MotoGP: 2015 round 18 - Valencia (SPOILERS)

michaelm said:

As I have said, you are the one running the conspiracy theories now. MM tried hard enough at PI to beat everyone in the race, including both Lorenzo and Rossi, whilst making no moves which put either of them at risk of dnfing; why after all these years of gp bike racing history is there suddenly a requirement for him to have done any more than this?.

As I have posted previously, his last lap was of the order of 0.3 seconds quicker than his penultimate lap at PI, as opposed to him catching up over 0.4 seconds on the last lap at Assen before the end of the lap to make his abortive passing attempt on Valentino. He was hence equally "obviously" faster there, and Jorge wasn't anywhere near, why did he wait till the last lap on that occasion?

Click to expand...

No, I just reported what Rossi said, and I insist that what he said is not the conjectures of a lunatic. It is something that cannot be proven, but it is quite in the realm of possibility and compatible with the facts. If one was to say only what can be proven in a court, we all would mostly stay shut.

Comparing these possible actions with the true conspiracy theories that typically say that the whole system is rigged is, I'm sorry, superficial.

RCV600RR;390699[B said:

]Why is that when Iannone says something, he can't be taken at face value, but when MM or JL say something, they must be taken at face value? [/B]It's okay to question Iannone's reasons for proferring that evidence, but to suggest that you authoritatively know why Iannone made that comment is just absurd.

Any evidence that might support Rossi's view is discarded as false, yet any evidence that might support MM's view is unquestionably accepted.

Hate blinds.

Click to expand...

Why is that when Marquez says something, he can't be taken at face value, but when Rossi and Ianonne say something, they must be taken at face value?

See how that works both ways, spooky huh?

JPSLotus said:

Iannone came to the same conclusion because Rossi was ready to throw him under the bus to the Italian media if he didn't go along with it.

Click to expand...

False. Rossi defended Iannone's racing without any reservation, in a way he could not possibly backpedal on it. The supposed threat is only in your mind.

povol said:

Why is that when Marquez says something, he can't be taken at face value, but when Rossi and Ianonne say something, they must be taken at face value?

See how that works both ways, spooky huh?

Click to expand...

Because when you say something that doesn't correspond to your actions, doubting is legitimate. Not only Rossi, but many other very competent observers had the impression that MM was "playing around" in at least three decisive races. The motive behind this playing attitude cannot be proven, and the playing itself is open to interpretation and justification (setup or tire issues or whatever), but there remains room for doubt. So when he insists he always gave 100% to stay in front in those races, believing him is hardly automatic.

povol said:

Why is that when Marquez says something, he can't be taken at face value, but when Rossi and Ianonne say something, they must be taken at face value?

See how that works both ways, spooky huh?

Click to expand...

In fact, I try to take all parties at face value. Unfortunately, the parties' comments contradict each other.

I give more weight to Iannone's comments as he was the third party involved in the battle and best placed to make a judgment, other than Vale or Marc. Despite this, Iannone's possible biases must be borne in mind.

This is why, only a few posts ago, I wrote that "Unfortunately, the evidence is not sufficiently clear to make a judgment either way (although I'd love to know what exactly Alzamora said to Rossi...)."

#22 said:

The amount of wild conjecture you manage to amass into a post is just mind boggling.

Click to expand...

Coming from you, and with the mandatory "Like" by Jums, I take it as a compliment by the real experts.

Cool Blue said:

The "lunacy" is in making accusations that could never be proven about actions that were within the rules.

Click to expand...

That maybe was an impulsive action that backfired, but why lunacy? He said what he thought.

RCV600RR said:

Why is that when Iannone says something, he can't be taken at face value, but when MM or JL say something, they must be taken at face value? It's okay to question Iannone's reasons for proferring that evidence, but to suggest that you authoritatively know why Iannone made that comment is just absurd.

Any evidence that might support Rossi's view is discarded as false, yet any evidence that might support MM's view is unquestionably accepted.

Hate blinds.

Click to expand...

Because the burden of proof is on those making the accusations to provide evidence. MM might be presumed to know how hard he himself was trying, so he is being called a liar, while all that Rossi is presenting is supposition.

What statements has JL made that are questionable, btw? He was presumably trying as hard as he could himself, and certainly appeared to me to be doing so, and as far as I know has not commented on how hard MM was trying at PI or Sepang.

RCV600RR said:

In fact, I try to take all parties at face value. Unfortunately, the parties' comments contradict each other.

I give more weight to Iannone's comments as he was the third party involved in the battle and best placed to make a judgment, other than Vale or Marc. Despite this, Iannone's possible biases must be borne in mind.

This is why, only a few posts ago, I wrote that "Unfortunately, the evidence is not sufficiently clear to make a judgment either way (although I'd love to know what exactly Alzamora said to Rossi...)."

Click to expand...

MM was the one riding the bike, and rode it sufficiently hard to win the race. Rossi and Iannone not only weren't riding the Honda at PI, but have never ridden it.

Jumkie said:

This post is fascinating. Marquez, the mastermind, thwarted Rossi's championship starting with Phillip Island. Passing the baton to Iannone, who apparently was also on the take, to screw up Rossi's title. I just wish they had been wearing a clear visor, so we could have seen Marc's wink to Ianonne! Ok Crazy Joe, I did my part, time to chase down Lorenzo, you gotta beat Rossi for my evil plan to be complete.

Click to expand...

Got to quote your sidekick #22 here, -- the amount of invented theories and wild conjectures you can attribute to others in a single post is mind-bobbling. The simple fact that you can think them out at such speed is an indicator of the severe overheating of your mind. Use lighter fuels i you can...

michaelm said:

MM was the one riding the bike, and rode it sufficiently hard to win the race. Rossi and Iannone not only weren't riding the Honda at PI, but have never ridden it.

Click to expand...

When you gain almost a second in the last lap on Lorenzo to beat him, there is no need to have ridden an Honda recently to understand you might have held it back in previous laps. Again, its not illegal, and the motive cannot be proven, but doubt is legitimate.

J4rn0 said:

No, I just reported what Rossi said, and I insist that what he said is not the conjectures of a lunatic. It is something that cannot be proven, but it is quite in the realm of possibility and compatible with the facts. If one was to say only what can be proven in a court, we all would mostly stay shut.

Comparing these possible actions with the true conspiracy theories that typically say that the whole system is rigged is, I'm sorry, superficial.

Click to expand...

Again, what is factual is that he won the race and beat both Lorenzo and Rossi.

I can also easily come up with any amount of conjecture which fits the facts with no actual supporting evidence evidence as to why Rossi might have said what he did.

You also didn't answer why him riding a last lap 0.3 seconds faster to catch Lorenzo at PI was suspicious while catching up 0.4 seconds on Rossi on the last lap at Assen wasn't.

michaelm said:

Because the burden of proof is on those making the accusations to provide evidence. MM might be presumed to know how hard he himself was trying, so he is being called a liar, while all that Rossi is presenting is supposition.

What statements has JL made that are questionable, btw? He was presumably trying as hard as he could himself, and certainly appeared to me to be doing so, and as far as I know has not commented on how hard MM was trying at PI or Sepang.

Click to expand...

Lorenzo is on record saying that Marquez may have spared him a possible pass at Valencia "to keep the title in Spain". This was also the impression of most observers. Again, not illegal, and motives cannot be proven, -- and Lorenzo's title was deserved anyway -- but this is what he said, and to an extent what happened at Valencia substantiates Rossi's "accusations".

J4rn0 said:

That's MM93 and Honda's mantra and you repeat it diligently, conveniently ignoring that Marquez, before eventually arriving in front of Lorenzo, made sure that Lorenzo would not be beaten by his direct title rival, -- and note that in that race Rossi was as fast or faster than Jorge, so the possibility was concrete. That's worth more than the 5 points Lorenzo "lost", because anyway he scored more points than Rossi!

Click to expand...

J4, you post some good logical well thought out arguments .............. and sometimes you slip and (IMO) this is one where you slip.

All of the speed that you are saying Rossi had over JL at PI is NOT shown in any lap charts and let us remember that JL started further up the grid (lap charts and sector breakdowns are attached)

Yes one could argue that Rossi's times on these charts were affected by MM but if one is to believe that then one should also accept that MM's explanation as to why he slowed for 5 or so laps (overheated front tyre) is as plausible.

J4rn0 said:

It was not apparent at first sight, even less to Rossi who was involved in it, but when you review the race you can see how Marquez, by lingering with Rossi and Iannone, (note that he could have easily left them there as he was faster) made sure that Rossi would never get enough advantage on Iannone in the corners to avoid being re-passed by the faster Ducati on the straights. He stayed with them until the last lap to be sure, then with sudden ease he caught up with Lorenzo and won.

Click to expand...

Well if it is not easy when during the race, how come VR knew immediately at Sepang?

I mean, if one cannot deduce alleged interference until one has reviewed their race (and btw, I see that as quite plausible) than does it not make VR's melt down worse as (using the logic) he could not have known until after the race, thus his in race reaction to me was worse as it has no explanation relevant to his Thursday press conference.

J4rn0 said:

Thanks to this (shall I repeat this?) Marquez made sure that Lorenzo scored more points than Rossi, and that is what mattered for the championship.

Click to expand...

Straw grab, sorry

If he really did not want VR to win the title he would have allowed JL to win ......... simple as he could not have known what would have happened in Sepang and/or Valencia, so logic would suggest that he would have gifted the highest number of points possible

And left us also not forget that to follow the theory he had to KNOW that Ianonne would over take VR and he could not have known this.

J4rn0 said:

So Rossi's claims may be a matter of interpretation, as evidence is difficult to come by in such things, but for sure they are not "lunacy" as you and others like to think.

Click to expand...

Nope not lunacy as I for one believe that Rossi is 100% certain with his belief ............ I just think he is grabbing at large straws to try to explain that he was not good enough in the last few races.

But just as VR is to be believed, then we should also believe ALL other riders involved including JL, MM, AI etc.

FWIW, I fully believe that ALL of these guys believe 100% in their interpretations of the incidents but that does not make any of them right nor wrong, and (you have not said this so please stick with me) it also does not make them liars as some may have acclaimed

RCV600RR said:

To be fair, Iannone came to the same conclusion.

Unfortunately, the evidence is not sufficiently clear to make a judgment either way (although I'd love to know what exactly Alzamora said to Rossi...).

Click to expand...

But only AFTER VR had made his accusations - prior to that there was no peep from Ianonne

It also came after Rossi had defended Ianonne from his (Rossi's) fanatical fanboys (not fans) who had been abusing Ianonne over social media (including threats)

As for the evidence, 100% correct, there is not the evidence to sustain any of VR's accusations, just as conversely there is not sufficient evidence to rule them out either, but the onus of an accuser to to provide sufficient evidence but what we say was a fishing expedition where Rossi burleyed the waters and let his fish go nuts

As for Alzamora, I have also seen somewhere that he denied making any comment to Rossi as accused, and if there is one thing that has become patently clear over the last few weeks and that is that VR is prepared to throw anyone under a bus, evidence or not as to the allegation (Alzamora is not the only one)

J4rn0 said:

When you gain almost a second in the last lap on Lorenzo to beat him, there is no need to have ridden an Honda recently to understand you might have held it back in previous laps. Again, its not illegal, and the motive cannot be proven, but doubt is legitimate.

Click to expand...

Except that he didn't.

The full race analysis for the PI race is available on motogp.com as it is for every race as I am sure you are aware.

Lorenzo was 0.778 seconds ahead of MM who was third at the end of lap 26, the penultimate lap. Lorenzo's lap time for that lap was 1' 29.980, with MM's lap time (behind Iannone) 1'29.658. Lorenzo could manage only 1' 30.307 for the last lap, MM's last lap time having gotten free of Iannone was 1'29.280. Perhaps Jorge conspired to beat himself.

I guess you guys would have liked a freeze on Pedrosa's health and MM's tactical sense as well as on the engines; I don't think that there is even a purported unwritten rule that MM had to keep crashing mid race because that is what he did for the 1st half of the season.

michaelm said:

Again, what is factual is that he won the race and beat both Lorenzo and Rossi.

I can also easily come up with any amount of conjecture which fits the facts with no actual supporting evidence evidence as to why Rossi might have said what he did.

You also didn't answer why him riding a last lap 0.3 seconds faster to catch Lorenzo at PI was suspicious while catching up 0.4 seconds on Rossi on the last lap at Assen wasn't.

Click to expand...

Marquez is a great rider no doubt, but the two cannot be compared.

First, 0.3 was the net margin MM had on Lorenzo at the finish line at P.I. -- you must add to that the time needed to reach Lorenzo and pass him, so the total gained is closer to 0.8 (in less than a lap). And it looked easy enough.

At Assen Rossi and MM were in front and were fighting it out for the win no holds barred. Marquez could reach Rossi at the last chicane taking big risks (visible) but he was at the very limit and failed to pass him.

Great riding always, but the difference is between a real duel and a fake one, imho.

RCV600RR said:

Why is that when Iannone says something, he can't be taken at face value, but when MM or JL say something, they must be taken at face value? It's okay to question Iannone's reasons for proferring that evidence, but to suggest that you authoritatively know why Iannone made that comment is just absurd.

Any evidence that might support Rossi's view is discarded as false, yet any evidence that might support MM's view is unquestionably accepted.

Hate blinds.

Click to expand...

The converse is also true is it not?

I will explain my take on the highlighted for you here so you know where my prior comments are coming from.

I have no issue with Ianonne making the comments, but have suspicions as to the timing (only after VR) and the circumstances (given VR's correct and undying support with regards the fanboy abuse of Ianonne), as well as nationality.

None of this is intended to denigrate or question Ianonne as a person but he was thrown into a spotlight and was somewhat caught up in the whirlwind of it all (apologies as I cannot recall whether VR mentioned that AI agreed or if AI came out independently).

Unfortunately for AI I do hope that he is not aligned to VR as a 'patsy' out of all this as the guy has some serious abililty and should be allowed to concentrate on himself and his ride without being distracted by the sideshow that has become

J4rn0 said:

Because when you say something that doesn't correspond to your actions, doubting is legitimate. Not only Rossi, but many other very competent observers had the impression that MM was "playing around" in at least three decisive races. The motive behind this playing attitude cannot be proven, and the playing itself is open to interpretation and justification (setup or tire issues or whatever), but there remains room for doubt. So when he insists he always gave 100% to stay in front in those races, believing him is hardly automatic.

Click to expand...

But J4, not ONE of these so called 'competent observers' mentions any concerns PRIOR to the Thursday press conference and MOST journalists and remaining competent observers admit and have stated that they were totally blown away by the suggestions of VR which kind of aligns to MOST people saw nothing untoward.

Of course from then on it became a person like/dislike/bias in some areas and from many I also suspect a case of 'which side is me bread buttered and I believe that side' for many.

None of this would have occurred if VR stated something immediately after PI or stated nothing at all but simply shut-up, raced and then at seasons end made a statement

J4rn0 said:

When you gain almost a second in the last lap on Lorenzo to beat him, there is no need to have ridden an Honda recently to understand you might have held it back in previous laps. Again, its not illegal, and the motive cannot be proven, but doubt is legitimate.

Click to expand...

Remember that he complained that his front tyre had overheated and thus he slowed, after which the tyre came back ......... all very plausible given history

We should also remember that being the last lap, JL would have seen a +1 or so and rolled back a fraction (not 1 second) and with MM after the win, he got there ............ just.

It really is a massive shame that such a great race is now being remembered more for teh suggestions that the greatness of that race was caused by MM 'slowing down', rather than recognising that it truly was a great race