Pedrosa's attitude

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (richo @ Jan 11 2007, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>the reason I call that site superBIASplanet.com

Hey Richo, and who ever else…

So you think superbikeplanet.com is “bias”, here are a few quotes from crash.net. They go great with the topic of this thread.

I’ll put my comments here, rather than wait until the end. I’m not a professional analyzer/commentator/sports writer (I just play one on TV, and lately, here on this site) but it sure seems like there are some others out there that concur with me regarding Pedrosa and his “attitude”. I’m in the minority here, but hey, it’s all good.

Here they are, enjoy: (Oh, not from superbikeplanet.com)

<u>On the subject of Pedrosa being treated as a supercilious prime Dona by Honda:</u>

“Meanwhile, on the subject of parts, poor Hayden said on Friday evening that Honda had booked an airfield to run some practice starts on Monday before Estoril, but the parts didn't arrive until Wednesday. That's over two weeks from when the bike was last ridden. I find it difficult to comprehend that the Honda Motor Company with its trillion dollar infrastructure could not have got a part brought forward by 48 hours. Or maybe not. You rather fancy that if it was Pedrosa having all these problems from the first race of the year, the private jet would have been laid on from Japan bringing clutch parts over to Europe throughout the 2006 summer.”
<u>
On the subject of teammate racing etiquette in regards to Pedrosa's teammate etiquette:</u>

“Away from technicalities, at Honda there was maybe a quick chat from the masters to their two riders about the race ahead, but it doesn't even matter what was said as there is one golden rule in motorsport that 6-year-old mini-moto riders learn early on. You don't knock off your own team-mate. It is not even a discussion. You just don't do it.”

<u>On the subject of what might Pedrosa had been thinking before the crash:</u>

“So just what did come over Pedrosa going into that corner? He may well have been annoyed by Hayden's manoeuvre into the same corner two laps before, but then the reason that Dani picked the bike up to avoid contact with Nicky, was because Nicky was actually alongside him, then ahead way before the apex; which is why Pedrosa could actually see him to pick the bike up. When the accident happened, Pedrosa was out of control. End of story.”

<u>On the subject of interpreting Pedrosa’s body language:</u>

“Pedrosa's body language as he rose to his feet in the gravel trap was disgraceful. Barely looking over to see if Nicky was injured, he just flicked his hands in the direction of the incident as if brushing a wasp away. Not an apology at all. It looked just so wrong that maybe it was some malicious plan all along...”

<u>On the subject of how other more honorable riders behaved during crashes: </u> (Oh, need I remind you what was at stake in Portugal)

“When Kenny Jr knocked off Tamada in exactly the same incident at Sachsenring, Jr rushed over to Tamada to see if he was OK. Kenny asked him in Japanese as such, but all it caused was laughter from Tamada because of the American's terrible formulation of the Japanese language. The difference between the older generation and the younger one!”

<u>On the subject of how Hayden could have conducted himself:</u>

“I do not condone violence, but one wag said that Nicky should have just whacked him over the head with his Arai, foregone his new two-year Honda contract and gone to Ducati there and then.”

But he didn't, he just vented into the air.

I still think he's a jerk. But, he's human, and maybe like me, he can learn to be decent (not that I am, but I'm working on it with the help of my friends at motogpforum.com)


(Excellent, the 100th post)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Jan 13 2007, 01:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hey Richo, and who ever else…

So you think superbikeplanet.com is “bias”, here are a few quotes from crash.net. They go great with the topic of this thread.

I’ll put my comments here, rather than wait until the end. I’m not a professional analyzer/commentator/sports writer (I just play one on TV, and lately, here on this site) but it sure seems like there are some others out there that concur with me regarding Pedrosa and his “attitude”. I’m in the minority here, but hey, it’s all good.

Here they are, enjoy: (Oh, not from superbikeplanet.com)

<u>On the subject of Pedrosa being treated as a supercilious prime Dona by Honda:</u>

“Meanwhile, on the subject of parts, poor Hayden said on Friday evening that Honda had booked an airfield to run some practice starts on Monday before Estoril, but the parts didn't arrive until Wednesday. That's over two weeks from when the bike was last ridden. I find it difficult to comprehend that the Honda Motor Company with its trillion dollar infrastructure could not have got a part brought forward by 48 hours. Or maybe not. You rather fancy that if it was Pedrosa having all these problems from the first race of the year, the private jet would have been laid on from Japan bringing clutch parts over to Europe throughout the 2006 summer.”
<u>
On the subject of teammate racing etiquette in regards to Pedrosa's teammate etiquette:</u>

“Away from technicalities, at Honda there was maybe a quick chat from the masters to their two riders about the race ahead, but it doesn't even matter what was said as there is one golden rule in motorsport that 6-year-old mini-moto riders learn early on. You don't knock off your own team-mate. It is not even a discussion. You just don't do it.”

<u>On the subject of what might Pedrosa had been thinking before the crash:</u>

“So just what did come over Pedrosa going into that corner? He may well have been annoyed by Hayden's manoeuvre into the same corner two laps before, but then the reason that Dani picked the bike up to avoid contact with Nicky, was because Nicky was actually alongside him, then ahead way before the apex; which is why Pedrosa could actually see him to pick the bike up. When the accident happened, Pedrosa was out of control. End of story.”

<u>On the subject of interpreting Pedrosa’s body language:</u>

“Pedrosa's body language as he rose to his feet in the gravel trap was disgraceful. Barely looking over to see if Nicky was injured, he just flicked his hands in the direction of the incident as if brushing a wasp away. Not an apology at all. It looked just so wrong that maybe it was some malicious plan all along...”

<u>On the subject of how other more honorable riders behaved during crashes: </u> (Oh, need I remind you what was at stake in Portugal)

“When Kenny Jr knocked off Tamada in exactly the same incident at Sachsenring, Jr rushed over to Tamada to see if he was OK. Kenny asked him in Japanese as such, but all it caused was laughter from Tamada because of the American's terrible formulation of the Japanese language. The difference between the older generation and the younger one!”

<u>On the subject of how Hayden could have conducted himself:</u>

“I do not condone violence, but one wag said that Nicky should have just whacked him over the head with his Arai, foregone his new two-year Honda contract and gone to Ducati there and then.”

But he didn't, he just vented into the air.

I still think he's a jerk. But, he's human, and maybe like me, he can learn to be decent (not that I am, but I'm working on it with the help of my friends at motogpforum.com)
(Excellent, the 100th post)

But hey, if you want to talk bised, what about Randy Mamola? His column in Motor Cycle News is the biggest load of anti-Rossi ..... going! He's been saying for years that Rossi wouldnt win the title, (thats a lot of times to get it wrong) then at the end of every season he got wrong he says that he always knew Rossi would do it.

The guy just talks out of his arse, maybe he's bitter cause he's the most successful second place guy ever, if thats the case, he should slag off Hayden, He got a title and only won 2 races! But ole Haystack is American and Mamola cant be seen to be bitter against him can he?

Seriously, I just wish Mamola would .... off and find something useful to do, like polish Nickys helmet, I liked the guy as a racer but he just annoys me now!

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jan 13 2007, 02:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But hey, if you want to talk bised, what about Randy Mamola? His column in Motor Cycle News is the biggest load of anti-Rossi ..... going! He's been saying for years that Rossi wouldnt win the title, (thats a lot of times to get it wrong) then at the end of every season he got wrong he says that he always knew Rossi would do it.

The guy just talks out of his arse, maybe he's bitter cause he's the most successful second place guy ever, if thats the case, he should slag off Hayden, He got a title and only won 2 races! But ole Haystack is American and Mamola cant be seen to be bitter against him can he?

Seriously, I just wish Mamola would .... off and find something useful to do, like polish Nickys helmet, I liked the guy as a racer but he just annoys me now!

Pete


Bised is like biased, its the scots spelling!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ptk50 @ Jan 8 2007, 05:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hmmmm - food for thought - HRC has always been soooo faithful to their riders - only other thing I question you say "after Hayden gets the bike sorted - I see more of an "IF"

What I have gatherd from some of the prior post is they(HRC) favor Dan over Nickey. Is that true? All HRC cares about is the development of the bike according to Rossi(from his autobiography). HRC didnt get rid of Vale; they treatd him like he was .... compared to the bike itself,so he went somewhere else. Funny, how he left and Yamaha startd winning. Rider is most important in this equation, IMO. Sorry, for the rant. Danny is just so adjusted to winning and not adjusted to the primere class competition. I guess...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Jan 13 2007, 11:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hey Richo, and who ever else…

So you think superbikeplanet.com is “bias”, here are a few quotes from crash.net. They go great with the topic of this thread.

I’ll put my comments here, rather than wait until the end. I’m not a professional analyzer/commentator/sports writer (I just play one on TV, and lately, here on this site) but it sure seems like there are some others out there that concur with me regarding Pedrosa and his “attitude”. I’m in the minority here, but hey, it’s all good.

Here they are, enjoy: (Oh, not from superbikeplanet.com)

<u>On the subject of Pedrosa being treated as a supercilious prime Dona by Honda:</u>

“Meanwhile, on the subject of parts, poor Hayden said on Friday evening that Honda had booked an airfield to run some practice starts on Monday before Estoril, but the parts didn't arrive until Wednesday. That's over two weeks from when the bike was last ridden. I find it difficult to comprehend that the Honda Motor Company with its trillion dollar infrastructure could not have got a part brought forward by 48 hours. Or maybe not. You rather fancy that if it was Pedrosa having all these problems from the first race of the year, the private jet would have been laid on from Japan bringing clutch parts over to Europe throughout the 2006 summer.”
<u>
On the subject of teammate racing etiquette in regards to Pedrosa's teammate etiquette:</u>

“Away from technicalities, at Honda there was maybe a quick chat from the masters to their two riders about the race ahead, but it doesn't even matter what was said as there is one golden rule in motorsport that 6-year-old mini-moto riders learn early on. You don't knock off your own team-mate. It is not even a discussion. You just don't do it.”

<u>On the subject of what might Pedrosa had been thinking before the crash:</u>

“So just what did come over Pedrosa going into that corner? He may well have been annoyed by Hayden's manoeuvre into the same corner two laps before, but then the reason that Dani picked the bike up to avoid contact with Nicky, was because Nicky was actually alongside him, then ahead way before the apex; which is why Pedrosa could actually see him to pick the bike up. When the accident happened, Pedrosa was out of control. End of story.”

<u>On the subject of interpreting Pedrosa’s body language:</u>

“Pedrosa's body language as he rose to his feet in the gravel trap was disgraceful. Barely looking over to see if Nicky was injured, he just flicked his hands in the direction of the incident as if brushing a wasp away. Not an apology at all. It looked just so wrong that maybe it was some malicious plan all along...”

<u>On the subject of how other more honorable riders behaved during crashes: </u> (Oh, need I remind you what was at stake in Portugal)

“When Kenny Jr knocked off Tamada in exactly the same incident at Sachsenring, Jr rushed over to Tamada to see if he was OK. Kenny asked him in Japanese as such, but all it caused was laughter from Tamada because of the American's terrible formulation of the Japanese language. The difference between the older generation and the younger one!”

<u>On the subject of how Hayden could have conducted himself:</u>

“I do not condone violence, but one wag said that Nicky should have just whacked him over the head with his Arai, foregone his new two-year Honda contract and gone to Ducati there and then.”

But he didn't, he just vented into the air.

I still think he's a jerk. But, he's human, and maybe like me, he can learn to be decent (not that I am, but I'm working on it with the help of my friends at motogpforum.com)
(Excellent, the 100th post)

I'm guessing most of those quotes came from the post-estoril articles. I must admit, reading some of those articles on crash.net left the same bitter taste in my mouth as the worst of the worst from superbikeplanet.com, concerning bias. I suppose it's understandable. I mean, it was such a shocking incident on for so many reasons, and the after-effects were potentially devestating (but we were saved from that by Rossi's "...-fault" game the next race.) And I guess the emotions were flaring. In that case, I prefered SBK planet. If I recall correctly, Dean Adams was in too much shock to spit out a proper anti-pedrosa rant/"race report".
I've found somthing from last week concerning Troy Corser's comments. It's not superBIASplanet gold, but it's not what I'd call objective journalism either. Note Dean's little sarcastic notes on the end.

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2007/Jan/070109q.htm

Just for refrence, here's the original story from ninemsn.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=175366

Which one do you think shows more Bias? Although I agree with Adams in this case, I still think he could be more objective.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (phleg @ Jan 13 2007, 02:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I KNEW IT! It's not just me who thinks Mamola is a prat.

In his column he constantly harps on about how much better Pedrosa is than Rossi, and Pedrosa may have won had he not crashed in Sepang.

I want to punch the fool!

Exactly, he is the king of the what if, well what if he'd won the title, would he be less of a ... now? we'll never know.

His opinionated crap is when I switch from Eurosport to Greyhound racing or something. You would get a more level opinion from a greyhound than from that guy. Whatever his problem is, he does not give Vale the respect he deserves.

Pete

I think what u meant to say was "he doesn't give Valentino the arse kissing that everybody else does"

Randy mamola is one of them ost fair and knowledgable guys out there. He does show his support for the americans in who he would like to do well, but he doesnt discredti any of the others. I think hes an excellent part of eurosports lineup and his column in MCN is the only good thing in the paper.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 13 2007, 04:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think what u meant to say was "he doesn't give Valentino the arse kissing that everybody else does"

Randy mamola is one of them ost fair and knowledgable guys out there. He does show his support for the americans in who he would like to do well, but he doesnt discredti any of the others. I think hes an excellent part of eurosports lineup and his column in MCN is the only good thing in the paper.

Well, i dunno what youre reading or drinking pal, coz its a biased loada ..... when I read it (weekly).

But then if you dont like Rossi, youre gonna be quite happy to read him say how this is gonna be the year that Rossi does nothing. (As he has done for about the last 6 seasons)

Its not about not kissing Vales arse, its about showing respect to a racer who has achieved more than he ever did.

Also the fact that he works for one of the factory teams, (or does he do all the Ducati stuff out of the goodness of his heart?) can hardly make him impartial.


Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 13 2007, 08:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think what u meant to say was "he doesn't give Valentino the arse kissing that everybody else does"

Randy mamola is one of them ost fair and knowledgable guys out there.

Absolutely agree. C'mon, I’ve read Mamola’s articles, much of what he has said. It's not just Rossi he comments on, he talks about all the riders. Including the series as a whole in how support classes relate to the premeir class. He gives his opinions about their strengths and weakness, and sometimes he says what he thinks about predictions. So hes been wrong a few times, but sometimes hes been right, including positive things about Rossi. Let me ask you, check out the predictions before the last race, who gave Hayden a chance? Who gave Rossi? Were they "all" bias? So does that make you “bias”? So what you are saying about Mamola then is the "bias" here I think? To say that it’s sour grapes because he never won a championship is really a bit much.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jan 13 2007, 11:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well, i dunno what youre reading or drinking pal, coz its a biased loada ..... when I read it (weekly).

But then if you dont like Rossi, youre gonna be quite happy to read him say how this is gonna be the year that Rossi does nothing. (As he has done for about the last 6 seasons)

Its not about not kissing Vales arse, its about showing respect to a racer who has achieved more than he ever did.

Also the fact that he works for one of the factory teams, (or does he do all the Ducati stuff out of the goodness of his heart?) can hardly make him impartial.
Pete

Dunno what's he'd drinking? Hum, maybe not, but I know what you're smoking...

"But then if you dont like Rossi, youre gonna be quite happy to read him say how this is gonna be the year that Rossi does nothing."

Interesting. This is what I would say to that. I hope Tom doesn't mind me using his line: I think what you mean to say is, "if you dont worship Rossi like I clearly do, youre gonna be quite happy to 'only' read into what him (Mamola) says about Rossi and 'misinterpret' it since he's not kissing his ... like me."



(dear mods, don't think I'm being disrespectful with pete, we get along like that. He says something ........, then I say something smart-..., its like a symbiotic relationship, we need eachother)

(where is roger? I'm sure he'd take your semi-intelligent side on this one.)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Jan 13 2007, 07:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Absolutely agree. C'mon, I’ve read Mamola’s articles, much of what he has said. It's not just Rossi he comments on, he talks about all the riders. Including the series as a whole in how support classes relate to the premeir class. He gives his opinions about their strengths and weakness, and sometimes he says what he thinks about predictions. So hes been wrong a few times, but sometimes hes been right, including positive things about Rossi. Let me ask you, check out the predictions before the last race, who gave Hayden a chance? Who gave Rossi? Were they "all" bias? So does that make you “bias”? So what you are saying about Mamola then is the "bias" here I think? To say that it’s sour grapes because he never won a championship is really a bit much.
Dunno what's he'd drinking? Hum, maybe not, but I know what you're smoking...

"But then if you dont like Rossi, youre gonna be quite happy to read him say how this is gonna be the year that Rossi does nothing."

Interesting. This is what I would say to that. I hope Tom doesn't mind me using his line: I think what you mean to say is, "if you dont worship Rossi like I clearly do, youre gonna be quite happy to 'only' read into what him (Mamola) says about Rossi and 'misinterpret' it since he's not kissing his ... like me."
(dear mods, don't think I'm being disrespectful with pete, we get along like that. He says something ........, then I say something smart-..., its like a symbiotic relationship, we need eachother)

(where is roger? I'm sure he'd take your semi-intelligent side on this one.)


Semi intelligent? I can read, and I read Motor Cycle ...... News and I'm not a biased, bitter ... like Mamola. MMM.....does he have letters after his name? No I think not, I do, so I will continue to think that he is a semi illiterate .... who could (almost) ride a bike at world champion standard.

And sadly if anyone dares to say that someone can ride a bike better than hayden you twats start to gob off. Then cry coz folk point out that Hayden won one race this year by his own ability,.(and one through Edwards stupidity)

Enjoy this year girls ,coz Haystacks goin back to "squeelin like a pig boy" next season.

Sorry guys Im all for a bit of a laugh, but I dont tolerate ...... stupidity.

Pete

Pete i think your confused, It seems to me like Jumkie has been listening more carefully.

Firstly, You mention that Randy is anti rossi, and this just isnt true. For sure i remember him saying this year that he thinks it'd be a bigger emotion for the fans and better for the sport to see Hayden take the title rather than another rossi win. Surely this is common sense, Motogp audiences fell hugely with Doohans dominance, and for the health of the sport it is important to have new winners, and a new first time winner is almost always a more emotional affair than the guy who won the last 5. To counter this, i remember hearing Randy say Many times this year after Rossi had a poor qualifying "you can never count valentino out". That doesnt sound to me like not giving him credit.

Secondly, Like Jumkie said he talks about all the riders, he mentions how they have been performing and what he expects from them in the future. With his knowledge and experience behind him, he is usually correct, plus he is hugely popular in the paddock and all the riders seem to chat to him. so hes getting his evidence from a pretty good source.

Thirdly, He may be slightly more interested in the american riders than the others, but i dont know of any motorcycling journalist who doesnt look out a bit extra for their compatriots. Also, in another thread running at the moment, we have established that american riders have played a huge part in the history of the sport, and the numbers would suggest a large part of the preasent, so its not entirely irrelevant (like Toby moody on eurosport constantly reminding you how far away from points the brits are). And, he isnt too biased to the americans, because if you Actually read his MCN column you would have recently seen how he admited to critisising KRJR too harshly at the end of last year, having said he was un-motivated and admited he was wrong.

So please, if you don't like Randy, thats fine, but it seems a bit silly to come on here and call everyone names, with what seems like little or no evidence to support your opinions.

Tom

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 13 2007, 11:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Pete i think your confused, It seems to me like Jumkie has been listening more carefully.

Firstly, You mention that Randy is anti rossi, and this just isnt true. For sure i remember him saying this year that he thinks it'd be a bigger emotion for the fans and better for the sport to see Hayden take the title rather than another rossi win. Surely this is common sense, Motogp audiences fell hugely with Doohans dominance, and for the health of the sport it is important to have new winners, and a new first time winner is almost always a more emotional affair than the guy who won the last 5. To counter this, i remember hearing Randy say Many times this year after Rossi had a poor qualifying "you can never count valentino out". That doesnt sound to me like not giving him credit.

Secondly, Like Jumkie said he talks about all the riders, he mentions how they have been performing and what he expects from them in the future. With his knowledge and experience behind him, he is usually correct, plus he is hugely popular in the paddock and all the riders seem to chat to him. so hes getting his evidence from a pretty good source.

Thirdly, He may be slightly more interested in the american riders than the others, but i dont know of any motorcycling journalist who doesnt look out a bit extra for their compatriots. Also, in another thread running at the moment, we have established that american riders have played a huge part in the history of the sport, and the numbers would suggest a large part of the preasent, so its not entirely irrelevant (like Toby moody on eurosport constantly reminding you how far away from points the brits are). And, he isnt too biased to the americans, because if you Actually read his MCN column you would have recently seen how he admited to critisising KRJR too harshly at the end of last year, having said he was un-motivated and admited he was wrong.

So please, if you don't like Randy, thats fine, but it seems a bit silly to come on here and call everyone names, with what seems like little or no evidence to support your opinions.

Tom

Tom, why did you sit and look at the post for 20 mins before replying? If you think I dont know what Im talking about then it shows that you have never read any of my posts before. I may say things that folk dont like, but guys like Jumkie and any others that disagree at least give me credit for knowing what Im talking about.

I have read Randys column in MCN since it started, and I have always found him biased, but when Vale came along, it seemed to really hurt him.

I dont come on here to call people names, and I always back up my opinions, and I dont wait for others to go offline to voice them.

Like I say, I dont tolerate ignorance.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (richo @ Jan 12 2007, 09:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Which one do you think shows more Bias?
Richo,

You’re killing me man. (of laughter)

On the question of “bias” Where to begin….

You tell me I shouldn’t quote superbikeplanet because “you” think there’re “bias”. Then you tell me you see how “I” wouldn’t think they are because after-all I “agree” with what they got to say there; therefore, (to prove your point you say) it would be “harder to detect any bias.” For the record, I don’t always agree with what they gotta say, as I’m sure you probably sometimes do agree with their take on stuff (as you admitted). This is why I think I was trying to make the case that media as an entity is inherently “bias”, which you somewhat agreed. This is why I spend way more time on other news outlets like MotoGP.com and various magazines.

So then I think to myself, ok, I’ll play along, and give you some quotes on topic from another site crash.net. But then you say, this was “worst” than superbikeplanet ( as you amusingly call them “superBIASplanet) , you say the quotes I posted from crash.net “left a bitter taste.”? On top of that you say those quotes must be from the “post-estoril articles” to imply that since the incident was “shocking” perhaps they were, unacceptable?, and in a way discredit it by suggesting that after-all “emotions were flaring.” Wow, unbelievable, amusing, hilarious, and ridiculous (I say this with the best intentions). I used those quotes to support what I think about Pedrosa (on topic) and to say, others think so too. But you call them “bias”; why?, because you don’t agree with them? So are the one’s “not” bias the ones you agree with? This totally reminds me of all the apologists (that means bias excuse makers) that came out in defense of the guy and explained away his actions. (By the way, Hayden winning the title, how is that “relevant” to Pedrosa’s attitude? I know what your implying, but I thought I would just point that out, smacks of bias to me.)

Before I move on I must say, I have lots of <u>respect for your opinions</u>. I’ve noticed since the first days I joined this site that you were all the things I like in a poster: fair, balanced, witty, thick skinned enough to take a joke, and dish one out, you didn’t strike me as an all-things-RV, and I noticed you were very knowledgeable. You will recall when I first joined I noticed a predominance of Rossi fans (and also many worshippers) and began to point this out by making fun and saying they should rename this site rossiworshipers.com. You may recall the whirlwind I stepped into, yet it was this that precipitated many MotoGP fans (rather than one-rider fans) that I have since then had the pleasure of exchanging debates. I went into all that so that you don’t think I’m being harsh.

So you come out with these two other links to support your claim about superbikeplanet’s bias. When I read them at first I thought you were joking, which made me laugh, but when I realized you weren’t joking, that’s when the laughter really started. I’m gonna bill you for crapping my pants.

You say to notice the “little sarcastic notes” at the end of the first link (super”BIAS”planet). Ok here it is this is what they said ‘after’ they presented Corser’s quote:

“Corser's comments bring to light again a debate--traction control and other aides make riding faster easier but to a degree less exciting. Are broken rider legs ever a good thing? Do the improved safety aspect of wheel-speed control null all arguments against dull racing?”

Call me crazy but, of these closing sentences, the middle one is the only one I can find sarcastic, and mildly at that: (“Are broken rider legs ever a good thing?”) The first seems a summary and the last seems an intriguing question relevant to Corser’s comments.

Now lets look at the second link from what I’m assuming you are making the case of “un-bias” news reporting from ninemsn.com:

Here is what they said ‘before’ presenting his comment. (Notice that they are already summarizing it before they present his quote). Uhm, what’s that style of presenting called again…I think you used the word “propaganda” to describe superbikeplanet, but it seems more fitting here, cuz it sure seems they were “leading” the reading ‘before’ presenting the quote: (I’ll summarize it here).

… Corser believes advanced technology is making bad riders look good.

… the modern average racer did not realise how much sophisticated electronic aids were allowing them to run with the pacesetters.

… the level of data acquisition and electronic assistance in world superbikes was now unprecedented.

… poorer riders were now able to get up to winning speed in record time.

Only after their own presumed interpretation did they then present Corser’s ‘actual’ quote ( some similarly as superbikeplanet but with twice the content).

<u>Inter mixed into the “unbias” ninemsn reporting it manages to put in this: </u>

…the king of two-wheeled racing, MotoGP star Valentino Rossi, would agree with him.

Uhm, call me crazy, but this is the ninemsn’s take on Corser’s comments (not his actual quote). (Not Bias?) Really, Corser called Rossi the “King”? Uhm, I think that’s some other guy named Roberts Sr.

I like Corser, so I read his comments, I couldn't find where he calls other riders, "bad & poor". This is the ninemsn's take. I think they had much more of their own commentary than superbikeplanet.

You asked me which link do I think is more bias, frankly, it’s the one you think is not.

Richo, I’m gonna quote you here but interchange a couple of words:

Your words: “I can understand that you Jumkie, would agree with a lot of what (superbikeplanet) writes, which will always make it harder to detect any bias.”

My words: I can understand that you Richo, would agree with a lot of what (ninemsn.com) writes, which will always make it harder to detect any bias, after-all, they know that Rossi is the “King.”

Thanks for the laugh buddy (being sarcastic here, but genuinely with the best intentions).

Sit and look at the post for 20 minutes? and what this waiting for people to go offline business, you've lost me.

Also i didnt intend to accuse you of not knowing what your talking about, i just felt your last post was a little brief, and i just wanted a little bit more of a justification, perhaps some reasoning or maybe even examples really. I dont wanna piss you off or offend you or any of this, i am just looking for interesting discussion.

And also all this talk of "....... stupidity" and not tolerating ignorance. It seems silly to assume i am stupid or don't know what i am talking about. Also, i have provided an argument with some points for discussion, and i am willing to listen to/read anything you have to say (preferably about the subject in hand, rather than defending your knowledge and calling me ignorant)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jan 13 2007, 04:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Tom, why did you sit and look at the post for 20 mins before replying?

Hi Pete, somebody accused me of doing the same thing to me once. But frankly, I don't think anybody is waiting for anybody to go off line to respond. That sounds alittle unrealistic, and plus, you're not that scary. People are just looking around and not simply sitting on your post. Plus sometimes nature calls and such.

Good debate though, keep it coming....

I think your a bit mistaken about Mamola. Why don't you try giving us some "actual" examples and give us something to debate rather than getting all ruffled.

Or are you waiting for us to go "off line"....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jan 13 2007, 04:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And also all this talk of "....... stupidity" and not tolerating ignorance. It seems silly to assume i am stupid or don't know what i am talking about.

Hey pete, I can't stand ignorance either but I have encountered it quiet often here. Being a Hayden fan, an American, not a Rossi fan, and disliking Pedrosa has been <u>extremely unpopular</u> at this site, it has been many times frustrating. I managed to get the attention of mods, admins, and members, usually for some long drawn out debate, and many times I felt they were bias inclined on the other side. Having said that, however, after accepting this plight, mostly now it is very amusing, entertaining, and I have learned a great deal about this sport I love. I have managed to make some friend at best, and some excellent debate with those who disagreed with me at least (though I admit some were super ignorant & infuriatingly narrow-minded); and some have become "friends". I think I have more than most, had to defend many of my perspectives. Which I have done by explaining my viewpoint thoroughly (perhaps to the annoyance of others). I think I have gained some level of acceptance by others because I have backed up my claims and views with actual facts, trends, history, and some reasoning.


Anyway, pete, I was thinking about Randy Mamola, and how you think he is “bias” and suggest he is a bit “anti-Rossi”. It bothered me so I decided to check out some of his commentary again. I found the following he said just a few days ago. January 9th to be exact, just four days ago, on alpinestars.com. Here is what he had to say about Rossi and his summation of his season:

On the subject of Valentino Rossi: “A kid with so much ...... talent it makes you laugh. This year we finally saw that the guy is human and he admitted as much himself, but I still don’t believe it! Valentino dented his own armour for the first time with the practice crash at Assen and made things hard for himself, especially after such a rotten run of luck in the first half of the season. I believe Yamaha made mistakes because they felt under pressure from Honda but I also think Rossi got distracted by the Formula 1 testing. Despite that he won more races than anyone else and scored ten podiums, so there is no questioning his ability or the fact that with a little more luck he would have won his sixth straight title.”

Here are a few notes that I think you should notice:

1. In his first sentence he clearly expresses that Rossi is fantastically talented, so much so that it tickles him.
2. In his second sentence he admits he thought Rossi was more than mere mortal (perhaps he is a Rossi fan since so many also think he is superhuman) and he goes on to say he still doesn’t “believe it” that Rossi is after-all just human. Uhm, maybe he thinks Rossi is god, just as so many of his other fans believe).
3. In his third sentence he says perhaps if was some “rotten run of luck” in other words, he chalk up some of Rossi’s season to bad luck. He doesn’t blame Rossi does he; he thinks it was some bad “luck”.
4. In his fourth sentence he lays most the blame on Yamaha! In addition to some distraction from F1. (those .......s)
5. In his fifth sentence he states what Rossi fans have argued all along about him winning the most races and explicitly (not suggesting or implying) that [/u]Rossi would have won the title had he had better luck.


So Pete. After reading his comments. I have realized you are absolutely right! Mamola is super BIAS. Just about everything he said here I disagree with and have been arguing against since I joined this forum and especially after Hayden won the championship! He thinks Rossi is superhuman, which I totally disagree with. He thinks the first part of the season was just bad “luck” for Rossi, which I think is a mugging shot on Hayden’s consistent podiums during this part of the season. He lays the blame on Yamaha and the pressure Honda inflicts, what ever happen to rider accountability here? <u>I would have preferred he said Rossi had some poor performance</u>, rather than blaming equipment, <u>as many suggested about Hayden to make a case of him being undeserving by losing a 51 point lead.</u> But no, he does not say it was Rossi’s fault,<u> as many hypocritically never admitted that perhaps it was Honda’s fault for losing all those points after Laguna.</u> And if that wasn’t bias enough, he(Mamola) has the audacity to say, Rossi would have won had he had better “luck”. <u>Screw this guy Mamola, he is so “anti-Rossi (ooops, I mean, ANTI-HAYDEN).</u>

Really, I had respect for Mamola, but I think you are right about him pete, he “is” fu….king BIAS. I will quote you about how you feel about Mamola: “I will continue to think that he is a semi illiterate .... who could (almost) ride a bike at world champion standard.” <u>You are right, Pete, I dislike this guy for saying all those nice things about Rossi.</u> He sounds like so many of the “semi illiterate” posters I met here arguing and sounding exactly like Mamola after Hayden beat Rossi to the championship, saying stuff like it was just “bad luck”.


(Incidently, in an attempt to stay on topic, this is what Mamola said about Dani Pedrosa:

“As a journalist I can’t remember meeting a more <u>awkward</u> customer but I think one of the reasons for that is because he is not driven by fame, he is driven purely by winning.”

What a spineless journalist Mamola is, he can only manage to describe this tweak as only “awkward”. Hell, being so BIAS, he should have just come out and called him a <u>jerk</u>.)

How do you feel about Mamola now?
How you like me now?

You are right pete, sometimes people say some pretty "ignorant" things....

(hey pete, I'm gonna get off-line so you can respond)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Jan 14 2007, 06:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hey pete, I can't stand ignorance either but I have encountered it quiet often here. Being a Hayden fan, an American, not a Rossi fan, and disliking Pedrosa has been <u>extremely unpopular</u> at this site, it has been many times frustrating. I managed to get the attention of mods, admins, and members, usually for some long drawn out debate, and many times I felt they were bias inclined on the other side. Having said that, however, after accepting this plight, mostly now it is very amusing, entertaining, and I have learned a great deal about this sport I love. I have managed to make some friend at best, and some excellent debate with those who disagreed with me at least (though I admit some were super ignorant & infuriatingly narrow-minded); and some have become "friends". I think I have more than most, had to defend many of my perspectives. Which I have done by explaining my viewpoint thoroughly (perhaps to the annoyance of others). I think I have gained some level of acceptance by others because I have backed up my claims and views with actual facts, trends, history, and some reasoning.


Anyway, pete, I was thinking about Randy Mamola, and how you think he is “bias” and suggest he is a bit “anti-Rossi”. It bothered me so I decided to check out some of his commentary again. I found the following he said just a few days ago. January 9th to be exact, just four days ago, on alpinestars.com. Here is what he had to say about Rossi and his summation of his season:

On the subject of Valentino Rossi: “A kid with so much ...... talent it makes you laugh. This year we finally saw that the guy is human and he admitted as much himself, but I still don’t believe it! Valentino dented his own armour for the first time with the practice crash at Assen and made things hard for himself, especially after such a rotten run of luck in the first half of the season. I believe Yamaha made mistakes because they felt under pressure from Honda but I also think Rossi got distracted by the Formula 1 testing. Despite that he won more races than anyone else and scored ten podiums, so there is no questioning his ability or the fact that with a little more luck he would have won his sixth straight title.”

Here are a few notes that I think you should notice:

1. In his first sentence he clearly expresses that Rossi is fantastically talented, so much so that it tickles him.
2. In his second sentence he admits he thought Rossi was more than mere mortal (perhaps he is a Rossi fan since so many also think he is superhuman) and he goes on to say he still doesn’t “believe it” that Rossi is after-all just human. Uhm, maybe he thinks Rossi is god, just as so many of his other fans believe).
3. In his third sentence he says perhaps if was some “rotten run of luck” in other words, he chalk up some of Rossi’s season to bad luck. He doesn’t blame Rossi does he; he thinks it was some bad “luck”.
4. In his fourth sentence he lays most the blame on Yamaha! In addition to some distraction from F1. (those .......s)
5. In his fifth sentence he states what Rossi fans have argued all along about him winning the most races and explicitly (not suggesting or implying) that [/u]Rossi would have won the title had he had better luck.
So Pete. After reading his comments. I have realized you are absolutely right! Mamola is super BIAS. Just about everything he said here I disagree with and have been arguing against since I joined this forum and especially after Hayden won the championship! He thinks Rossi is superhuman, which I totally disagree with. He thinks the first part of the season was just bad “luck” for Rossi, which I think is a mugging shot on Hayden’s consistent podiums during this part of the season. He lays the blame on Yamaha and the pressure Honda inflicts, what ever happen to rider accountability here? <u>I would have preferred he said Rossi had some poor performance</u>, rather than blaming equipment, <u>as many suggested about Hayden to make a case of him being undeserving by losing a 51 point lead.</u> But no, he does not say it was Rossi’s fault,<u> as many hypocritically never admitted that perhaps it was Honda’s fault for losing all those points after Laguna.</u> And if that wasn’t bias enough, he(Mamola) has the audacity to say, Rossi would have won had he had better “luck”. <u>Screw this guy Mamola, he is so “anti-Rossi (ooops, I mean, ANTI-HAYDEN).</u>

Really, I had respect for Mamola, but I think you are right about him pete, he “is” fu….king BIAS. I will quote you about how you feel about Mamola: “I will continue to think that he is a semi illiterate .... who could (almost) ride a bike at world champion standard.” <u>You are right, Pete, I dislike this guy for saying all those nice things about Rossi.</u> He sounds like so many of the “semi illiterate” posters I met here arguing and sounding exactly like Mamola after Hayden beat Rossi to the championship, saying stuff like it was just “bad luck”.
(Incidently, in an attempt to stay on topic, this is what Mamola said about Dani Pedrosa:

“As a journalist I can’t remember meeting a more <u>awkward</u> customer but I think one of the reasons for that is because he is not driven by fame, he is driven purely by winning.”

What a spineless journalist Mamola is, he can only manage to describe this tweak as only “awkward”. Hell, being so BIAS, he should have just come out and called him a <u>jerk</u>.)

How do you feel about Mamola now?
How you like me now?

You are right pete, sometimes people say some pretty "ignorant" things....

(hey pete, I'm gonna get off-line so you can respond)

Good Morning guys!

The point I am making is that in his weekly MCN column (sorry, I dont have any examples to back this up, coz I put the paper in the bin after I read it) Mamola has used up many column inches over the years telling us how this will be the year that Rossi wont cut it.

Ive never read what he says on other websites, maybe Mamola writes to suit what he thinks is his audience, and if as you say, he is anti Hayden there, then he is in even worse journalist than I thought.

Anyway Tom, I thought that you were being dismissive of my opinion, and if I picked you up wrong , then I apologise. I dont come in here to offend or upset folk, I do enjoy winding up Haystack fans though. I wont lose any sleep over what folk say in here, and I hope you dont lose sleep over what I say.

Like I say Jumkie, I think Mamola is a ...., and if he is putting Hayden down elsewhere, then he is a bigger .... than I first thought. Being biased is bad enough but he cant even be consistant about who he is biased about!

What do I think of you now? I still think youre a nice guy with misguided loyalties to Haystack.

What do you think of Mamola now, he has commited the henious crime of INCONSISTANCY! that must be particularly galling for Haystack fans, coz I know that to you its not the winning that counts its racking up those thirds and fourths.


At least my opinions are consistant, you guys must admire me for that!

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Jan 14 2007, 10:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Richo,

You’re killing me man. (of laughter)

On the question of “bias” Where to begin….

You tell me I shouldn’t quote superbikeplanet because “you” think there’re “bias”. Then you tell me you see how “I” wouldn’t think they are because after-all I “agree” with what they got to say there; therefore, (to prove your point you say) it would be “harder to detect any bias.” For the record, I don’t always agree with what they gotta say, as I’m sure you probably sometimes do agree with their take on stuff (as you admitted). This is why I think I was trying to make the case that media as an entity is inherently “bias”, which you somewhat agreed. This is why I spend way more time on other news outlets like MotoGP.com and various magazines.

So then I think to myself, ok, I’ll play along, and give you some quotes on topic from another site crash.net. But then you say, this was “worst” than superbikeplanet ( as you amusingly call them “superBIASplanet) , you say the quotes I posted from crash.net “left a bitter taste.”? On top of that you say those quotes must be from the “post-estoril articles” to imply that since the incident was “shocking” perhaps they were, unacceptable?, and in a way discredit it by suggesting that after-all “emotions were flaring.” Wow, unbelievable, amusing, hilarious, and ridiculous (I say this with the best intentions). I used those quotes to support what I think about Pedrosa (on topic) and to say, others think so too. But you call them “bias”; why?, because you don’t agree with them? So are the one’s “not” bias the ones you agree with? This totally reminds me of all the apologists (that means bias excuse makers) that came out in defense of the guy and explained away his actions. (By the way, Hayden winning the title, how is that “relevant” to Pedrosa’s attitude? I know what your implying, but I thought I would just point that out, smacks of bias to me.)

Before I move on I must say, I have lots of <u>respect for your opinions</u>. I’ve noticed since the first days I joined this site that you were all the things I like in a poster: fair, balanced, witty, thick skinned enough to take a joke, and dish one out, you didn’t strike me as an all-things-RV, and I noticed you were very knowledgeable. You will recall when I first joined I noticed a predominance of Rossi fans (and also many worshippers) and began to point this out by making fun and saying they should rename this site rossiworshipers.com. You may recall the whirlwind I stepped into, yet it was this that precipitated many MotoGP fans (rather than one-rider fans) that I have since then had the pleasure of exchanging debates. I went into all that so that you don’t think I’m being harsh.

So you come out with these two other links to support your claim about superbikeplanet’s bias. When I read them at first I thought you were joking, which made me laugh, but when I realized you weren’t joking, that’s when the laughter really started. I’m gonna bill you for crapping my pants.

You say to notice the “little sarcastic notes” at the end of the first link (super”BIAS”planet). Ok here it is this is what they said ‘after’ they presented Corser’s quote:

“Corser's comments bring to light again a debate--traction control and other aides make riding faster easier but to a degree less exciting. Are broken rider legs ever a good thing? Do the improved safety aspect of wheel-speed control null all arguments against dull racing?”

Call me crazy but, of these closing sentences, the middle one is the only one I can find sarcastic, and mildly at that: (“Are broken rider legs ever a good thing?”) The first seems a summary and the last seems an intriguing question relevant to Corser’s comments.

Now lets look at the second link from what I’m assuming you are making the case of “un-bias” news reporting from ninemsn.com:

Here is what they said ‘before’ presenting his comment. (Notice that they are already summarizing it before they present his quote). Uhm, what’s that style of presenting called again…I think you used the word “propaganda” to describe superbikeplanet, but it seems more fitting here, cuz it sure seems they were “leading” the reading ‘before’ presenting the quote: (I’ll summarize it here).

… Corser believes advanced technology is making bad riders look good.

… the modern average racer did not realise how much sophisticated electronic aids were allowing them to run with the pacesetters.

… the level of data acquisition and electronic assistance in world superbikes was now unprecedented.

… poorer riders were now able to get up to winning speed in record time.

Only after their own presumed interpretation did they then present Corser’s ‘actual’ quote ( some similarly as superbikeplanet but with twice the content).

<u>Inter mixed into the “unbias” ninemsn reporting it manages to put in this: </u>

…the king of two-wheeled racing, MotoGP star Valentino Rossi, would agree with him.

Uhm, call me crazy, but this is the ninemsn’s take on Corser’s comments (not his actual quote). (Not Bias?) Really, Corser called Rossi the “King”? Uhm, I think that’s some other guy named Roberts Sr.

I like Corser, so I read his comments, I couldn't find where he calls other riders, "bad & poor". This is the ninemsn's take. I think they had much more of their own commentary than superbikeplanet.

You asked me which link do I think is more bias, frankly, it’s the one you think is not.

Richo, I’m gonna quote you here but interchange a couple of words:

Your words: “I can understand that you Jumkie, would agree with a lot of what (superbikeplanet) writes, which will always make it harder to detect any bias.”

My words: I can understand that you Richo, would agree with a lot of what (ninemsn.com) writes, which will always make it harder to detect any bias, after-all, they know that Rossi is the “King.”

Thanks for the laugh buddy (being sarcastic here, but genuinely with the best intentions).

I guess I deserve that. I was going to go through superbike planets archive and pick out some off the stuff that I think was biased journalism, but it rapidly struck me that doing that involves a lot of work. I'm not much of a debater, and I couldn't be bothered spending time going through page after page of old news. So being the lazy ....... that I am I just picked out the first peice I could that seemed opinionated, and made a lame, two-bit, lazy man's argument with it. And it's come back to bite me on the arse.
I just got off the clock on a long shift, so I'm too tired to keep this up. You seem to thrive on this debating stuff, man. For me, it's very demanding on my limited brain cells, especially when you're using all them bolds and Italics. So screw it, you think the site's good, I think it's biased. Opinions is like arses, we all got 'em. Goodnight/morning/afternoon/whatever it is wherever you live.

P.S. All this talk about Mamola, you guys should head over to motogpnews.com and check out a few or Randy's big ups from the season. Ok, so they're full of ...., but they make for funny reading.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jan 14 2007, 04:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Good Morning guys!

The point I am making is

Pete I think you missed my point entirely!

Most of it was me being sarcstic. I just wanted to show you that Mamola is fair. But you wouldn't take my or Tom's word for, so I gave you an example of how Mamola is not what you thought. I still like the guy, even if he is a Rossi lover. (though you thought he was a Rossi hater).



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (richo @ Jan 14 2007, 05:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I guess I deserve that.

Yup, but its cool. I see you've decided to stay with your stick-your-head-in-the-sand opinion about superbikeplanet. That's ok.

Anyway "buddy", I can call you that right? When people say something on this site I found I usually have to back it up, being unpopular an all, so I guess that's made me a debater as you say.

When some of my friends get together and talk sports and we sometimes debate and finally don’t agree with eachother, as the night comes to an end, we say our good bys and end with: “Its cool man, we’ll still party.

So Richo, “We’ll still party.”


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Jan 14 2007, 04:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>At least my opinions are consistant, you guys must admire me for that!

Yes, I agree, they are "CONSISTANTLY" WRONG.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Jan 14 2007, 04:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Pete I think you missed my point entirely!

Most of it was me being sarcstic. I just wanted to show you that Mamola is fair. But you wouldn't take my or Tom's word for, so I gave you an example of how Mamola is not what you thought. I still like the guy, even if he is a Rossi lover. (though you thought he was a Rossi hater).


No I dont think so Jumkie, If Mamola slags off Rossi and bigs up Edwards in one place, then does the opposite somewhere else, then he cant even make up his own mind about who he hates!

Thats why I have even less respect for the guy than I did already.

I stick by what I said initially, I know what the guy has written, if I had kept all my old MCNs I could bring out loads to back it up, but its a rag, and once I've read it I bin it. It's all been down in black and white, so I'm not going to say that I was wrong all along, because I know the score. And you know yourself, this is probably the first time Ive said something and not backed it up immediately.

We will have to agree to disagree. Again!

Pete