<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 2 2008, 09:56 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I disagree with some points and agree with others. First of all, this is prototype and 07 was the first year with a major displacement change. I seriously doubt the bikes were "close enough" in development to make "accurate" assumptions. Even on the same team, the bikes were different in significant ways. In the first year of such a major change in what is prototype racing, in the first year is when the bikes are MOST different (in other words, least similar). I'm a bit confused with your point about Michelin on the tracks you listed. Also, as you were going through the races, did you factor in DNFs where Rossi, Pedrosa, & Hayden would have surely placed higher?
I think your were making the point that both Bridgestone and Michelin had fair parity. I have a tendency of agreeing with this assessment, but the season was so wacky and dominated by one Bridgestone rider, that the tendency of saying the tire was better can be made.
I don't doubt there were differences from Rossi's to Edwards bike, or Hayden to Pedrosa's, or maybe even Stoner's to Caparossi's. But I don't think the difference in bikes between each team mate was huge. Agree?
Then we can look at Edwards, Hayden, Caparossi, lump them in with Melandri, Hopkins, Vermulen, and we can see how close they finished in the chamionship and how close they finished in some of the races. Now we can assume that the bikes were indeed some what close. Agree?
Now if we take Rossi Pedrosa and Stoner, They clearly were just better then anyone else, on the same bike, tire, doesnt matter. Its clear they are better riders. So if they rode "similar" bikes to their team mates who only finished mid pack and the bikes mid pack were some what close. We can assume all the bikes are some what close and the riders make the biggest difference. Agree?
I know even the best rider on a poor bike doesn't have a chance. the races at Quatar and Shanghia last year were a joke to watch with the HUGE speed advantage Stoner had at the first few races. But For most of the year, I think the bikes weren't seperated by as much as the riders were seperated by talent.
I tried my best to make the tires equal last year using facts. I tried to take out the top 2 riders for each tire maker in each race which would have often included Stoner, Rossi and Pedrosa, but the results became even more one sided. I already removed the wet races, I could have just removed the races Pedrosa or Rossi didn't finish but then we would just be making excuses for Michelin.
Facts are facts. And I used FACTS, which is the average finishing position for the top five riders on each tire. Those are hard numbers that don't lie. What I used the facts for was to make an assumption like I stated. An assumption is a normative statement so please don't confuse the assumption as fact also.
So what this means is I have facts to back up my assumption.
