Are you all gobsmacked that the thunderstorms didn't appear?

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:50:14 -0700, "Mark N"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Maybe the rain didn't, but the 800s sure did - that was textbook boring 800
>racing in spades.

Maybe.

But Eurosport are currently airing 'classics' - races from a few years
back. I saw some of the 2004 MotoGP race via this route on Sunday.
These were 990 ****-kickers, and you know what - they *looked* slow.
Corner speed was visibly way down on what the 800s are doing nowadays.

As someone who rails against an artificially constructed 'show' (and
I'm with you on this), then shouldn't the top flight championship be
one where the bikes go as fast as possible?

--
Champ

ZX10R (road), ZX10R (race; breaking), GPz750 turbo (classic) Hayabusa (touring)
To email me, neal at my domain should work.

On Jun 28, 9:50*am, "Mark N" <menusbaumNYETS...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> "Dr Ivan D. Reid" wrote
>
> > Are you all gobsmacked that the thunderstorms didn't appear?
>
> Maybe the rain didn't, but the 800s sure did - that was textbook boring 800
> racing in spades. The fight for the win was what we saw many times in the
> AMA over the last few years ...

the AMA runs 800s? i didn't think so. your attempt at a repeated
putdown for motogp (of which you have never had much good to say
unless US riders were winning) shows that motorcycling sometimes
historically just runs into moments of rider-motorcycle superiority.
the ago years. the roberts years. the doohan years. the rossi years.
and it has never been a coincidence that the best riders and the best
machines and teams come together.

i wonder whether you'll become -quite predictably- more enthusiastic
about WSB now that Spies is closing in and things are not as one sided
as you predicted when you deplored the eurojap conspiracy that made
the ducati oh so unbeatable... :-)

no assen was not a very entertaining race. a debacle for the Hondas,
once more showing they lack a rider that can direct their mighty
resources in the right direction. and stoner why does stoner get so
sick every time he doesn't get an easy win... stress? it just seems a
bit odd at this point. he needs to relax.

....p

....p

On Jun 29, 8:03*am, "Mark N" <menusbaumNYETS...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> Don't be stupid. If you can manage that.

you obviously can't, back to the killfile, fool.

On Jul 1, 8:56*am, Champ <n...@champ.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 07:38:34 -0700, "Mark N"
>
> <menusbaumNYETS...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >> But Eurosport are currently airing 'classics' - races from a few years
> >> back. *I saw some of the 2004 MotoGP race via this route on Sunday.
> >> These were 990 ****-kickers, and you know what - they *looked* slow.
> >> Corner speed was visibly way down on what the 800s are doing nowadays.
>
> >> As someone who rails against an artificially constructed 'show' (and
> >> I'm with you on this), then shouldn't the top flight championship be
> >> one where the bikes go as fast as possible?
>
> >Hey, no one would argue that the 800s aren't faster than 990s in the
> >corners, but then again, so are 250s, right? What I don't agree with is that
> >the 800s are necessarily faster over an entire lap than 990s would be with
> >three more years' development, on the machines as well as the tires.
>
> Well, I distinctly remember when the 800s were first being tested that
> everyone was amazed that they were (slightly) faster than the 990s.
>
> >The
> >problem with 800s is the way you have to ride them makes the racing less
> >interesting, needing to be on the optimum line to maintain that speed, but
> >too big and fast to fight on them like they can on 250s, and not powerful
> >enough to fight they way they could on 990s.
>
> Why stop at 990? *Why not allow 1500cc or more.

If the 800s are in fact faster then why not? Who would choose the
bigger bike if they are slower? One less rule to worry about

>*You have to draw a
> line somewhere, and there was concern about the 220mph top speeds that
> the 990s were doing. *The 800s are back towards that point, so the cc
> reduction did give us a few years - imagine what the 990s would be
> doing along the straight at Mugello by now!
> --
> Champ
> neal at champ dot org dot uk

"Mark N" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:9NWdneBNDuUgNdTXnZ2dnUVZ_v-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "pablo" wrote
>>"Mark N" wrote:
>> >Don't be stupid. If you can manage that.
>
>>you obviously can't, back to the killfile, fool.
>
> Well, that's one way to get out of responding, I suppose...
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
> signature database 4378 (20090828) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>



__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4378 (20090828) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com