Anybody who doubts that Rossi went to a 'safetey' meeting and started a discussion about regulations where he feels he has a performance disadvantage is just lying to themselves. I'd imagine he was trying to set the media discussion off so he can gauge what is generally thought about the issue before he starts to press the issue more seriously.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Its what happens when the answer given is the only practical conclusion, if you don't accept this, then an alternative must be argued regardless of how impractical or impossible is the alternative. Somebody (can't remember who or bothered to look back) gave the best possible answer to this proposition of scientifically testing this question of weight, (paraphrasing): "we already have 18 tests a year, the evidence is inconclusive." That should have been the thread end.
Lets for a minute assume the lighter riders do have a weight advantage, as has been proposed by the loudest voice in the paddock and the only reason we are discussing it here (in case you are wondering, that would be Valentino Rossi, despite the active denial by some it even happened). Now lets take this further and assume we can assign a scientific method to all those parameters you list above, rider talent, setup differences, riding style etc. (yes, seems impossible, but more allusive things have been actually quantified you know, seriously, I recently read a finding on "the most happy countries in the world". How you quantify "happiness" is quite amazing, eh.)
So then, lets say at the end of the tests we find that in fact lighter riders do have an advantage. Then what? Should we penalize midget riders like Pedrosa who have never won a 'big boy' championship? I think that would insure Pedro never wins a title.... wait wait wait. On second thought; I like it!!!
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,605
- Location
- here
Jumkie, I even bolded the important bits - no public statement that he felt disadvantaged or that something should be done. Saying "yes lighter riders have an advantage in some points, no, I'm not sure what we can do about it." is not the same as calling for combined weight limits in public or otherwise. Obviously I quoted Kropotkin's summation of Rossi's public statement and so I do agree with the fact he said something. It was what he said that I felt didn't tally with your summation.
BTW I wasn't defending anyone, it's just my opinion that j4rno was trying to say much the same as I was.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Yamaka my friend, I'm not sure how this can be so confusing. (In summation) Rossi saying, yes some have an advantage in some points means exactly that he thinks he is being disadvantaged in those points! He goes on to add (in the summation) he doesn't know what can be done about it, which means, if he knew how to correct this he would suggest it. That is in effect spawning the debate, which takes the form of rider-weight limits as a solution.
Let me break it down like this:
Journalist: Hey Vale, do you think we have a problem with light weight riders?
Vale: Yup, but I don't know how to solve it.
Debate: solution to the problem-- rider-weight limit pros and cons.
(Can I get some help here? I'm not sure how more to break it down to people like J4rno doubting Vale had anything to do with this debate and simply chalking it up to the villainization of poor o' Rossi.)
No need to explain to me atleast.
Maybe some people,not entirely unjustified want to see the evidence from exact words from a quote.
I for one NEVER read anything Rossi sais without thinking ,what could he really be saying?.
I'm not saying Rossi is a liar, but a constant competitor.Using every statement or comment to be better of in the end.
If there need to be a change of rules like weight limit he would obviously not spell it out,because he already knows he has bigger a vote than the others.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,451
- Location
- The North!
Well Pedrosa is a featherweight. To be as small as him and in riding shape amazes me. Using myself as an example I am 6'0 and I have had my body fat calculated to show that I hit around 168 with no fat whatsoever and I am not hugely muscular at all. For me to get into the shape they are in I end up being 190-200 which would be far too heavy to compete. I would also put myself at about average, maybe slightly taller and more of an athletic build than average but around that point. My point is that I am an average person and there is no real way I could achieve the maximum level in motorcycle racing. That fact alone shows that there is at least a problem, maybe not one we can or should try to fix but it exists.
Like what I said in my earlier post injuries are an odd case and really need to be ignored in this argument. If you have some data that shows that smaller people take significantly more physical harm from the same impacts I would be interested to see but I really can't see that being the case.
sorry, finals time so this draft was open for a few days and I forgot to post xD
Also, I thought some, or most, of you could use this.
You want to be higher up on the pyramid btw.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2007
- Messages
- 11,374
- Location
- Pomona NY
Well Pedrosa is a featherweight. To be as small as him and in riding shape amazes me. Using myself as an example I am 6'0 and I have had my body fat calculated to show that I hit around 168 with no fat whatsoever and I am not hugely muscular at all. For me to get into the shape they are in I end up being 190-200 which would be far too heavy to compete. I would also put myself at about average, maybe slightly taller and more of an athletic build than average but around that point. My point is that I am an average person and there is no real way I could achieve the maximum level in motorcycle racing. That fact alone shows that there is at least a problem, maybe not one we can or should try to fix but it exists.
Like what I said in my earlier post injuries are an odd case and really need to be ignored in this argument. If you have some data that shows that smaller people take significantly more physical harm from the same impacts I would be interested to see but I really can't see that being the case.
sorry, finals time so this draft was open for a few days and I forgot to post xD
Also, I thought some, or most, of you could use this.
You want to be higher up on the pyramid btw.
Some place around 3rd from the bottom they need to add: Refuses to answer a simple yes or no question which will
completely disintegrate the entire foundation of the fallacy being proposed.
and
Refuses to acknowledge information held to be true by everyone in the world but himself.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Well Pedrosa is a featherweight. To be as small as him and in riding shape amazes me. Using myself as an example I am 6'0 and I have had my body fat calculated to show that I hit around 168 with no fat whatsoever and I am not hugely muscular at all. For me to get into the shape they are in I end up being 190-200 which would be far too heavy to compete. I would also put myself at about average, maybe slightly taller and more of an athletic build than average but around that point. My point is that I am an average person and there is no real way I could achieve the maximum level in motorcycle racing. That fact alone shows that there is at least a problem, maybe not one we can or should try to fix but it exists.
Like what I said in my earlier post injuries are an odd case and really need to be ignored in this argument. If you have some data that shows that smaller people take significantly more physical harm from the same impacts I would be interested to see but I really can't see that being the case.
sorry, finals time so this draft was open for a few days and I forgot to post xD
Also, I thought some, or most, of you could use this.
You want to be higher up on the pyramid btw.
The observation about his injuries was an aside, but I don't think can be dismissed as an odd case; I have documented it previously but it is a matter of fact that he has had injuries, often fractures, which have significantly impaired him for the last 7 years, with the injury in 2005 occurring after he had clinched the 250 title. I actually have a medical degree, but will admit to having made an assumption that smaller stature would make him more injury prone as this seems obvious; off hand I could suggest he will be thrown further/higher by the same force, have less soft tissue to insulate him, less muscle to support his joints, possibly lower bone density and less massive bones etc.
However you seem to be making a bigger assumption ie that it is axiomatic that less weight is an overall advantage, despite many posters providing you with evidence that the actual race and championship wins don't correlate with weight which is surely what matters rather than a discussion of theoretical physics; 8 of the last 11 championships have actually been won by riders large by gp racing standards, and dani has won none in 5 attempts, and only 12 or so races. Even the things you postulate as advantages such as better fuel economy aren't proven by his performances; he in fact has often tended to slow more than most later in races, and even his starts may be more a function of the bike and its launch software etc than his weight, given that stoner was the lightning starter in 2007 and 2008. You actually say yourself that it is amazing he can ride at this level, and as I said if a shoulder injury which did not preclude valentino from winning races on a yamaha stops him riding the ducati to capacity it seems doubtful dani could ride a ducati at all.
As I have also said I do think from the medical point of view it is bad that the large riders do seem to feel the need to become skeletonic in the quest for extra advantage, whether or not they gain one, but increasing the fuel limit would seem to be the only way to fairly address this which they won't do; I don't see how adding weight penalties to the bikes could be done in any fair or sensible fashion.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 1,011
- Location
- Pangea
Excellent post Anders.
Rossi is a very smart guy and no doubt realises he has probably pushed the limits of fairness in the past and therefore his present and future public statements with respect to major rule changes must reflect this - hence a more diplomatic stance on this issue. The push for Bridgestone tires and subsequent control tire introduction was fairly transparent and I would think he knows he can only push things so far in future. He has every right to pursue a competitive advantage for himself, which he always does, and this is one of the reasons he is such a formidable competitor.
I would think he and Simoncelli would have definitely discussed their strategy before raising this issue at the riders safety meeting. My take is he would have made Simoncelli the spearhead of this campaign with the proviso he would back him up 100% without issuing any statements himself that would be too damning to his own standings. However, if you read between the lines (which is a prerequisite for deciphering his often coded messages) it is crystal clear he is again pursuing his own agendas at the expense of his "mate" Simo who is now copping most of the heat while Valentino can sit back and play "Mr Innocent".
As I said Rossi is a very shrewd operator and this aspect of his persona along with his psychological warfare, bike development skills and sublime riding talent are just some of the reasons he has remained on top for so long.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 1,011
- Location
- Pangea
Are you kidding? It has been my stance the entire time that we need data on this to see possible trends, I am not assuming anything. We actually discussed a basic scientific experiment that would attempt to start to see what and where those advantages lie. In fact, you are replying to responses about that experiment. Your last paragraph is almost exactly what I stated earlier as well.
Everything you are saying about me and my stance is wrong and I could pick this apart further but it's obvious you haven't read the thread so I won't waste my time.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2011
- Messages
- 1,011
- Location
- Pangea
I think in future people may need to borrow some of Barry's smiley emoticons and paste at least half a dozen or so of them after they post a response so Postiez can actually distinguish when people are kidding or not.
I think in future people may need to borrow some of Barry's smiley emoticons and paste at least half a dozen or so of them after they post a response so Postiez can actually distinguish when people are kidding or not.
I agree! I can't tell what's real when half the people are seriously claiming things such as rider conspiracy. ^_-
Lmao, so thats a joke? whoops xD
My faith in humanity has returned at least.
imo the necessity for your experiment would need to be established before undertaking what would not be a trivial endeavour; available evidence evidence is that there is not a strong influence, which is the point of my post, as is that nothing uncomplicated and fair could be done about the results of the experiment in any case. I strongly suspect there are too many variables involved to do a scientifically valid experiment anyway, apart perhaps from a straightline acceleration test which would still rely on rider input, and I can actually speak as somebody who has been involved in scientific experiments professionally.
My last paragraph is what I said much earlier in the thread also so you obviously haven't been reading either; I do sometimes follow a basketball forum also, but don't necessarily want to read about basketball on here.
I'm confused... I thought you were kidding.
Sigh.
Either you are still trollin' or your arguments are just really weak.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 3,802
- Location
- Tuscany, Italy
I said you need a couple of weeks on MINERAL WATER, Jum, --
careful, because VODKA is of the same color but isn't what you need
You know Monsieur De La Palisse? He was famous for stating only obvious matters of fact. I like that style because it keeps one safe from your favorite sport -- mental onanism.
When I say that Rossi did NOT say that he has a disadvantage because of his weight, I mean just that: he never said it. I challenged you to demonstrate the contrary, and of course you can't.
Your mirror-climbing trying to speculate that he might have implied it, only boils down to one single point -- that YOU have no doubts that he wants to arrive at some form of rider+bike weight limit (btw are you really convinced such a rule would help him? ridiculous!).
You may be convinced and that may be enough for YOU -- but it's not enough for all the sensible people who look at facts. You cannot go around accusing people of being peeps or similar kindergarten talk for not believing in what is true only in YOUR mind.
Tip: study the difference between subjective and objective truth.
careful, because VODKA is of the same color but isn't what you need
You know Monsieur De La Palisse? He was famous for stating only obvious matters of fact. I like that style because it keeps one safe from your favorite sport -- mental onanism.
When I say that Rossi did NOT say that he has a disadvantage because of his weight, I mean just that: he never said it. I challenged you to demonstrate the contrary, and of course you can't.
Your mirror-climbing trying to speculate that he might have implied it, only boils down to one single point -- that YOU have no doubts that he wants to arrive at some form of rider+bike weight limit (btw are you really convinced such a rule would help him? ridiculous!).
You may be convinced and that may be enough for YOU -- but it's not enough for all the sensible people who look at facts. You cannot go around accusing people of being peeps or similar kindergarten talk for not believing in what is true only in YOUR mind.
Tip: study the difference between subjective and objective truth.
Ok, I give up, you are obviously too smart for me, and for everyone else who has posted on this thread including kropotkin, and hence are quite justified in rejecting every point contrary to your opinion offered by every other poster in this thread (without recourse to the midlevels let alone the tip of your pyramid), and your several posts early in the thread stating that weight was a significant influence obviously didn't say that.
