RULES IS ROOLZ
Rules and regulations... they can be a right pain in the arse, but they can also make the difference between great and terrible racing.
In whatever sphere of life we venture, rules are there to keep us in check, whether that’s riding a bike or driving a car on the road, going about our daily business in the street or toeing the line in the corporate workplace. Without them, we are bolloxed. In sporting circles too, it’s no different as in order to make it as fair and competitive as possible all round, markers have to be laid down as to how it all operates otherwise there’s little point. Some rules stay the same indefinitely – the offside rule in football being a case in point – and others change with ridiculous regularity (NASCAR Playoffs anyone?). And as with any rules, new or ancient, people will always look at ways of manipulating them for their own benefit. Bending the rules is as much a modernday trait as the idiom suggests and we all do it, whether we realise it or not. But when it comes to two-wheeled motorised sport, it takes on a whole new dimension as increasingly, more than any other time in history, the regulations not only dictate what happens on track for now, they influence the direction in which both the manufacturers and the sport will go in years to come. Organisers and promoters have to delicately balance the whims and wishes of the teams they work with as well as those of the bike builders they can’t do without while putting on a spectacle which both trackside and television audiences wish to subscribe to via means of close and exciting racing. All of this while future-proofing the concept to allow the necessary investment and embracing modern developments in technology and trends. It’s not easy, and not every championship gets it right – as is best highlighted by the current allure of the World Superbike championship, for instance.
The World Superbike debacle
In years gone by, it’s been the most exciting championship in existence, drawing humongous crowds and big named racers to its melting pot, but those heady days seem to have vanished wholesale from the World Superbike experience. At times it’s been embarrassing to see just a handful of loyal spectators manning state of the art grandstands at some of the best circuits from around the world, because fans simply haven’t been drawn to the World circus like they used to be. Why’s that? Well, because the racing’s got a bit boring, to be honest. It’s all got a bit predictable to the extent that 2018 and its anticipated rule changes for the championship can’t come soon enough. Nothing at all should be taken away from Jonathan Rea winning an unprecedented third consecutive world title this year as he continues his quest to be one of the all-time greats of World Superbikes, but it must be said he’s been on the best bike with the rules as they were.
It was commonly acknowledged that something needed to be done to slow the Kawasaki (and Ducati) juggernauts, so in late October this year, the Superbike Commission comprising Gregorio Lavilla (World SBK sporting director), Rezsö Bulcsu (FIM CCR director), Takanao Tsubouchi (MSMA representative), Daniel Carrera (World SBK executive director), Paul Duparc (FIM CCR co-ordinator), Charles Hennekam (International Technical Commission co-ordinator) and Scott Smart (FIM technical director) met and subsequently announced changes for the 2018 MOTUL FIM Superbike World Championship.
What’s the plan?
Aimed primarily to address the performance disparities and to ensure greater equality among teams and factories, the measures will see rev limits replacing weight penalties and air restrictors as a performance equalising mechanism, as well as a performance-based concession points system for allowing engine updates during the season. In layman’s terms, these changes fall into three main categories: the performance equalising system, a system of concession points and the price capping of a range of suspension, chassis, and engine parts related to performance. The performance balancing system and the concession points system are aimed at creating more parity between different manufacturers, while the price capping of certain parts is aimed at limiting costs, while ensuring that all teams have access to the same parts.
Mirroring a similar system which has revolutionised BSB so successfully, the most effective change is the adoption of rev limits to balance out the performance aspect. Out goes the old system of using air restrictors, introduced primarily to slow down the 1200cc Ducatis, as not only were the factories becoming more adept at squeezing more power out, but they were cumbersome. That, and it only really addressed the issue between twin and four-cylinder machines so while Ducati’s threat was contained, it allowed Kawasaki – the most technically resourced four-cylinder manufacturer – a free shot. The other manufacturers were so way behind the eight ball, the rule didn’t help them at all.
By switching to rev limits, it gave the organisers more control and with this being on a sliding scale with some manufacturers allowed more than others, it impacts the peak power and torque of each individual make. So if Kawasaki keep disappearing off into the distance, they’ll reel the revs in, and give the others a few more to catch them up and make them more competitive.
This will all be done via a defined mathematical formula using algorithms considering numerous factors (lap times, top speeds, results, laps led, Granny’s maiden name etc.) to determine performance as to whether you qualify for 250rpm more or less than you had at the start. Rev limits will be imposed via the ECU and monitored by the compulsory FIM-approved datalogger on each bike and the formula will be re-calculated every three rounds to ensure fairness.
For better… or worse?
Hmmm, all very complicated say some, and shouldn’t the others be playing catch up by their own means rather than penalising success? Most purists think so, but desperate times call for desperate measures and something needed to be done otherwise the ship was sinking. It could be construed as papering over the cracks as everyone knows the real aim of the rev limits is not so much raising the limits for underperforming manufacturers, as lowering the limits for the manufacturers which are currently dominating.
Also addressing the performance inequality issue is the introduction of concession points, which will be used to allow less successful manufacturers to catch up with the those who are already winning. It’s like the one used in MotoGP, which has proven to be successful, but instead of testing allowances, manufacturers with concessions will be allowed to provide upgraded engine parts.
It works by awarding points for each podium finish; three points for a win, two points for second and one point for third. At two stages during the season, concession points will be tallied up for each manufacturer, and those who lag too far behind the manufacturer with the most concession points will be allowed to introduce new, upgraded parts. It’s a contentious point at present as various aspects to this ruling are not clear and the wording is a little ambiguous but in effect, the worse you do, the more parts you can throw at the bike, although the list of parts which can be upgraded is limited. Concession points will be evaluated at the end of the season as well. Any manufacturer who trails the leading manufacturer by 36 points or more will be allowed upgrades for the following season as well. Manufacturers within 36 points will be forced to retain the same spec of certain parts for the following year.
Practically speaking, if we were to take a snapshot of this rule at the end of the 2017 season, it would mean that Kawasaki and Ducati would have to race next year with unchanged engines while the other manufacturers would all be allowed updates. Again, isn’t that penalising success?
The third element to this relates to concession parts being part of a pricecapping initiative, to both restrict the cost of development, and to ensure that privateer teams have the same access to updated parts as the factory supported teams. Engine parts which have been designated as concession parts must come from an approved supplier, appointed by the factory. They are all price capped, to keep them affordable for privateer teams and in addition to concession parts, there is also a list of approved parts, including chassis and suspension components, which are also price capped.
Of course, the prime objective of these rules is to reduce the advantage of the
Kawasakis and Ducatis, especially the factory bikes, while at the other end of the grid, it helps the manufacturers and teams who are lagging behind to catch up. By ensuring that certain key performance parts are available to all teams at an affordable price, that makes it easier for privateer teams and slower manufacturers to compete.
The factories, even KRT and Ducati Corse, acknowledge the fact that racing is their best means of R&D, and while success is their aim, it’s not at all costs. They want to beat the opposition, not slaughter them, and with diminishing audiences because of their dominance, it’s not good, and they know that. So, they accept the need to change the rules. Notwithstanding, Johnny Rea will still win races, so will Ducati, and the privateers will still finish last, but it’s a step in the right direction, and as for World Superbikes, it could be the shot in the arm that’s needed to resurrect this once brilliant series. Time will tell…
British Supebikes… the right way
When it comes to rules and regulations, the consensus is that BSB leads the way in terms of innovation and forward-thinking, having evolved a successful formula over its 20-year modern existence. That’s mainly down to the vision of the man who has been at the helm throughout that tenure, Stuart Higgs. Acting as both race and series director, Higgs knows that to keep on top of the game and ensure sustainability, there is a basic need to keep things fresh and in a sport where the very essence is gaining an advantage over your rivals, that means constantly monitoring and changing the rules as necessary.
From the heady days of the Cadbury’s Boost Yamahas and Red Bull Ducatis right the way through to leaner times whereby the factory-backed Ducati and Honda teams were solely dominating and grid sizes dwindling, Higgs, along with the MCRCB governing body and in conjunction with the teams and manufacturers reacted by firstly introducing a control tyre and then establishing an EVO class in 2010, which was the forerunner to today’s modern BSB rules. That pioneered the use of a series specified ECU, with no traction control, launch control and antiwheelie strategies as well as a one-bike rule. At the turn of the decade, series promoters MSVR spent a period of two years engaging in detailed discussions with teams, manufacturers and other interested parties to formulate the current technical rules. Bearing in mind at that time, the broader economic climate was at its toughest and within world motorsport there were many examples of manufacturers and teams reducing their activity as a consequence. Despite the recession, the quality and quantity of teams and riders in the British Superbike Championship hit an all-time high, but such was the vision of Higgs and Co, they realised that in order to develop it even further it was clear that decisive groundbreaking technical regulations were required.
The objectives of the new, MCRCBapproved BSB technical rules were to: 1. Create a regulations platform of minimum four years’ validity from 2012 to 2015. 2. Reduce the requirement for and use of certain technologies. 3. Improve the spectacle of the competition. 4. Increase the opportunity for private teams to compete competitively. 5. Limit performance by using the limits of the standard components together with allowing limited modifications to improve reliability and durability and to create parity among motorcycle models and types.
In short, what it meant was modifications were few and far between and only allowed if deemed necessary. Pistons and valves remained standard with minimal work to the crankshaft, camshafts, connecting rods, valve springs, inlet and exhaust ports and the cylinder head allowed. An aftermarket gearbox with a single set of gear ratios nominated for the season could also be used.
Crucially, a rev limit 750prm above standard, set by control specification and mandatory MoTeC Engine Control Unit (ECU) was introduced to flatten the playing field electronically, all of which was done to ensure costs were kept under control.
Winning formula
It’s proved a masterstroke as the racing at BSB level continues to be close, exciting and importantly, unpredictable, certainly leading the way in terms of competition. In 2017 there were no fewer than ten riders on six makes of motorcycles that topped the podium, with six additional riders making it
onto the podium in the 26 races. No other series in the world can match that. BSB was the first to allow the transition from 750cc to 1000cc fours and the first series to utilise a control tyre when Pirelli came on board, and the Italian brand remains a pivotal part of the series. The safety car innovation, which surprisingly no other series has replicated, ensures continuity for races to go ahead in less serious situations and such basics as fan integration, commercial awareness and media interaction all tick boxes with the BSB cause.
And with the constant evolution in not only BSB, but the support race packages as well, 2018 will see the introduction of a Moto2-based formula alongside the dwindling Supersport format for example. That on the back of the Motostar concept of Moto3/Standard machines in recent seasons, which is already putting kids on bikes in foreign championships. When it comes to getting it right, BSB indisputably leads the way and is likely to continue on in that same vein for the foreseeable future.