<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Oct 2 2008, 02:29 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I may hate myself for doing this...
To satisfy all the Rossi boppers out there. IF there is a control tire and everyone gets the same stuff and they arn't made specifically for Rossi and the M1 or anyone else on the field. If all the riders are on equal ground, <u>then Rossi would win.</u> He may have a harder time and the racing would be better but this is taking away any advantage that other teams and riders may have.
Sack. Call me a pedantic arsehole (my wife does every day) but you cannot say Rossi
would win. Rossi
may be the most likely winner.
In life there are only a handful of certainties and pretty much everything else is probability.
Rossi may win, he mightn't either. He is the most likely candidate for the win but I think the whole conspiracy theory thing is dependant on a minutia of impetus in the direction of one or two riders just to affect that probability outcome in a given direction. Really it isn't a conspiracy, it's the organisers interfering in the process, you make a set of rules, and you allow the teams to organise themselves. You only change the rules for the benefit of all parties. The outcome of the process is independent of the organisation of the series.
If it was a science experiment we would have to write it up saying someone has tampered with the independent variable and it’s not so independent any more.
I wasn’t so convinced about all of this until a few teams indicated they would swap to Michelin including all the Ducati bikes and this was rejected.
Everything was in place and now I can only conclude that the series organisers do not want variables in place that affect the outcomes in ways not considered appropriate by them.
If a team (tyres/bike/rider/tech people) is not winning it is incumbent on that team to engineer a better solution. This is the way it has always been. Dunlop tyres were in the series and they were ..... This was alright. Bridgestone were in the series and they were ..... This was alright as well up until 2007 because no one important enough was using them.
Come 2007/2008 the organisers of the series
interfered in the contracts that exist between suppliers and teams. I believe this is unprecedented. This is not changing the rules. This is acting in a way that only benefits one or two teams and riders. This is interfering in the outcome of the series. Tyre contracts have never concerned DORNA previously, except to make a dispensation for Dunlop to allow them to develop tyres. But that was a rule and not an exception to one. Nor did it interfere in existing contract arrangements between teams and suppliers.
This in itself is
evidence prima facia that the organisers have a vested interest in the outcome of the series. Meetings refusals (repeated) and then a threat of a single tyre rule and then supply. This is where the outcomes have taken precedent over the process and not the other way.
The process (rules/racing/teams/suppliers are independent of the organisers) is fair and the other way is a little artificial (like wrestling). Whilst wrestling is 100% contrived pure sport is supposed to be 0% contrived. That's just it. There is no sorites paradigm applicable in pure sport. We have the rules and processes, the race is run, the winner is the winner. We don't micromanage the series.
If this penny drops then what we see is that
even a 1% interference in the outcome detracts from the sport (if you are a somewhat morally ascendant purist).
It's like seting up a democracy, calling an election and then having a coup directly after the election because an unexpected candidate got it. It's backward, third world and artificial.
Now we have the single tyre rule after all of that, after it was averted by the last minute decision to supply Rossi (and later Pedrosa).
After all of that work and interference to avert it why implement it?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Oct 2 2008, 05:11 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, I'm with you. What is this 40% rule and when did Ezy decide it was necessary? He's definitely trying to make it hard on Michelin.
Actually, I have to call my own bluff even though I want to believe it.
Bridgestone have asked for the 40% measure and Ezy probably agreed. Without it, Michelin could switch to supply only Marlboro Ducati. With Michelin/Ducati's budget and Stoner/Hayden at the helm, it wouldn't take long before Bridgestone was the second tier tire manufacturer once again.
A single tyre rule prevents another flip flop in a couple of years time in case Michelin get their .... together. A stampede looks like a stampede when it goes in one direction. It looks really silly to have a stampede one way and then engineer it back the other.
You think that after all the years Michelin were dominant that they are incapable of doing it again?
neither does ezy?
You see sack, that Rossi would be the most probable rider to win the R1 cup out of the whole field. But Casey is real real close and Ezy doesn't want a small chance ...... over by a tyre ever again.
Good enough to state Rossi going to Bridgestone was the end of the single tyre rule.
Good enough to put Pedro there.
Frightened like all .... when Ducati smiled in reassurance and said, "We’ll go to Michelin, no worries mate" (can’t do that in Italian).
Ezy is having a real problem micromanaging probability (with too many variables) that’s all.
