Motofrakcija

dar neparasei "parasyk"!!

Na kagi, staiga "geriausias gaydenas" jau nebe geriausias, ir jau jis loozeris (Nors toks buvo visada).

Pas mane kaime yra viena bobute, kuri jau daug metu pamacius TV, zegnojasi ir rekia, kad jos kambaryje velnias!....

Ir nepadeda jai niekas, nei giminaciu raminimai, nei kunigas, nei Sustausko partija. Tiki ji, kad TV yra velnias ir nors tu ka.

Teskite. Patiko.

Idomu kai konkurentas dnf padaro, ar nuo to gaydenas greiciau vaziuoja? nelabai nelabai...respektas rossiui kad turedamas -51tasko skirtuma sugebejo parodyti kas istikruju yra dievas ir uzlipo vel i virsu.

When I looked over the email responses to our article on the Hayden-Pedrosa incident, I noticed that quite a few readers brought up Rossi's mechanical problems early in the season. These readers felt that the 'fastest rider' deserved the championship, and in their opinion, that rider was Valentino. They pointed out that if not for Rossi's "bad luck", Nicky would never have lost the points lead due to the incident with Pedrosa, becausehe would never have held it at the time anyway.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I think some fans have a basic misunderstanding of what MotoGP racing is. It seems to me that if the point of the series was merely to find out which rider was the fastest on any given weekend, every rider would be mounted on identical bikes, with identical tires. Furthermore, to take mechanical problems out of the equation, there would be no race at all - just qualifying, maybe four hours of it, to make sure everyone got a fair chance to develop a good setup, pick the right tire, and get their fastest lap in. The winning points would then be awarded to the rider with the fastest time, and so on down the list.