MotoGP Austin: Valentino Rossi “It's a shame about the fall, today I felt strong and fast”
The rider from Pesaro, struggling with a clutch that was acting up, crashed at the beginning of the 3rd lap
Valentino Rossi MotoGP 2016 Grand Prix Of Americas Yamaha Movistar – Valentino Rossi he closed the Austin grand prix with a crash, suffering a 0 after 24 consecutive races with points. The Pesaro driver, who had not finished outside the points since the 2014 Aragon Grand Prix, crashed at the beginning of the 3rd lap while he was 6th and thus lost his second position in the drivers' standings. Rossi's race didn't start in the best way: at the start the clutch burned out, which didn't allow him to push as he could, causing him to lose several positions during the first lap, even though he remained close to the leaders. Then, just when it seemed like the clutch was coming back for him, came the crash in Turn 2.
“It's really a shame because at the start I burned the clutch – said Valentino Rossi – I was 3rd but the clutch was slipping a lot so I was forced to go slower to recover it and I lost several positions. But I wasn't far from the leaders, I felt good on the bike because we had worked well this weekend and in fact I was fast. I felt the clutch was getting back on track but going into turn 2 I crashed. I didn't think I entered too fast, but seeing how it went I think I was wrong in my assessment...It's really a shame because we lost a lot of points and also because I could have had a good race. The good thing is that we were strong and fast today too, so we can't wait to go to Jerez."
Photos: Alex Farinelli
if you want to always be updated on our news
Follow us here
MotoGP | GP Le Mans, Bagnaia: “All the conditions are there to be fast”
MotoGP | Casey Stoner critical of 2027 regulation
MotoGP | GP Le Mans, Rins: “We will test in the race what we tested in Jerez”
MotoGP | GP Le Mans, Quartararo: “Special race”
MotoGP | Le Mans GP: Brembo, demanding circuit for the brakes
MotoGP | GP Le Mans: Michelin ready to face the home Grand Prix
MotoGP | Le Mans GP, Espargarò: “I can't wait to arrive and start getting the results we deserve”
It's a shame, you could have had a good race, but racing is like that...
Pity…
Maybe you didn't get to the podium anyway because of the clutch but you took home a few points.
It will be for the next race, just get a first place and recover.
@Lyon
for goodness' sake, don't light the fuse ;)
Strange, you burn the clutch at the start and he had started very well from the grid, it's a contradiction...
If the clutch had burned out, half the field would have passed him at the green light
..if you talk like that..you must be someone who at most has a spitfire...if you have a motorbike with a clutch you have to worry about hearing certain things..
maybe he expressed himself wrong, it's a term that is used, maybe he had just overheated her at the start...
if you saw, on the straight and even before he seemed almost stationary, in fact 4/5 drivers passed him.
@Cujo
In fact, in the Gazzetta or Stadio (I don't remember which of the two newspapers) there was talk of an overheated clutch.
However, at the end of the day, whatever the reason, he fell.
Clutch? Tires? His mistake? Both things added together?
The result does not change…
It can happen, everyone falls; can he end up on the ground for once too?
It's just a shame that it didn't happen in the practice sessions but in the race.
These are the races, I can only wish the "Mythical Vale" to recover the points lost in the next race.
in fact there is little to say, bammm, it's over....
I was just saying, it's a generic expression to say that the clutch burns out even if it's overheated and slips a bit
if it really burns as tonykart hypothesizes, you can go directly to the garage…..
It will be for the next one.
He must also have gotten nervous after losing all those positions on the straight and pushed a little too hard.
It's plausible that there was a problem with the bike due to all those lost positions, because it didn't just happen on one lap, but also on the following one with an easy overtaking by Pedrosa and the Honda wasn't that much faster than Yamaha in practice.
Seeing the number of crashes in Austin during the race, Lorenzo's crash in the warm up, and all those in Argentina, there would be something to complain about the tyres.
They certainly don't guarantee constant performance.
It's strange that Lorenzo fell in the warm-up when he wasn't pushing very hard, and Rossi's fall is also strange, he didn't seem to have gone over the limit, and he didn't touch the white line or curbs and he wasn't even off the racing line.
Based on what we saw in Argentina, with Jorge's crash but also with the discontinuous performances between 2 bikes that should be almost identical, there is some doubt about the fact that the Michelins do not guarantee all the same tires.
With Bridgestone it happened that tires turned out badly, but this is not the case with Michelin, it seems that they just can't maintain the same quality on all tyres. Something needs to be improved in series production and also in quality control.
Maybe they should pre-run the tires by doing a stress test, monitoring the temperatures and deformations of all the tires before giving them to the drivers.
The track was slippery for sure, the rear tires have never been tested, but many riders couldn't stop with the front, so that's the biggest problem.
These tires were made in a hurry to overcome the problems encountered in Argentina. Harder carcass and softer rubber. Production done in France, for all the drivers and making even more than necessary I suppose, then send them to Texas, in time for testing.
Objectively, it is not easy to assume that the product is sufficiently standardized, also because the time for the appropriate tests was not "abundant". Differences could already be noticed on the B tires (several times we read about a tire that wasn't performing as it should have), it's difficult now to expect this on tires that wouldn't even have been produced if that problem in Argentina hadn't been evident.
I'm not displeased with these tyres, they are already almost at the level of the Japanese and the fact that they are not yet perfectly known makes the races even more uncertain.
It's true but if, as they say, they are not all the same in terms of performance, the result is distorted.
Why "falsified". These things have already happened, even with the Bridgestones. A product made at the last minute, to make up for a defect, while still falling within the established tolerances, may have pieces that are at the limit, this does not mean that the result of a competition is distorted.
The fact that they performed differently is just a hypothesis put forward here, no driver has said such a thing.
Such tires were not even supposed to be produced. I find it normal that clearer differences can be found between one tire and another, even if they fall within the established tolerance limits, without, for this reason, having to think of a distorted result.
I think Michelin has given a somewhat simplistic explanation and there is a lot of confusion.
From what I read in the French articles and from this site I assume that since Monday they have loaded the stiffer carcasses with a base layer with the compounds suitable for the Austin GP.
These are suppositions, but the tire that had failed in Argentina had not exploded. The rear tire had worn off.
This makes me assume that tires are made with at least 2 layers of “rubber”.
There is the casing, a first cover and then a second which is adapted to the circuit.
In short, just like in Argentina, a part of the tire was already ready, then they did additional vulcanization to adapt to specific conditions.
You have to wonder why they didn't bring the stiffest and safest carcass straight away.
Clermont-Ferrand is practically a Michelin city, they have the international airport 2 steps away.
Perhaps they even made 3 trips by plane to bring the various containers to the Austin circuit.
It takes about 13 hours with a direct flight from Clermont-Ferrand to Austin, in short they could have produced the tires on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.
To deliver them Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
From what I understood, on Friday they only had the softer compound on the rear and then on Saturday and Sunday they also gave him the harder one.
That they didn't bring them to Argentina because a similar combination wasn't foreseen?
However, I don't understand where you're going with this.
You put forward the hypothesis of tires that give different performances, based on crashes, but the crashes occurred due to the loss of the front tire, while the problem encountered was with the rear tire. The front has remained unchanged if I'm not mistaken.
ligera I mean that the problem is not only at the rear.
Perhaps with that other casing, the one with the tire that loses skidding, the bikes have better balance, while with the stiffer casing, by losing grip at the rear, they also partially compromise braking performance and the bike overall is more unstable.
The fact that they have brought the stiffest carcasses ever tested by the riders suggests that for the moment they remain a second choice that significantly compromise performance to bring a feared safety, which perhaps given the falls is not so high.
In their statements, the drivers are careful not to attack the sole supplier of the tyres, but actually in the last 2 weekends we have seen some rather strange things.
Perhaps not so strange after all given that the tire supplier, despite having been preparing for a few years, is still faced with almost unknown situations.
Especially on the 2 circuits we have just raced on.
The riders said that the front had improved a lot, and this is probably the case, but given the crashes, especially of illustrious riders, such as Lorenzo, Rossi and Pedrosa, all 3 of whom crash very little, it is strange to have seen so many of them falls in so few weekends.
Furthermore, they are in good company, and those who crash are certainly not inexperienced pilots.
Above all, the Honda riders except Marquez complained about the lack of grip at the rear, and this could be due to the tyres.
However, in addition to the rear, there were also strange choices on the front, see Marquez who raced with the soft despite knowing that it would be difficult to get to the end of the GP.
This means that what Michelin brought to the front, for example in Austin, caused serious problems.
They can accuse the track of being slippery, but in my opinion it's a strange excuse.
The circuit was clean from the rain and from the various free practice sessions, the race was run in the dry and I don't think it rained enough to clean the rubber deposited on the circuit.
So the problems are different, and are probably caused by the tires and the pressures they are forced to use for safety.
In addition to the crashes, there were several long crashes, riders who make very few mistakes, they have done all kinds of things, they are people who adapt to variable conditions in a very short time, and yet they seemed to be on eggshells.
At least in the last 2 races Michelin has encountered problems with both the front and rear, I hope that now that they return to Europe, things will change.
I hope that in past seasons they have had the opportunity to do tests on European tracks to find water so as to have useful feedback for the race weekends and to guarantee the safety of the riders.
Before the championship started I knew that the tires would make the difference in this world championship, but I didn't expect either the positive result in Qatar, or even the negative ones of the last 2 GPs.
I was thinking of a greater focus on safety on Michelin's part, but guaranteeing the necessary grip.
Maybe GP in which some bikes were more advantaged and others with other bikes had an advantage.
Instead it seems that they have brought compounds that are either super performing like those from Qatar and everything is fine, or compounds that cause problems in both safety and performance.
Maybe they bet a little too much for the last 2 GPs.
In the end I think they lose out both in image and money. Why do more tests in Austin with their drivers, and in Argentina it was cheaper both in terms of image and costs to rush to make new tires and have to quickly deliver them to the circuits.
In short, I'm not saying that they made themselves look incompetent because they aren't at all, but let's say that the figures they made were avoidable, and it would have cost them even less to invest more in advance to be more ready in case of problems.