WSBK » Sykes snatches lead with Imola double


Tom Sykes wins his second race of the day to move into the lead of the World Superbike Championship standings for the first time in his career...

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

1234liftR

June 30, 2013 10:01 PM

MGP v WSB

The biggest problem MGP has is that only 4 riders are currently likely to win a race, with the notable exception of Cal if the cards fall.

In WSB any one of at least 10 could win a race, today just happened to be Sykes getting it 100% right.

RSMick

June 30, 2013 10:16 PM

Sham, again your a killer and I think crack alert is more appropriate for yourself, takes more than 1 to be an exodus.

MGP V WSB take those 4 riders out of GP and put them in WSB, the result will be the same, Sykes just isn't in their class.
A question of popularity, how many countries get WSB live or at all? How many attend? How many comments on here compared to GP?
The writing was on the wall with FGS years ago, even a great economist like Shamorone couldn't see it, but most sensible people with a basic acumen could, now it stands a chance of surviving.

Nick636

July 01, 2013 7:15 AM

RSMick

I'm sorry, but you are mistaken.

Last year (And the year before, and the year before) people slated Sykes saying he wasn't in the league of the front WSBK guys. Boy, did he prove them wrong... He is one super rider, kindaold school, and pushes his heart out to get what he gets. I think, were Kawasaki to start a developing their own MotoGP bike again, and Tom were to be the development rider and then race it, he would be well competitive!

GREAT RESULT for Tom.

So nice when the rider and team you've supported as underdogs for years start coming good!!!

RSMick

July 01, 2013 9:30 AM
Last Edited 544 days ago

Nick, in your opinion I'm mistaken. I'm sorry in mine he is good but not in the same league as the likes of Crutch low, way off the top 4. As I reminded he loyal fan PC Mac, Kawasaki didn't want him and if Paul bird didn't stump his own money he would have been out of Kawasaki.
As for the bike its virtually their last gp effort, Gardener said it was by far the best bike on the grid 3 years ago, it just had bad electronics, now they have them sorted.

Nick636

July 01, 2013 9:39 AM

Well, IN MY OPINION, Gardener was mistaken then too. 3 years ago it was still the previous model ZX10! That bike was a turd. 2 Years ago it was a brand new bike, competing against VERY extensively and well developed bikes from Aprilia, Ducati, BMW and Yamaha.

As for your facts on it being their previous MotoGP bike, I think that is less than solid. The MotoGP effort was a Suter frame, and not very good. This bike was new from the ground up (Unlike Aprilia's, which is definitely based off their previous (Abandoned) attempt at MotoGP).

RSMick

July 01, 2013 7:00 PM
Last Edited 544 days ago

Well Nick your opinion is noted however if the bike Gardener said was the best was a dog, think how good the new one is if you are to be believed, old Wayne knows a thing or two.
As for the Motogp bike and Suter that was only for 2006 or 2007, cant remember but I was talking to Ian Wheeler about it not long ago asking which was best and why was Suter dropped, what Hopkins finished on and even the Hayate was pure Kwack. Look at the pictures on Google and the only real difference is the extended nose, it even has the heavy swing arm and we all know about WSB swing arm and forks.
Kwack were the second biggest spenders in WSB last year and probably leading this year, rumours of them returning to Motogp providing engines for Forward, personaly I think they should stick to WSB, GP does not need them and never has, even with 17 bikes.

RSMick

July 02, 2013 8:28 AM
Last Edited 543 days ago

Hmm interesting although I could say NOT TRUE, I am sure 2006 was the Suter partnership after the disaster of 2003.
Another company adopted the Suter chassis in 2007 to run in the 2008 series which was very short lived (clearly see again its a Suter). Not sure Kawasaki would have allowed that.

Edit* Its actually on Suters web-site to confirm the dates I said above with the addition of 204 and 2005.

Page 2 of 4
« 1 2 3 4  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2014 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.