Mind Games...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Feb 22 2008, 11:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>We have already discussed that on this forum. Is 1 point worth the same as a victory? Of course not, but with this system it can become more important. So the system is wrong. The point system should be corrected so that a minimum of 5 points difference is required between two riders, -- if the difference is less than 5 points at the end of the season then the number of victories and podiums should prevail.

This may be your opinion, but the system that exists was clear at the start of the season and Dani exploited that better than Rossi.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Feb 22 2008, 03:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>We have already discussed that on this forum. Is 1 point worth the same as a victory? Of course not, but with this system it can become more important. So the system is wrong. The point system should be corrected so that a minimum of 5 points difference is required between two riders, -- if the difference is less than 5 points at the end of the season then the number of victories and podiums should prevail.
Perhaps we should rewrite the record books. I'm sure Kevin Schwantz would like that. Lets add another two titles to his name. (Check how many times he had more wins than the title holder for respective years).

I do think victories are given a five-point reward versus the second place finisher already. Now let me ask you, if we had a rider that won the first 4 rounds, then sat out the several rounds of the season, but came back and managed several mid pack finishes to accumilate points; and we had another rider that reached the podium over all the rounds in the entire season but won only one race, who would be the champion under your system? To me it seems rather laughable that you would want to change the system because it didn't suit your rider. Lets not forget that Rossi was second in the standing up until the last round and just had to keep his position. But if you recall, he made a mistake, almost went off the track, and by the time he came back on he was over 15 seconds from the next position to regain the second overall standings. He chose to retire and take in his bike and call it a season. That made the difference.

So how do DNFs factor into your neat little system? Should we reward or doc the self-inflicted DNFs? (Keep in mind that Rossi’s DNF at Valencia (the last round) was not a mechanical issue (engine, tire, etc.) so he retired himself. So how does your system deal with this?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 04:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Lets not forget that Rossi was second in the standing up until the last round and just had to keep his position. But if you recall, he made a mistake, almost went off the track, and by the time he came back on he was over 15 seconds from the next position to regain the second overall standings. He chose to retire and take in his bike and call it a season. That made the difference.

I don't really think can use the words 'chose' and 'mistake' here, at least not in any fair way. Let's not forget that rossi had 3 broken bones in his wrist the very fact that he was on the track is a statement to how much he wanted that 2 place and how hard he fought for it.

If Pedrosa can't even handle going on a plane for a promotional event for his team because, poor baby, his hand has a boo boo, do you really believe, that had the possitions been reversed, Pedrosa would have even tried? Based on his behaviour it would have called it a season and spent the whole off season not only bad mouthing Hayden but also doctores.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 11:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>(Keep in mind that Rossi’s DNF at Valencia (the last round) was not a mechanical issue (engine, tire, etc.) so he retired himself.
Reallyyy?????? Sorry,I don't buy it...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Feb 21 2008, 10:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'> (howard @ Feb 21 2008, 03:47 PM)
I don't think Stoner's got the maturity yet to convincingly pull off any mind game-age.
i agree. i think its just idle chit chat and nothing offensive meant by it. jurno's are baying for a war of words like the old biaggi/gibbers days as are some of us here . stoner so far has been a respectful sportsman and i cant see that change in the near future, win or loose.


You guys obviously forgotten your own childhood and don't have any children.

mind games and manipulations are something most learn sub 5 years. These guys with such strong egos were rather on the early side, lets say 2.

To young, pfffft!


Btw. expect rossi to counter with a comment like: I have no hope to beat Stoner, I hope to fight among top ten this year

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#46 @ Feb 22 2008, 06:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Reallyyy?????? Sorry,I don't buy it...

If he repeats it many times maybe? You know, a lie repeated enough times becomes the truth.

BTW: Tom is just stirring, and you take the bate, unlike Rossi. Stoners true apretiation of his achivements came through at the end of last season, when that victory shirt came out. It did <u>not </u>have Pedrosas name on it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Feb 22 2008, 04:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>This may be your opinion, but the system that exists was clear at the start of the season and Dani exploited that better than Rossi.

Exploited? He was just lucky, that's all

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 21 2008, 05:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I just read Casey's statement, and I couldn't help but think this was some reporter's attempt to create a "mind game" himself, not from the person saying it. ...., Casey might have said he thought Rossi was an equal threat the very next sentence. It seems such a short article full of a one sided attempt by the reporter to try and get a fight going. Please, this seems a bit contrived for my blood. I'd be willing to bet a year's wages that if you were to put a microphone in Casey's face today and ask him what he thought about the challenge of racing with against Rossi, he wouldn't say it would be a cake walk. .... the reporter who wrote and published this .........

Just look at these statements:



I'm positive this was the report's creation trying to make it a mind game. Jesus, can this statement be any more leading?




Amazing, but here the Autosport report, wasn't even the ...... who got the story but simply reporting on a story from another publication, the Gazzetta. No wonder he injected his own personal take on it by declaring it a "mind game" and we all are now swallowing his characterization of it as we have done on this thread. I say .... him, that's my characterization of his ........ bias reporting job. Just give us the news ......, we don't need your personal analysis of it, let us make up our mind if its a "mind game" or not. As far as I see it, Stoner was simply making a precise statement, that is he was saying Pedrosa was second in the championship (fact) and "therefore" (notice this little overlooked word) "should" be more worried about Peders. But is he? Can we deduce from this second hand article from this .... head at Autosport what actually was the context of the interview between Casey ant the Gazzetta?

Again, .... the report's injection of sensationalism.



Where is the mind game above? But notice the reporter’s injection of his own ....... want to make something of it below:




Saying Rossi won’t “take the bait” in this “war of words” is the equivalent of the school yard egging of kids tring to get a fight out of thin air. I’m sure we all remember the scene, imagine the boys saying, “what, your gonna let him talk to you like that? Oh, I would NOT let him talk to me like that, why don’t you hit him.”

Why have I read so many taking the bait here on this thread? ...., to me this article was written purely to get us all in a tizzy, and from what I'm reading it worked.



Here is the media in a nutshell

A biker is riding by the zoo, when he sees a little girl leaning into the lion's cage. Suddenly, the lion grabs her by the cuff of her jacket and tries to pull her inside to slaughter her, under the eyes of her screaming parents. The biker jumps off his bike, runs to the cage and hits the lion square on the nose with a powerful punch. Whimpering from the pain the lion jumps back letting go of the girl, and the biker brings her to her terrified parents, who thank him endlessly.

A reporter has seen the whole scene, and addressing the biker, says: 'Sir, this was the most gallant and brave thing I saw a man do in my whole life.' Why, it was nothing said the biker, really, the lion was behind bars. I just saw this little kid in danger, and acted as I felt right. I noticed a patch on your jacket said the journalist. Yeah I ride with a Christian motorcycle club the biker replies. Well, I'll make sure this won't go unnoticed. I'm a journalist, you know, and tomorrow papers will have this in first page. The journalist leaves.

The following morning the biker buys the paper to see if it indeed brings news of his actions, and reads, on first page: Biker gang member assaults African immigrant and steals his lunch.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 05:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Perhaps we should rewrite the record books. I'm sure Kevin Schwantz would like that. Lets add another two titles to his name. (Check how many times he had more wins than the title holder for respective years).

I do think victories are given a five-point reward versus the second place finisher already. Now let me ask you, if we had a rider that won the first 4 rounds, then sat out the several rounds of the season, but came back and managed several mid pack finishes to accumilate points; and we had another rider that reached the podium over all the rounds in the entire season but won only one race, who would be the champion under your system? To me it seems rather laughable that you would want to change the system because it didn't suit your rider. Lets not forget that Rossi was second in the standing up until the last round and just had to keep his position. But if you recall, he made a mistake, almost went off the track, and by the time he came back on he was over 15 seconds from the next position to regain the second overall standings. He chose to retire and take in his bike and call it a season. That made the difference.

So how do DNFs factor into your neat little system? Should we reward or doc the self-inflicted DNFs? (Keep in mind that Rossi’s DNF at Valencia (the last round) was not a mechanical issue (engine, tire, etc.) so he retired himself. So how does your system deal with this?

It is your assumption that I do not like the current system because it did not 'suit' what you assume to be 'my' rider. 'My' system is simple and clear enough, but you apparently are inclined to misunderstand it. So let me state it again :

"If at the end of the season there are less than 5 points (i.e. the difference between 1st and 2nd in a single race) between two riders, the classification will take into account the number of wins and podiums to determine who ends on top of the other. If wins and podiums are the same, then even 4, 3, 2 or 1 points will matter."

Easy and fair. No other variables to take into consideration. Not much to discuss really...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (citadina @ Feb 22 2008, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't really think can use the words 'chose' and 'mistake' here, at least not in any fair way. Let's not forget that rossi had 3 broken bones in his wrist the very fact that he was on the track is a statement to how much he wanted that 2 place and how hard he fought for it.

If Pedrosa can't even handle going on a plane for a promotional event for his team because, poor baby, his hand has a boo boo, do you really believe, that had the possitions been reversed, Pedrosa would have even tried? Based on his behaviour it would have called it a season and spent the whole off season not only bad mouthing Hayden but also doctores.
Hi Citadina & #46. I think we are looking at the last race through a different perspective. Please, don't mistake my description of the events as a dig or disrespect to Rossi. I am aware that he injured his hand. But I'm also aware how he rode in that race and how it ultimately effected the championship standing. I'm not saying he was a coward, I'm sure the injury was painful, but he managed to ride pretty well up until he made a "mistake". It is irrelevant what factored into him going off track (barring a mechanical) to be called a mistake. It is irrelevant what factored into his decision to retire and stop (barring a mechanical) to be called “choosing” to stop. Unless he went off track or the bike failed, then I can’t see another way to describe it with the words “mistake” and “chose”. I could have said “quit” but I chose not to use it because that word would be more inflammatory, but it seems I couldn’t please everybody.


Well, as I recall (and I witnessed it with my own eyes) Marco Melandri had a sick off (crash) at Laguna and went on to make the podium. I am aware of the reason why Rossi had difficulty in the race. He had injured his hand in practice. However, he made the grid and was in a position to hold on to second in the points when he made a "mistake" and ran wide onto the dirt. (You may want to check the race again if you have it recorded). Rossi battle for position and managed to pass the rider in front of him, he was even poised to pass another rider in front of him because he had caught up to a pack. The mistake was not induced by his bike or some tire issue, it was a self-inflicted injury from practice, therefore, it was a self-inflicted DNF. What other word would you like me to assign to him riding well enough to catch, pass a rider, and be poised to pass more, but then running wide? How would you like me to describe that? Also, he didn't finish the race. He didn't finish the race NOT because of some mechanical issue but because he "chose" to stop. What other word would you like to assign to his decision to stop the race?

Citadina, as to your second point, I agree.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (#46 @ Feb 22 2008, 09:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Reallyyy?????? Sorry,I don't buy it...
Oh so you must have a different version of what happened? Ok, lets hear it.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 22 2008, 09:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If he repeats it many times maybe? You know, a lie repeated enough times becomes the truth.
Why do you throw your hat into such biased rhetoric? Don't you realize it evaporates what little if any objectivity you had?

I'm sure your version of what happened in Valencia was that it wasn't Rossi's hand that caused the "mistake" or DNFing from the race, but that it was the TIRES that caused it, right? Haha, oh yeah, I forgot, you blame the tires for every time Rossi didn't win.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 07:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi Citadina & #46. I think we are looking at the last race through a different perspective. Please, don't mistake my description of the events as a dig or disrespect to Rossi. I am aware that he injured his hand. But I'm also aware how he rode in that race and how it ultimately effected the championship standing. I'm not saying he was a coward, I'm sure the injury was painful, but he managed to ride pretty well up until he made a "mistake". It is irrelevant what factored into him going off track (barring a mechanical) to be called a mistake. It is irrelevant what factored into his decision to retire and stop (barring a mechanical) to be called “choosing” to stop. Unless he went off track or the bike failed, then I can’t see another way to describe it with the words “mistake” and “chose”. I could have said “quit” but I chose not to use it because that word would be more inflammatory, but it seems I couldn’t please everybody.


Well, as I recall (and I witnessed it with my own eyes) Marco Melandri had a sick off (crash) at Laguna and went on to make the podium. I am aware of the reason why Rossi had difficulty in the race. He had injured his hand in practice. However, he made the grid and was in a position to hold on to second in the points when he made a "mistake" and ran wide onto the dirt. (You may want to check the race again if you have it recorded). Rossi battle for position and managed to pass the rider in front of him, he was even poised to pass another rider in front of him because he had caught up to a pack. The mistake was not induced by his bike or some tire issue, it was a self-inflicted injury from practice, therefore, it was a self-inflicted DNF. What other word would you like me to assign to him riding well enough to catch, pass a rider, and be poised to pass more, but then running wide? How would you like me to describe that? Also, he didn't finish the race. He didn't finish the race NOT because of some mechanical issue but because he "chose" to stop. What other word would you like to assign to his decision to stop the race?

Citadina, as to your second point, I agree.


Oh so you must have a different version of what happened? Ok, lets hear it.

AFAIK see you continue to claim that the mistake were a human error, while Rossi says something else.
According to him there was an engine problem. I understand that this is completely unlikely for someone who choose to ignore most technical issues, but accidently there was a similar incident this year on one of the first winter sessions where Edwards went down when going straight forward. This was caused by the electronic handling of the slipper clutch and I find it interesting that edwards were riding little else but the latest revision of the '07 bike. The same Rossi claims had problems. We could speculate in what he would have done with a healed hand, but that could just as well been disaster as success. First corner at Valencia is somewhere you <u>really </u>don't want the rear to lock up when you expect a smoth entry. That can end straight into the wall.

You say "choose to stop" but how much does it require for that description? Should you continue with the gear stuck in first, a flat tire, with blue smoke, push your bike around with a blown engine, ....

In his eyes the bike took away his possibilty to hold on to second, but you "witnessed it with my own eyes", so yeah, he definatly just quit.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 07:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Oh so you must have a different version of what happened? Ok, lets hear it.
See above, it's a bit technical so you better just ignore it, and continue trusting your eyes.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Why do you throw your hat into such biased rhetoric? Don't you realize it evaporates what little if any objectivity you had?

At again I see. Try arguing instead of throwing .... and your credibility might avid plumting like it does with this .....
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>I'm sure your version of what happened in Valencia was that it wasn't Rossi's hand that caused the "mistake" or DNFing from the race, but that it was the TIRES that caused it, right? Haha, oh yeah, I forgot, you blame the tires for every time Rossi didn't win.

Is it suposed to be funny? Why not at least try to stay updated instead of clueless, by actually reading post race comments?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 22 2008, 11:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>See above, it's a bit technical so you better just ignore it, and continue trusting your eyes.

At again I see. Try arguing instead of throwing .... and your credibility might avid plumting like it does with this .....

Is it suposed to be funny? Why not at least try to stay updated instead of clueless, by actually reading post race comments?
Oh I see, it was another phantom engine problem at Valencia. Interesting how you and a few others are the only ones that see and believe that. Why is it that you see what isn't there and don't see what everybody else usually sees? Amazing. Hey, maybe the engine had the same problem the tires had at Motegi? Just like you say, if your repeat it enough, will it make it true? You’re one of a few who always seems to see some imaginary tire shredding, when there isn't any, and now you see imaginary engine problems, when there aren't any. Is there no end to your bias rants? Wow, I think you have topped Pinky, TE, and any other predisposed poster (at least they make no bones about it, where as you try to pretend you have objectivity), but you're nothing more than a Rossi-colored glasses wearing mindless cheerleader. Congrats, you’re the best at this.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 22 2008, 05:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i agree. i think its just idle chit chat and nothing offensive meant by it. jurno's are baying for a war of words like the old biaggi/gibbers days as are some of us here . stoner so far has been a respectful sportsman and i cant see that change in the near future, win or loose.


You guys obviously forgotten your own childhood and don't have any children.

mind games and manipulations are something most learn sub 5 years. These guys with such strong egos were rather on the early side, lets say 2.

To young, pfffft!


Btw. expect rossi to counter with a comment like: I have no hope to beat Stoner, I hope to fight among top ten this year
3 actually, 14 year old boy. 11 year old boy, 7 year old girl. what about you ?

as for your second point here, i say it depends on up bringing and environment. stoner may be a little naive or clumsy with some of the things hew has said to the press, but i believe that's all it is, he is not making deliberate attempts at mind games, just jurno spin at work here.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Feb 22 2008, 12:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>stoner may be a little naive or clumsy with some of the things hew has said to the press, but i believe that's all it is, he is not making deliberate attempts at mind games, just jurno spin at work here.
Ah, the unlikely voice of reason. I totally agree buddy.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 06:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi Citadina & #46. I think we are looking at the last race through a different perspective. Please, don't mistake my description of the events as a dig or disrespect to Rossi. I am aware that he injured his hand. But I'm also aware how he rode in that race and how it ultimately effected the championship standing. I'm not saying he was a coward, I'm sure the injury was painful, but he managed to ride pretty well up until he made a "mistake". It is irrelevant what factored into him going off track (barring a mechanical) to be called a mistake. It is irrelevant what factored into his decision to retire and stop (barring a mechanical) to be called “choosing” to stop. Unless he went off track or the bike failed, then I can’t see another way to describe it with the words “mistake” and “chose”. I could have said “quit” but I chose not to use it because that word would be more inflammatory, but it seems I couldn’t please everybody.


Well, as I recall (and I witnessed it with my own eyes) Marco Melandri had a sick off (crash) at Laguna and went on to make the podium. I am aware of the reason why Rossi had difficulty in the race. He had injured his hand in practice. However, he made the grid and was in a position to hold on to second in the points when he made a "mistake" and ran wide onto the dirt. (You may want to check the race again if you have it recorded). Rossi battle for position and managed to pass the rider in front of him, he was even poised to pass another rider in front of him because he had caught up to a pack. The mistake was not induced by his bike or some tire issue, it was a self-inflicted injury from practice, therefore, it was a self-inflicted DNF. What other word would you like me to assign to him riding well enough to catch, pass a rider, and be poised to pass more, but then running wide? How would you like me to describe that? Also, he didn't finish the race. He didn't finish the race NOT because of some mechanical issue but because he "chose" to stop. What other word would you like to assign to his decision to stop the race?

Citadina, as to your second point, I agree.

Hey Jumkie! Glad to see we´re on the same Petro page...

I never thought you were showning any disrespect, just expressing your opinion, which you are of course entiled too.

Here is the thing, I don't think you can use those terms, mistake and chose in the case because there are far to many variables. When you make a mistake it is something of your own doing, meaning that there is no other variable to consider. For example, faced with and elevador or the stairs you choose to take the staires, on the other hand if you have a broken leg you are forced to take the elevator wheather or not you want to, or if under normal situations you take the stairs. The term mistake is the samething. For example, you have a test in 24h and you spent the whole night partying, then you fail, that was your mistake for chosing to party instead of studying. On the other hand say that you have a high fever the night before, and even though you have studied long before the test, the day of you can't keep your eyes openned. Was it your mistake that lead you to have the fever?

What I'm trying to get at here is that throughout his career we have all seem Rossi do some amazying things and sometimes even things that made him seem almost unbrakable. As a result when he returns to the level of a 'normal' humanbeing (remember he is almost 30 now and healing isn't as easy as it once was) we get shocked and assume it must be a mistake or a choice.

See the thing is that when you have broken bones in your wrist it, or any kind of bone injury, there is a great deal of edema which makes it dificult to move, even with anti-inflamatories there is no way to keep it completely undercontrol. In other words, Rossi 'mistake' in your eyes could have been due to a 'mechanical failer' in his 'machine' (aka, body) which simply refused to do what he wanted it too. As a result he was forced to leave because his machine simply would not work. Like any other machine, our biological ones have limits, limits that we often push (especially in athletes) but sooner or later they do break. And when you depend so much on your 'machine' as an athlete does you have to learn to recognize the signs.

The bottomline is that all of these guys push the limit everyday, and yes, Rossi does make mistakes (Valencia 2006 jumps to mind) just like everyone else, but when he, or any of the otheres are injured, I say we cut them some slack.

Sorry for the long post and sorry about any errors in spelling or with my english.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (citadina @ Feb 22 2008, 12:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>... consider. For example, faced with and elevador or the stairs you choose to take the staires, on the other hand if you have a broken leg you are forced to take the elevator wheather or not you want to, or if under normal situations you take the stairs. The term mistake is the samething. For example, you have a test in 24h and you spent the whole night partying, then you fail, that was your mistake for chosing to party instead of studying. On the other hand say that you have a high fever the night before, and even though you have studied long before the test, the day of you can't keep your eyes openned. Was it your mistake that lead you to have the fever?

Sorry for the long post and sorry about any errors in spelling or with my english.

Good post, and I agree, I may get carried away with my own perspective sometimes. Thanks for working through a reasoned post. As far as your examples, I think he did have some correlation to the hand injury in that it happened while he was at practice, that is, he caused it himself. But if he did have a bike or tire problem during practice to cause the crash and subsequent hand injury, then I would agree with you.

I guess we got off topic a bit. But I just wanted to give my opinion as to why he came third and not second in points. I'm certainly not a Pedrosa fan, but he did have some bad luck just like Rossi this last season. And all things considered, well he claimed the second spot in the standings fair and square no matter how much I rather would have seen Rossi there at least as a consolation for his efforts.

Back on topic: I don’t really think Casey meant his statements as a dig at Rossi. I just think it was a statement of fact that the closest guy to him in the points standings was Pedrosa. Had Rossi been able to maintain the second spot, he would have inserted Rossi’s name as his biggest threat.


I remember when they interviewed Hayden after the Portugal 06 incident, he was trying to avoid giving the reporter any fodder but they kept trying to insist on him saying something inflammatory. So he finally said (paraphrasing): 'It doesn't matter what I say or don't say, it won't be right for you guys, and what ever I say you will turn it into something wrong.' I think that pretty much sums up what I think this particular reporter tried to do with Casey's comments, as I'm sure they will try to do later with Rossi and call it a "war of words."

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 08:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Good post, and I agree, I may get carried away with my own perspective sometimes. Thanks for working through a reasoned post. As far as your examples, I think he did have some correlation to the hand injury in that it happened while he was at practice, that is, he caused it himself. But if he did have a bike or tire problem during practice to cause the crash and subsequent hand injury, then I would agree with you.

I guess we got off topic a bit. But I just wanted to give my opinion as to why he came third and not second in points. I'm certainly not a Pedrosa fan, but he did have some bad luck just like Rossi this last season. And all things considered, well he claimed the second spot in the standings fair and square no matter how much I rather would have seen Rossi there at least as a consolation for his efforts.

Back on topic: I don’t really think Casey meant his statements as a dig at Rossi. I just think it was a statement of fact that the closest guy to him in the points standings was Pedrosa. Had Rossi been able to maintain the second spot, he would have inserted Rossi’s name as his biggest threat.

Thank you Jumkie, it´s so much more fun to chat and exchange points of view! I guess we did go off topic didn't we.... oh well, my bad.

As for Pedrosa, I am no were near indiferent to him (to say I dislike him is putting it mildly) so in any serious discussion about his personal performance I will refrain from commenting as I am pretty sure that it would boil down to rambling....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 22 2008, 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Oh I see, it was another phantom engine problem at Valencia. Interesting how you and a few others are the only ones that see and believe that. Why is it that you see what isn't there and don't see what everybody else usually sees? Amazing. Hey, maybe the engine had the same problem the tires had at Motegi? Just like you say, if your repeat it enough, will it make it true? You’re one of a few who always seems to see some imaginary tire shredding, when there isn't any, and now you see imaginary engine problems, when there aren't any. Is there no end to your bias rants? Wow, I think you have topped Pinky, TE, and any other predisposed poster (at least they make no bones about it, where as you try to pretend you have objectivity), but you're nothing more than a Rossi-colored glasses wearing mindless cheerleader. Congrats, you’re the best at this.

.... YOU Jumkie!
Who's the one repeating lies here!
I've refrained from taking up a dead beaten discussion about the tires despite your frequent reference and one sided version, and I belive it was Le Mans, allthoug I might be wrong, but the important thing is that there WAS an issue with the tires in that ALL michelin riders except the HRC team were pushed on hard tires from michelin, useless in the flooding that appeard.
We didn't know that until the day after and before that I and a few others speculated based on what we did know: under par performance combined with close up pictures of a tire with schreds of rubber flying around. It was of course a speculation and with the official explanation, and yet another excuse from michelin, that theory fell to the ground, just like your speculations regarding Rossi's DNF at Valencia should have been silenced.
I have personal experience with shredded tires (and for the public unnoticed) engine trouble. That include my own races as well as being crew for friends in national, scandinavian and european races. Nothing of what we (and no less than 4 commentator pairs I've heard through You Tube) speculated in were out of place. At the time that was the most plausible explanation allthough it turned out to be wrong. At least I was man enough then and still am man enough to admit I was wrong. That said, your version is a lot further from the truth when you claim there were no problems with the tires. Let us see if your man enough?

I register you just blow away Rossi's verion despite Edwards problems early this year. I'll give you a free one: Edwards did that on purpose to make Rossi's explanation more likely. That's more in your ally: Take a stand and base all your arguments on that, .... the facts, they are boring.

Thank You Jumlie. I might be a Rossi cheerleader, but I'll take that role anytime before yours: The clueless moron that cherry pick other posts.

Lets sum it up:

You: "You’re one of a few who always seems to see some imaginary tire shredding, when there isn't any and now you see imaginary engine problems, when there aren't any."

Me: Official excuse from michelin to the riders supplied with the wrong tires, what more is needed?
Rossi said it was a problem with the engine going into the turns, Edwards went to the ground for a similar/the same? problem a few sessions later. Who are YOU to decide Rossi is lying?

At least I back up my arguments based on some actual information, I can live with makeing the wrong assumtion in the moment, especially as it was quite close after all, what would be dreadfull was if I turned into someone like you who ignore details, technical information and rider information just because I've made up mind on beforehand.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 23 2008, 08:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Who's the one repeating lies here!



Well where are the articles and youtubes showing Rossi had a mechanical failure?

I thought Yamaha said quite clearly they could not find a problem .... which would explain why there were no articles on "the mechanical problem".


The "Valencia Incident" was swept under the carpet well at the time ..... why ruin all that good sweeping by turning it into another "Rossi fan fact"

In motogp there are two perceptions ...... there are facts ..... and then there are "Rossi Fan Facts"