Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but paid users have great benefits. Paid member benefits:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2024 SX, MX, and SMX series (regularly $30).
the million dollar question is: How and what can we do?
But I don't believe the bikes are to blame, look at the top guys who are injured. They typically finish miles in front of the rest of the field for a reason, they are going as fast as they possibly can, which is called racing and its dangerous! You can slow the bikes down as much as you want, but they are still going to push the limit of whatever bike they are riding and they will still crash/get injured. If anything is to blame, other than rider error obviously, it would be the tracks. I don't care what bike you are on when you crash on a sx triple you are probably going to get hurt.
The Shop
Mo and Canard are good examples of that need. They can't let the pack, let alone the leaders pull them for even a quarter of a lap. Lighten the field, create a 125 class in addition to the 250/450's. Make the 125's point out but leave the 250 riders there. The cream will always rise to the top, but there will be more opportunity for more riders and they'll be matched up closer in speed. That will help with Whoops, Quads, Triples, Lappers and the show.
SPEED AND MENTAL PROCESSING
When guys ride into the "red zone" or "on the limit" it is pretty much like a musician (or, think Guitar-Hero) playing the piano to the edge of his or her ability. When a musician makes a mistake, the only bad thing that happens is a terrible sound. The faster these guys go, and the harder they push one another, the more information their brains are processing, except when they make a mistake, they pay for it physically. This weekend, Jeff Emig was talking how James Stewart is able to mentally process information quicker than most the other riders out on the track, allowing him to go faster. Everyone has probably ridden over their head a time or two, or heard the phrase. When information is coming in faster than the brain can process, the risk for error increases.
Since there are now five guys going for wins and a championship, it really has caused a rapid acceleration of progress in the sport. When I say the progression, mechanics have had to evolve the bikes in order to chase the fastest rabbit setting the pace each year. Riders have also not only pushed themselves to new physical limits, but also to new limits of processing information out on the track.
Slowing the bikes down would not only reduce the impact of riders taking soil samples, like RC mentioned, but it would also allow riders to mentally process information much easier out on the track, similar to backing it down a few difficulty notches on Guitar-Hero, or slowing the tempo while playing a song, which would result in greater safety as well.
Good discussion. Let me play devils's advocate and comment. Speed is one of many factors that contribute to the extent of information to be processed. Yet, we have many examples of speed alone not exceeding human capacity. Fighter pilots come to mind. Also higher speeds in mx with different injury issues. Frankly many of the injuries this year wouLd be difficult to attribute to information overload. For example, Morais, Cannard, any number of Stewarts crashes, Windham, Reed, Partridge, Tomac, to name a few. Most of these incidents were related to track issues or the rider pushing things, the red zone if you will. To carry your guItar hero analogy further, the speed is one area that causes failure, another is note/key placement even at slower speeds.
While slowing speeds down, might lessen impact damage, it may not actually decrease the number of incidents in that I suspect it would result in greater Rider clustering on the track. Isn't this the experience of NASCAR. Unlike NASCAR where the excessive speeds were directly correlated to driver survivability, we don't have any direct evidence that a few miles per hour difference on a SX track would have a similar impact. Frankly, injuries can and do occur at various different speed in SX. Returning to the clustering issue, this could result in even more information for the rider to process given an increase in the variables to be concerned with while racing in a multi-bike cluster.
Frankly, I am not disagreeing that speed/increased bike performance is involved, rather, my personal perspective is that simply restricting the bikes performance may cause as many issues as it attempts to solve. When all is done and said I tend to feel that it is a combination of increased performance, track design and the Riders willingness to push the envelope that have resulted in the injuries this year.
Also the main difference between the fast and fastest guys is corner speed, and the main change to tracks with the advent of 4 strokes is the turns, no more tight 180 bowl turns.
and who misses the old school whoops?
One thing I read in the Cycle News article on SX in 2012 was how the margin of error in Supercross has shrunk to the size of a gnat testicle. That really seems about accurate. I just think that if you threw the top 450 riders on 250f machines, they would be able to ride the machines to their maximum capabilities, yet have more mental resources left over than if they were going all out on 450's. Instead of running 58 second laps on a track in the red zone, they would be limited to 60 second laps in the yellow zone. Then again, each rider has a different red zone, and just because things become safer for the top tier riders wouldn't necessarily mean they were safer for the second tier riders. Things just seem to be happening too fast on the supercross tracks (I will get to more on that later).
I don't really like to cherry pick individual crashes, since every accident scenario is different. I try to look at the overall picture of injuries in 2012, which everyone seems to be agreeing is a problem. I'm not going to say some of the crashes that happened in 2012 could have been prevented by slower machines, but one could make the argument. Villopoto said him and Reed were pushing the limits in Arlington when Reed crashed. If they were on slightly slower machines that would have prevented them from reaching that extreme edge, maybe that slight mistake by Reed would have been less likely to occur.
The same goes for Windham. K-Dub seems to ride in the "green zone" of safety a lot of times, but we all know that when the man wants to lay it on the line, he can run with absolutely anybody! When he crashed in Huston, that was "red zone" Kevin Windham we were seeing - he wanted James. Perhaps if they were racing slower bikes, both him and Stewart could have been battling it out in the "yellow zone," which would be a little slower and a little safer than what they were running that night. It would be interesting to know the difference in comfort level riders feel just by slowing their best lap times down by a second. Maybe reducing the pace 1-2 seconds a lap would make a huge difference in being able to mentally process things for them?
Now that you mention it, speed really is not the issue. As RC said in the Cycle News article, guys are racing much faster speeds outdoors, yet things are much open so they have more time to think and react, where everything is happening extremely fast indoors, which kind of connects into the mental processing aspect of my original post.
Regarding tracks, the 450's have allowed for possibilities that were not possible ten years ago. Emig said during the 2011 Anaheim 1 broadcast that a 250 two-stroke would not be able to do the quad over the table riders were doing in the long rhythm section that year. Reducing power some would eliminate some of those crazy possibilities. Take San Diego this year for example and the table-to-table Brayton got hurt on. RV said he had that in his back pocket if he needed it, but obviously the risk was high considering nobody was doing it in the main. However, I'm pretty sure had one guy started doing it in the main, the others would have felt pressured to do it also, increasing the risk for "sooner than later" season ending injuries.
I would honestly like to hear the opinions of the top riders. Even though it maybe against their interests to say how they truly feel due to sponsors. I doubt many of them would say 450's are too much to handle. They all seem to have adapted quite well considering the amount of progression the sport has seen in the past five years. As RC said though, gravity and the human body still haven't changed.
@scottydog: I really like it when dirt wurx removes berms. They did for quite a few tracks in 2010. I thought it was great watching the inside line return to racing, or guys tip-toe around the outside of a flat loamy corner and blast a triple from the outside. Once again, slower speeds.
Basically, I am wondering if the primary factor in the crashes is track design. In making this comment, let me elaborate. I am making the assumption that there has been no change in the extent that Riders are always pushing their own personal envelope and riding at times in the red zone. I really appreciate your point about the the tracks and 450s increasing the performance possibilities well beyond what existed the past. With that said, have the track layouts accomodated or changed to allow for the increased possibilities. Perhaps the obstacle design needs to be changed so that we again have certain things not being possible such as the examples you mentioned. Another factor of interest is the scrubbing element. Many notable injuries have occurred in the seemingly trivial timing mistakes in a scrub. Could the tracks be designed to increase the safety zone?
I like you would really like to hear from the Riders on this. Perhaps Vital could figure out a way to allow for verified Industry individuals to post anonymously their thoughts. I realize anonymus posting is possible now, the trouble being that anyone can be an anonymous poster. I'd like to see anonymous postings from those that are verified as Racers, Riders, Team managers, mechanics, etc. Some sort of designation that the poster is such. Oh, well, I can only wish.
These guys are smart. Look at top fuel. They cut them to 1000 feet, and they now make more power, because the mechanics have 320 less feet of track to worry about the car blowing up on.
Now that they are EFI, you can put a throttlebody restriction on them, similar to WRC. I see this as the most immediate path for the AMA to walk, if they walk any path at all.
Long term, 5-10 years, I think the AMA and FIM will follow through with their 350cc rule, and possibly even 175-200 for the lites. STrange thing is, prior to 1996, the AMA rules were 360cc and 175cc. Turns out they had it right, all along.
Pit Row
If we were road racing or drag racing it would be a different story. We won't see any factory bike dyno sheets anytime soon but you can assume close to 60 HP for the people who feel HP is king and in the mid 50s for people who understand tractable power is better.
Sometimes less really is more.
I have seen multiple places where it was claimed that MC's 96 CR250 did 60hp.
I have read some interviews with Rich Winkler, who has said that they have had to space the jumps further apart with the arrival of four strokes. I think he was mostly talking about doubles and triples coming out of turns. I guess in the two stroke days there was 10 feet between the bottom of the jumps, and he said they now space them around 16. http://www.racerxonline.com/2010/01/28/between-the-motos-rich-winkler&#…;
I really liked the 2012 A1 track layout. People complained about it and thought it was stupid, but it seemed like a pretty safe track with all the speed stopping obstacles. .
Why do PBR Guys ride the Gnarliest bulls? I wonder if the bull rider forums are saying " The PBR Pros should ride Calfs" cuz this stuff is dangerous?
As far as a 2 Stroke class to replace MX3 at the Des Nations that would pretty cool but why would the OEM's get behind this if they don't sell 2 Strokes?
Awesome Pipe Dream !!
For the sport to be successful there needs to be good racing on television and for the fans. Those are Ricky Carmichael's words from the interview, not mine. The past two out of three years in the 450 class have turned into "Survivorcross". This year only three riders were in every main event.
Maybe 450s, tracks, and progression are not the problem. Maybe riders need to wear more advanced full body protection?
Serious question.
With that being said about 4 strokes, though, we have had some serious injuries on two strokes as well. So I contend it is the less technical and difficult tracks that are the problem.
I was watching some of the Bailey/Johnson battles and the tracks were just way more rugged. I say make the tracks more difficult/technical and that will slow the racing down somewhat.
Just my 2 cents. I've never raced professionally though so I may be wrong.
Post a reply to: Ricky Carmichael interview, 4-strokes and injuries in SX