There seems to be a lot of talk about whether or not Dungey is comfortable on the KTM and may go to RCH. With KTM being the only bike to use a steel frame, I was wondering what your thoughts are on steel vs. aluminum? I know you have raced both. Seems to me aluminum must be better for consistent "flex" which would make suspension setup more dependable. Why else would all the other bikes use a material that is more expensive and harder to work with? Steel may be better for the average Joe but, we all know, because of the production rule the bikes are built for the top tier racers. If you are ever in the Finger Lakes area of NY, I got a place to ride if interested.
Your moto kinsman,
I don’t think I would put much stock in the chatter you hear on the interweb. While the occasional truth nugget floats around the porcelain toilet bowl that is Al Gore’s greatest contribution to society, the simple fact is that most of the things you read are just turds. Dungey left Suzuki to go with Roger and so far they have a pretty successful run going over there. If Roger and Ryan really want to improve his chances of winning they don’t need to get on another bike they need to ask Ryan Villopoto to retire.
As far as steel versus aluminum I think personal preference plays a role. I know several former pro racers who liked the feel of a steel frame better than the rigid characteristics of aluminum. Manufacturers still struggle and make changes trying to get more flex out of their aluminum frames in the right places. Of course steel frames flexed so much your bike would actually grow in length over time.
Finger Lakes? Sounds like the start of a dirty limerick or something. If I’m ever visiting the area I’ll look you up.
There has been some debate about RV's off track excursion at Thunder Valley this past weekend where he went off the track at the top corner and then motored down the side of the track the whole straightaway, coming within a few feet of a flagger in the process and re-entering way at the bottom of the track. I know the rulebook states that "A rider leaving the course must re-enter at the same point or at the first point where he/she can safely, without interfering with other riders and without gaining an advantage". But my question is how far can that rule be stretched? KROC had a small off track excursion and got right back on after the next obstacle. Marvin also took the agricultural route one time and came back on the track after he got by the banners, slowed down, took a look and then re-entered. In RV's off-road adventure to some it seemed he wasn’t worried about re-entering at the first safe spot like the rulebook states, but his only concern was to lose the least amount of time after his mistake, as there was plenty of space to re-enter anywhere on that part of the track. I know these guys are racers and their focus is on winning, but how does the AMA look at situations like this and how far can this rule be stretched by riders? I seriously doubt it would have made any difference anyways as RV is riding so well right now he could probably win on a Tornado ST 250 unlike that other rider they had contracted to race for them some years ago. I tried posting this on a forum to try to get an adult response but the ones posting responses seem to be the ones who would not be asking for his goggles but rather his jock strap. So wise one, please enlighten us on this rule and how the AMA looks at a situation like this and the rule in general. Keep up the great work!
The ambiguity in the AMA rulebook is expansive. If it were a globe the land would be cut-and-dry rules and all the water would be grey area. I argued that the AMA needed to be more specific with their rules earlier this year when RV made a pass on James Stewart on a yellow flag with the red cross flag out. In that incident they just made a decision that what he did was fine and no penalty would be assessed, even though the rulebook clearly states that no passes shall be made when that flag is displayed. Would Ryan have won even if he had been assessed a penalty? Probably, but that isn’t the point. Each and every time that organization lets an infraction slide they lose integrity.
You could argue that Ryan didn’t re-enter the track at the earliest, safest place on the track last weekend but who makes that call? Unless they have designated entry points at the end of each section or straightaway it is really the riders discretion where he joins the circuit again. I don’t think Ryan was cheating. Honestly, he doesn’t need to right now. When you bounce off the track at his speed you find yourself at the end of the next straight pretty quickly. This problem could be curtailed if more thought were put into re-entry points on the course. If you forced riders to enter at a specific location for each section they would probably lose more time [that’s the penalty for going off the track] but it would be safer and there would be less argument over whether or not an unfair advantage was gained. Maybe they could just force riders who do gain an advantage in those situations to ride a Tornado ST 250 in the next moto. I’m confident that would even things out. That’s my two cents, though I’m not sure whether its tax deductable or not… That might be grey area in our IRS tax code.
I am also a woman motocross rider, racer, and supporter. I am training very hard to make it to the pro ranks and your response to Danielle Izzy did not make me or any other of my fellow women motocrossers very happy. We know the economy is horrible, but why doesn't the AMA and MX Sports cut down the men's supercross series to 15 series instead of 17? I'm sure doing just that would save enough money for the professional women to race 8 rounds of motocross. But since we're women, that won't even be considered. We know. We are being attacked and put down because of our gender. This could be taken much further than the motocross industry and eventually will be if the women continue to be attacked because we are females and are not as fast. We are still the fastest in the world and are stepping it up. We are much smaller and have to handle the same power bikes. Don't you believe we should be given A LOT more credit? We have petitions up and running and if they get enough signatures the website takes legal action towards the situations. If MX Sports ran out of money they'd find out ways to make more for the men. Why can't they do that for the women? There for I think your response to Danielle was invalid. We are in the 21st century not the 19th. Put yourself in our position and you would not be happy with your response either.
-The Frustrated, Hard Working Women of Motocross
I’m not interested in responding to this but I wanted to share this one with everybody.
Have a question for Ping? Email him at firstname.lastname@example.org.