Misano Review: Barking up the wrong rubber tree

Sport is all about winning and losing. We regularly see the winners on TV because it is a meritocracy of getting first over the line. That's why there are world champions; they scored more points than the next bloke.

Sometimes someone wins a race out of nowhere and never wins another. Alberto Puig at Jerez in 1995, Simon Crafar at Donington 1998, Regis Laconi at Valencia 1999, all shining examples of victories that everyone celebrated, happy that the guy had finally won.

So what goes wrong when people win fair and square through hard graft after being nowhere for years, and people don't like it? It's just like what Sete Gibernau did at Welkom in 2003. There was not a dry eye in the house that day, following the death of his team-mate Daijiro Kato just days earlier.

I cannot understand about the current 'it's not fair on Michelin because Bridgestone have dominated this year's championship' discussion that has enveloped many in the paddock.

Sete Gibernau won the 2003 South African Grand Prix at Welkom for Gresini Honda © Reuters

Just to recap on the facts, the last 13 500cc/MotoGP titles have been won by Michelin - Doohan, Criville, Roberts Jr, Rossi and Hayden - and dominantly so with Dunlop. Until latterly Bridgestone has been nearly nowhere. That's 1994 up until now.

Since the start of the 1994 to the end of 2006, there have been 201 500cc/MotoGP races, 188 of which have been won by Michelin riders, eight on Bridgestone and five on Dunlop.

That's 94 percent of races won on Michelins; an impressive statistic that they quite rightly sang from the rooftops about...

So far as my memory serves, at the end of 2003 Michelin started some discussions with Bridgestone and Dunlop to try and save costs in some shape or form. Normal practice really in today's motorsport world.

Tyres are expensive to make, expensive to ship and if not used, are sent off and scrapped. With thousands being brought to the tracks for testing and racing, something had to give.

Everybody approved things and we had the current rules of 14 fronts and 17 rears to be put into 'parc ferme' by 5pm Thursday night, less for Dunlop who are still free to use as many tyres as they wished in order to give them a 'foot up' in competitiveness.

As and when they win two dry races, then they under the same ruling of 31 tyres per rider per weekend.

The reason these rules came about was because Michelin made tyres overnight in Clermont Ferrand and drove them to the track by dawn on Saturday and Sunday mornings.

The process was a big PR coup for the French, something that to this day is pretty impressive: tailor-made tyres for you, your bike and the track conditions. That will never happen again.

But then things backfired on the French, as Japanese-based Bridgestone muttered that just because the majority of races took place in Europe, a overnight drivable distance from Michelin's HQ, things were weighted towards the French.

It was a 'geographical advantage' that had nothing to do with anything actually happening on the track. The Japanese had a point, hence the 'all your tyres in a pot before we go racing' rule was made.

Jeremy Burgess © Yamaha

Everyone looked forward to the new 2007 rules levelling things out, with bullish comments about how it was a level playing field. Indeed, Valentino Rossi said before the opening round in Qatar, "I am very happy about the regulation with the tyres. The situation is more clear and there is less confusion."

Rossi's crew chief, Jeremy Burgess, reflected his rider's sentiments at the time. He said that the 2007 regulations "will mean the works Yamaha team will have their allocation to concentrate on and nothing else to cloud decision-making come the race."

How things have changed though, with Rossi saying last weekend to Italian TV, "The technical conditions are not favorable so something has to be changed, we must work hard and Yamaha must put in a big effort. And most of all there's a tyre situation [that] I think nobody likes except Ducati, because the races are very ugly to watch and there's no fighting anymore."

C'mon, guys. In 2002 Rossi, on a brand-new Michelin-shod Honda V5, finished first or second in every single race, less for one mechanical failure, the Italian going on to win the title by 140 points.

He won seven races on the bounce, but it was all good fun because it was Valentino Rossi, and you cannot stop yourself feeling happy for him.

I don't recall anyone feeling too sorry for the last of the two-strokes during that cross-over 500cc MotoGP four-stroke year, with the 185bhp engines struggling around behind the massively powerful 225bhp four-strokes.

The two-strokes had their days, with a pole for Jeremy McWilliams at Phillip Island, while either Alex Barros or Olivier Jacque were going to win the German GP on two-strokes until they knocked each other off, handing the glory to Rossi's four-stroke.

Sometimes the two-strokes were there, sometimes the four-strokes. One picked one's poison. It has never changed. Picking what bike/team/crew chief/tyres/mechanics you use to go out and win a world title is always the key, and that's exactly what Ducati and Stoner have done this year.

Is Stoner faster than Rossi in a straight fight? We will never know, but Stoner has got the stars aligned in 2007. He suits the bike, the tyres and the vibe of the season, just as Rossi did in 2002.

He is leading the world title chase in 2007 because he is the best in the world at getting himself and his bike over the line first.

Now, as we know, the new rule was introduced because Michelin were able to bring completely new tyres to circuits each morning at the European races, and Bridgestone felt that they were at a disadvantage if they got things wrong. And boy, did they get things wrong at times...

As Livio Suppo of Ducati said, "The biggest drama for us was Barcelona 2005. Both Carlos (Checa) and Loris (Capirossi) were struggling at the end of the race. They were four seconds a lap slower than the top guys."

But the whole change over to Bridgestone was a calculated risk by Ducati.

Loris Capirossi © DPPI

"We knew it would be difficult moving to Bridgestone in 2005, but nothing is easy in life. Sometimes it is better to win three races a year and finish fifth in the championship than to finish third but without any wins.

"That was what we felt when we went to Bridgestone. The worst scenario was not winning races. It was easier to at least win some races. The second scenario was that if they were really good then you can do a step, and this is that year."

Last year, without the monster Barcelona crash, Loris Capirossi and Ducati were in a position to win the MotoGP title, but if they had have done, the world would have looked upon Loris as having won just because Rossi had had some non-scores due to mechanical failures, ironically one of them being a Michelin tyre failure in China.

Instead, Nicky Hayden won the title and the world was a happy place... well, less for the Yamaha garages that is. As I said at the top of the page, the object of the season is to score more than the next guy and that is what Stoner is doing, like it or not.

But hey, this whole column has been a waste of time because actually we ought not to be talking about tyre rules. Don't the rule makers at the MSMA need to be brought bear, as it was they who changed the rules from 990cc to 800cc for 2007?

Just remind me why we needed to change the engine capacity rules after 2006 races such as Mugello, Assen, Sepang and of course... 0.002s photo-finish Estoril?

The 990cc era was the five years of motorcycle racing's version of the 'Group B Rally Cars'. The fire-breathing rally cars got banned because they were completely out of control, but are still revered 21 years after they were banned.

Were 990cc bikes really that bad?

Methinks people are barking up the wrong tree by blaming the tyres. You need to look at more fundamental things...