This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Rules changes in wake of 2015 discussion

Fair enough. Thanks for clarification.

I don't know how I got sucked in to rehashing this crap. Especially when there is a test going on.

Edit: oh yeah, I know why, because of the news that Dorna had created a new Race Direction2.0. Kinda reminds me of Factory2.
I have addressed the question of the kick in an edit to my previous post btw.

The change is a nothing change. I shared some of Povol's fear that they were going to impose some version of the late season "Rossi Rule" in regard to which riders were allowed to race late season, so at least they haven't done that.
 
I had a logical position about the telemetry and brake pressure spike. You should read it.

I remember many things, but there has been so much in regard to all this that I don't specifically remember that post.

I absolutely allocate all responsibiilty for the contact and MM going down to Rossi, and can well believe that there may have been contact with Rossi's foot, but agree with David Emmett that telemetry can't determine Rossi's intent, in regard to any putative kick anyway; his intent in the incident in general is fairly clear to me at least.
 
I remember many things, but there has been so much in regard to all this that I don't specifically remember that post.

I absolutely allocate all responsibiilty for the contact and MM going down to Rossi, and can well believe that there may have been contact with Rossi's foot, but agree with David Emmett that telemetry can't determine Rossi's intent, in regard to any putative kick anyway; his intent in the incident in general is fairly clear to me at least.

While I agree about the intent, all that matters is the brake pressure spike does not happen if Rossi doesn't do what he did. That's what the end result of Rossi is.thr problem is that the same people arguing you can't know Rossi's intent, seem to know what MM'S INTENT was in spite of zero evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
(EDIT I was agreeing with what David said about the likelihood of the data definitively proving anything in regard to the putative kick, btw. I only quickly scanned his article, and hadn't thought he was arguing one way or the other about the data being released, and would agree that journalists in general arguing for data to be withheld is bizarre. Absolutely no doubt that the contact whatever its nature which led to MM going down was entirely down to Rossi as I read David as saying; whether he deliberately kicked MM can ony be determined if RD bring out the mind reading equipment or abilities which allowed them to determine MM's bad intentions in the Sepang race, and they are being disbanded now anyway.

I also agree with Kropo that the data wouldn't change much minds. There is a great TED talk I mentioned a while ago regarding "belief" processed in the same sector as "facts". It may seem futile, but then again why continue a case in court beyond the opening arguments?


Race Direction's mind reading equipment, hahaha indeed.

Btw, I personally believe a kick was involved, I disagree with Dennis Noyes' eloquent wordy argument against it's existence (see the comments section). I also think his admonishing of journalists using it in there headlines as irresponsable is a bit like regulating the temperature of boiling a person in oil. What I should think is reprehensible is the ongoing entertainment of what happened at the point of collision as relevant. It reminds me of Phil Read and Wayne Gardner's opinion on the subject, where they skip over the reason why Marquez was in his predicament then proceeded on assigning fault to Marc because he didn't evade successfully his attacker. Notwithstanding, if there is anything I'm going to say is "irresponsable" it's the description of a one-sided bullying episode as a mutual feud. If I may use hyperbole, it's as accurate as saying the Jews had a "feud" with Hitler.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
With all due respect to Kropo, tell me Mike, when was the last time a journalist took the position to argue against the release of information?

Sorry Krops, but I find that position odd.

I am not against it. I am just saying that you, and I, and every other dumb .... on the planet are too dumb to actually understand what they are being shown. It will make precisely zero difference to the conversation. The pitchfork-wielding mobs will continue to scream in blind incomprehension, their viewpoints unchanged.

I'd love to see the data. But I couldn't give a .... about what it shows, my inner geek just has a hankering for some graphs.
 
... people arguing you can't know Rossi's intent, seem to know what MM'S INTENT was in spite of zero evidence.

Immaculate Conception! That's what must be believed for the rest of it to make sense.


The crux is reading of Marquez's mind that he "intended" to screw Rossi's championship at Sepang, nothing, absolutely nothing else can be logically argued going forward past this single solitary event. Marquez must have intended to provoke Rossi in order for anything else to be accepted.

Think about it, it's exactly like Christmas. You can go around talking about every aspect of Christmas if you don't first accept in the Immaculate Conception.

What we have here is a case built on a single moment that is pages upon pages of journalists articles, fans responses, former racers tweeting, organizers expressing and making new rules, all of it built on a ....... act of faith that Marquez deliberately provoked Rossi at Sepang. An act that has, as you correctly say, has absolutely zero evidence, and the absurdity on offer is that Marquez passes too many times cleanly. That's it! In other words, a complete perversion of racing itself. Its not any different than a virgin girl getting pregnant.
 
Last edited:

Like I said, I am all debated out on the subject. The only thing I do now is agree with Rossi fans when they say that riders who can't win the championship shouldn't get involved, and seize the chance to roundly condemn the actions of Andrea Iannone at Phillip Island. For some reason, they seem to think that was different.

The convoluted logic which they use in that case is why I don't take debate on the issue seriously. From either side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I am not against it. I am just saying that you, and I, and every other dumb .... on the planet are too dumb to actually understand what they are being shown. It will make precisely zero difference to the conversation. The pitchfork-wielding mobs will continue to scream in blind incomprehension, their viewpoints unchanged.

I'd love to see the data. But I couldn't give a .... about what it shows, my inner geek just has a hankering for some graphs.
Haha, but Kropo, that's why there are people like you, to help us sift through the complexity of the data for clues to formulate conclusion. God knows how many times I've read your blog to come better understand .... I didn't get.

Anyway, I agree, I don't think the data would have changed anybody's mind at this point. But it may have served to reinforce our already staunch position. There's value in that, isn't there? Ha!
 
Like I said, I am all debated out on the subject. The only thing I do now is agree with Rossi fans when they say that riders who can't win the championship shouldn't get involved, and seize the chance to roundly condemn the actions of Andrea Iannone at Phillip Island. For some reason, they seem to think that was different.

The convoluted logic which they use in that case is why I don't take debate on the issue seriously. From either side.
Fair enough Krops. I ebb and flow myself. Some days I wake up and think, I never want to hear about this .... again, Rossi has ruined the sport. I was so excited about the test, then....i log on to the forum and read Dorna makes a new Race Direction 2.0, and there I go, balls deep into the Rossi debacle. .....

Again, thanks for taking the time to throw around .... with us. Its all good man.


Btw more annoying than the Rossi debacle, is Casey dashing our hopes for a wildcard every time a journalist brings it up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Haha, but Kropo, that's why there are people like you, to help us sift through the complexity of the data for clues to formulate conclusion. God knows how many times I've read your blog to come better understand .... I didn't get.

I consider myself a drooling ....., but most (though thankfully not all) of my fellow journalists make me look like a ....... genius. At least I am smart enough to understand that I don't understand everything. Most in the media center would be leaping to conclusions which simply weren't there.

Anyway, I agree, I don't think the data would have changed anybody's mind at this point. But it may have served to reinforce our already staunch position. There's value in that, isn't there? Ha!

Because what the debate really needs is yet more entrenchment, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I consider myself a drooling ....., but most (though thankfully not all) of my fellow journalists make me look like a ....... genius. At least I am smart enough to understand that I don't understand everything. Most in the media center would be leaping to conclusions which simply weren't there.



Because what the debate really needs is yet more entrenchment, right?

You sell yourself short David. I survey a good 10 publications, hardcopy and online, yours is at the top of the list. Perhaps why I give you so much grief. As I believe there is still hope to save your soul. I may or may not be right. :)
 
Like I said, I am all debated out on the subject. The only thing I do now is agree with Rossi fans when they say that riders who can't win the championship shouldn't get involved, and seize the chance to roundly condemn the actions of Andrea Iannone at Phillip Island. For some reason, they seem to think that was different.

The convoluted logic which they use in that case is why I don't take debate on the issue seriously. From either side.

Let's talk about Phillip Island 1990.

Can you ask Fausto Gresini if he ever regrets doing what he did to help Loris Capirossi win the title?
 
What the conspiracy theorists overlook is the point that Povol has made on several occasions; ie that Rossi was simply not fast enough late season. Any conspiracy could easily have been subverted simply by Rossi being fast enough to get in front of MM or Lorenzo at PI and Sepang and stay there, or by him being faster than Pedrosa at several races or Iannone at PI. I suppose he might have had a different approach at Valencia had the back of the grid penalty not totally removed the possibility of him finishing better than 4th on his own merits, but as others have said it seems unlikely he would have had the pace to finish any better than that anyway.

The points that Kropotkin made which are incontrovertible imo is that the Spanish conspiracy theory involving Dorna is ridiculous, it was overwhelmingly in their interest for Rossi to win the title, and that there is not much way around whoever is on Race Direction or any equivalent being in Dorna's employ given they own the sport. From my point of view at least the FIM are at some remove and know something about the sport (as opposed to Dorna), but as I said I am inclined to believe David that the current members of RD are honest men. My general opinion of Dorna is that they are not infrequently incompetent and that Carmelo tries to imitate F1 too much apparently not realising bike racing is a different sport, but that they do not contrive actual race results.

Conspiracy theories are usually suspect by their nature in any case, but given at least one conspiracy held by many, ie that Dorna because they are Spanish conspired to help a Spanish rider win the title , is patently insane as David says, surely this hardly lends credence to other conspiracy theories advanced by the same people. I certainly think that the penalty Rossi received was the minimum he could have been given, and perhaps RD could have been influenced by factors such as Rossi's stature in the sport, a desire not to completely decide the championship off the track and make the last round a dead rubber, or even some anticipation of the criticism they would receive, but in the end they did give him a penalty, and a back of the grid penalty in general terms is a severe penalty if not as severe as a disqualification.

As you say few minds will change now, but this all started with the supposed conspiracy at PI, which remains ridiculous imo, given Dani Pedrosa was 5 seconds down the road from the supposedly sandbagging MM on the same bike despite having competitive or better pace than MM at other late season races, even apart from that sandbagger actually winning the race.

I agree 99.5%. The fact that Dani was 5 seconds behind when MM was allegedly sandbagging could be attributed to many factors. The dynamic between those two riders varied a great deal over the course of the season what with changes to chassis and the capacities of the two riders to adapt to the wide variety of fixes that Honda were throwing at them. The bikes and new bits and pieces added to make them more competitive were as different as the riders themselves. I think MM has shown himself to be himself vastly more capable of controlling a race when he's on form unlike Dani who's known for winning by way of a jackrabbit start, followed by disappearing in the distance. As I recall Dani looked pretty heroic - but only in the closing laps when it was too late. Not so much a counterpoint, but a general observation.
 
Like I said, I am all debated out on the subject. The only thing I do now is agree with Rossi fans when they say that riders who can't win the championship shouldn't get involved, and seize the chance to roundly condemn the actions of Andrea Iannone at Phillip Island. For some reason, they seem to think that was different.

The convoluted logic which they use in that case is why I don't take debate on the issue seriously. From either side.

Rossi controls what those noobs think and say, they will parrot his words till the end of time. If He tells them to leave Ianoone alone, they leave Ianoone alone. . We have been trying to tell you it's a cult and there is no reasoning with them.I'm 100% convinced many of them would drink poison if he told them to.The sad part is you know this, but continue to walk the fence when it comes to your writing. I enjoy most of your articles, but your unwillingness to confront the yellow hoard bothers me and many others.
 
Like I said, I am all debated out on the subject. The only thing I do now is agree with Rossi fans when they say that riders who can't win the championship shouldn't get involved, and seize the chance to roundly condemn the actions of Andrea Iannone at Phillip Island. For some reason, they seem to think that was different.

The convoluted logic which they use in that case is why I don't take debate on the issue seriously. From either side.

.....................and Pedro riding like 'a ....' at Aragon. Some of those moves were the most aggressive seen by the little midget. I for one didn't think he had it in him.

I don't know what is being debated either. Rossi has had hate no sorry 'respect' issues with.............

Biaggi
Gibernau
Stoner
Lorenzo

And now finally Marquez. What's that 3 generations? Another record for the GOAT.
 
Last edited:
I agree 99.5%. The fact that Dani was 5 seconds behind when MM was allegedly sandbagging could be attributed to many factors. The dynamic between those two riders varied a great deal over the course of the season what with changes to chassis and the capacities of the two riders to adapt to the wide variety of fixes that Honda were throwing at them. The bikes and new bits and pieces added to make them more competitive were as different as the riders themselves. I think MM has shown himself to be himself vastly more capable of controlling a race when he's on form unlike Dani who's known for winning by way of a jackrabbit start, followed by disappearing in the distance. As I recall Dani looked pretty heroic - but only in the closing laps when it was too late. Not so much a counterpoint, but a general observation.

In general in the past, meaning his title winning 2013 and 2014 seasons in terms of the premier class, MM I would agree has been more capable of controlling races, except for those rare weekends Dani has had throughout his career when everything clicks and he is untouchable by any rider on the planet including all riders who have been contemporary with him in his premier class career; Sepang 2015 was one of those weekends imo. In 2015 MM had well documented difficulties/discontent with his bike which still seem to persist to a degree in the current testing and eventually led to him reverting to the 2014 chassis. Trying to control races as he had in the previous 2 seasons led to him crashing out of 6 races, and as a consequence out of championship contention.

My point which I made previously is that if he was 5 seconds ahead of a fit Pedrosa he had to be trying pretty hard, and it seems harsh to call him a cheat if he was varying his pace if this as seems likely involved varying between riding at 105% and 110% (or something in that general vicinity) of what anyone else could do.

I think MM probably dislikes both JL and VR, but dislikes VR more, and if that impels him to try harder against VR that is human nature and just the way it is for VR , makes it doubly unwise for VR to have insulted him, and could have been answered/countered by Rossi being fast enough himself as I have contended previously.
 

So that's your response, pointing out a spelling error. Great, now tell us why you walk the fence when the subject is Rossi. I'm guessing it's the same reason Dorna treads so lightly. Bread and butter?
 

Recent Discussions