Rossi and Lorenzo not sharing anymore

yamaka46..
no one's any idea how this is will work out word for word.to the rules its a mess.

If the extra engine is taken during the race (i.e. by switching bikes during a flag-to-flag race), then the rider will be given a ride through penalty. The ride through penalty rules state that riders may not swap bikes during the ride through, so they can't take advantage of the penalty to swap bikes again.

One interesting note - a sure sign that drawing up rules and regulations is the work of human hands - the new regulations read that the ride through penalty will be imposed for violating article 2.3.6. But the introduction of the new engine rules for Moto2 means that the article numbers have been reshuffled, and article 2.3.6 now covers the engine rules for Moto2. This will be fixed, but as the rulebook stands right now, taking an extra engine is not punishable.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Feb 12 2010, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>yamaka46..
no one's any idea how this is will work out word for word.to the rules its a mess.

If the extra engine is taken during the race (i.e. by switching bikes during a flag-to-flag race), then the rider will be given a ride through penalty. The ride through penalty rules state that riders may not swap bikes during the ride through, so they can't take advantage of the penalty to swap bikes again.

One interesting note - a sure sign that drawing up rules and regulations is the work of human hands - the new regulations read that the ride through penalty will be imposed for violating article 2.3.6. But the introduction of the new engine rules for Moto2 means that the article numbers have been reshuffled, and article 2.3.6 now covers the engine rules for Moto2. This will be fixed, but as the rulebook stands right now, taking an extra engine is not punishable.
The rules as they stand are quite clear and following them is not confusing. They are only a mess in terms of how they may well affect the race for the championship. My point was that IMO, this particular rule will be changed before the season is through.

Your second point is self evident - one cannot gain an advantage whilst serving a penalty, unless of course, one is M Schumacher at Silverstone serving a stop go on the last lap and winning the race whilst so doing, due to the placement of his pits beyond the start/finish line.

Your last paragraph I have seen on another thread - or even another site - word for word. I am presuming you were the author of both. You may wish to note that, as per the cut & paste I did from the FIM website in my post, the penalty now correctly references article 2.3.7 NOT 2.3.6.

I think this is good! Lorenzo can now only grow as a rider and be able to think for himself. Bout time this happened.

a MASTER can only take his Grasshopper so far and then he's on his own

My take of this is simply that there will be an internal championship between the two Yamaha garages... Each rider developing and racing his bike independently, until mid-season. Then results will decide who stays as rider #1, and who goes. Incidentally, it will coincide with contract renewal time.
Makes plenty of sense from Yamaha's point of view. If Rossi proves to be able to still beat Lorenzo, why not stay with him for some more time and look at Spies for the future. Otherwise, should Lorenzo do better than Rossi, well, they have a winner anyway

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>V,

Across a career statistics can only be calculated on the events (be that races or tournaments) in which the person participated, not those that they did not (irrespective of reason), thus to include the likes of non-Starts in statistics is, by extension a statistical anomoly.

But the ‘Tournament’ in this case consisted of 18 (or 17, or 16) Races!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As an examply, should a tennis player's career statistics and win ratio include tournaments in which they did not compete due to injury and/or rest?

Not tournaments in which they did not participate, but all games they were supposed to play in a Tournament they did participate, yes.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>They currently do not do so as to first be considered competitive and therefore qualify as a 'statistic' one must first compete, so a DNS is just that, a DNS not a DNF which can and does affect statistics (applies to all riders).

Gaz

If you like to get Stats out of a single race, we can do that too Gaz, but this comparison is another whole different matter.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 8 2010, 11:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As an example of not being there (DNS), Bayliss ran once in 2006, should we consider his win and podiums ratios 100% for that year?

This example with Bayliss, do you think he’s got a 100% Win and Podium ratio in the whole year (2006)? No way compadre.

Onto another matter:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Interesting comment the highlighted one and yes I fully expect this to elicit a few 'usual' type responses from people, but why should the performances in the lower classes determine one's worth or credibility for a factory ride?

Not necessarily ‘determine’, but for most Teams it would give a great insight, it helps (only helps) to make the decision of whether someone is worth a Factory or a Satellite for starters.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Certainly it had no effect on previous champions like Doohan, Rainey, Lawson, Hayden et al who were 'gifted' factory rides without lower class or WSBK championships, so why should a 'non championship' lessen one's worth or make one's elevation less credible and/or deserving?

Don’t really know the rest, but Hayden did have at least an AMA Title.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To be fair, it may well be the thing for another topic but you comment has me interested as it would seem to say that only lower class champions should be given factory rides, which then means that without a championship no rider is given a factory ride. So, how could a rider than earn a factory ride and what equals being worthy or what makes one credible enough to get a factory ride?

No, of course not, any rider could get a Factory Team. But winning a Title is not an easy task, is it? Retain it is not an easy task, is it? Whoever achieves it gives a bit more credibility than someone that has not done so.

Note: (WSB or AMA Titles do count on my view).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Conversely, if you mean that their elevation to a factory ride is less questioned because of those other championships than that is a perfectly understandable position

Exactly, it would be just another of many analysis I would take into account as a Factory Team Manager.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 10 2010, 04:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>but as has often been said/asked, a lower class champion does not make a higher class champion so risks do and will be taken.

Gaz

Racing implies a ‘Risk’ that God, or else we would be discussing Chess!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But the ‘Tournament’ in this case consisted of 18 (or 17, or 16) Races!



Not tournaments in which they did not participate, but all games they were supposed to play in a Tournament they did participate, yes.



If you like to get Stats out of a single race, we can do that too Gaz, but this comparison is another whole different matter.



This example with Bayliss, do you think he’s got a 100% Win and Podium ratio in the whole year (2006)? No way compadre.

Onto another matter:



Not necessarily ‘determine’, but for most Teams it would give a great insight, it helps (only helps) to make the decision of whether someone is worth a Factory or a Satellite for starters.



Don’t really know the rest, but Hayden did have at least an AMA Title.



No, of course not, any rider could get a Factory Team. But winning a Title is not an easy task, is it? Retain it is not an easy task, is it? Whoever achieves it gives a bit more credibility than someone that has not done so.

Note: (WSB or AMA Titles do count on my view).



Exactly, it would be just another of many analysis I would take into account as a Factory Team Manager.



Racing implies a ‘Risk’ that God, or else we would be discussing Chess!
I can see your nefarious plan, you want to downgrade mick doohan by including in his career statistics all the races he missed due to injury in 1992 and 1999 .

Most if not all sports get around anomalies like bayliss's one-off race by specifying a certain minimum number of races etc entered/started to be included in comparative statistics; I can't think of any where that number is all competition events between the start and end of a competitor's career, or where this is the denominator in such statistics. Such a criterion would admittedly make valentino's statistics even more impressive, not that he needs any help, but could perhaps be considered unfair on the "golden age" 500cc riders given how much easier it appeared to be to crash those bikes.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Feb 13 2010, 10:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I can see your nefarious plan, you want to downgrade mick doohan by including in his career statistics all the races he missed due to injury in 1992 and 1999 .

You got me on that plan!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Feb 13 2010, 10:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Most if not all sports get around anomalies like bayliss's one-off race by specifying a certain minimum number of races etc entered/started to be included in comparative statistics; I can't think of any where that number is all competition events between the start and end of a competitor's career, or where this is the denominator in such statistics. Such a criterion would admittedly make valentino's statistics even more impressive, not that he needs any help, but could perhaps be considered unfair on the "golden age" 500cc riders given how much easier it appeared to be to crash those bikes.

Not all a competitor’s career, just a specific tournament (or Championship) in which he/she was supposed to be participating! To win first you have to finish, to finish at all first you have to be there. Anyhow, the GOAT needs not much help either way.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But the ‘Tournament’ in this case consisted of 18 (or 17, or 16) Races!

Not tournaments in which they did not participate, but all games they were supposed to play in a Tournament they did participate, yes.

So, for your argument then, a rider missing a race or a sequence of races due to injury/illness is considered a DNF because they 'should' have particpated in those races across the season?

Again, does this then mean that people particpating in team sports who are injured have their 'statistics' affected by missing games due to injury/illness when their team did particpate?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If you like to get Stats out of a single race, we can do that too Gaz, but this comparison is another whole different matter.



This example with Bayliss, do you think he’s got a 100% Win and Podium ratio in the whole year (2006)? No way compadre.

For the year of 2006 in MGP the answer is yes, Bayliss had a 100% win or podium statistic for races in which he competed.

The converse is that you say he didn't have that percentage because he could have competed in other races that year which is incorrect one suspects due to contractual obligations and thus I refer you back to your first point, which is that only races in which they could or should participate should count.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Not necessarily ‘determine’, but for most Teams it would give a great insight, it helps (only helps) to make the decision of whether someone is worth a Factory or a Satellite for starters.

But does it matter?

As has been shown time again, many riders have been successful in MGP (or 500cc as it was) without a 'lower' category pedigree, so for mine a team should be looking at all riders as many 'non performers' in one category could well be champions in another



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, of course not, any rider could get a Factory Team. But winning a Title is not an easy task, is it? Retain it is not an easy task, is it? Whoever achieves it gives a bit more credibility than someone that has not done so.

Agree and disagree.

To win a title is difficult and certainly to retain in moreso, but all are title winners whether than be oncem twice, nine or fifteen times, thus all are as credible as the other, just that some show far greater longevity and a different skillset

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Note: (WSB or AMA Titles do count on my view).

What of other national titles (ie. BSB, WSBK SS etc)






Gaz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So, for your argument then, a rider missing a race or a sequence of races due to injury/illness is considered a DNF because they 'should' have particpated in those races across the season?

Has Pedrosa had injuries (Pre-Season) that affect his Season Stats Gaz?

I am not saying that DNS should be considered DNFs, not the same. But for a Season (Whole Championship) all races add points, being a specific Rider there or not, so if at the end of 2006 Bayliss had more points per (participated) race that he was in, why did he not win the Championship?

My view is that for a whole Championship, 'All' races count in Stats! I guess we agree to disagree.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Again, does this then mean that people particpating in team sports who are injured have their 'statistics' affected by missing games due to injury/illness when their team did particpate?

Well yes, if you consider how many touchdowns or received passes per Season, etc. I definitely think their Stats were affected. Same as Bayliss example. For a Rider to improve his/hers Stats first they have to be there!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>For the year of 2006 in MGP the answer is yes, Bayliss had a 100% win or podium statistic for races in which he competed.

So was Bayliss the Best in the Whole Season?

You kind of answer my question… "For the races in which he competed"… Exactly, single race Stats, not Championship Stats! Of course Bayliss was not the Best in the whole 2006 Season; he was the Best in a 'Single' race.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The converse is that you say he didn't have that percentage because he could have competed in other races that year which is incorrect one suspects due to contractual obligations and thus I refer you back to your first point, which is that only races in which they could or should participate should count.

Again, agree to disagree, single race Stats are to be considered as Single race Stats, not as a whole Season Championship Stats, in which then everything counts.

You can always say Roberts (Jr.) had one Great Season (2000), but you cannot say he had one Career! Same here.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But does it matter?

No, it does not matter much, here we finally agree!

It is Stats, a great reference but still a reference!

Man, we have nothing to discuss about when there is no racing!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As has been shown time again, many riders have been successful in MGP (or 500cc as it was) without a 'lower' category pedigree, so for mine a team should be looking at all riders as many 'non performers' in one category could well be champions in another

Again, having Championship Titles in the bag gives insight as a reference too, not to be considered the final decision in which to base the Factory or Satellite bikes to be assigned. But in other to accumulate data and information for decision making, it is a great help to have as many references as possible.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Agree and disagree.

As usual but always a pleasure to learn diverse points of view!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To win a title is difficult and certainly to retain in moreso, but all are title winners whether than be oncem twice, nine or fifteen times, thus all are as credible as the other, just that some show far greater longevity and a different skillset

Yes Gaz, all are actually. But the subject was who deserved a Factory Team when they first got into MotoGP, riders with other World Championship Titles or whoever did not have any World Title ('Whole' Season Title, just a joke).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Feb 13 2010, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What of other national titles (ie. BSB, WSBK SS etc)

Gaz

National titles start adding Pedigree of course! But to be the best of the best, then there's World Championships!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (halfpint @ Feb 12 2010, 06:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think this is good! Lorenzo can now only grow as a rider and be able to think for himself. Bout time this happened.

a MASTER can only take his Grasshopper so far and then he's on his own

Lorenzo must learn to let go (of Burgess's data) and become one with the motorcycle.  

<object width="425" height="350<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EadMQ4cnK8A</param><param name="wmode" value="transparent</param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EadMQ4cnK8A" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350</embed></object>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 01:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Has Pedrosa had injuries (Pre-Season) that affect his Season Stats Gaz?

In short, yes and I suspect that he is not alone in that regard, but he did compete and thus his figures (irrespective of what they may well be) are affected by that decision. Had he not have competed his accumulated points would have been affected but (IMO here) any percentage stats should not as the race/s missed should not be included in percentage based stats.

Basically, in golf as an example all statistics (ie. shots per round etc) are based on actual rounds competed and averaged, not rounds where the player did not make the cut or did not compete. To me, there is a marked difference between using non-competed instances in percentage based statistics as opposed to using only competed statistics.

Guess we won't agree as we have marked diametrically opposed views here.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 01:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I am not saying that DNS should be considered DNFs, not the same. But for a Season (Whole Championship) all races add points, being a specific Rider there or not, so if at the end of 2006 Bayliss had more points per (participated) race that he was in, why did he not win the Championship?

Answer is simple.

A championship is an accumulation of points across a series or events/tournaments, each having the same level of points with no weighting affecting the result. Thus, to compete in fewer than the maximum available events will (and should) affect one's ability to finish in a high position at season's end based upon that points accumulation.

But, if a rider competes in only one race that season and wins it, his win percentage is 100%, not 10% were the season to be 10 races (ie. 1 win in 10 races).


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Feb 14 2010, 01:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>My view is that for a whole Championship, 'All' races count in Stats! I guess we agree to disagree.

Absolutely agree to disagree as for me it is where does it end.

As an example, should Wayne Rainey's statistics be affected by his tragic early departure mid-season, or what or a rider who start late in the season as a replacement for other riders?







Gaz