycle racing, defines motorcycles specifically designed for road-racing, including production motorcycles that have been extensively modified for road-racing, far beyond what would be allowed in production class motorcycle road-racing. A road-racing motorcycle will therefore generally fall under one of two categories; ... Grand Prix classes, or Production classes.

For example, a Norton Manx, while mass-produced, was always considered to be a Grand Prix racer, even though some were later modified by owners to be street legal, since the original intent by the manufacturer was to produce a road-race only bike.

On the other hand, a Norton Commando, also mass-produced, but as a street-bike, could either race in a Production Class, with relatively minor, class-rule-allowed modification, or by being heavily modified with few restrictions, race as a GP bike in that class.

In a nutshell, while Production (non-GP) class road-racing rules attempt to keep the motorcycle close to as produced by the factory specifications, Gran Prix rules are much more open, basically restricting engine type and displacement, overall weight and size, and safety.

In summary, Gran Prix motorcycles covers any and all full-race motorcycle road racing over the years. MotoGP only covers the Gran Prix events sanctioned by Dorna. And road-racing motorcycles covers all of that, plus the non-GP Production classes. - Chuck Lantz 172.11.57.255 (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tyre v tire

[edit]

Now, usually I work out these sorts of arguments based on the location of the subject of the article (UK article, UK spelling etc). Should we have a vote on which spelling we should have, because at the moment the article has both and looks sloppy. Personally, being British I would go for tyre, but I'm not fussed. What we do need is consistency. Ged UK (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I usually like to let Google help us out in these situations to determine which is the more common/popular term.
Both are fine, but in this case I would go with "tire" for consistency sake. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would vote tire being AmeriCanadian but I think tyre looks cooler. ;-p ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 20:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm more comfortable looking at "tire", the MOS mentions that "In the early stages of writing an article, the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used, unless there is reason to change it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic," so I vote for tyre.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 16:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As per the guidelines, if either is acceptable it should be the case that the first major use is made the standard for the remainder of the article's lifetime, and so I believe it should be tyre. Cpl Syx (talk) 20:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency seems to be something we all agree on. I'm going to make the initial change right now to "tire" for consistency sake, but we can make another change later based on the outcome of this discussion. Roguegeek (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Academically I prefer British English to US English, and so "tyre" please. --Amedeo Felix (talk) 13:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since MotoGP is predominantly a European sport, I'd happy w tyre... and I'm American. When American road racers (am I showing my age?) graduate to the big time, they go to Europe. DEddy (talk) 15:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

125cc, 250cc or 125 cc, 250 cc

[edit]

How should the GP classes be written? according to WP:MOS, values and unit symbols are spaced but these are not just that, they are also names of the classes, the subject did come up in the past but I dont think consensus was ever reached Chris Ssk talk 22:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It really doesn't matter to me. I only changed it due to WP:MOS, but I definitely see your side of it. You're claiming "250cc" to be a proper noun. I think if that's the case, it should be "250cc". Roguegeek (talk) 23:17, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I stand by my original comments: no space. Plus, using the trusty Google method, "500cc" gets 2.84m hits and "500 cc" gets 1.12m hits. Not to mention when you search for "500 cc", the search actually asks you: "Did you mean: 500cc." ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 23:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I vote no space.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm good with no spaces as well, but I want to clear up something for Wadems. Google method is good to identify popularity of a term. I'm saying it's good to make this change here because "250cc" is a proper noun as per the MotoGP organization. If it wasn't, there would be no doubt about what to do here as the policy and style guides state it should be shown as "250 cc". Roguegeek (talk) 18:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was being facetious about Google. Not that I care what the MOS says either. It looks better with no space, regardless. Even if I was referring to volume, I'd still say 50cc because I'm a rebel, man! ;-p ♫ ψadems ♫ (talk) 18:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No space please! Ged UK (talk) 19:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No space is how it is defined by the governing body, as they are not just engine capacities but also the titles of the racing class. According to the MoS there should be a space, but these are in fact proper nouns as used by MotoGP, as Roguegeek said above. As such, no space is what should be used here. Cpl Syx (talk) 13:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chronology

[edit]

I added a selected chronology of milestones in the sport, but I hope that rider achievements are kept out of it, because those are so well covered already in individual rider pages, and they don't represent changes in the sport itself. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 22:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps if it was called 'Technological Chronology' that would help? Ged UK (talk) 07:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes maybe, but I think it'd be useful to include regulation changes and events like deaths also. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but what would be very good is if anyone can add some references to the items listed as well. Then if it starts looking too big for this page we will be able to move it to a page by itself without it being deleted.Mighty Antar (talk) 19:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. I hope the list gets expanded by other contributors. I just wanted to get it rolling but not have it swamped by Agostini's/Doohan's/Rossi's/etc. records. --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What are opinions about adding future events to the chronology (eg: Michelin dropping out in '09). While there is official confirmation, would such items require the future motor sport tag? {{future motor sport}} Wouldn't this kind of thing be better off in the page for that future season, rather than the main article? --Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 21:36, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the wording of the future tag is pretty clear in it's aim; it's about warning people that the article may change rapidly as an event progresses. There's no rapid changes, Michelin have dropped out, and they aren't suddenly going to come back in again. I've absolutely no problem with future events so long as they're sourced. --Ged UK (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about Kawasaki dropping out?--Amedeo Felix (talk) 13:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, i think so; they're a major manufacturer after all. --Ged UK (talk) 13:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh another thing... It's also rather lame that "chronology" starts in 1973! Motorcycle Grand Prix dates more or less as far back as Automobile Grand Prix - i.e. near enough the turn of the 19th to the 20th Century, and there are note worthy items aplenty prior to 1973. How about when MV Agusta started racing or noting their first and last race and championship wins? How about the first 2 stroke bike racing? How about the first Japanese entrant company? How about the last Isle of Man TT to be part of the World Championship? Streamlined bikes? Running starts? I will try to dig up years for things, but if anyone else already happens to know... --Amedeo Felix (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The best would be to find good and complete sources, and write a separate "History of the world championship" article or something similar! Asendoh (talk) 23:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ONLY if the "Chronology" section were then to be deleted. If that section were to stay then I still say it should cover the entire history and not start at some random pooint.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 09:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's easily done though, just needs a link-through to a History of Motorcycle Racing or whatever it's called. I think it's a great idea. I would volunteer to do it, but i have no books or references to start from, and a long to-do list as it is! --Ged UK (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Quite so. I may do it at some point if need be, but mainly I wated to raise the point in case someone reading this already has the necessary information to hand.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 11:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with AmedeoFelix. I'm also very disappointed that this article only includes the modern era of Grand Prix motorcycle racing, totally ignoring what was the Golden Age of the sport, when Norton, Gilera, MV Agusta and others made it the dominant motorsport in the world, eclipsing even four-wheeled racing in popularity. I hope someone with the time and knowledge will add to this topic. 67.101.39.124 (talk) 16:25, 21 May 2009 (UTC) Chuck Lantz: AFM 144, AMA 49Y & 48C[reply]

Hey, well, this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, you could have a go! --GedUK  17:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I miss references and sources to the chronology-section...--Mats33 (talk) 21:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sponsors

[edit]

User Abdul Qayyum Ahmad has recently added a list of MotoGP sponsors. Is this a section we really want? I think not, as it's just a list of companies and it's not a really information about the World Championship and its history. Asendoh (talk) 12:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I don't think that is needed, its just a list of sponsors that doesn't seem to serve any purpose other than publicity of the sponsors involved. Chris Ssk talk 15:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did wonder about this when i saw it appear. I can see the logic in having it there, but apart from the logistical difficulty of keeping it up to date, I'm not sure it adds anything. --GedUK  19:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I took it out. Asendoh (talk) 11:13, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Challenges for the designer section

[edit]

The content in this section is very speculative and unlikely to ever be sourced adequately. Would removing it altogether harm the article much? I think it's worse to have weak information than none.--Rubber Nipple Salesman (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is littered with fact tags and does feel rather like a personal essay. I don't think any of it is particularly wrong, but like you said, it may well be difficult to source. I'd have no issue with it coming out. GedUK  09:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Power:weight ratio

[edit]

Removed statement saying MotoGP had better power-to-weight ratio than F1. MotoGP bikes are about 330 lbs (excluding rider). Hp is about 220. With a 140 lb rider, hp/weight ratio is 330+140/220, or 2.1 lb per hp. By contrast an F1 car weighs 1,334 lb (including driver and fluids). Hp is about 800. Thus F1 hp/weight ratio is 1334/800 or 1.66 lb per hp. Joema (talk) 14:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add a row to the spec table with p:w ratio? Also, I think a row for torque should be added, although the page is locked so I can't add it myself.

I believe the GP 500cc 2 strokes of the 1980s and 1990s had a power to weight ratio better than an F1 car. The new heavier 4 stroke MotoGP bikes are much slower and heavier than their 2 stroke predecessors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.139.218 (talk) 13:17, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Points scoring system in 1992

[edit]

Almost all of the articles relating to motorcycle Grand Prix racing of the period, such as rider profiles and race reports, list the current points system of 25-20-16-13-11 (etc.) for 1992, and give that year as the date it began. The actual system in 1992 was 20-15-12-10-8-6-4-3-2-1, and the current system began in 1993. There are a lot of articles that need tidying/fixing because of this, but I have started with the main points system article. Volunteers welcome? 91.107.65.171 (talk) 16:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a fairly simple job with AWB. Unfortunately, as I've now dumped windows, I don't have AWB anymore. If no-one else is up for it, i'll try and get it done over the christmas break. GedUK  17:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the change requested above has not gone through - can anything be done in one action? 137.108.145.10 (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Manufacturers, riders & teams 2010

[edit]

At this moment, with various races passed, is strange that the manufacturers, riders and teams who are present in 2010 weren't actualized in the right table on main page - in fact, 250 seems alive as wasn't changed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.91.67.17 (talk) 09:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

[edit]

MotoGP is a shadow of itself without the 500cc 2 strokes. Those took "real" men to ride. Lawson, Rainey, Shenne, Doohan, Schwantz, Mamola, Haslam et. al. ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.192.107.142 (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC) I agree MotoGP is an utter joke compared to the 2 stroke 500cc of the 1980s. This front page of this rag is incorrect as to the reason why the 500cc 2 strokes were discontinued in favor of the slower and much heavier 4 strokes. I believe the reason given back then was the pollution emitted from the 2 strokes was what caused the manufacturers to switch to street legal four strokes in favor of their retail store line up and to boost sales. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.139.218 (talk) 12:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kalex?

[edit]

Kalex was missing from the list of Moto2 constructors. How is that? The Kalex bike won the Moto2 world championship in 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.22.152.176 (talk) 06:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Factory vs Satellite Teams

[edit]

Should there be a section on "factory" vs. "satellite" teams? (Mainly the difference between them) The-Bus (talk) 12:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Prix motorcycle racing?

[edit]

This name is quite odd. The article tells about world championship arranged by FIM. So, that should mean it is the only motorcycle racing series which have its races called "grand prix". Is that true? If not, better title would be for example FIM motorcycle world championship. 212.50.203.198 (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lower quality class to C or start because

For example but not limited to:

- Incoherent - Incomplete - No references - Title is wrong to start with - No history - No past manufacturers list - No past world champion list

Absolute piece of s**t article and a disgrace for wikipedia. And no i'm not going to correct it, because I don't have the time for your silly registration system. I'm willing to correct this article, but not making 10 edits on subjects I'm not interested in at the moment. I have a company to run and bills to pay. Also the wikipedia community and people waiting to delete everything they don't find relevant any more, doesn't motivate me to register or even donate any more. You cannot delete history, how irrelevant you might find it, a part from the practical reasons, I just feel that is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.177.116.58 (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

vlintino rossi is the peoples champion.Bearshark451 (talk) 21:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Grand Prix motorcycle racing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Highest recorded speed (Dovizioso in Qatar 2016) quotes wrong resource

[edit]

The reference is to race speeds, which does not state the claimed top speed during warm-up. Id change it myself but Im rather new to editing, I hope the active maintainers of this page will update the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A212:80:5E80:59DD:9D1E:F460:BF90 (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Event Format

[edit]

"Event Format" section is outdated and needs to be changed to reflect Moto3, Moto2, and Premier Class. Checking for objections, or bringing it to the attention of a more knowledgable writer than I

2601:601:CB7F:B800:1589:3491:E840:EE85 (talk) 07:50, 5 August 2018 (UTC) 082018[reply]

Grid Boys and Girls

[edit]

Certainly riding is the main objective/focus of this article. However, it seems remiss that there is no mention of the apparent controversy surrounding the grid boys and girls and more importantly female riders entering the sport. From this writer's perspective the umbrella wielding girls have always appeared to be respectable and, given the overall environment, tastefully/appropriately dressed. Everything aboveboard. Prohibition of them seems prudish and reactionary. Is the "controversy" due to general discrimination against women in certain countries where races are conducted? Providing longer shafts on the umbrellas, so that they rest on the track, seems sensible. If it's sexism that is the issue then the overarching question is certainly why are more girls not introduced to motorcycle riding at a young age? 'It is important to show we can compete in a man's world' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithf (talk • contribs) 23:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Champions

[edit]

In 2001 Rossi won in 500 cc List of 500cc/MotoGP rider records Wispyrainunder (talk) 10:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wispyrainunder Do you see why it is called "500cc/MotoGP"? It's because they're the same championship. The regulations just changed, so as the name, but it is still the premier class of motorcycle racing. Rossi's 500cc and MotoGP titles are considered as done in the same class. Engr. Smitty Werben 11:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I mean that! Wispyrainunder (talk) 12:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, 7 in premier class + 1 in 250 + 1 in 125. Not as it was written before "and one in 500cc" that is included in those 7 titles. Wispyrainunder (talk) 12:36, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New WikiProject Proposal Alert

[edit]

This is a note to let editors know that a user has proposed "WikiProject MotoGP". You can visit the proposal and discussion here. (Proposer was not me, I am just a guy alerting editors to the proposal.) Elijahandskip (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Legality of machines

[edit]

Perhaps an explanation might be added of why the machines used in these races are not street legal.Bill (talk) 22:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A bit late in the day, but GP machines are race-only dedicated designs, have huge specific power outputs, require much maintenance and would wear out quickly. World Superbikes, World Supersport and similar national series are based on road machines, for one thing being silhouette class, meaning the race bikes have to comply to the dimensions and appearance of the base machine. Not road-legal, but much nearer.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Racing in more than one class at an event

[edit]

Does anyone know when racing in more than one class at an event ceased?
e.g. Freddie Spencer raced in both 250cc and 500cc class races in 1985 B. Fairbairn (talk) 07:46, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK there is no formal restriction on racing in multiple events; the UK commentators have stated that when Spencer did it he was wrecked by the experience. With the doubling of horsepower since then and the requirements of the modern tyres and brakes (g forces) then it wouldn't be physically possible to operate at this much higher level without prohibitively draining their energy levels needed to compete in a subsequent event.
The general consensus is that nowadays only thin, lean machines will prevail (the humans, I mean ). They have personal trainers and nutritionists/chefs. Some are remarked upon to be cycling companions of Mark Cavendish and they perform at world-level standard. One tale is that Scott Redding cycled from one racetrack to another before competing at the latter. He was remarked upon as reducing the muscularity of his shoulders to get behind the upper fairing. Some also swim - I recall seeing Bradley Smith in a wet suit, triathlon-style. I've only just seen this as I've been watching what you've been adding for Jack Miller.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 21:30, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flags in the Infobox

[edit]

Why arent there flags next to rider/team name in the infobox? Whas there a decision to be removed? It seems motorsport world championships on the Template:Main_world_championships except motorcycle road racing championships (motogp, wsbk, wssp) have them and it would be nice to have them in these article too, for consistency if nothing else. Chris Ssk talk 17:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, you'd like to see more like this? , of course, as you might guess, I knew where to find it, and whom was responsible (has referred to the UK sub-nations). With flags, it pre-supposes that the average reader would recognise the (potentially endless) worldwide variations. Ratthapark Wilairot (Thailand)? Narain Karthikeyan (India)? With what's been happening with Russian invasion, Illia Mykhalchyk's national flag (Ukraine) is more likely to be recognised.
I did a post somewhere on this problem (of partisan editors prominently promoting their national idols and flags) and I added small comparison flags to show how many I knew (perhaps a dozen), and how similar others are (Australia, New Zealand). I will not replicate it all, but Sylvain Guintoli when commentating recently on TV stated that one flag (the French, I think France) was misaligned and looked like Dutch Netherlands.
For the record, the Formula One car Brigade gave themselves local consensus to use infobox flags on F1 races and F1 racers (I vaguely recognise your username so you may be involved already know this). The said F1 Brigade recently bitterly complained that the RfC was old and with too-few participants. Writing this perhaps roughly from memory, but ended with one car-regular getting a formal warning at AN/I.
For the (non)recognition reasons stated above, I am not a supporter of showing flags as, without a caption they could be misleading/confusing, being decorative additions; with a caption, of course, they are redundant, again being decorative. As with the post above, I only just saw this. Rocknrollmancer (talk) 22:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Liberty Media Acquire 86% of Dorna Sports, who Own MotoGP and World Superbikes

[edit]

Liberty Media's Press Statement: https://www.libertymedia.com/investors/news-events/press-releases/detail/527/liberty-media-announces-agreement-to-acquire-commercial

MotoGP's Press Statement: https://www.motogp.com/en/news/2024/04/01/liberty-media-announces-acquisition-of-motogp/493938

WSBK's Press Statement: https://www.worldsbk.com/en/news/2024/Liberty%20Media%20to%20acquire%20Dorna Wycombefan (talk) 11:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grand_Prix_motorcycle_racing&oldid=1216678383"