Will Lorenzo defend his MotoGP championship title this season?

michaelm said:

As I said, 5:1 for total season results and 3:0 for titles in the last 6 years (EDIT and 35:9 for race wins). Google it, look up motogp.com, or whatever else you care to do, those numbers will remain.

If you want to argue Rossi was better than Jorge is now when he was 25 or 26, or even when he was 30 in 2009, that is another question and I probably wouldn't disagree, but rather unfortunately for your case that is not what you were arguing. It isn't 2009 and Rossi is actually 37 now. He may well win the race today btw, he is still remarkably good obviously.

I thought you Rossi fans were "no excuses" guys, and in particular what Rossi may or may not have done had he been at Yamaha in the years 2011 and 2012 which you conveniently ignore is irrelevant, particularly given he made a deliberate choice motivated by hubris, and I don't see much controversy in Valentino after a praiseworthy tilt at the title not being fast enough in the last races of the 2015 season to beat Lorenzo, MM and Pedrosa in most races and Iannone in one race in any case. I don't seek to and have no need to offer any extenuation to Jorge for his title loss to MM in 2013 or his defeat by Rossi in the one year out of those 6 in 2014, and won't in future if Jorge himself doesn't prosper at Ducati.

Click to expand...

I'm not a "Rossi fan" just because I disagree with your figures. In fact, I supported Lorenzo through 2009 to 2011, as I thought Rossi had already won more than enough... In 2012 I fancied Pedrosa to finally win and in 2013 I wanted to see Marquez win in his rookie season as I was extremely impressed by him since his 125 days. In 2014&2015 I fancied Rossi again as I thought it'd be nice to see him win again once before he retires, but I wasn't too bothered, I'm not a fanboy of anyone. However, what happened last year does mean I will not be able to support Marquez or Lorenzo anymore. Regardless of whether the victim had been Rossi or anyone else.

Would you count 2017 if Rossi was winning races and JLo struggling with the Ducati? I know I wouldn't, after having spent 7 seasons as team mates it would just confuse things.

Lorenzo is a great rider, he doesn't need biased hyperbole. He's better than Rossi in some aspects and not quite as good in others. Very different types of riders.

The Worst said:

I'm not a "Rossi fan" just because I disagree with your figures. In fact, I supported Lorenzo through 2009 to 2011, as I thought Rossi had already won more than enough... In 2012 I fancied Pedrosa to finally win and in 2013 I wanted to see Marquez win in his rookie season as I was extremely impressed by him since his 125 days. In 2014&2015 I fancied Rossi again as I thought it'd be nice to see him win again once before he retires, but I wasn't too bothered, I'm not a fanboy of anyone. However, what happened last year does mean I will not be able to support Marquez or Lorenzo anymore. Regardless of whether the victim had been Rossi or anyone else.

Would you count 2017 if Rossi was winning races and JLo struggling with the Ducati? I know I wouldn't, after having spent 7 seasons as team mates it would just confuse things.

Lorenzo is a great rider, he doesn't need biased hyperbole. He's better than Rossi in some aspects and not quite as good in others. Very different types of riders.

Click to expand...

I would say Lorenzo had made the wrong choice and that it was his problem and nobody else's, any wins by anyone are against all comers, and that riders of the like of Lorenzo and Rossi mostly have more choices than many others open to them.

I simply don't accept Rossi's version of events in regard to late season 2015, with which you appear to agree, which has been pretty much the crux of all subsequent discussion, regard the burden of proof to be very much on the accusers with this and any other conspiracy theory, consider Rossi had no proof whatsoever, and don't see that MM was under any obligation in the PI race in any case other than to win and not take out a contender (or anyone else) by a rash/unfeasible move while doing so. He can, as has been the case throughout GP bike racing history, imo run whatever winning race strategy he likes provided it does not involve riding illegally.

tps7c said:

I can't really explain my obsession with Rossi, but I do admit I have one.

Click to expand...

You know what they say: The first step is admitting you're powerless.

michaelm said:

I simply don't accept Rossi's version of events in regard to late season 2015, with which you appear to agree, which has been pretty much the crux of all subsequent discussion, regard the burden of proof to be very much on the accusers with this and any other conspiracy theory, consider Rossi had no proof whatsoever, and don't see that MM was under any obligation in the PI race in any case other than to win and not take out a contender (or anyone else) by a rash/unfeasible move while doing so. He can, as has been the case throughout GP bike racing history, imo run whatever winning race strategy he likes provided it does not involve riding illegally.

Click to expand...

You can have any theory you like, denialist or conspiracist, both can be clever or stupid. I can accept any theories that are consistent with all the facts, there could be more than one, but I can't accept any theory that is not consistent with any one of the fact.s

To me, Rossi knowingly making false accusations against Marquez does not make sense at all, it's simply implausible. It doesn't prove they're true, but I give him the benefit of the doubt and it warrants further investigation. I agree that it cannot be proven that Marquez was guilty or innocent, and that in any case his actions were not technically against the rules. But that doesn't mean all possible scenarios are equally likely. They're not. Or that it wasn't morally despicable unsporting behaviour never seen before, if it did actually happen...

The Worst said:

You can have any theory you like, denialist or conspiracist, both can be clever or stupid. I can accept any theories that are consistent with all the facts, there could be more than one, but I can't accept any theory that is not consistent with any one of the fact.s

To me, Rossi knowingly making false accusations against Marquez does not make sense at all, it's simply implausible. It doesn't prove they're true, but I give him the benefit of the doubt and it warrants further investigation. I agree that it cannot be proven that Marquez was guilty or innocent, and that in any case his actions were not technically against the rules. But that doesn't mean all possible scenarios are equally likely. They're not. Or that it wasn't morally despicable unsporting behaviour never seen before, if it did actually happen...

Click to expand...

And you keep saying the same thing, which is that your opinion and Rossi's opinion coincide, your only evidence for this appears to be that Rossi wouldn't have said it if it wasn't true, and you ignore the massive potential effect on MM's career and reputation of making allegations which he must have known he could in no way substantiate.

I have an opinion about why Rossi might have said it, which I gave you, and is consistent with multiple reports that Rossi was calling for riders other than Jorge not to try to beat him, late season 2015 "Rossi rules" with no previous existence/precedent in GP bike racing. I don't particularly care if you choose to consider that unlikely, and find it hypocritical that you are in fact taking the opposite stance where MM is concerned and calling him a liar, but we wouldn't be discussing this had Rossi not raised an unproveable conspiracy theory in the first place.

It is very simple, as we have discussed at great length on here. If Rossi wanted to win the title he should have beaten Pedrosa in several late season races, and Iannone at PI, which cost him far more points than not beating Jorge at PI, and that he could have beaten Jorge at PI is an assumption anyway particularly since MM and Iannone managed to beat him with no involvement by Jorge. He could also have ridden the race he did today and obviated all problems.

THis has been done to death here, but I'm bored so will humour this:

The Worst said:

You can have any theory you like, denialist or conspiracist, both can be clever or stupid. I can accept any theories that are consistent with all the facts, there could be more than one, but I can't accept any theory that is not consistent with any one of the fact.s

Click to expand...

Except when you distort the facts to suit your theory.

To me, Rossi knowingly making false accusations against Marquez does not make sense at all, it's simply implausible.

Click to expand...

Why? Because you don't want them to.

It doesn't prove they're true, but I give him the benefit of the doubt and it warrants further investigation.

Click to expand...

So you will give Rossi the benefit of the doubt, but not Marquez? As Krops said. Confirmation bias, you haz it.

michaelm said:

you ignore the massive potential effect on MM's career and reputation of making allegations which he must have known he could in no way substantiate.

I have an opinion about why Rossi might have said it, which I gave you, and is consistent with multiple reports that Rossi was calling for riders other than Jorge not to try to beat him, late season 2015 "Rossi rules" with no previous existence/precedent in GP bike racing. I don't particularly care if you choose to consider that unlikely, and find it hypocritical that you are in fact taking the opposite stance where MM is concerned and calling him a liar, but we wouldn't be discussing this had Rossi not raised an unproveable conspiracy theory in the first place.

Click to expand...

I'm neither saying that Rossi was "right" nor that Marquez was "right". I dont'k know. You don't know. Neither can be proven. But we all can have our theories based on and consistent with the available evidence. You're the one flat out denying ANY possibility that Rossi wasn't lying. I don't undestand why. It is POSSIBLE. The potential damage to reputation is the same for both riders, not just to Marquez by the way.

What reports prove that Rossi was pressuring riders not to pass him? Can you provide a source please?

michaelm said:

If Rossi wanted to win the title he should have beaten Pedrosa in several late season races, and Iannone at PI, which cost him far more points than not beating Jorge at PI, and that he could have beaten Jorge at PI is an assumption anyway particularly since MM and Iannone managed to beat him with no involvement by Jorge. He could also have ridden the race he did today and obviated all problems.

Click to expand...

You deliberately miss the point here. The issue is whether Lorenzo and Rossi had an equal battle for the title in the last 3 races. If they did great, if they didn't it's called race fixing.

#22 said:

Why? Because you don't want them to.

So you will give Rossi the benefit of the doubt, but not Marquez? As Krops said. Confirmation bias, you haz it.

Click to expand...

No. Because the false accusations scenario does not make logical sense. It just doens't. There is just no reason for Rossi to do that, it's completely ridiculous. You may disagree with Rossi of course, but you have to assume at least that he believed what he was saying. You have Iannone backing his claims and Rossi on record saying Alzamora himself confirmed to him that Marquez was doing "it" for Argentina, which Alzamora never denied.

Krops? You mean the motomatters guy? EVERYONE in the paddock knows he has an antiRossi agenda, the furthest you can get from objectivity in general, and this issue in particular. He used to remove comments and ban people from his website simply because they politely disagreed with him or criticise anything in his writing.

The Worst said:

No. Because the false accusations scenario does not make logical sense. It just doens't. There is just no reason for Rossi to do that, it's completely ridiculous. You may disagree with Rossi of course, but you have to assume at least that he believed what he was saying. You have Iannone backing his claims and Rossi on record saying Alzamora himself confirmed to him that Marquez was doing "it" for Argentina, which Alzamora never denied.

Click to expand...

Well answer me this. If it doesn't make sense for Rossi to make false accusations, does it make sense for Marquez to impede Rossi in PI to try and stop him winning the championship, then go and overtake the ONLY guy who can prevent that on the last but one corner and deny him 5 valuable points?

You ask Michaelm for proof of Rossi asking riders why they raced him so hard last year, then submit no proof about Alzamora's supposed statement. See where your logic fails here?

Krops? You mean the motomatters guy? EVERYONE in the paddock knows he has an antiRossi agenda, the furthest you can get from objectivity in general, and this issue in particular. He used to remove comments and ban people from his website simply because they politely disagreed with him or criticise anything in his writing.

Click to expand...

That's funny, because he has been accused by some here of being pro Rossi.

The Worst said:

No. Because the false accusations scenario does not make logical sense. It just doens't. There is just no reason for Rossi to do that, it's completely ridiculous. You may disagree with Rossi of course, but you have to assume at least that he believed what he was saying. You have Iannone backing his claims and Rossi on record saying Alzamora himself confirmed to him that Marquez was doing "it" for Argentina, which Alzamora never denied.

Krops? You mean the motomatters guy? EVERYONE in the paddock knows he has an antiRossi agenda, the furthest you can get from objectivity in general, and this issue in particular. He used to remove comments and ban people from his website simply because they politely disagreed with him or criticise anything in his writing.

Click to expand...

A 3rd theory from someone on here was that Rossi, realising that there was a chance a championship he thought was in the bag was slipping away was preparing his excuses. Not very complimentary, but nor was Rossi to MM, and as the proponent of a conspiracy theory the burden of proof is on him, and that proof simply doesn't exist. He might well believe all manner of things, such as that he deserved a 10th championship for his services to the sport, and apparently possibly did believe no-one but Jorge should be allowed to race him, but this doesn't make him correct or mean other riders are obliged to abide by his beliefs. I agree Rossi is smart, and hence he is well aware
of his power with a significant portion of the media and particularly with his fan base, and the likely effect of his statement. Ask Sete Gibernau or Max Biaggi whether he is capable of being vindictive and of using that power.

As I have said that he could have passed Jorge if he got to him is supposition in the first place, if he was capable of passing that he had to come through the field to do so was no- one's problem but his anyway, and there is absolutely no requirement on MM other than to ride safely in winning the race, which as has been pointed out cost Jorge 5 points. Are you advocating cortical implants to measure the amount of effort/will exerted by riders at any given stage in a race or compulsory mind rejading after the races? MM may well be more motivated to beat VR than JL, but it is hardly unprecedented for some rivalries to be stronger than others (cf a certain last corner pass at Jerez 2005), and in the end MM beat both of them, and Rossi could have obviated all else by being faster than both of them.

Your case would be helped if you could produce a date stamped observation from any observer in the media who detected MM's malfeasance prior to that Sepang press conference. This was requested by Povol, the proponent of the excuse theory, and is yet to be produced by anyone. I doubt there is even anyone on a blog, and don't recall any poster on here raising the matter, and the depth of anti-Rossi sentiment on here largely followed the Sepang press conference and subsequent events, with plenty of people considering VR to be in the right at Assen.

The Worst said:

No. Because the false accusations scenario does not make logical sense. It just doens't. There is just no reason for Rossi to do that, it's completely ridiculous. You may disagree with Rossi of course, but you have to assume at least that he believed what he was saying. You have Iannone backing his claims and Rossi on record saying Alzamora himself confirmed to him that Marquez was doing "it" for Argentina, which Alzamora never denied.

Krops? You mean the motomatters guy? EVERYONE in the paddock knows he has an antiRossi agenda, the furthest you can get from objectivity in general, and this issue in particular. He used to remove comments and ban people from his website simply because they politely disagreed with him or criticise anything in his writing.

Click to expand...

I'd maintain that krops is a bit of a fence sitter and leans to the yellow as a means to appease his subscribers.

The Worst said:

You can have any theory you like, denialist or conspiracist, both can be clever or stupid. I can accept any theories that are consistent with all the facts, there could be more than one, but I can't accept any theory that is not consistent with any one of the fact.s

To me, Rossi knowingly making false accusations against Marquez does not make sense at all, it's simply implausible. It doesn't prove they're true, but I give him the benefit of the doubt and it warrants further investigation. I agree that it cannot be proven that Marquez was guilty or innocent, and that in any case his actions were not technically against the rules. But that doesn't mean all possible scenarios are equally likely. They're not. Or that it wasn't morally despicable unsporting behaviour never seen before, if it did actually happen...

Click to expand...

Rossi made public allegations, MM didn't whatever his suspicions about Argentina (his fault imo, whatever eventually happened it was very poor judgement, as it was very obvious he was much slower than VR at that stage of the race), and you are specifically stating that MM acted vindictively while dismissing the possibility of any dishonourable motive on Rossi's part. MM has or had a well deserved reputation for carelessness and recklessness, but no previous history of being vindictive as far as I am aware. Rossi does have a record of cracking in the only close title battle he previously had, btw.

My own view is that he dislikes both JL and VR, did his best (by his own standards anyway) at PI to interfere with neither, then took his chance to win when it came with no risk of taking JL out, hence him being so upset as was reportedly the case by Rossi's allegations.

michaelm said:

you are specifically stating that MM acted vindictively while dismissing the possibility of any dishonourable motive on Rossi's part. MM has or had a well deserved reputation for carelessness and recklessness, but no previous history of being vindictive as far as I am aware. Rossi does have a record of cracking in the only close title battle he previously had, btw.

My own view is that he dislikes both JL and VR, did his best (by his own standards anyway) at PI to interfere with neither, then took his chance to win when it came with no risk of taking JL out, hence him being so upset as was reportedly the case by Rossi's allegations.

Click to expand...

What plausible dishonourable motive could Rossi have, can we be specific?

Where did Rossi "crack" in the past? He may not be a saint, but was Biaggi a saint? Was Rossi unfair to them on the track? Has he come up with ridiculous excuses when he hasn't won the championship before?

The PI lap times only make sense if he wanted to interfere. Unless you have an alternative explanation for the lap times, interference is by far the most likely scenario. I thought it was a great race at first, but all that passing was a farce unfortunately.

The Worst said:

What plausible dishonourable motive could Rossi have, can we be specific?

Click to expand...

The 2015 MotoGP World Title, his "Tenth" and the hype surrounding it. That specific enough?

Where did Rossi "crack" in the past?

Click to expand...

Valencia 2006
Valencia 2007 (Crashed in Practice)
Mugello 2010
Sepang 2015

To name but a few.

The PI lap times only make sense if he wanted to interfere. Unless you have an alternative explanation for the lap times, interference is by far the most likely scenario.

Click to expand...

Again, where were you between the end of the race at Phillip Island and when Rossi made his accusations the following Thursday? I and Povol have challenged anyone in the past to show a single post on the internet where someone says the exact thing you said above. If it was so obvious from the laptimes, why did you not deduce it as soon as all the said details were published, and not 4 days later?

Interference is by far the most likely scenario in your head because it fits you narrative. There are plenty of other scenario's such as tyre management to name but one.

I thought it was a great race at first, but all that passing was a farce unfortunately.

Click to expand...

What you actually mean is "I thought it was a great race at first, until my false idol told me all that passing was a farce by Marc Marquez to interfere with my race"

The Worst said:

What plausible dishonourable motive could Rossi have, can we be specific?

Where did Rossi "crack" in the past? He may not be a saint, but was Biaggi a saint? Was Rossi unfair to them on the track? Has he come up with ridiculous excuses when he hasn't won the championship before?

The PI lap times only make sense if he wanted to interfere. Unless you have an alternative explanation for the lap times, interference is by far the most likely scenario. I thought it was a great race at first, but all that passing was a farce unfortunately.

Click to expand...

I have given you 3 explanations as to why Rossi may have made the claims, the first of which was that he was stressed at the threat to a dearly held ambition and his judgement was clouded, which you conveniently dismiss, yet you have no trouble making your own claim that MM was motivated by vindictiveness. As MM said, Rossi needed to beat JL not him, and could have achieved this by getting and staying in front of Lorenzo at the start of the race as he did in the most recent race, and didn't or couldn't do so. As you keep ignoring, MM won the race, his only job, without putting any rider at risk. And yet again, there was no suspicion by any observer of malfeasance in this race at the time or until that Sepang press conference. MM is more than capable of pulling out a banzai lap as he actually already did on the last lap at Assen 2015, and it is judicious imo rather than suspicious to reserve such a lap for the last lap particularly when you have had 6 dnfs in the season pushing too hard earlier in races. In the PI race he had a near lose earlier in the race which allowed Rossi to pass him, and a near tankslapper on a straight on his own. If he can fake such things then he is too good for everybody anyway. His race tactics may also have included concern that Crazy Joe would take him out, which was a stated and perhaps not iillegitimate concern of JL's post race. And again the whole construction relies on the supposition that Rossi would have beaten Lorenzo when he couldn't even beat Iannone

Rossi didn't need to finish all that high in the last race to win the 2006 title but crashed out early, after failing to beat Toni Elias in the previous race when success would have gained him the 5 points he lost the title by. Troy Bayliss, a non-contender, won that last race leading every lap btw, and Toni Elias was obviously another rider who considered it legitimate to race VR then as Iannone did at PI last year.

#22 said:

The 2015 MotoGP World Title, his "Tenth" and the hype surrounding it. That specific enough?

Click to expand...

Certainly not... it sounds like complete .........

#22 said:

Valencia 2006
Valencia 2007 (Crashed in Practice)
Mugello 2010
Sepang 2015
To name but a few.

Click to expand...

Oh great, now cracking and crashing are interchangeable terms... Extremely convincing argument. As for Sepang, he was being harassed in an unprecedent way by another rider looking for trouble. What would you do in his situation?

#22 said:

Again, where were you between the end of the race at Phillip Island and when Rossi made his accusations the following Thursday? I and Povol have challenged anyone in the past to show a single post on the internet where someone says the exact thing you said above. If it was so obvious from the laptimes, why did you not deduce it as soon as all the said details were published, and not 4 days later?

Click to expand...

If not even Rossi himself fully realised it until he watched it with the lap times, how can you expect anyone to notice it watching the race live? Are we being deliberately obtuse here?

#22 said:

Interference is by far the most likely scenario in your head because it fits you narrative. There are plenty of other scenario's such as tyre management to name but one.

Click to expand...

No. It is by far the most likely scenario because I haven't heard a single plausible alternative explanation to those lap times. Show me any race from Marquez with similar tyre wear patterns or any indication of those during that weekend. You can't just vaguely say "tyre management" and leave it at that, there are no precedents of it occurring at that rate and so timely vs the race circumstances.

When Rossi said what he said I gave him the benefit of the doubt, because I could not see any reason for him to say that if he didn't believe it was true. So I rewatched the race with the lap times (and sector times), put it together in a spreadsheet, something you clearly haven't done but doesn't stop you from flat out denying the whole thing. Typical denialist attitude. No facts, no arguments, right by default (others have to prove they're wrong), etc.

The Worst said:

Certainly not... it sounds like complete .........

Click to expand...

In your opinion. However, your statements sound like complete ........ to others

Oh great, now cracking and crashing are interchangeable terms... Extremely convincing argument. As for Sepang, he was being harassed in an unprecedent way by another rider looking for trouble. What would you do in his situation?

Click to expand...

He crashed in Valencia 2006 while under pressure in what was his first championship showdown in the premier class. He had pole position. All he had to do was finish ahead or even a place or two behind Nicky Hayden, and he'd be champion. He then betched his start, and crashed while trying to catch up to the leading group including Hayden. Yes he cracked, and that caused him to crash so of course they are interchangeable.

If not even Rossi himself fully realised it until he watched it with the lap times, how can you expect anyone to notice it watching the race live? Are we being deliberately obtuse here?

Click to expand...

I didn't say live. You are the one who said it was obvious from the lap times. Therefore you have reviewed the rider lap data after the race, only you didn't notice anything unusual until Rossi said there was.

No. It is by far the most likely scenario because I haven't heard a single plausible alternative explanation to those lap times. Show me any race from Marquez with similar tyre wear patterns or any indication of those during that weekend. You can't just vaguely say "tyre management" and leave it at that, there are no precedents of it occurring at that rate and so timely vs the race circumstances.

Click to expand...

I can leave it at that actually. Because winning an internet argument isn't important to me. You believe what you want to believe, that's great. But stop trying to convince everyone here you are impartial and the voice of reason.

When Rossi said what he said I gave him the benefit of the doubt, because I could not see any reason for him to say that if he didn't believe it was true. So I rewatched the race with the lap times (and sector times), put it together in a spreadsheet, something you clearly haven't done but doesn't stop you from flat out denying the whole thing. Typical denialist attitude. No facts, no arguments, right by default (others have to prove they're wrong), etc.

Click to expand...

Good for you little boy who joined in April 2016, and clearly hasn't visited all this which was discussed in detail in about 20 threads last October and November.

The only thing I am in denial of, is that your opinion is fact my friend. You there, have displayed a trait common among Rossi fans.

michaelm said:

I have given you 3 explanations as to why Rossi may have made the claims, the first of which was that he was stressed at the threat to a dearly held ambition and his judgement was clouded, which you conveniently dismiss, yet you have no trouble making your own claim that MM was motivated by vindictiveness.

Click to expand...

There's nothing to dismiss in that "argument", there's just nothing in it. I've given evidence of what MM could have felt aggrieved about, confirmed by Alzamora.

michaelm said:

As MM said, Rossi needed to beat JL not him

Click to expand...

Not if MM put himself between both on purpose, which is what's the point of the discussion here. Rossi was faster than Lorenzo in PI and only finished behind JLo because of MM. Both VR and AI were much faster than JL there. Sepang was different, most likely VR actually got 3 extra points there thanks to Marquez, but got the penalty too. Valencia was the other big blow, where MM refused to pass JL, against his own and his team's interests. VR lost the title because of PI and Valencia. In PI he should have gained 3 points on Lorenzo, but lost 7. In Valencia he should have lost 3 points to Lorenzo by Lorenzo being 3rd and Rossi 4th (worst case scenario) but lost 12. That made the difference.

So no, Rossi was not just racing Lorenzo. That's the whole problem actually.

And please, stop this "MM won in PI therefore he did not interfere" crap. He did interfere but, at the time, he did not see it necessary to concede the race win because of his massive pace advantage there. His work cost VR a net change of -10 points! If he did that in one more race that was it, job done, which he did at Valencia.

michaelm said:

Rossi didn't need to finish all that high in the last race to win the 2006 title but crashed out early, after failing to beat Toni Elias in the previous race when success would have gained him the 5 points he lost the title by. Troy Bayliss, a non-contender, won that last race leading every lap btw, and Toni Elias was obviously another rider who considered it legitimate to race VR then as Iannone did at PI last year.

Click to expand...

2006 has nothing to do with 2015. VR uncharacteristically crashed and lost the title. Full stop. Did he ever complain or come up with any ........? No. He lost it fair and square without any wrongdoing by anyone. Elias was riding hard for his own interests as he was expected to do.

The Worst said:

So I rewatched the race with the lap times (and sector times), put it together in a spreadsheet,

Click to expand...

Excellent. Could you share that?

#22 said:

The only thing I am in denial of, is that your opinion is fact my friend. You there, have displayed a trait common among Rossi fans.

Click to expand...

You're not stating your opinion as fact? but in a rather less convincing way? Talking about bloody 2006? WTF? You sound like a man of faith (rather than a man of reason), blindly "believing" in some kind of "truth" accepted by the mainstream.

This topic might have been discussed to death here but it doesn't sound like many have managed to understand the basic points of the debate.