Jump to content

FERRANDIS SAYS NO MXON

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, KTMRider4Life said:

But they aren't fans...... Yeah freakin right...

I don't get to vote other than to blow off following these guys from January through May.  

If I had my way, SX wouldn't exist, we'd have MX all year just like MXGP with 2 week breaks in between.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, redrider144 said:

I don't get to vote other than to blow off following these guys from January through May.  

If I had my way, SX wouldn't exist, we'd have MX all year just like MXGP with 2 week breaks in between.

If you pay to watch it,  go to it, or argue online...  any one of those things much less two or three you're a fan.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a believer that mx and sx should split and run at the same time. I like both of them but I don't care for the modern "cookie cutter" sx tracks in use today. I like to go to youtube and watch the old races. I don't think they should be racing 70hp 450's that slower rider can quad on....

in mx they shouldn't be running on flat land tracks....didn't the AMA learn anything at Millers or Elsinore ? MX should have hills and off camber turns....evidently they didn't thus we had Pala and Florida this year.

As far as the mxon,,,,,,I don't care about it and in all the years around mx tracks I can say that it didn't generate much pit talk either....nothing like weekly sx races did...World Mini and Ponca generated more pit talk than mxdn ever did....

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, redrider144 said:

I don't get to vote other than to blow off following these guys from January through May.  

If I had my way, SX wouldn't exist, we'd have MX all year just like MXGP with 2 week breaks in between.

I actually like the break in between the two series.  MXGP is pretty damn boring right now.  I couldn't imagine having to constantly watching one series.  I think the last SX season was some of the best racing in years.  It was exciting and you didn't know who was going to win.  As long as the racing is entertaining, why not like it.  Once JH and AC got hurt, it became boring.  Same happens in the states but so far, SX and MX has been great in the U.S.  I have no complaints.   Not sure why people don't like SX.  Seems to be the norm with some around here.  To be honest, without SX, I think there would be less sponsorship dollars for the teams in MX.  Not only that, but one series equals less riders.  Just look at MXGP.  There was 19 riders on the gate.  That's a shame.  You don't really have that in the states.  Just my two cents.     

  • Like 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, redrider144 said:

Parking lot tracks are lame, no elevation changes.  SX tracks are lame too for different reasons, partly due to being holeshot-cross.  

Then you should reject all tracks in the low countries, including almost all sand tracks in north germany, denmark, poland and baltic states. All those ancient landscapes were formed as it was a river delta with no elevations. So there is not much difference between a man made track on top of a GP circuit or an open common man made track in the fields.

Edited by deanevo
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, KTMRider4Life said:

If you pay to watch it,  go to it, or argue online...  any one of those things much less two or three you're a fan.  

I'm a fan of the riders, not of SX.  You're a fan of one mfg, perhaps that's why it's different to you.

Edited by redrider144
  • Like 5
  • Helpful 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, deanevo said:

Then you should reject all tracks in the low countries, including almost all sand tracks in north germany, denmark, poland and baltic states. All those ancient area's were formed as it was a river delta with no elevations. 

They weren't built in IKEA parking lots, so it's fine.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Budlite said:

I've been a believer that mx and sx should split and run at the same time. I like both of them but I don't care for the modern "cookie cutter" sx tracks in use today. I like to go to youtube and watch the old races. I don't think they should be racing 70hp 450's that slower rider can quad on....

in mx they shouldn't be running on flat land tracks....didn't the AMA learn anything at Millers or Elsinore ? MX should have hills and off camber turns....evidently they didn't thus we had Pala and Florida this year.

As far as the mxon,,,,,,I don't care about it and in all the years around mx tracks I can say that it didn't generate much pit talk either....nothing like weekly sx races did...World Mini and Ponca generated more pit talk than mxdn ever did....

 

That would be the end for MX, way more $$ in Supercross so all but a few riders would just ride SX. You cannot have both series competing against each other for viewers and sponsors because hands down SX would win. I prefer MX too but numbers don't lie. Real fans love MX but most casual fans don't even know it exists and just watch SX. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Budlite said:

I've been a believer that mx and sx should split and run at the same time. I like both of them but I don't care for the modern "cookie cutter" sx tracks in use today. I like to go to youtube and watch the old races. I don't think they should be racing 70hp 450's that slower rider can quad on....

in mx they shouldn't be running on flat land tracks....didn't the AMA learn anything at Millers or Elsinore ? MX should have hills and off camber turns....evidently they didn't thus we had Pala and Florida this year.

As far as the mxon,,,,,,I don't care about it and in all the years around mx tracks I can say that it didn't generate much pit talk either....nothing like weekly sx races did...World Mini and Ponca generated more pit talk than mxdn ever did....

 

I think splitting the series would never work.  The teams are already thin as it is.  I don't many teams wanting SX/MX only guys.  Just think, what if some of the top riders were split.  That would make for bad racing imo.  If you split the series, I think you would eventually have factory teams having to choose one or the other.  Like it or not, I think SX would win out due to viewers and dollars coming in.  Look how bad the mx series in to watch on T.V.  It's on two to three different channels.  Give me a break.  Not only that but some can't even get MAVTV (Dish).  I have to constantly check my listings to see what channel MX is going to be on.  Now SX isn't prefect by any means but the T.V. coverage as a whole is pretty good.  For the most part, one channel.  From what I was reading, the SX attendance was awesome.  That can only help the sport and be good for both series.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, redrider144 said:

They weren't built in IKEA parking lots, so it's fine.

Even if you would build elevations and off camber it would not work with botomless sand. Riders could not climb it, off camber sections would form into trails etc. For those types of tracks you need to have some grip.

Edited by deanevo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tmeyer37 said:

That would be the end for MX, way more $$ in Supercross so all but a few riders would just ride SX. You cannot have both series competing against each other for viewers and sponsors because hands down SX would win. I prefer MX too but numbers don't lie. Real fans love MX but most casual fans don't even know it exists and just watch SX. 

It would probably end the big time mx as it exists today.  More than likely it would have to reinvent itself at a much lower cost. The costs for a factory to field a team is absurd. The price of a modern day bike on the showroom floor is absurd.  Mx is on a collision course with pricing itself out of existence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Budlite said:

It would probably end the big time mx as it exists today.  More than likely it would have to reinvent itself at a much lower cost. The costs for a factory to field a team is absurd. The price of a modern day bike on the showroom floor is absurd.  Mx is on a collision course with pricing itself out of existence.

I agree!  To be honest and if you want a more level playing field, limit what the teams can and can't do.  I don't think you need titanium foot pegs that cost 10K or trick carbon fiber this or that.  Make the bikes closer to what you can buy and then if will be a little more fair for the non-factory rider.  I'm good with full exhaust and suspension (if you can actually go out and buy it), like an A-Kit or WP cone valve.  I'm amazed with how fast and light the bikes are now.  I'm a fan of 4T's but they are expensive.  However, you're getting a lot of technology as well.  Not saying I don't like 2T's but they take a little more work to get them to be on par with a 4T.  I do like 2T's though.  That being said, I don't like having to rejet my son's bikes when we travel to different tracks with different temps/elevations.  I think if 4T were 6-7K or less, they would sell more.  Some bike's are 10-11K.  That's just silly.  Just my opinion.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Z O SICK said:

I think splitting the series would never work.  The teams are already thin as it is.  I don't many teams wanting SX/MX only guys.  Just think, what if some of the top riders were split.  That would make for bad racing imo.  If you split the series, I think you would eventually have factory teams having to choose one or the other.  Like it or not, I think SX would win out due to viewers and dollars coming in.  Look how bad the mx series in to watch on T.V.  It's on two to three different channels.  Give me a break.  Not only that but some can't even get MAVTV (Dish).  I have to constantly check my listings to see what channel MX is going to be on.  Now SX isn't prefect by any means but the T.V. coverage as a whole is pretty good.  For the most part, one channel.  From what I was reading, the SX attendance was awesome.  That can only help the sport and be good for both series.     

cry me a river....I remember getting to watch one race a year on tv. Then we started getting one or two supercross races a year. I remember waiting each month for the new magazine to come out so we could find out who won 3 months ago. It evolved to SX on internet (audio only) then to where we are today. Now it is moving towards pay per view. I don't feel sorry for you because MAVTV isn't on Dish, I also have Dish but I also have the NBC Gold app.....

I am very well aware that SX is subsidizing the sport. The economic scenerio can't continue forever in the AMA just like it can't in the GP's....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, redrider144 said:

I'm a fan of the riders, not of SX.  You're a fan of one mfg, perhaps that's why it's different to you.

Im a supercross fan and a fan of many riders as well.  You can be a fan of riders and motocross but not supercross.  I know a few people like that who pay no attention to sx.  

 

You sir are a fan,  even if you don't like to admit it.  

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Budlite said:

cry me a river....I remember getting to watch one race a year on tv. Then we started getting one or two supercross races a year. I remember waiting each month for the new magazine to come out so we could find out who won 3 months ago. It evolved to SX on internet (audio only) then to where we are today. Now it is moving towards pay per view. I don't feel sorry for you because MAVTV isn't on Dish, I also have Dish but I also have the NBC Gold app.....

I am very well aware that SX is subsidizing the sport. The economic scenerio can't continue forever in the AMA just like it can't in the GP's....

 

Not asking you to feel sorry for me in anyway, not sure where that comment comes from.  Just stating that SX has helped the sport weather people think so or not.  I too remember the days you described.  However, that was before being about to view or find out information on your smart phone which pretty much everyone has now.  It's hard to compare the past with today.  Hence why print is outdated and almost obsolete.  I for one love getting a magazine in the mail even if I already know who won and what not.  I really hope SX/MX doesn't move to a pay per view only system.  If it does, I think the sport will die.  I'm in no way bitching about the coverage on the sport because I think it's great we are able to watch the races for free (per say).

As far as MXGP goes, I think only having one series kinda hurts them.  Like I said, I believe it's way more expensive to run that series than the series we have in the states.  If you fix that, the series would only improve.  Same can be said with our series here.  The powers at be are getting their money in the end.  The riders are the one's wo are getting screwed.  I do agree, the economic part of the sport is killing it's self, year after.  Everything is just too expensive.  Some think the E bikes will help the sport. Yet, I think they will cost more (initially) and hurt the sport even further.    

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redrider144 said:

I don't get to vote other than to blow off following these guys from January through May.  

If I had my way, SX wouldn't exist, we'd have MX all year just like MXGP with 2 week breaks in between.

If Sx didnt exist 9lives would be riding a Kawasaki 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, deanevo said:

Even if you would build elevations and off camber it would not work with botomless sand. Riders could not climb it, off camber sections would form into trails etc. For those types of tracks you need to have some grip.

Makes sense actually.

I can say from experience that downhill corners in bottomless sand really really sucks.  I'm not a good enough sand rider to be on the gas through a downhill corner.

Edited by redrider144
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, KTMRider4Life said:

You sir are a fan,  even if you don't like to admit it.  

There's no other option to follow the US riders from Jan - May.  I'm a reluctant fan.  

I would enjoy SX a lot more if they would eliminate a lot of the stadium races and put them at Nascar tracks instead, like Daytona.  But it seems like this year they even lamed out the Daytona track.  Needs more whoops and turns, less straights and jumps.

Edited by redrider144

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Z O SICK said:

Not sure why people don't like SX.

Because it's StartOCross.  Get the holeshot and you're likely going to win unless your name is Mike Alessi.

Look at Webb's Top 3 starts vs wins in SX and then look at MX.  He gets great starts in MX but gets passed because he isn't faster.

Yeah Webb had a few SX races like when he caught Roczen and eeked out a win, but not the norm.

Edited by redrider144
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redrider144 said:

Because it's StartOCross.  Get the holeshot and you're likely going to win unless your name is Mike Alessi.

Look at Webb's Top 3 starts vs wins in SX and then look at MX.  He gets great starts in MX but gets passed because he isn't faster.

Yeah Webb had a few SX races like when he caught Roczen and eeked out a win, but not the norm.

Not sure I agree entirely.  He gets passed in MX because the other riders are faster.  I think Webb did well in SX because he was faster the majority of the time.  If a rider doesn't get a good start, that's on him.  If a rider who is truly faster can't get a good start and looses, then he's not a "faster" or a better rider at the time.  Having good starts is part of racing.  Not Webb's fault he gets good starts.  When ET gets a bad starts and has to pass a bunch of riders to get into first, that's on him.  Some say Webb got lucky and that's why he won the SX championship.  I think that's total B.S.  Just like when a rider gets hurt.  That doesn't make him "unlucky" lol.  Getting good starts is a product of lots and of practice.  Crashing is a product of making a mistake or being at the wrong place at the wrong time.  I think the riders are so close in speed that getting a good start makes a big difference.  Although I think ET is the fastest MX rider right now, he gets poor starts.  Webb is not on par with ET's speed right now.  However, when and if he does find the speed, he's going to beat ET because doesn't start well.  Just like in SX.             

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:


×