Leblanc Story: this is why AMA needs under 23 rule

Hats Off wrote:

At 24 years old, I think this guy has the skill set to race the 450 class. But thats another point why the limit is needed...

At 24 years old, I think this guy has the skill set to race the 450 class. But thats another point why the limit is needed in AMA, all of a sudden you literally have hangarounds coming to the US because they can't find a ride in europe.

Boomslang wrote:

So Jett, who is 19 yrs old must camp in the 250 class for another 3 yrs?

Hats Off wrote:

Why couldn't he move up if he wanted / was ready to? Why should Jett's abnormal success be used as an example to the detriment of...

Why couldn't he move up if he wanted / was ready to?

Why should Jett's abnormal success be used as an example to the detriment of developing riders?

Hats Off wrote:

First of all, Jett is from europe where they actually have a reapectable amatuer system that competes similar to pros. The other riders mentioned are from...

First of all, Jett is from europe where they actually have a reapectable amatuer system that competes similar to pros. The other riders mentioned are from way different eras, notable ones with much less talent depth.

The idea is not that they are inherently more deserving, its simply that the 250 class is at least somewhat a development class: hence the west/east regionals etc.

You're right that the free market prevails typically and those that control production typically make the best choices, and i agree, typically. But in this limited situation, it would really be better for the fans and the sport as a whole, especially the development of the younger riders to have an age cap. Then they at least have a fighting shot to get those first 2-3 seasons in

Its a lites class. Bike designed to ride against 125's. Women also ride them. Lite bike lites class. You act like putting a 24 year old guy on a 450 is like sending him to the morgue

dsc131 wrote:

It's not about "controlling production". We are talking about fucking EMPLOYMENT here. Are you saying that you support age discrimination in the job market? [b]For the...

It's not about "controlling production". We are talking about fucking EMPLOYMENT here. Are you saying that you support age discrimination in the job market?

For the 3rd time, answer my question

Why should older riders get pushed out for younger riders if they are faster? Do they deserve the job more?

Hats Off wrote:

First of all, I clearly articulated an answer to that question in my previous post. And "controlling production" simply alluded to the owners of the race...

First of all, I clearly articulated an answer to that question in my previous post. And "controlling production" simply alluded to the owners of the race teams. I agreed with your point, that in a totally open and free market, the business (or the one controlling production) should and does have absolute say over who he hires.

But again, we're not talking about changing employment rules, or "age based discrimination." We're simply talking about changing the rules of the game, which is a valid and legal thing to do. You can have an age cap, you can have a "points" system like currently in place (which will inevitably favor the injury prone and those that throw away races).

But to answer your question: a third or fourth time: its not about the 18-19 year old being "more deserving" of the job. Its simply a rule for the game, which happens to be better for the sport in general by helping younger riders develop and pushing more depth to the main class which is the 450 class

dsc131 wrote:

OK, let's go with Sexton. Here are his moto finishes for 2018 when he was 18 years old: 11 5 10 8 10 6 10 Ret...

OK, let's go with Sexton.

Here are his moto finishes for 2018 when he was 18 years old:

11 5 10 8 10 6 10 Ret 8 4 5 14 11 6 8 5 5 10 5 8 7 2 2 6

Hats Off wrote:

What does sexton even have to do with the conversation though? He's not even a rider in question. He moved up voluntarily at an age below...

What does sexton even have to do with the conversation though? He's not even a rider in question. He moved up voluntarily at an age below the proposed cap.

But you can see why I'm making the case that a Leblanc shouldn't have to race his first year of SX against a 25-26 year old forkner

Sully wrote:

[i]"How do you legitimately an in good faith expect a rookie at 17 years old to show up and perform at the exact same level as...

"How do you legitimately an in good faith expect a rookie at 17 years old to show up and perform at the exact same level as some of the 26 year olds out there."

Ask Jett, Jo, Hunter, JMart, Sexton, Eli, Marchbanks, Swoll, Brown, McAdoo, Forkner, etc. They all performed well at 16 - 17 years old against older dudes.

Hats Off wrote:

Jmart didn't go pro until age 18-19. forkner is getting to the point where would now have to move up under this rule. Sexton obviously has...

Jmart didn't go pro until age 18-19. forkner is getting to the point where would now have to move up under this rule. Sexton obviously has nothing to do with this discussion as he moved up on his own at appropriate age. Same with Eli. Mcadoo is no ones role model for anything. Swoll is just a diversity hire. And i have no idea who Brown even is

Hats Off wrote:

I'm not going to entertain anyone who attempts to present himself as somehow more intelligent than his adversary by dementing his own writing. I never said...

I'm not going to entertain anyone who attempts to present himself as somehow more intelligent than his adversary by dementing his own writing.

I never said they couldn't be successful under 23. I said its bad for the sport when so many good riders are unable to make it to year 2 of the pro ranks after competing with a gang of 25-30 year old lites riders. Is that concept so difficult to understand? Geez, I'm not explaining how to run a car into a lightbulb here.

Hats Off wrote:

First of all, Jett is from europe where they actually have a reapectable amatuer system that competes similar to pros. The other riders mentioned are from...

First of all, Jett is from europe where they actually have a reapectable amatuer system that competes similar to pros. The other riders mentioned are from way different eras, notable ones with much less talent depth.

The idea is not that they are inherently more deserving, its simply that the 250 class is at least somewhat a development class: hence the west/east regionals etc.

You're right that the free market prevails typically and those that control production typically make the best choices, and i agree, typically. But in this limited situation, it would really be better for the fans and the sport as a whole, especially the development of the younger riders to have an age cap. Then they at least have a fighting shot to get those first 2-3 seasons in

Its a lites class. Bike designed to ride against 125's. Women also ride them. Lite bike lites class. You act like putting a 24 year old guy on a 450 is like sending him to the morgue

Hats Off wrote:

I'm not going to entertain anyone who attempts to present himself as somehow more intelligent than his adversary by dementing his own writing. I never said...

I'm not going to entertain anyone who attempts to present himself as somehow more intelligent than his adversary by dementing his own writing.

I never said they couldn't be successful under 23. I said its bad for the sport when so many good riders are unable to make it to year 2 of the pro ranks after competing with a gang of 25-30 year old lites riders. Is that concept so difficult to understand? Geez, I'm not explaining how to run a car into a lightbulb here.

Sully wrote:

You calling Swoll a diversity hire isn't me trying to present myself as somehow more intelligent, it's you making yourself look like an idiot.

Hats Off wrote:

Excuse me sir, you tried to say I was an idiot and then make that case by presenting your own writing with some idiotic spaces. Was...

Excuse me sir, you tried to say I was an idiot and then make that case by presenting your own writing with some idiotic spaces. Was that your attempt to talk down to me?

Diversity quotas are a very real thing for every industry and business, even though they don't exist in this particular case, the concept in effect is valid.

By the way, I'm pretty sure 0 of the riders you mentioned were successful at age 16-17. Your first example, jeremy martin raced a supermini at age 16 at lorettas. Bet you feel smart now

fanger wrote:

Surely he'd pick up a 2nd tier ride quite easily? The guy just might not want to pursue it anymore, the sport is an absolute meat...

Surely he'd pick up a 2nd tier ride quite easily?

The guy just might not want to pursue it anymore, the sport is an absolute meat grinder.

roninho wrote:

The whole age rule in MX2 is just stupid. In the past 2 seasons guys like Jed Beaton, Wilson Todd, Mathys Boisrame, Conrad Mewse, Ben Watson...

The whole age rule in MX2 is just stupid.
In the past 2 seasons guys like Jed Beaton, Wilson Todd, Mathys Boisrame, Conrad Mewse, Ben Watson, Alvin Ostlund, Morgan Lesiardo, Josh Gilbert, Nathan Renkens, Cyril Genot, Davy Pootjes, Richard Sykina, Brian Hsu, Michael Sandner, Hardi Roosiorg and Mitchell Harrison had to move up.

Maybe Ben Watson ends up with a full time ride in MXGP next year. All these others will not have a full time ride unless they bring big $.

I have no idea why it helps MXGP that they are forced to move up.

And as for 'they are keeping spots in MX2 that should go to young talent!'. Well if you cant beat the majority of this list then you are not such a supertalent imo.

Hats Off wrote:

I think its great that these older riders had to demote themselves to domestic championships or run with the big dogs in the 450s. All the...

I think its great that these older riders had to demote themselves to domestic championships or run with the big dogs in the 450s.

All the names mentioned were the usual suspects who would have hung around and taken up seats. You probably wouldn't have had rides available for Geerts, vialle, lagenfelder and others early on in their careers if they had to compete for rides with the names mentioned. Thats exactly why the rule works so well and has been such a successful policy in mxgp

Hats Off wrote:

The Matt LeBlanc story epitomizes why we need an under 23 rule in the AMA so badly. There are SO many older riders (above 25) still...

The Matt LeBlanc story epitomizes why we need an under 23 rule in the AMA so badly. There are SO many older riders (above 25) still hanging around the lites class and hogging jobs that should be available to kids coming up through the ranks.

Think about LeBlancs results this year, if it wasn't for the older riders he would be a seriously marketable athlete. Just thinking about this from a logical standpoint, how is any 17-18 year old really expected to come into the lites class and compete with a Vince friese or a christian craig? These guys have had 10-12 years of professional SX experience and you throw a kid in with them a few months after lorettas and expect him to compete, the guy probably wasn't allowed to even practice on a SX track the year before.

Now I'm all for a free market and the best man should win, but when you have a development class I think there should be a cut off. By the time a rider turns 24 years old he's likely in his 6th professional season. I think its unfair to expect a rookie at 17 to compete with a Smith, Hampshire, Martin, craig on pro season/attenmt #7-12. You end up with a stale group of burnt out personalities hanging onto these jobs, and thats exactly why they made the 23 age cap in europe.

The age cap would be a great way to make sure that younger riders have a chance at development and actually having a pro career. The 24-26 year olds who can't find a 450 ride can do money races or move on to a career, the 450 class is not deep enough anyway with usually only 10-12 fast guys out there.

Anyway i would much rather see one of these 24-26 year old lites riders have to go out and look for a job right now as opposed to LeBlanc