Casey Stoner Critiques the Impact of Large Asphalt Run-offs in Modern MotoGP Racing

Casey Stoner Critiques the Impact of Large Asphalt Run-offs in Modern MotoGP Racing

Casey Stoner, the Australian two-time MotoGP world champion, is renowned not only for his exceptional talent on the track but also for his candid opinions about the sport he dominated for several years. Since his retirement, Stoner has frequently expressed his views on the evolution of MotoGP, offering insights that reflect his deep understanding of motorcycle racing. One of his most pointed critiques in recent years is about the introduction and prevalence of large asphalt run-offs at circuits. In Stoner’s view, this development is “the worst thing that’s happened to motorcycle racing,” and his argument touches on both the technical and philosophical elements of the sport.

The Rise of Asphalt Run-offs in Modern Circuits

Asphalt run-offs, introduced over the past decade in most MotoGP circuits, were originally intended to improve rider safety. Traditionally, circuits were lined with gravel traps that provided a buffer between the track and barriers. The purpose of these gravel traps was to slow down riders who lost control and slid off the track, thus reducing the severity of injuries from high-speed crashes. However, gravel traps posed risks of their own—especially if riders hit the ground hard or tumbled, they could become entangled in their bikes or experience further injury from the uneven surface.

The shift toward asphalt run-offs was seen as a solution to this issue. Unlike gravel, asphalt allows riders to maintain better control of their bikes after going off-track. In theory, they could regain control and re-enter the race rather than having their bike stuck in gravel, which usually meant the end of their race. This innovation was met with approval from many quarters, particularly in terms of improving rider safety, but for Casey Stoner, it signaled the beginning of a deeper issue for the sport’s integrity and competitiveness.

Stoner’s View: Undermining the Spirit of Racing

Stoner, who won his world titles in 2007 and 2011, believes that the introduction of these expansive asphalt run-offs undermines one of the core elements of motorcycle racing: the risk-reward balance. In his era, going off-track came with significant consequences. If a rider made a mistake and went wide, there was an immediate penalty—whether that meant crashing, losing valuable positions, or retiring from the race altogether.

For Stoner, this risk was an integral part of the sport. Riders had to balance pushing the limits of their bikes and their abilities against the potential cost of making an error. The margin for error was narrow, and only those who could handle that tension succeeded at the highest level. In his words, “We used to have to put the bike on the limit, but now, if you go wide, it’s almost like nothing happens.” He believes that these asphalt run-offs remove the consequence of mistakes, allowing riders to be more reckless or less precise without paying a high price.

Encouraging Less Disciplined Riding

One of the key criticisms Stoner has about the asphalt run-offs is that they encourage less disciplined riding. In his era, riders had to develop an acute sense of precision because of the unforgiving nature of the circuits. A minor mistake could result in significant consequences, which cultivated an atmosphere where discipline, focus, and technical mastery were paramount.

With the presence of asphalt run-offs, Stoner argues that riders today are less concerned with making small errors. They can afford to take more risks, knowing that the consequences of a mistake are far less severe. This, he believes, dilutes the skill required to excel in MotoGP. “When we raced, you had to be pinpoint accurate,” Stoner has remarked. “Now, riders can make mistakes and go straight across these asphalt run-offs and rejoin the race without much of a penalty. It’s changed the essence of what makes racing so challenging.”

Safety vs. Spectacle: The Debate

Stoner’s critique of asphalt run-offs touches on a broader debate within motorsport: the balance between safety and spectacle. Proponents of asphalt run-offs argue that rider safety should be the top priority, and the changes made to modern circuits have undoubtedly reduced the frequency of severe injuries and fatalities. In fact, MotoGP as a sport has worked hard to improve rider safety over the years, and the introduction of better track designs, along with advanced rider gear and protective systems, has contributed to a safer environment overall.

However, Stoner counters that in making the sport safer, some of the spectacle—the essence of what makes MotoGP thrilling—has been lost. Fans come to see the best riders in the world battling at the edge of their abilities, and part of that appeal is the danger and risk involved. While no one wants to see riders hurt, Stoner argues that there needs to be a balance between ensuring safety and preserving the competitive spirit that makes the sport so compelling. “Of course, safety is important,” Stoner acknowledges, “but we need to remember what racing is. It’s about pushing yourself and your machine to the absolute limit and knowing that if you go too far, there’s a price to pay.”

 The Changing Nature of Track Design

Another element of Stoner’s critique revolves around the design of modern circuits. He argues that the wide run-off areas have contributed to changes in how tracks are designed, making them less challenging for riders. In earlier years, many circuits had narrower corners, tighter turns, and elevation changes that required significant skill to navigate. Today’s circuits, with their expansive run-off areas, tend to be wider, faster, and more forgiving—again reducing the margin for error that once defined the sport.

For Stoner, these changes diminish the excitement for both riders and fans. “Tracks used to be an art form,” he has said. “You had to learn every nuance, every bump. Now, it’s almost like the tracks are being built to make it easier for everyone.” This, he believes, not only reduces the skill required to succeed but also makes races less interesting to watch, as the challenge of mastering a difficult circuit has been watered down.

A Call for Reconsideration

While Stoner’s views may be seen as traditionalist by some, they offer a valuable perspective on the ongoing evolution of MotoGP. His critique invites the sport’s organizers, fans, and riders to reflect on the balance between safety and the competitive spirit that has made MotoGP one of the most exciting motorsports in the world. Stoner isn’t calling for a return to the days when rider safety was less prioritized, but he does believe there is room for improvement in how modern circuits are designed.

In his view, the sport can achieve a balance between safety and challenge—one that respects the lives and wellbeing of the riders while maintaining the skill and discipline that make MotoGP so thrilling. As he has said, “Racing is dangerous, and we can’t forget that. But that danger is also part of what makes it so rewarding. If you take away all the risk, you take away part of what makes it great.”

Stoner’s opinions resonate with many traditional fans of MotoGP who long for the days when the sport seemed less sanitized and more about the raw challenge of rider and machine against the track. Whether the sport will move to address these concerns remains to be seen, but Casey Stoner’s voice remains a powerful one in the ongoing conversation about the future of motorcycle racing.