I am surprised that as a scientist you consider the evidence to be definitive from only one arm of an experiment even regardless of the small sample size and possible external factors such as injury; how do you know how fast stoner would be on an unchanged 2010 yamaha set up for rossi?
The problem here is that you are seeing what I see as a possible outcome based on the current data, as a law.
Speculation is a big part of science. The collected data from arranged events ( eg. tests ), aimed at answering the questions of that speculation, does help understand eventual understanding of what is later treated as a law.
These test have debunked several myths and added to several speculations. This site, being a forum, is more like the lunchroom in a lab.. not a textbook.
I think when I speculate that I have used phrases as "I can't see it ... ", or " ... shows that that".
I think I have made it quite clear in a past post that "it would be nice to see Stoner on Rossi's Yam" indicating there is still unknowns there, however since that is not possible we do have data on Rossi on Stoners bike ........ so that part of the equation has been answered.
Now, the interesting bit: ............ given that the bigger part of the assertions, in the Stoner v's Rossi equation, were from Rossifans claiming that "anybody could ride the Duc", "Rossi would clean up on the Duc.", "the Duc. rides itself", " the duc is the fastest" .......... adnauseum ...... all aimed at discreditting Stoner and the reason he has been able to match, or beat, Rossi in wins, then these assertions merely needed to be discredited to answer the biggest speculation .......... the Valencia tests, have answered that.
In the end:
Its still a Rossi v's Stoner "Grandialato" (
) that seems to be raging. ..... and given all the past speculations around the lunchroom table here:
Rossi on the Duc. at valencia ........... do you really think this went anything other than very much in Stoners favour?
Stoner on the Honda ................ it would be very hard to find anything but the ultimate positive in that toward Stoner.
I strongly suspect that we will never see a true test ( say 3 races each on each others bikes ) of the supremacy of either Stoner or Rossi, but in terms of the tests and indicators we can get access to, well thats why there is bucketloads of "lab. lunchroom discussion" going on very actively here.
The biggest problem though is when one of the tests/indicators goes Stoners way. The data is hard to digest, though some it would seem have swung toward at least a different view on Stoner. Then you have folks like Talpa, Reg., and co. ..... no matter how much data shows their speculations to be wild and fanatical, they still stick with their first ever assertion ...... whether they can't take in the data and its implications is dificult to say, but it is mindnumbingly "
....... ing" when after 4 years of data, indicating the oposite, Talpa comes out with "Stoner uses the most electronics" again
Yes its not "the lab," here, its "the lunchroom", but some of the questions help us decipher what weare seeing in "the lab.:
PS. Oh and its certainly no "Church" in here ....... so really you need to also take everyones post/s as having the caveat "don't take this as Gospel ... but ..... "
In short I think I'm saying ......... lighten up Michael, its an internet forum not the number 42 ( the answer to the Univer ..... ) , but it does have its uses
