Irrespective of Marquez, Jorge's strategy has always been to push early, escape and race the track. Absolutely agree that Marquez had the pace and package to possibly win this, but Lorenzo would have pushed just as hard without Marc being in the equation, he was equally putting as much space between himself and his Yamaha counterpart and 'champion elect'.
Ah ha! Challenge accepted my friend.
So far, we are in general agreement. Though Lorenzo did say managing that lead became difficult. So if he wanted to put more space that would have proven possibly an impossible task. If there is a counter point here, ive missed it. So I'll just go with: we described the same thing.
My only addition here would be that u consider why Lorenzo has been employing this strategy, that is to get in front, and attempt to clear away, coupled with the fact it hasnt always worked despite the same effort as we observed at Aragon. Review the Indy race. And there is a point to be made here, but I'll make it below.
Of course Rossi NEEDED that second place, and tellingly his immediate demeanour and reaction in Parc Ferme was very reminiscent of when Sete beat him on the final corner at Sachsenring in 2003.
False. He absolutely did NOT NEED this second place. FACT. Absolute indisputable FACT!
Rossi did not need the points from the race you speak of either. VR 2003 WC.
He may have 'wanted' second at Aragon, and in all his experience up until that moment, wanting it, and the act of putting his bike ahead of Pedro was enough...that was until that strange and anomalous day this Sunday. Could Rossi have anticipated this was going to be different then his previous experience? You, Arrabi, are the memory of GP, tell me why Rossi would have anticipated otherwise. I'll assume based on your vast recall that you like everyone else would answer no, that was a surprise for Rossi as much as it was for everyone who have watched Pedro and Rossi race throughout the years. Rossi's reaction was telling, but its my point here that was the story of that body language.
It may be 'Rossi's title to lose' but it is also Lorenzo's title to win and emphatic rides like that make him an even more formidable opponent.
Agree buddy. Ok. Is there a counterpoint here? Because i dont see what you are disputing or maybe you are just pointing it out that Lorenzo is formidable, which fine, yes, I know this, im with u. But if you want to talk about why its Rossi's title to lose and why Lorenzo must muster ever nano ounce of his talent and determination to win against such a situation, then im your man. But for god sakes, dont start with conspiracy dismissive tactics my friend, especially given they both ride M1s, and the need to dismiss any of my proposals if it were a RCV vs M1 discussion shouldn't be invoked.
Edit to add: Next point, let me preface the quote(S) below by pointing out how odd your attempt(S) at disputing something about Dani (which you must have imagined) in the CONTEXT that I was responding to LeviG regarding my point about ROSSI! In other words, you have stretched your bow to fire off an arrow for Dani when in FACT I was making a point about ROSSI and his racecraft. But thats never stopped anyone of US from projecting...
If you think that Dani's finish above Vale was:
A/ Because Rossi was content to settle for third place
and B/ 'Because the of the RCV'; then once again you are letting your own bias, emotions and very possibly denial obscure rational objectivity. In fact why bother with Dani at all? - Perhaps they should have kept Hiro Aoyama on the thing.
Let's stick to what we are contending without revising the point of contention, shall we.
A/ Rossi tried to take 2nd. He arrived in 3rd. Why? The answer is not because he needed 2nd, we established this mathematically. My point, which you have erroneously (at best) interpreted to inject Dani was ABOUT ROSSI, namely: Valentino would have punted Pedro if he NEEDED 2nd.
The message I was conveying to LeviG is that VR was caught by surprise (which is what actually happened, and is not to be construed as a dig to Pedro at all)
however the Rossi I know would have used Makaveli tactics (not unlimited to punting) if he NEEDED those points! That was the point! .... all to do with Pedro. And, given this was the last laps (which apparently their some rule ive never read) I believe Rossi considers punting is 'A-OKay' in last laps and is cause for celebration. That he didn't do it this time was be cause he was SURPRISED by Pedro. I contend, He will resort to it the next time he needs points, this time he was caught by SURPRISE. Make no mistake, Rossi has filed this episode into his memory and will make Rossiesk adjustments.
B/ Your implications for this and previous season in regards to some kind of point that the RCV presents to its riders a kind of impediment is fascinating. If you are going to quote me, then quote me right:
"Pedro beating VR was an anomaly of the rarest kind, PART of that reason was because the RCV... NOT inspite of it". Lets examine my quote further since you took special issue with it:
part 1:
"Pedro beating VR was an anomaly of the rarest kind,..." Unemotional unqualified FACT! What in this do you want to dispute? Its a statement of FACT not opinion. I'm not buying your problem is with me not praising Pedro, because this statement does not convey anything about his performance, does it? "Anomaly" FACT. "rarest" FACT. Nothing here said about his performance!
Ok, lets examine the second part,
part 2: "...
part of that reason was because the RCV... NOT inspite of it" This is what you really have a problem with and nothing to do with anything I've said about Pedro's performance, and how do I know this, because I haven't commented on his performance. It bothers you that I've said "PART" of the reason Pedro beat Rossi has to do with his
RCV. ("PART" of the reason, what do you suppose
is the other part not associated with the RCV? Why do you think I reserved this point with the use of the word "PART"?) If you plan on contending the fact he beat Rossi partly because of the RCV my esteemed and respected friend, then you are welcome to it. You turned this into me saying, Pedro beat Rossi because of the RCV, thats it, you didn't even quote me right, much less disputed the message...which again the context was about Rossi not Pedro. Are you prepared to explain why Pedro was hampered by the RCV to beat Rossi on his M1 at Aragon? You in this very post conceded that Marc may have beat Lorenzo on an RCV, did u not? I suppose you could make a case why Pedro's RCV may have hampered him, which would make for a laborious though interesting read.
Oh, maybe Dani would have been able to mount this challenge on a satellite Honda? Is it 'Dani' then who by sheer will beat Rossi? Or..is "your emotional bias" and fascination and "denial" of the factory RCV's capabilities "obscuring your rational objectivity"? (Damn, it sounds so awful when I say it, though I am just using your words). Maybe "Dani" the man could have won the race then, why settle for 2nd?
(Again, you projected here something you must think I said about Dani while I was making a poignant take about ....... Rossi. Now I can't praise Pedro because you've taken my thunder...now I'll never be able to comment on his performance because it will sound contrived, your fault. You overreacted and now poor Dani will never get to read my assessment of his performance, you happy now? --that was supposed to read funny, hence the superlative, ....... forums.)
That was a damn fine ride by Rossi and Dani. Pedrosa wrung the .... out of that motorcycle - totally rinsed it, and if - just once - you are unable afford him any kudos for that ride or appreciation for the way that he has adapted his riding style, I seriously am beginning to question what pleasure (if any) you derive from watching this sport anymore.
Forums, eh compa? I'll file your emotional appeal here as... misplaced emotion appeal. Unless of course I can make an emotional appeal of my own. Let me paraphrase you: 'It was a damn fine ride by VR & DP' uhm... sounds ominous because I know something must be attached to this statement, otherwise why would you state the obvious...are we disputing something or are u getting ready to set up a point by making that statement-- which is NOT a countepoint to anything ive said, but certainly one that nobody could argue with right? Why would you say that? So.... let me see, whats being set up....
Oh...there it is, right there followed by "-"...
THEREFORE: I am unable to appreciate Dani because im a hater and therefore I should stop watching racing! Out of respect, I shall not entertain your absurd, erroneous, and may I add, un-unique comment.
LOL - remind me why u dont 'like' this.
Edit to add: I see you quoted an exchange I had with LeviG, maybe that explains why you made erroneous conclusions and laborious counterpoints in response to your imagined ones about my take on Pedro's performance (which I have made none...oops). I'll be happy to discuss, dispute, debate the points I have actually made.
So in all fairness, if you are going to play the luck card for Rossi, as many are, then apply it evenly. 
