Stop Watch: Spec Racing Rules

For sure I can understand the march in this direction, especially with the financial problems everyone is dealing with and the importance of making the racing closer and more exciting to attract a larger fan base. I can appreciate that the changes are necessary to move the sport forward for the time being. But the engineer inside me cringes every time I see a new rule introduced that brings a series closer to true spec racing, where everyone is aboard exactly the same motorcycle. For me, the fewer constraints the better, as this allows more creativity and puts emphasis on the team and machinery as well as the rider.

The benefits of a more open rules structure, especially in the top series in the country or world, are many. It's here that technological advancement moves from the racetrack to the streetbikes we ride, and when you stifle that progress you slow the pace of streetbike development. For example, I doubt the rate of tire development will be quite as frantic now as it has been in the past, as there's no competitive need to improve with spec tires in practically every major series. Certainly the tire companies are making changes and improving their products, but definitely not at the rate that more competition would bring.

Another area I think spec racing could be detrimental is in rider development-even though the change is supposed to put an emphasis on the riders. Say a promising youngster comes up through the ranks in spec-based classes the entire time. When it comes to making the jump to World Superbike or MotoGP, even though the talent may be there, the setup knowledge may not be. If you've been forced to ride on one tire or stock suspension or brakes your entire career, for example, how will you be able to accurately test different tire compounds, or know what changing fork offset or rotor material does? If we move more toward spec racing in the future here in the U.S., I worry that fewer riders will be prepared to make that jump as they won't have the necessary experience to deal with all the setup variables of a true superbike or MotoGP machine.

A lot of the argument for spec racing comes back to money and making a series cheaper for more people to become involved, but for years people have used creativity and knowledge to overcome a lack of funds. When I was racing the 250GP class, I didn't have much money but my bikes were always fast, thanks to my brother putting a lot of effort into learning about two-strokes and trying different things when building the engine. Spec racing will take away a lot of that creativity and knowledge, as it simply can't be used. Close up the rules and you stop the tire companies burning the midnight oil to come up with the perfect compound, the little guy toiling away in his garage on the next big breakthrough in motorcycle technology. As an interesting side note to this, a lot of the people I raced against on 250s have gone on to bigger and better things in the industry, and I don't think that's a coincidence; we all learned a lot about motorcycles-things what we wouldn't have learned racing production-based bikes-because we had to in order to be competitive.

It's all well and good to make the racing closer and cheaper for everyone, but we have to remember that the sport as a whole isn't about just the riders, nor is it about just the money. It's about continual improvement in both performance and safety. It's about the John Brittens and Kenny Roberts of the world putting together something special in their shops. It's about competition in all aspects of the racing. I'm happy to see the rules packages we have now, both here and abroad, but I hope that eventually, when things turn around financially, the series' organizers will open up things up again.