Are the boys at BSB with their "stock" superbikes onto something?

**Bykmad** · 21st August 2012, 20:18

And now to the control tyres. This is the latest from ASBK.
-- No control tyre for 2013 ASBK
-- Pirelli, Michelin and Dunlop tyres for 2013 ASBK

Riders will have the choice to race on Pirelli, Michelin and Dunlop tyres in the 2013 Australian Superbike Championships (ASBK).

International Entertainment Group (IEG) will place a cap on the number and price of tyres to ensure costs are kept to a minimum for all participating.

IEG Managing Director Yarrive Konsky said: “The move was made to allow riders a wider choice and will bring the cost of racing down, as well as add another exciting element to the tactics and strategy of racing.

“IEG thanks Pirelli and Michelin for their interest in being involved once more and Dunlop for their continued support.”

The cap and number of tyres per class are as follows:

Superbike & Prostock: Under $580 per set / 3 front & 4 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated per brand

Supersport & Superstock: Under $480 per set / 3 front & 3 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated per brand

Superlites: Under $350 per set / 2 front & 2 rear / 2 compounds will be homologated per brand

250 Production: Control tyre by Pirelli / 1 front & 1 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated

**codgyoleracer** · 21st August 2012, 20:34

Originally Posted by Bykmad

And now to the control tyres. This is the latest from ASBK.
-- No control tyre for 2013 ASBK
-- Pirelli, Michelin and Dunlop tyres for 2013 ASBK

Riders will have the choice to race on Pirelli, Michelin and Dunlop tyres in the 2013 Australian Superbike Championships (ASBK).

International Entertainment Group (IEG) will place a cap on the number and price of tyres to ensure costs are kept to a minimum for all participating.

IEG Managing Director Yarrive Konsky said: “The move was made to allow riders a wider choice and will bring the cost of racing down, as well as add another exciting element to the tactics and strategy of racing.

“IEG thanks Pirelli and Michelin for their interest in being involved once more and Dunlop for their continued support.”

The cap and number of tyres per class are as follows:

Superbike & Prostock: Under $580 per set / 3 front & 4 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated per brand

Supersport & Superstock: Under $480 per set / 3 front & 3 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated per brand

Superlites: Under $350 per set / 2 front & 2 rear / 2 compounds will be homologated per brand

250 Production: Control tyre by Pirelli / 1 front & 1 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated

Another way to skin the cat ?

**The Chow** · 21st August 2012, 21:26

Originally Posted by Bykmad

And now to the control tyres. This is the latest from ASBK.
-- No control tyre for 2013 ASBK
-- Pirelli, Michelin and Dunlop tyres for 2013 ASBK

Riders will have the choice to race on Pirelli, Michelin and Dunlop tyres in the 2013 Australian Superbike Championships (ASBK).

International Entertainment Group (IEG) will place a cap on the number and price of tyres to ensure costs are kept to a minimum for all participating.

IEG Managing Director Yarrive Konsky said: “The move was made to allow riders a wider choice and will bring the cost of racing down, as well as add another exciting element to the tactics and strategy of racing.

“IEG thanks Pirelli and Michelin for their interest in being involved once more and Dunlop for their continued support.”

The cap and number of tyres per class are as follows:

Superbike & Prostock: Under $580 per set / 3 front & 4 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated per brand

Supersport & Superstock: Under $480 per set / 3 front & 3 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated per brand

Superlites: Under $350 per set / 2 front & 2 rear / 2 compounds will be homologated per brand

250 Production: Control tyre by Pirelli / 1 front & 1 rear / 2 compounds may be homologated

The way it should be. Control tyres are a big wank. IMAO . I heard ASBK was moving away from one make months ago . Let the brands compete. The sooner Michelin and Dunlop etc can return to world championship the better. Just look at the problems WSBK control wets , they are bitching like hell about those tyres.

**steveyb** · 21st August 2012, 21:34

Having stayed away from commenting for fear of having my feelings hurt, I think that information from ASBK (I assume it is true) is enlightening.
Contemporary economic theory and practise it seems (not that either of these are the be all and end all) suggests that only in a competitive market will the best prices for goods or services be achieved. Best for both provider and consumer. That goes for performance also.
IMHO the single supplier argument for any product or service is somewhat of a red-herring and a knee jerk reaction to a situation that might actually not exist.
If, in our case, riders are shying away from competing in a particular class, the provider of a certain product be it tyres, suspension, hell, even bikes, is not the reason for that.
The reasons will be that the overall package is unworkable. Too expensive, too difficult to be competitive, too complicated, too whatever. But it does seem that many believe that our current rules make the bikes too expensive to build and run.
If a single supplier corners any market, they can then supply whatever product they effectively want to, and charge whatever price they can make the market stand.
What would happen say, if Dunstonelli won the contract to supply NZSBK with tyres in 2013/14/15? cos a one year contract would not be workable due to lead times, logistics, margin recovery etc.
But halfway through the year or contract they started ramping up the price, or started bringing over leftover compounds/constructions that no-one else wanted?
You can see where I am going.
Yes, there would be contracts, but what good does that do anyone at that point? The contract would be necessarily vague in several vital areas, and MNZ has the resources to litigate? No, it does not.
Reputation? Not everyone will think they are crap if they end up being crap, but no one will believe our word over that of Dunstonelli will they?
But, you say, we will just cancel that contract and get Metmichcontstone to supply.
What? Halfway through the year? After they have been told their services are not required? How many tyres was that? When, next month?
Yeah, right.

And the obvious logical outcome of the argument is to introduce a single motorcycle supplier. Why just stop with tyres or anything else?

My point is that "dumbing down" effectively a formula motorsport class (Superbike is effectively a formula class based on production bikes) by introducing single suppliers does just that. Dumbs it down, and eventually can actually increase costs in certain areas due to the opportunity risk that is inherent in an inefficient market that was created. Why would another company carry race tyres if the racing classes are on a control tyre? Obviously they will not, so that restricts all other possible users and closes off a product line for those suppliers.

I know that they do this in other sports, sailing is a good example. But competitors therein are happy to race single types of boats that are effectively all the same; Opti, Laser, 420, 490 etc. Effectively we would have to introduce single model classes to go down that road.

So, it seems to me that rather than restricting what products or services riders/teams can use, limiting the rules around what can be built, modified and changed while allowing open use of preferred products/services would be better. Remember, that what will work on a Suzuki, might not on a Honda etc.

So, in the main, I think that yes, the BSB guys are onto something. Leveling the playing field in terms of what can be modified on the bike is a good thing, but restricting supply is not. The best teams with the best intelligence, best workshops, best technicians, best budgets and best riders will still probably come out in the best positions in the end.

Thank you all for listening.

**Billy** · 21st August 2012, 22:07

Originally Posted by steveyb

Having stayed away from commenting for fear of having my feelings hurt, I think that information from ASBK (I assume it is true) is enlightening.
Contemporary economic theory and practise it seems (not that either of these are the be all and end all) suggests that only in a competitive market will the best prices for goods or services be achieved. Best for both provider and consumer. That goes for performance also.
IMHO the single supplier argument for any product or service is somewhat of a red-herring and a knee jerk reaction to a situation that might actually not exist.
If, in our case, riders are shying away from competing in a particular class, the provider of a certain product be it tyres, suspension, hell, even bikes, is not the reason for that.
The reasons will be that the overall package is unworkable. Too expensive, too difficult to be competitive, too complicated, too whatever. But it does seem that many believe that our current rules make the bikes too expensive to build and run.
If a single supplier corners any market, they can then supply whatever product they effectively want to, and charge whatever price they can make the market stand.
What would happen say, if Dunstonelli won the contract to supply NZSBK with tyres in 2013/14/15? cos a one year contract would not be workable due to lead times, logistics, margin recovery etc.
But halfway through the year or contract they started ramping up the price, or started bringing over leftover compounds/constructions that no-one else wanted?
You can see where I am going.
Yes, there would be contracts, but what good does that do anyone at that point? The contract would be necessarily vague in several vital areas, and MNZ has the resources to litigate? No, it does not.
Reputation? Not everyone will think they are crap if they end up being crap, but no one will believe our word over that of Dunstonelli will they?
But, you say, we will just cancel that contract and get Metmichcontstone to supply.
What? Halfway through the year? After they have been told their services are not required? How many tyres was that? When, next month?
Yeah, right.

And the obvious logical outcome of the argument is to introduce a single motorcycle supplier. Why just stop with tyres or anything else?

My point is that "dumbing down" effectively a formula motorsport class (Superbike is effectively a formula class based on production bikes) by introducing single suppliers does just that. Dumbs it down, and eventually can actually increase costs in certain areas due to the opportunity risk that is inherent in an inefficient market that was created. Why would another company carry race tyres if the racing classes are on a control tyre? Obviously they will not, so that restricts all other possible users and closes off a product line for those suppliers.

I know that they do this in other sports, sailing is a good example. But competitors therein are happy to race single types of boats that are effectively all the same; Opti, Laser, 420, 490 etc. Effectively we would have to introduce single model classes to go down that road.

So, it seems to me that rather than restricting what products or services riders/teams can use, limiting the rules around what can be built, modified and changed while allowing open use of preferred products/services would be better. Remember, that what will work on a Suzuki, might not on a Honda etc.

So, in the main, I think that yes, the BSB guys are onto something. Leveling the playing field in terms of what can be modified on the bike is a good thing, but restricting supply is not. The best teams with the best intelligence, best workshops, best technicians, best budgets and best riders will still probably come out in the best positions in the end.

Thank you all for listening.

Agree with the bulk of the above statement,But the funniest thing for me to take out of this thread is that nobody on the commission has suggested going to control tyres and no submissions from any members have been recieved either,In fact the first and only place Im aware of it being mentioned is right here,In fact we werent even considering looking at the Superbike regs at all until approached by a well respected,Multi national champ and his distributor/sponsor,Go figure aye,The wonders of the internet.

**Mental Trousers** · 21st August 2012, 23:10

Originally Posted by Billy

Agree with the bulk of the above statement,But the funniest thing for me to take out of this thread is that nobody on the commission has suggested going to control tyres and no submissions from any members have been recieved either,In fact the first and only place Im aware of it being mentioned is right here

Goodo. I don't like being told what I can and can't buy.

**Robert Taylor** · 22nd August 2012, 07:14

Originally Posted by Billy

Agree with the bulk of the above statement,But the funniest thing for me to take out of this thread is that nobody on the commission has suggested going to control tyres and no submissions from any members have been recieved either,In fact the first and only place Im aware of it being mentioned is right here,In fact we werent even considering looking at the Superbike regs at all until approached by a well respected,Multi national champ and his distributor/sponsor,Go figure aye,The wonders of the internet.

Indeed, Steve put a lot of time into this and it all makes sense. One thing that is well known is that the control tyre situation in Dingoland has been a dogs breakfast. There are not so many kind words about the tyres and getting the bloody things to work

**DidJit** · 22nd August 2012, 09:02

ASBK’s approach is getting noticed internationally already.

**codgyoleracer** · 22nd August 2012, 09:10

1. With respect to control tyres:

There are a number of Pro's and a number of Con's, the reason for considering or trialing such a system is sometimes simply driven by the current status quo that exists in the market/sport and this drives the need for a change.

If for example the commonly voted "best tyre in the world" happened to be available and in the same market it also happened to be bloody well priced - then there really wouldn’t be an incentive to change or consider the option of establishing some "control"

If however there were just a select few teams importing direct 'special tyres", or select few teams without budget considerations - then one might argue the opposite.

The other "anti-sell" or "fear-sell" on the control tyre discussion is that they will be or are "shit" and not what "we want" performance-wise. To narrow that down a bit this means that some teams, managers, riders who don’t like the idea or don’t want to be in the same boat as every other joe blow - will simply diss the tyres whether they are good or even if only "acceptable". The media love these sorts of comments and thus negativity about the concept travels around the globe quick smart.
Certain types of riders also love to point the finger at something that is outside of their control (tyres) - and make claim that that’s the reason they aren’t winning or doing better. This is an unfortunate fact of human nature.

On the subject of competition, well i am the last to disagree that its a good thing (most riders who race need it to improve themselves and competition certainly does that!). In respect to suppliers though and the philosophies behind a control tyre operating in the market. We need to remember its only proposed for one or maybe two classes, + its introduction is a response to a need for reasons other than considering a tyre suppliers market position.

The fact of the matter is that this is an emotional subject for some - And the only way to correctly assess a subject like this is to firstly have a good process in place for those that make the calls on such things.
That process IMO is currently dismal, and you could argue doesn’t exist. There is virtually no transparency and very little communication, however Billy is trying to improve the link between members and hierarchy

**jellywrestler** · 22nd August 2012, 09:16

Originally Posted by steveyb

. Effectively we would have to introduce single model classes to go down that road.

they tried that here before, anyone ever remember the GS550 Katana Cup?

**codgyoleracer** · 22nd August 2012, 09:25

Originally Posted by Billy

Agree with the bulk of the above statement,But the funniest thing for me to take out of this thread is that nobody on the commission has suggested going to control tyres and no submissions from any members have been recieved either,In fact the first and only place Im aware of it being mentioned is right here,In fact we werent even considering looking at the Superbike regs at all until approached by a well respected,Multi national champ and his distributor/sponsor,Go figure aye,The wonders of the internet.

And the next cab off the rank Billy......... The one bike rule.

**Robert Taylor** · 22nd August 2012, 18:00

Originally Posted by codgyoleracer

And the next cab off the rank Billy......... The one bike rule.

Id just go with the stuff that is winning the most races weekend in weekend out . MotoGP, Moto2, WSBK and WSS600. Its clearly the best and less brain hurt for making changes with.