"I repeat he won the race. I need give no other argument, this is the actual aim of the whole endeavour, and some of the greats of motorsport as I have detailed have opined that winning should be at the slowest pace which will be successful rather than the fastest which is possible"
Actually that point is used to make when a person is leading, to control the pace, to avoid risks and save machinery, because there is no need to win by a big margin. Definitely not applicable to PI.
"I think he also has a duty in the circumstances not to put a contender at risk of being taken out by an intemperate move of his, which he also clearly fulfilled at PI 2015, if not so much at Sepang although he still rode quite legally imo watching live and in the opinion of RD, and in fact rather cleanly by his previous standards, again imo."
So now you are arguing that championship contenders are someone that other riders have to be careful around? This is a change, well if that is the case he did a terrible job of it in both PI and Sepang for Rossi, and suspiciously excellent job of it in Sepang and Valencia for Lorenzo, something even Lorenzo admitted.
"Rossi always had the option of settling for 4th with no risk of crashing out of the race at Sepang if he was not good enough to get and stay in front of MM in that race, btw."
That is clearly not an option realistically speaking.
"What you consistently have done is to give your unchanged opinion about the events of late 2015, an opinion to which you are obviously entitled as to any other opinion you may have, including the moon being made of green cheese if that is your opinion as to its constitution. What you have consistently failed to do is provide any of the evidence you claim backs your opinion, other than it being the opinion of others including one Valentino Rossi, quite possibly because such evidence doesn't exist."
Repetitive. What's the obsession with moon and green cheese by the way?
"What is really amusing is you trying to split hairs over the definition of a conspiracy; call it a plot then if it just involves one man. Those you dispute over tyre conspiracy theories could equally argue that it is all a plot by one man rather than a conspiracy among many, a bloke named Carmelo Ezpeleta I would imagine being their likely candidate."
Sure, the definition of the matter is not that important. And you are free to believe Stoner was screwed over countless times over his career if it makes you feel better, I won't stop you.
Actually that point is used to make when a person is leading, to control the pace, to avoid risks and save machinery, because there is no need to win by a big margin. Definitely not applicable to PI.
"I think he also has a duty in the circumstances not to put a contender at risk of being taken out by an intemperate move of his, which he also clearly fulfilled at PI 2015, if not so much at Sepang although he still rode quite legally imo watching live and in the opinion of RD, and in fact rather cleanly by his previous standards, again imo."
So now you are arguing that championship contenders are someone that other riders have to be careful around? This is a change, well if that is the case he did a terrible job of it in both PI and Sepang for Rossi, and suspiciously excellent job of it in Sepang and Valencia for Lorenzo, something even Lorenzo admitted.
"Rossi always had the option of settling for 4th with no risk of crashing out of the race at Sepang if he was not good enough to get and stay in front of MM in that race, btw."
That is clearly not an option realistically speaking.
"What you consistently have done is to give your unchanged opinion about the events of late 2015, an opinion to which you are obviously entitled as to any other opinion you may have, including the moon being made of green cheese if that is your opinion as to its constitution. What you have consistently failed to do is provide any of the evidence you claim backs your opinion, other than it being the opinion of others including one Valentino Rossi, quite possibly because such evidence doesn't exist."
Repetitive. What's the obsession with moon and green cheese by the way?
"What is really amusing is you trying to split hairs over the definition of a conspiracy; call it a plot then if it just involves one man. Those you dispute over tyre conspiracy theories could equally argue that it is all a plot by one man rather than a conspiracy among many, a bloke named Carmelo Ezpeleta I would imagine being their likely candidate."
Sure, the definition of the matter is not that important. And you are free to believe Stoner was screwed over countless times over his career if it makes you feel better, I won't stop you.
