bart:
Ben at no time did I say anything in this thread about the Suzy 1000 VS the Duck 1200
No you didn't say anything about suzuki's, but you did say plenty about how ducati can't make a "better" bike only make it bigger. and you called it "effin bullshit"

Quote Originally Posted by Bartman
Only one problem there Benji, Twins GTO is now a 1200cc or more twins class with the Duck and the KTM RC8R. So how about we call it Heavyweight Twins so everybody that has a heavyweight twin has something of a chance.
This has always been the problem with the twins class, instead of making a better bike they just make them bigger, it is effin bullshit. When honda was gettin their ass handed to them by ducati what did they do, they built a 1000cc twin to kick ducatis ass. They did not make there 750 four into a 900 or some shit and then bitch and complain to get the rules changed they beat them with in the rules.
Thats why I am here Tony, strictly for entertainment value plus it is fun to push Gentle Bens ducati button.
yeah, you know what, you are pressing my buttons, smart ass....

guess what I do for a living? hmmm... let me think.... yeah thats it, I do work on ducatis. Whoa who'd ever thunk I'd get a little pissed about someone ridiculing the brand of motorcycle i put food on my table with.

If I was in here ridiculing your specialty, you'd get a little upset.

Regardless, you are one of the masses that has never seen "REAL" racing from the inside so whatever the media spoonfeeds you, that now becomes your perceived reality. For instance, ducati getting a 1200cc allowance by merely complaining alot, which is what your basing your arguments on and i can only guess this is contrived from superbikeplanet or some other sensationlist racing reporter.

So let me put it this way. Do you really think that a company like ducati has to do nothing more than complain to the FIM to get 200cc's? really?

You don't think there's a multitude of lawyers and engineers with "SOUND" empirical data to back up the argument that this 200cc is necessary for a level playing field? You have no clue what's behind the scenes with engineers on a professional racing level. These people don't make changes unless there's a case study and a spreadsheet and a multitude of other things. There's no "i think" it's black or white.

Whats my point? my point is that there's alittle more thought process behind rules in professional racing than someone, like you, who say's "ducati's accelerate" differently, yes possibly, but what real data do you have to back that up? you can't make a statment like that unless you can prove it. Your view is not a scientific approach.

When your not using a scientific approach to how you look at and perceive professional motorcycle racing around you, then how in the hell can you help to define rules for a rulebook, even on an amateur level racing.