Thanks! At least now I know what we're talking about. However, radical as his statements seem, they are also rather vague. To me, it reads like he is implying that it was a case of Micheling playing favorites. Which, granted, is not a very strong defence for his crashing, as he should have tried to adapt to a lesser quality race-day tire (if this would have indeed been the case, which is quite a bold claim). What I just do not see is any claim of Honda having people secretly temper with his bike. Pity he was not more outspoken, it would have prevented the confusion.
Perhaps we can all agree that Stoner has claimed that a certain company (which could only have been either Honda or Michelin) tried to give some people on the grid a better chance of winning than others, and that because of this his race day material differed from his practice material. Personally, I'd say he was hinting at Michelin, but I can see how some might claim it was Honda.
By the way, great interview.
Might I add that I do believe I remember Stoner being critical of Honda in the sense of being disappoint by the quality of his material relative to that of the factory effort.
EDIT Sorry, just read the third page:
Compare Honda electronics with Magneti Marelli.
C.S: I don't know what the real HRC stuff is like. They were always telling me last year that I was on the same stuff as Dani and Nicky but now I see that was a whole load of crap. There is no way that they give the same stuff to the satellite teams that the factory team has and it is the same thing with the other companies providing products. They tell you, 'you are on the same this and that,' but it is just not true and now I can see that from the outside because, like I said, my bike changed from session to session and it wasn't anything to do with anything the team was doing. The team was doing a great job, but it was the companies playing around.
POINT TAKEN. It seems than rather either-or, he was referring to both companies.
