Team Ineos Discussion thread

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

I'm not saying I read it that way, I am saying that it could be read that way. They just need to clear it up.

I guessed that, I just used that reading as it was the newest post. The problem with the rules is that they are now having to cope with a lot of R and D that the rule makers probably don't understand. Similar to how the teams are collaborating with F1 teams, I think the UCI should take a page out of their book and speak to the FIA to get some help on how to control all this properly. If they want to of course.

I'm guessing people are questioning Sagan's kit from yesterday too?

I'm guessing this kind of kit has a very similar effect to a golf ball. Of course, many other teams have similar kits, just an example.

You can't read I gather? the dimples on that kit as the ones on the Sportful TT kit are part of the fabric
this

isn't

if the argument is that the patches with droplets are "a part of the jersey" as they are stuck to it, might as well put a Camelbak between two layers of fabric. Ta da! Part of the jersey.

Lets not be rude now, nothing good will come of that.

As I pointed out in my reply to you in my reply to your post just now, layered jerseys are not new and that Sagan jersey is likely 2 or 3 very thin layers of different fabric.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Whether they are technically legal or not right now, the UCI should really just issue standard skinsuits to each team. Otherwise cycling is going to turn into Formula 1, where the race is decided by technological advancements off the bike, rather than on it. Currently, it's just not a level playing field; most teams can't afford an exclusivity contract with Endura or Castelli for the latest designs.

That would also remove the current disadvantage that jersey leaders have when having to race in the UCI standard skinsuit. Which is a ridiculous situation.

The biggest disadvantage of the standard race leader kit is probably that they don't fit as well

as for the exclusivity contract - I may be mistaken but isn't there a rule that anything riders use must be available on the market as well? except prototypes

I think it has to be available on the open market in theory. But not in reality. They can charge such ridiculous prices, or make sales only through special requests to a company.

And anyway, even if they genuinely do put the new skinsuit or whatever on open sale the day or two before the Tour, it's obviously way too late for the smaller teams to make use the same technology.

It seems a bit strange that the UCI is still enforcing weight limits on bikes for pretty much the same reasons - i.e. to prevent an 'arms' race where the richest teams will generally benefit most - but allow the big budget teams to still gain an advantage in different ways.

Almost certain that Castelli will release that skinsuit at some point. The amount of money people spend on TT gear, even for local races is insane. If it works they'll be worth a fortune to them.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Whether they are technically legal or not right now, the UCI should really just issue standard skinsuits to each team. Otherwise cycling is going to turn into Formula 1, where the race is decided by technological advancements off the bike, rather than on it. Currently, it's just not a level playing field; most teams can't afford an exclusivity contract with Endura or Castelli for the latest designs.

That would also remove the current disadvantage that jersey leaders have when having to race in the UCI standard skinsuit. Which is a ridiculous situation.

The biggest disadvantage of the standard race leader kit is probably that they don't fit as well

as for the exclusivity contract - I may be mistaken but isn't there a rule that anything riders use must be available on the market as well? except prototypes

I think it has to be available on the open market in theory. But not in reality. They can charge such ridiculous prices, or make sales only through special requests to a company.

And anyway, even if they genuinely do put the new skinsuit or whatever on open sale the day or two before the Tour, it's obviously way too late for the smaller teams to make use the same technology.

It seems a bit strange that the UCI is still enforcing weight limits on bikes for pretty much the same reasons - i.e. to prevent an 'arms' race where the richest teams will generally benefit most - but allow the big budget teams to still gain an advantage in different ways.

Almost certain that Castelli will release that skinsuit at some point. The amount of money people spend on TT gear, even for local races is insane. If it works they'll be worth a fortune to them.

Absolutely, and especially with all the publicity they've now managed to generate. But no doubt whn releasing this skin suit, they'll already be well advanced on working on the next one - and so teams with exclusivity contracts with the best manufacturers like Sky or Movistar will always be one step ahead of the other teams. And will maintain a 'bought' advantage.

 

[bambino]

Re: Re:

I'm not saying I read it that way, I am saying that it could be read that way. They just need to clear it up.

I guessed that, I just used that reading as it was the newest post. The problem with the rules is that they are now having to cope with a lot of R and D that the rule makers probably don't understand. Similar to how the teams are collaborating with F1 teams, I think the UCI should take a page out of their book and speak to the FIA to get some help on how to control all this properly. If they want to of course.

I'm guessing people are questioning Sagan's kit from yesterday too?

I'm guessing this kind of kit has a very similar effect to a golf ball. Of course, many other teams have similar kits, just an example.

You can't read I gather? the dimples on that kit as the ones on the Sportful TT kit are part of the fabric
this

isn't

if the argument is that the patches with droplets are "a part of the jersey" as they are stuck to it, might as well put a Camelbak between two layers of fabric. Ta da! Part of the jersey.

Lets not be rude now, nothing good will come of that.

As I pointed out in my reply to you in my reply to your post just now, layered jerseys are not new and that Sagan jersey is likely 2 or 3 very thin layers of different fabric.

Agree, you can see easily the effect in both, Sagan's and Berto's suit has been created using thin layers. The only difference to Sky suit is that the layers might be bit thicker and not consistent over upper body.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Absolutely, and especially with all the publicity they've now managed to generate. But no doubt whn releasing this skin suit, they'll already be well advanced on working on the next one - and so teams with exclusivity contracts with the best manufacturers like Sky or Movistar will always be one step ahead of the other teams. And will maintain a 'bought' advantage.

This is why we need a clear set of rules that aren't open to interpretation and are actually enforced. And we need a budget cap. But unfortunately the UCI are as incompetent as a bag of potatoes so we'll be waiting a long time

 

[spalco]

Re: Re:

Have you seen the photos? there is LITERALLY a patch with droplets on the upper arm and on the shoulder. The rest of the fabric is see through so you can clearly see it was added as a seperate layer. I'm NOT saying you can't have a kit consisting of multiple fabrics sewn together but in this case an extra layer was added with the droplets. It's as clear as water.

Firstly, it might just be a thicker material, and secondly where does it say the fabric can be only single-layer?

I mean, if you ask me, I wouldn't mind forcing the riders to return to wool jerseys and putting newspapers under the shirts on descents, but otherwise I don't see any way to restrict skinsuits developments like this.

I'm not even sure this Castelli shirt violates the spirit of the rules.

 

[bambino]

Re: Re:

Absolutely, and especially with all the publicity they've now managed to generate. But no doubt whn releasing this skin suit, they'll already be well advanced on working on the next one - and so teams with exclusivity contracts with the best manufacturers like Sky or Movistar will always be one step ahead of the other teams. And will maintain a 'bought' advantage.

This is why we need a clear set of rules that aren't open to interpretation and are actually enforced. And we need a budget cap. But unfortunately the UCI are as incompetent as a bag of potatoes so we'll be waiting a long time

Rules agree, but it is extremely hard to write the rules covering all possible future development the scientist may come up with. Ask ski jumpers, downhill and XC skiing, speedskating etc. But of course they could at least try.

Budget restriction for kit development, I don't know if that is a good idea. I fear the manufacturers would lost their interest to pro-cycling if they don't get their develoment funded by pro teams (partially). And those manufacturers are among the biggest sponsors of the whole sports (obviously).

Salary cap to riders though could be something to consider.

Sorry for OT.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Whether they are technically legal or not right now, the UCI should really just issue standard skinsuits to each team. Otherwise cycling is going to turn into Formula 1, where the race is decided by technological advancements off the bike, rather than on it. Currently, it's just not a level playing field; most teams can't afford an exclusivity contract with Endura or Castelli for the latest designs.

That would also remove the current disadvantage that jersey leaders have when having to race in the UCI standard skinsuit. Which is a ridiculous situation.

The biggest disadvantage of the standard race leader kit is probably that they don't fit as well

as for the exclusivity contract - I may be mistaken but isn't there a rule that anything riders use must be available on the market as well? except prototypes

I think it has to be available on the open market in theory. But not in reality. They can charge such ridiculous prices, or make sales only through special requests to a company.

And anyway, even if they genuinely do put the new skinsuit or whatever on open sale the day or two before the Tour, it's obviously way too late for the smaller teams to make use the same technology.

It seems a bit strange that the UCI is still enforcing weight limits on bikes for pretty much the same reasons - i.e. to prevent an 'arms' race where the richest teams will generally benefit most - but allow the big budget teams to still gain an advantage in different ways.

Almost certain that Castelli will release that skinsuit at some point. The amount of money people spend on TT gear, even for local races is insane. If it works they'll be worth a fortune to them.

Absolutely, and especially with all the publicity they've now managed to generate. But no doubt whn releasing this skin suit, they'll already be well advanced on working on the next one - and so teams with exclusivity contracts with the best manufacturers like Sky or Movistar will always be one step ahead of the other teams. And will maintain a 'bought' advantage.

Are Sky paying for an exclusivity contract? Or are Castelli giving them gear for free? I would have thought it the second to be honest but I don't know. Castelli will be doing R and D anyway and they'll get to showcase their new kit on the likely TdF winner and best team in the peloton. That's likely worth a huge amount of money to them.

The way to do it is to have a salary cap of course and this might also make racing more competitive, particularly the GTs. But whether cycling could maintain a system is another matter.

 

[miguelindurain111]

Steve Smith, Castelli’s brand manager, says the controversy is much ado about nothing.

The UCI rule clearly states that non-essential items that improve aerodynamics cannot be added to clothing. But Smith says despite the appearance, the dimples are actually part of the fabric itself, not an addition. “The dimples are in the fabric, not on them,” he says. “The way the rules are written, we didn’t even think it would apply to what we were doing. The dimples do not fundamentally change the shape of the cyclist.” Smith wouldn’t reveal the process by which the dimples are formed.

 

[oldcrank]

Re: Team Sky Discussion thread

A minor point, my learned friends, that may or may
not have any real bearing on this discussion but ...
in certain cases there may be slight "divergences"
between English and French texts in the UCI Rules
and Regulations even though the translators work
hard to maintain both the spirit and the letter of
the rules.

If a dispute should arise, then the text in its original
language shall prevail. In the case at hand, the rule
is from Part 1 of the UCI Rules and Regulations and
the original language is French ... but I am not even
close to being fluent in French, so I can't comment
on any possible "divergences".

But perhaps Monsieur Grappe could.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Team Sky Discussion thread

A minor point, my learned friends, that may or may
not have any real bearing on this discussion but ...
in certain cases there may be slight "divergences"
between English and French texts in the UCI Rules
and Regulations even though the translators work
hard to maintain both the spirit and the letter of
the rules.

If a dispute should arise, then the text in its original
language shall prevail. In the case at hand, the rule
is from Part 1 of the UCI Rules and Regulations and
the original language is French ... but I am not even
close to being fluent in French, so I can't comment
on any possible "divergences".

But perhaps Monsieur Grappe could.

Couldn't you get it to rhyme?

Seriously though, this is a good point. One that shouldn't really be an issue in today's age with such an abundance of translators working through legal documents and on behalf of big multi-nationals. But, knowing the UCI, there undoubtedly are numerous discrepancies.

 

[jmdirt]

Re: Re:

Whether they are technically legal or not right now, the UCI should really just issue standard skinsuits to each team. Otherwise cycling is going to turn into Formula 1, where the race is decided by technological advancements off the bike, rather than on it. Currently, it's just not a level playing field; most teams can't afford an exclusivity contract with Endura or Castelli for the latest designs.

That would also remove the current disadvantage that jersey leaders have when having to race in the UCI standard skinsuit. Which is a ridiculous situation.

The biggest disadvantage of the standard race leader kit is probably that they don't fit as well

as for the exclusivity contract - I may be mistaken but isn't there a rule that anything riders use must be available on the market as well? except prototypes

I think it has to be available on the open market in theory. But not in reality. They can charge such ridiculous prices, or make sales only through special requests to a company.

And anyway, even if they genuinely do put the new skinsuit or whatever on open sale the day or two before the Tour, it's obviously way too late for the smaller teams to make use the same technology.

It seems a bit strange that the UCI is still enforcing weight limits on bikes for pretty much the same reasons - i.e. to prevent an 'arms' race where the richest teams will generally benefit most - but allow the big budget teams to still gain an advantage in different ways.

Almost certain that Castelli will release that skinsuit at some point. The amount of money people spend on TT gear, even for local races is insane. If it works they'll be worth a fortune to them.

Absolutely, and especially with all the publicity they've now managed to generate. But no doubt whn releasing this skin suit, they'll already be well advanced on working on the next one - and so teams with exclusivity contracts with the best manufacturers like Sky or Movistar will always be one step ahead of the other teams. And will maintain a 'bought' advantage.

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

 

[spalco]

Did Castelli make any specific claims?

 

[Vasilis]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

If you think innovation is an unfair advantage, I guess everyone should ride the same bikes as well and have the same trainer and training methods, because another trainer could have more effective training methods.

 

[jmdirt]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

I don't think that any team at the TdF buys off the shelf. A quick look at sponsors: Craft, Assos, POC, Oakley, Vermarc, Shimano, Endura, Giordana, Castelli, Etxeondo, Sportful, Champion, Nalini...

The numbers were given by another DS who was complaining not by Castelli.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

I don't think that any team at the TdF buys off the shelf. A quick look at sponsors: Craft, Assos, POC, Oakley, Vermarc, Shimano, Endura, Giordana, Castelli, Etxeondo, Sportful, Champion, Nalini...

The numbers were given by another DS who was complaining not by Castelli.

Exactly, there's no way with so many different teams producing kits, that there is not going to be a difference in watts saved. And, inevitably, the ones spending most on R&D, supported by the richest teams, will benefit the most.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

If you think innovation is an unfair advantage, I guess everyone should ride the same bikes as well and have the same trainer and training methods, because another trainer could have more effective training methods.

Well, it's a different case. There are already a lot of restrictions on bikes (i.e. they all have to be a minimum weight and conform to minimum design standards). The arms race in that respect has been very limited. In clothing, it seems the restrictions are a lot fewer and a lot less clear; allowing the bigger teams to benefit more.

To answer your question though, yes, in an ideal world from a sporting perspective, it would be great to see all riders using virtually identical equipment imo. Like they do in soccer, basketball and most other top sports. But I realise that is not possible given how integral bike sponsors are to the sport. Still, in something as crucial to a race as a time trial, where every watt is vital, I would like to see standardised equipment and clothing.

The rules are all too inconsistent at the moment; for example, you're not allowed the watt saving from a flying Landis position (a free development), but you are allowed the watt saving from heavily researched and invested improvements in clothing (something which the big teams benefit most from).

 

[Vasilis]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

If you think innovation is an unfair advantage, I guess everyone should ride the same bikes as well and have the same trainer and training methods, because another trainer could have more effective training methods.

Well, it's a different case. There are already a lot of restrictions on bikes (i.e. they all have to be a minimum weight and conform to minimum design standards). The arms race in that respect has been very limited. In clothing, it seems the restrictions are a lot fewer and a lot less clear; allowing the bigger teams to benefit more.

To answer your question though, yes, in an ideal world from a sporting perspective, it would be great to see all riders using virtually identical equipment imo. Like they do in soccer, basketball and most other top sports. But I realise that is not possible given how integral bike sponsors are to the sport. Still, in something as crucial to a race as a time trial, where every watt is vital, I would like to see standardised equipment and clothing.

The rules are all too inconsistent at the moment; for example, you're not allowed the watt saving from a flying Landis position (a free development), but you are allowed the watt saving from heavily researched and invested improvements in clothing (something which the big teams benefit most from).

I think the fact that not everyone has the same equipment is good for innovation, if everyone had the same equipment there would never be any incentive to improve anything. And if a rider wants to improve in a certain area, he may have to switch teams, but that makes it interesting. Like this, everyone tries to improve in different ways and whatever works will be adopted by the other teams. The fact that certain teams can throw more money at a problem doesn't mean that a particular rider can't beat another rider. I don't think you can deny a team the ability to innovate because it would allow them to win, that's the point of a sport.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I already posted about this a few pages back: I have a five year old *MTB skin suit that was made by Champion during their early days (read: they weren't cutting edge), and its made using three types of material: mesh (most of the top), smooth (most of the bottom), dimpled (shoulders). Plus all of the seams are placed to control air flow. My point being that pro teams will all have access to similarly fast clothing. Hopefully someone is already testing so we can get some real numbers soon because my guess is that there isn't as much difference as was stated (especially in the rain).
*the MTB skin suit was just their TT suit with two tiny pockets sewn in the back (we used to be self supported).

I don't think they do have access to similarly fast clothing. Not if one big team has an exclusive contract with Endura and is pumping a lot of R&D into the technology, while another small team has to buy something off the shelf.

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe for one minute that the differences are as big as Castelli were claiming for Sky. But even a saving of a few watts, which I think is realistic for the big budget teams, is a 'bought' saving and distorts the competition imo.

If you think innovation is an unfair advantage, I guess everyone should ride the same bikes as well and have the same trainer and training methods, because another trainer could have more effective training methods.

Well, it's a different case. There are already a lot of restrictions on bikes (i.e. they all have to be a minimum weight and conform to minimum design standards). The arms race in that respect has been very limited. In clothing, it seems the restrictions are a lot fewer and a lot less clear; allowing the bigger teams to benefit more.

To answer your question though, yes, in an ideal world from a sporting perspective, it would be great to see all riders using virtually identical equipment imo. Like they do in soccer, basketball and most other top sports. But I realise that is not possible given how integral bike sponsors are to the sport. Still, in something as crucial to a race as a time trial, where every watt is vital, I would like to see standardised equipment and clothing.

The rules are all too inconsistent at the moment; for example, you're not allowed the watt saving from a flying Landis position (a free development), but you are allowed the watt saving from heavily researched and invested improvements in clothing (something which the big teams benefit most from).

I think the fact that not everyone has the same equipment is good for innovation, if everyone had the same equipment there would never be any incentive to improve anything. And if a rider wants to improve in a certain area, he may have to switch teams, but that makes it interesting. Like this, everyone tries to improve in different ways and whatever works will be adopted by the other teams. The fact that certain teams can throw more money at a problem doesn't mean that a particular rider can't beat another rider. I don't think you can deny a team the ability to innovate because it would allow them to win, that's the point of a sport.

I understand your point, and accept that is how it is in the world today. But I certainly don't think the point of sport is about the ability to innovate. I think it is about athletic endeavour and tactics. For me, sport should always be about the best athlete, or best tactician triumphing, not the one with the best equipment or the biggest financial backing.

 

[Vasilis]

Then I assume you don't consider Formula 1 racing and the like as sports

 

[silvergrenade]

Not necessarily. Most of the motorsport is about the best machine+human combination(MotoGP, F1, Rally, Sailing)

Edit: Vasilis beat me to it

 

[Vasilis]

Re:

Not necessarily. Most of the motorsport is about the best machine+human combination(MotoGP, F1, Rally, Sailing)

Yeah except the machine plays a much bigger part than the human, I heard that motorsport is about 80% machine and 20% rider

 

[DFA123]

Re:

Then I assume you don't consider Formula 1 racing and the like as sports

To be honest, no, not really.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Then I assume you don't consider Formula 1 racing and the like as sports

To be honest, no, not really.

Good