Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Racing' started by yooperbikemike, Jul 12, 2012.
Don't hold back, son. Let's hear it?
Where do you think we are? Jo mamma? Even I don't go there, and I'm an opinionated git with a talent for insults, and serious lack of give a frack.
I think you destroyed your entire argument in your last line. As far Stoner's pass on Bautista, there was a gap, just like the move by Rossi on Stoner that your alright with.
Simoncelli was killed in a freak accident, a one in a million chain of events. Yes, he did often ride aggressively, but that had little to do with his death. If very, very, very little something was different, he would have just crashed and gone off the track, and we´d seen him go back to the pits on the back of a scooter, just like we see those guys do dozens of times every race weekend. But this time the bike stayed on its wheels, and swayed back into the racing line at exactly the wrong time.
It could have happened to anyone, who rides a MotoGP bike at a competitive pace.
At the start of the season Honda was producing "in excess of 250hp" (according to press release by LCR whereas Ducati claimed "more than 230hp" in their press release. Assuming both sides are sandbagging, it's probably safe to assume that Honda's power advantage they introduced last year with their 800 has carried over into the 1000 bike this year. It should also be noted that the press release from LCR is referring to the satellite team bikes; no reason to believe the "factory" bikes don't get the newest, juiciest bits sooner and that the advantage Stoner or Pedrosa have with respect to power is actually greater.
That the Ducati's can't put the power is beyond dispute. I simply don't believe they have a power advantage anymore.
The race commentators seem to agree that Honda has the best motor, Yamaha has the best complete package, and Ducati the most, er, never mind.
Well, it never hurts to get a few back when you throw them out there - I kinda like it myself, both the give and the take!
I disagree. It was a fundamentally different situation. Rossi was beside and past as they turned into the bend. Then he lost the front because he went in hot. If you read my post again, you'll see that I consider it a debatable situation (one could e.g. in his defense say that he trusted his front end and went for the overtake, but this time it let him down, and one could argue that he should know better than to go in hot like that - but it wasn't anywhere near as extraordinarily bone-headed a move as Bautista's for example).
Bautista otoh was ahead and already turning in when Stoner - what, like a bike length behind! - decided that his was the more important/valuable/righteous line and proceeded to force Bautista out, basically using him as a braking pad like rallycross cars do. There's nothing debatable about it, it was one of the dirtiest moves I've seen - in fact I can't recall another one quite as flagrant at the moment - and it was sheer luck that prevented them from winding up in the shit. He should have the same penalty as Bautista got.
I looked the rules up now to see what they specifically say about situations like these. Unfortunately, they (at least the ones open publicly - can't say if the race direction have further guidelines) are so ambiguous that it gives the people with teams such as HRC or Yamaha behind them a get-out-of-jail card. And an opportunity to ensure that no one f*cks with their championship bids (J-Lo's campaign and PP last year twd Sic is a disgusting example), while keeping them in the clear when they do something similar themselves.
I guess that it does warrant the "anything goes" statement someone made above, so I have to give best to that. But in that world, neither Bautista nor Stoner should be penalised. And I'd be ok with that too, although it would create a much more dangerous situation - but no one is forcing these guys to go out and ride. At least it's fairer - what I seriously dislike is differential treatment. The Senna-Prost-Balestre soap opera back in the day (at Suzuka was it?) comes to mind. If I want to watch politics, I'll tune in to the live broadcast of the Parliamentary sessions we have.
The Bautista incident put another rider out of the race and injured him. Stoner's pass didn't.
If Stoner had taken his target out of the race I think we'd see a penalty. Outcome counts, not just apparent intent.
Out of control is out of control. It's just different luck that you don't take anyone with you.
Hard passing, it's unheard of
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KDv3Dv2qIps" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
True, outcomes are part of how to judge a situation. But it was sheer luck that no one was taken out and injured this time, so all it should affect is the severity of the penalty. I'd be inclined to hand out the same because how else will the brat learn - next time he (or rather Bautista) may not be so lucky, but I could see a milder penalty as well in light of what you say. But since it was the world champion, sitting on a factory Honda, we'll not see anything happen. Until someone does the same to him, of course..
Dug in the archives for that one Sure, that pass on Gibernau at 2:20 is pretty much as bad as Stoner on Bautista now. When was it, 2005? So that makes it the worst pass in 7 years then.
There are surely other examples, but my gripe is why Bautista gets penalised and Stoner gets nothing in these cases. And how J-Lo and Porcellain boy with their teams can be allowed to gang up on a spectacular rider to make politics out of racing.
Nice vid. 2005 was right when I started watching motorcycle racing and I remember seeing the Biaggi thing. I think its racing, and at the end of the day, you leave a door open, and someone comes through it, its your fault. Probably the reason why you see a lot more guys riding more defensively these days..they have learned to expect what the guy behind would do...cause that is what they would do if trying to gain position.
Oh yes, the lactose would be flying if it was the other way 'round
the main difference in these incidents is that one rider actually took the other out...If Stoner actually knocked Baitista off the bike then the comparison could be made.That is the only comparison.If Stoner keeps colliding with other riders perhaps it may be diferent
I disagree. From my perspective, Simo was trying to recover from a washout, fully aware of the congestion around him. While I don't fault him for that, it is a race after all, he did have a choice. Unfortunately, he made a bad gamble. I don't see it as unrelated to his history.
Simo's history deserved more serious concern from officials and bosses. He repeatedly discounted legitimate criticism. He had a problem and he denied it. Why should he listen anyway, he was being promoted up the ranks and widely celebrated?
Jorge and Pedrosa were his best friends. They were brave enough to confront him but they were instead seen as enemies. That's a sign of immaturity.
Something bad was bound to come of it. Little did I know just how bad.
After a period of mourning, it would be tragic not to examine and learn something from the situation.
I must say this post is a shameful bunch of Hopefully this thread is gone in a few days.
I stopped reading anything credible into your opinion right about there...
let's just leave Marco out of this please
The only credible part of your post.
Thanx for that. Was startn t get a bit rrrrrrrrrrrr
You better watch out! I almost got a vacation from ADVRIDER for saying similar things post Simo crash.
Cast out the heretics!!
Not sure how we got to be dissecting Simoncelli again but (this being the internet) everyone gets to voice their opinion unless they are advocating bad things on good people.
Diversity is good - right?