450 gate twitch? JETT DOCKED 1 LAP

GrapeApe
Posts
8862
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX, USA
8/12/2025 11:54am
Did you see Barcia behind him? He hit and got stuck in the gate.  He was about 20 feet behind Jett.   Where did they place...

Did you see Barcia behind him? He hit and got stuck in the gate.  He was about 20 feet behind Jett.   Where did they place Jett in 23rd? As he crossed the holeshot line? You can see he  was 37th at best 50 feet out of the gate.  He may have gassed it hard. But he let everybody pass him except the other guys who were stuck in the gate.  You can see them behind Jett in that image that is right after it drops. 

 

 According to the rule book, either situation is the same since it doesn't define an advantage or disadvantage factoring into it.  

 

 I have been stuck in one and depending on how long the start straight is, You can make up a lot of time going into the first turn as the pack bunches up. Much easier to have done in the classes I raced than a AMA national.  

 

 The rule book  doesn't say there is any difference between what Jett did and what Barcia did. 

Press516 wrote:
20 feet better than Barcia?  That's the advantage you wish to ignore.  Barcia was different, he had to take the penalty of the gate and pull...

20 feet better than Barcia?  That's the advantage you wish to ignore.  Barcia was different, he had to take the penalty of the gate and pull back before going, Jett did not...  Why can you not see that?

Jett didn't have the option of pulling back . He let what he thought was the entire pack get in front of him before getting back...

Jett didn't have the option of pulling back . He let what he thought was the entire pack get in front of him before getting back into the race. 

 

 The rule book doesn't say that there has to be an advantage gained to be penalized. Just Jumping the start , and if Peliter had no choice but to penalize him according to the rule book. Barcia and whoever else should also be penalized.  If that is how You are reading  what Jumping the gate means.  The reason the penalty is so harsh is because of riders literally JUMPING over the gate like a jump on purpose to get a better start .  

 

 You either have judgement or do not. They are playing it both ways in this case. Saying they did not penalize Barcia for jumping the start  since he did not have any advantage  because he had to back up. That  would imply they can make a judgment call. 

 

  Penalize Barcia too since he too did not start deadlast. If that is the threshold for breaking the rule. There is another rider behind him so he clearly had an advantage over the other guy that hit the gate like Jett did over him. 

Hitting the gate is not a penalty.

Leaving the gate before everyone else is a penalty. 

This is not difficult.

7
3
8/12/2025 11:57am
Press516 wrote:
20 feet better than Barcia?  That's the advantage you wish to ignore.  Barcia was different, he had to take the penalty of the gate and pull...

20 feet better than Barcia?  That's the advantage you wish to ignore.  Barcia was different, he had to take the penalty of the gate and pull back before going, Jett did not...  Why can you not see that?

Jett didn't have the option of pulling back . He let what he thought was the entire pack get in front of him before getting back...

Jett didn't have the option of pulling back . He let what he thought was the entire pack get in front of him before getting back into the race. 

 

 The rule book doesn't say that there has to be an advantage gained to be penalized. Just Jumping the start , and if Peliter had no choice but to penalize him according to the rule book. Barcia and whoever else should also be penalized.  If that is how You are reading  what Jumping the gate means.  The reason the penalty is so harsh is because of riders literally JUMPING over the gate like a jump on purpose to get a better start .  

 

 You either have judgement or do not. They are playing it both ways in this case. Saying they did not penalize Barcia for jumping the start  since he did not have any advantage  because he had to back up. That  would imply they can make a judgment call. 

 

  Penalize Barcia too since he too did not start deadlast. If that is the threshold for breaking the rule. There is another rider behind him so he clearly had an advantage over the other guy that hit the gate like Jett did over him. 

Press516 wrote:
You continue to ignore so many important parts of the equation.  The gate is self penalizing if you don't ram it so hard that you flip...

You continue to ignore so many important parts of the equation.  The gate is self penalizing if you don't ram it so hard that you flip it forward.  Therefore, Barcia and whoever else already got their penalty.  You refuse to see it, no need to continue the argument...  

I get it that its self penalizing. So is going backwards on the track , but its still a rule violation.  If there isn't anything about gaining an advantage in the rule. Being at a disadvantage should not exempt you from the punishment. 

1
4
aees
Posts
2787
Joined
8/20/2015
Location
USA
8/12/2025 12:32pm
Madkiwi wrote:
It's bullshit, he flinched and jumped the start, NOT the gate. The punishment is designed for people jumping the gate.And not one mention of the rule...

It's bullshit, he flinched and jumped the start, NOT the gate. The punishment is designed for people jumping the gate.

And not one mention of the rule the guy posted that literally said "may".

If this happened to Eli, you guys would be up in arms about it. ESPECIALLY if it was the MX Nations.

 

aees wrote:
If you think they should interpret jumping literally as Jett taking the bike and jumping with wheels over the gate i don't know what to say.Everyone...

If you think they should interpret jumping literally as Jett taking the bike and jumping with wheels over the gate i don't know what to say.

Everyone knows that jumping the gate includes anything that allows you to pass the gate before it has been dropped.

They made the penalty so strict after Jlaw was doing just that. Jumping the gate like a jump. Wheelieing into it and hitting it with the...

They made the penalty so strict after Jlaw was doing just that. Jumping the gate like a jump. Wheelieing into it and hitting it with the back wheel and jumping it before it dropped. Before he started doing that, they had a 1 spot penalty for jumping the start.

 

They realized how most people wouldn't care if they lost a single spot if they could get a headstart every moto.  And made the penalty strict to stop people from purposely literally jumping the gate.    

Actual Jumping the gate only works when gate is lower, broken in or damaged so to say. On a normal gate, you cant jump it.

So jump it means anything that gets you passed the gate before you are supposed to be able to.

I got/had the jump is a normal expression, it means you are ahead.

1
Sparkalounger
Posts
1618
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
8/12/2025 12:38pm
Falcon wrote:
Were you guys watching the same race as I was? It sure looked to me like he bumped the gate, which then fell forward. He backed...

Were you guys watching the same race as I was? It sure looked to me like he bumped the gate, which then fell forward. He backed up, then hit the gas, got about a quarter bike lead on everyone, then the gate fell and the rest of the pack took off. Penalty earned! 

His start was messed up because of the chaos and he eventually got eaten up down the straight, but that's irrelevant. The rule isn't about where you enter the first turn; it's about whether or not you started the race at the correct time, which he clearly did not. 

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2hdaItSvGA8

Watch this clip. I guess when I watch it, i don't see a 1/4 bike lead when the gate drops...?  I watched it several times and see him leaving right at the gate drop, just like the kawi to his left.

The Shop

Johnny Ringo
Posts
8220
Joined
1/11/2016
Location
Tombstone, AZ, USA
8/12/2025 12:39pm Edited Date/Time 8/12/2025 12:42pm

Would love to see a Venn diagram of people crying in here that the penalty is unfair and should be reversed with the people that think RC should not have gotten his points back in 06

 

2
5
8/12/2025 1:20pm Edited Date/Time 8/12/2025 1:21pm
aees wrote:
If you think they should interpret jumping literally as Jett taking the bike and jumping with wheels over the gate i don't know what to say.Everyone...

If you think they should interpret jumping literally as Jett taking the bike and jumping with wheels over the gate i don't know what to say.

Everyone knows that jumping the gate includes anything that allows you to pass the gate before it has been dropped.

They made the penalty so strict after Jlaw was doing just that. Jumping the gate like a jump. Wheelieing into it and hitting it with the...

They made the penalty so strict after Jlaw was doing just that. Jumping the gate like a jump. Wheelieing into it and hitting it with the back wheel and jumping it before it dropped. Before he started doing that, they had a 1 spot penalty for jumping the start.

 

They realized how most people wouldn't care if they lost a single spot if they could get a headstart every moto.  And made the penalty strict to stop people from purposely literally jumping the gate.    

aees wrote:
Actual Jumping the gate only works when gate is lower, broken in or damaged so to say. On a normal gate, you cant jump it.So jump...

Actual Jumping the gate only works when gate is lower, broken in or damaged so to say. On a normal gate, you cant jump it.

So jump it means anything that gets you passed the gate before you are supposed to be able to.

I got/had the jump is a normal expression, it means you are ahead.

This is why they changed the penalty to a lap from a single spot.  This is not AI or some faked clip. This was a REAL thing that resulted in the rule change.  

At this point I really don't care, I know that people have their minds set.  But THIS IS THE reason for the 1 lap penalty. If that is the reason for the harsh penalty,  all I'm arguing is that they are not acting in the spirit of the rule.  And that Mike had a choice to enforce or not. 

 

Only reason I bring up Barcia is that he too hit the gate and was so close to Jett in that photo. And the difference between what Jett and Barcia did was a stronger gate and or less commitment to the start by the racer.  After watching the start challenge that Pulp did. I see that You have to commit to the start and be wide open. The way the start map and starting on those grates work.  I could never get the drive to hit a gate that hard on a concrete start, maybe on a dirt start. But the level of commitment and how much throttle I would be giving the bike is going to be dramatically less when NOT on a grate.  It  takes a little bit of time to realize the gate did not drop and then let off the gas when You are so committed to the start..  

 

IMG 1466 0 0
6
3
CPR
Posts
6872
Joined
10/4/2018
Location
AU
8/12/2025 2:31pm Edited Date/Time 8/12/2025 2:32pm
Motodude wrote:
Screenshot 20250810-103750 M365 CopilotScreenshot 20250810-103539 M365 Copilot
VRR7 wrote:
Reads MAY result - gives room for interpretation -  AMA in this case acted with malice !!! Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty...

Reads MAY result - gives room for interpretation -  AMA in this case acted with malice !!! 

Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.

Meaning the AMA CHOSE to give the penalty against the logic of no advantage was gained. 

Which makes the AMA Corrupt ! 

mark_swart wrote:
Take the time to re-read that sentence. "May result in a penalty of one lap penalty OR disqualification." The question isn't whether or not a rider...

Take the time to re-read that sentence. "May result in a penalty of one lap penalty OR disqualification." The question isn't whether or not a rider gets a penalty, it's which penalty will they get, and Jett actually got the lesser of the two penalties. 

There's nothing childish or embarrassing about the AMA enforcing a rule, although I could make a case for it being childish and embarrassing for professional teams and riders to not know the rule book..

If your interpretation is correct, then it should read “….WILL result in a penalty of one lap penalty or disqualification”, not MAY.

6
luckypunk
Posts
50
Joined
2/25/2018
Location
Boise, ID, USA
8/12/2025 2:40pm

why'd that gate flop over so easily

1
3
8/12/2025 2:44pm
Press516 wrote:
20 feet better than Barcia?  That's the advantage you wish to ignore.  Barcia was different, he had to take the penalty of the gate and pull...

20 feet better than Barcia?  That's the advantage you wish to ignore.  Barcia was different, he had to take the penalty of the gate and pull back before going, Jett did not...  Why can you not see that?

Jett didn't have the option of pulling back . He let what he thought was the entire pack get in front of him before getting back...

Jett didn't have the option of pulling back . He let what he thought was the entire pack get in front of him before getting back into the race. 

 

 The rule book doesn't say that there has to be an advantage gained to be penalized. Just Jumping the start , and if Peliter had no choice but to penalize him according to the rule book. Barcia and whoever else should also be penalized.  If that is how You are reading  what Jumping the gate means.  The reason the penalty is so harsh is because of riders literally JUMPING over the gate like a jump on purpose to get a better start .  

 

 You either have judgement or do not. They are playing it both ways in this case. Saying they did not penalize Barcia for jumping the start  since he did not have any advantage  because he had to back up. That  would imply they can make a judgment call. 

 

  Penalize Barcia too since he too did not start deadlast. If that is the threshold for breaking the rule. There is another rider behind him so he clearly had an advantage over the other guy that hit the gate like Jett did over him. 

GrapeApe wrote:

Hitting the gate is not a penalty.

Leaving the gate before everyone else is a penalty. 

This is not difficult.

Shit, speak for yourself. A LOT of people don’t have common sense. They don’t understand what’s in black and white. 

1
2
8/12/2025 6:33pm
Madkiwi wrote:
It's bullshit, he flinched and jumped the start, NOT the gate. The punishment is designed for people jumping the gate.And not one mention of the rule...

It's bullshit, he flinched and jumped the start, NOT the gate. The punishment is designed for people jumping the gate.

And not one mention of the rule the guy posted that literally said "may".

If this happened to Eli, you guys would be up in arms about it. ESPECIALLY if it was the MX Nations.

 

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

Check out page 142.

You can be excluded from the re-start. Or in other words, DQ'd.

I did see that...

image 1964.png?VersionId=

but what constitutes a "false start" is not defined, if it's not defined, it's not a rule.

As I said...

There's no rule against jumping the gate at MXoN!

6
aees
Posts
2787
Joined
8/20/2015
Location
USA
8/13/2025 1:56am
SEEMEFIRST wrote:

Check out page 142.

You can be excluded from the re-start. Or in other words, DQ'd.

I did see that...but what constitutes a "false start" is not defined, if it's not defined, it's not a rule.As I said...There's no rule against jumping...

I did see that...

image 1964.png?VersionId=

but what constitutes a "false start" is not defined, if it's not defined, it's not a rule.

As I said...

There's no rule against jumping the gate at MXoN!

Race director can always issue penalty for unsportmanship behavior. DQ normally.

Jumping the gate would classify as that easily so in effect you cant do it.

It doesn't have to be defined to be a rule.

1
8/13/2025 4:13am
SEEMEFIRST wrote:

Check out page 142.

You can be excluded from the re-start. Or in other words, DQ'd.

I did see that...but what constitutes a "false start" is not defined, if it's not defined, it's not a rule.As I said...There's no rule against jumping...

I did see that...

image 1964.png?VersionId=

but what constitutes a "false start" is not defined, if it's not defined, it's not a rule.

As I said...

There's no rule against jumping the gate at MXoN!

aees wrote:
Race director can always issue penalty for unsportmanship behavior. DQ normally.Jumping the gate would classify as that easily so in effect you cant do it.It doesn't...

Race director can always issue penalty for unsportmanship behavior. DQ normally.

Jumping the gate would classify as that easily so in effect you cant do it.

It doesn't have to be defined to be a rule.

That's true, but it's weird a "false start" is not specified in the FIM regulations.

2
8/13/2025 11:52am
VRR7 wrote:
Reads MAY result - gives room for interpretation -  AMA in this case acted with malice !!! Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty...

Reads MAY result - gives room for interpretation -  AMA in this case acted with malice !!! 

Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.

Meaning the AMA CHOSE to give the penalty against the logic of no advantage was gained. 

Which makes the AMA Corrupt ! 

mark_swart wrote:
Take the time to re-read that sentence. "May result in a penalty of one lap penalty OR disqualification." The question isn't whether or not a rider...

Take the time to re-read that sentence. "May result in a penalty of one lap penalty OR disqualification." The question isn't whether or not a rider gets a penalty, it's which penalty will they get, and Jett actually got the lesser of the two penalties. 

There's nothing childish or embarrassing about the AMA enforcing a rule, although I could make a case for it being childish and embarrassing for professional teams and riders to not know the rule book..

CPR wrote:

If your interpretation is correct, then it should read “….WILL result in a penalty of one lap penalty or disqualification”, not MAY.

I agree , and if You look another 20 pages into the rule book ( I posted screenshots of the rulebook with page numbers on page 5 of this thread) it says first offense is a lap, second is DQ.   That is why I take the " may" to meen that there is a choice to penalize or not. And after You decide the rule was broken, the penalty is set. Otherwise why write it out that way?  

 

And Jett made a mistake. He wasn't trying to jump the gate. Not that the intent matters according to the rule book. But I really think that should have been factored into the decision of whether to penalize or not. 

 

3
2
-MAVERICK-
Posts
66317
Joined
3/26/2015
Location
Ontario, CA
8/15/2025 7:01pm

DC in Racerhead this week: 

So, what about the Jett Lawrence penalty of one full lap for “fouling” the starting gate at Ironman in the first moto, which turned a third place finish into a 17th and effectively cost him the overall win? The decision to assess a one-lap penalty was made based on the wording of the existing rule in the AMA Pro Motocross Championship rulebook, and it will be up to Honda to appeal, though that puts them in a weird spot: an overturning of the penalty would give Jett the overall and knock Hunter out of his first 450 win. In my personal opinion, I believe the AMA should revisit a couple of things in the rulebook during the offseason, specifically the wording and the automatic penalty: “Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.”

Most of the old pros who have weighed in on social media seem to believe that getting caught up in the gate and starting mid-pack like Jett did was penalty enough. That's why we have individual starting gates that fall towards you—if you go early, your gate will either catch your front wheel or just cause a bad start. So in this case, with Jett having just a momentary advantage (for maybe a split second) and then an outside-the-top-20 start, the added penalty seemed harsh.

Also, this obviously occurred within the competition, and Jett did not gain any lasting advantage. Yes, his wheel fouled the line, but that was for a brief second. Had he accelerated throughout, he would have had the holeshot. Instead, if you watch the close-up videos, he obviously just pushed it over and then hesitated; his holeshot device did its thing, and he started 22nd or 23rd. So, here's the conundrum: How is this in-competition infraction any different from a rider going off the track, missing markers, coming back on, but not gaining any advantage?

The most egregious penalty I remember like this was the black flag of Chad Reed back at Anaheim one year when he got into it with Trey Canard. This was not a black flag, but it was hefty—15 points for fouling the starting gate, despite no benefit. Moving forward, maybe make its a points penalty based on how much advantage he gained, rather than a full lap? Also, it was an in-competition infraction, but with a much heavier punishment than pretty much any other infraction—going outside the markers, jumping on red cross/lights, overly aggressive riding, etc. Jett didn’t intentionally jump; he just reacted to the guy next to him (Jeremy Hand) flinching. It was a natural, accidental reaction instead of a deliberate attempt to cheat the start. His gate just happened to flip forward, whereas Hand’s did not, nor did Chase Sexton’s earlier this year in the Detroit SX (which Sexton then backed up and got going dead, dead last).

And that’s where we find some inconsistency between how things are done in SX and how they are done in MX. Supercross starting gates are designed to not go all the way over; instead, they have a stop that keeps them from going all the way forward, making the rider stop and back up if he fouls it. In MX, where every track also has amateur races, most of the starting gates are built so that individual gates can go all the way over forward when they are hit, as amateurs—especially newer riders—tend to panic when caught in the gate, often tearing it out and causing delays. Had the Ironman gate been the same as the Detroit SX gate that Sexton hit, he would not have been able to get his wheel past the line, as he would have been stuck in the gate, which in most cases—including Chase at Detroit—is penalty enough. As mentioned above, the rule reads, “Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.” Does “may” mean automatically one or the other, one lap or the full DQ, or does "may" mean optional, which might allow the officials room here to determine a rider’s intention and whether they gained any true advantage? Those should all be topics of discussion for the SMX League during the upcoming off-season.

And you can listen to Matthes' interview with Honda HRC Progress team manager Lars Lindstrom, who explains that the spirit of the rule is to prevent the Mike Alessi "count to five and go" attempt to beat the start, but that's clearly not what happened here. Like I said, these are all things for discussion moving forward.

4
3
motomike137
Posts
8180
Joined
4/22/2010
Location
Fenton, MI, USA
8/15/2025 7:18pm
-MAVERICK- wrote:
DC in Racerhead this week: So, what about the Jett Lawrence penalty of one full lap for “fouling” the starting gate at Ironman in the first...

DC in Racerhead this week: 

So, what about the Jett Lawrence penalty of one full lap for “fouling” the starting gate at Ironman in the first moto, which turned a third place finish into a 17th and effectively cost him the overall win? The decision to assess a one-lap penalty was made based on the wording of the existing rule in the AMA Pro Motocross Championship rulebook, and it will be up to Honda to appeal, though that puts them in a weird spot: an overturning of the penalty would give Jett the overall and knock Hunter out of his first 450 win. In my personal opinion, I believe the AMA should revisit a couple of things in the rulebook during the offseason, specifically the wording and the automatic penalty: “Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.”

Most of the old pros who have weighed in on social media seem to believe that getting caught up in the gate and starting mid-pack like Jett did was penalty enough. That's why we have individual starting gates that fall towards you—if you go early, your gate will either catch your front wheel or just cause a bad start. So in this case, with Jett having just a momentary advantage (for maybe a split second) and then an outside-the-top-20 start, the added penalty seemed harsh.

Also, this obviously occurred within the competition, and Jett did not gain any lasting advantage. Yes, his wheel fouled the line, but that was for a brief second. Had he accelerated throughout, he would have had the holeshot. Instead, if you watch the close-up videos, he obviously just pushed it over and then hesitated; his holeshot device did its thing, and he started 22nd or 23rd. So, here's the conundrum: How is this in-competition infraction any different from a rider going off the track, missing markers, coming back on, but not gaining any advantage?

The most egregious penalty I remember like this was the black flag of Chad Reed back at Anaheim one year when he got into it with Trey Canard. This was not a black flag, but it was hefty—15 points for fouling the starting gate, despite no benefit. Moving forward, maybe make its a points penalty based on how much advantage he gained, rather than a full lap? Also, it was an in-competition infraction, but with a much heavier punishment than pretty much any other infraction—going outside the markers, jumping on red cross/lights, overly aggressive riding, etc. Jett didn’t intentionally jump; he just reacted to the guy next to him (Jeremy Hand) flinching. It was a natural, accidental reaction instead of a deliberate attempt to cheat the start. His gate just happened to flip forward, whereas Hand’s did not, nor did Chase Sexton’s earlier this year in the Detroit SX (which Sexton then backed up and got going dead, dead last).

And that’s where we find some inconsistency between how things are done in SX and how they are done in MX. Supercross starting gates are designed to not go all the way over; instead, they have a stop that keeps them from going all the way forward, making the rider stop and back up if he fouls it. In MX, where every track also has amateur races, most of the starting gates are built so that individual gates can go all the way over forward when they are hit, as amateurs—especially newer riders—tend to panic when caught in the gate, often tearing it out and causing delays. Had the Ironman gate been the same as the Detroit SX gate that Sexton hit, he would not have been able to get his wheel past the line, as he would have been stuck in the gate, which in most cases—including Chase at Detroit—is penalty enough. As mentioned above, the rule reads, “Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.” Does “may” mean automatically one or the other, one lap or the full DQ, or does "may" mean optional, which might allow the officials room here to determine a rider’s intention and whether they gained any true advantage? Those should all be topics of discussion for the SMX League during the upcoming off-season.

And you can listen to Matthes' interview with Honda HRC Progress team manager Lars Lindstrom, who explains that the spirit of the rule is to prevent the Mike Alessi "count to five and go" attempt to beat the start, but that's clearly not what happened here. Like I said, these are all things for discussion moving forward.

Don't care what the old pros think. He knocked the gate over forward. Penalty is DQ or 1 lap. He got the lesser of the two. If Honda or whoever doesn't like it petition to have the rule changed. The irony here is that they abided by the letter of the law and people are upset. 

3
10
8/15/2025 7:23pm
-MAVERICK- wrote:
DC in Racerhead this week: So, what about the Jett Lawrence penalty of one full lap for “fouling” the starting gate at Ironman in the first...

DC in Racerhead this week: 

So, what about the Jett Lawrence penalty of one full lap for “fouling” the starting gate at Ironman in the first moto, which turned a third place finish into a 17th and effectively cost him the overall win? The decision to assess a one-lap penalty was made based on the wording of the existing rule in the AMA Pro Motocross Championship rulebook, and it will be up to Honda to appeal, though that puts them in a weird spot: an overturning of the penalty would give Jett the overall and knock Hunter out of his first 450 win. In my personal opinion, I believe the AMA should revisit a couple of things in the rulebook during the offseason, specifically the wording and the automatic penalty: “Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.”

Most of the old pros who have weighed in on social media seem to believe that getting caught up in the gate and starting mid-pack like Jett did was penalty enough. That's why we have individual starting gates that fall towards you—if you go early, your gate will either catch your front wheel or just cause a bad start. So in this case, with Jett having just a momentary advantage (for maybe a split second) and then an outside-the-top-20 start, the added penalty seemed harsh.

Also, this obviously occurred within the competition, and Jett did not gain any lasting advantage. Yes, his wheel fouled the line, but that was for a brief second. Had he accelerated throughout, he would have had the holeshot. Instead, if you watch the close-up videos, he obviously just pushed it over and then hesitated; his holeshot device did its thing, and he started 22nd or 23rd. So, here's the conundrum: How is this in-competition infraction any different from a rider going off the track, missing markers, coming back on, but not gaining any advantage?

The most egregious penalty I remember like this was the black flag of Chad Reed back at Anaheim one year when he got into it with Trey Canard. This was not a black flag, but it was hefty—15 points for fouling the starting gate, despite no benefit. Moving forward, maybe make its a points penalty based on how much advantage he gained, rather than a full lap? Also, it was an in-competition infraction, but with a much heavier punishment than pretty much any other infraction—going outside the markers, jumping on red cross/lights, overly aggressive riding, etc. Jett didn’t intentionally jump; he just reacted to the guy next to him (Jeremy Hand) flinching. It was a natural, accidental reaction instead of a deliberate attempt to cheat the start. His gate just happened to flip forward, whereas Hand’s did not, nor did Chase Sexton’s earlier this year in the Detroit SX (which Sexton then backed up and got going dead, dead last).

And that’s where we find some inconsistency between how things are done in SX and how they are done in MX. Supercross starting gates are designed to not go all the way over; instead, they have a stop that keeps them from going all the way forward, making the rider stop and back up if he fouls it. In MX, where every track also has amateur races, most of the starting gates are built so that individual gates can go all the way over forward when they are hit, as amateurs—especially newer riders—tend to panic when caught in the gate, often tearing it out and causing delays. Had the Ironman gate been the same as the Detroit SX gate that Sexton hit, he would not have been able to get his wheel past the line, as he would have been stuck in the gate, which in most cases—including Chase at Detroit—is penalty enough. As mentioned above, the rule reads, “Jumping or fouling the gate may result in a penalty of one lap or disqualification.” Does “may” mean automatically one or the other, one lap or the full DQ, or does "may" mean optional, which might allow the officials room here to determine a rider’s intention and whether they gained any true advantage? Those should all be topics of discussion for the SMX League during the upcoming off-season.

And you can listen to Matthes' interview with Honda HRC Progress team manager Lars Lindstrom, who explains that the spirit of the rule is to prevent the Mike Alessi "count to five and go" attempt to beat the start, but that's clearly not what happened here. Like I said, these are all things for discussion moving forward.

Don't care what the old pros think. He knocked the gate over forward. Penalty is DQ or 1 lap. He got the lesser of the two...

Don't care what the old pros think. He knocked the gate over forward. Penalty is DQ or 1 lap. He got the lesser of the two. If Honda or whoever doesn't like it petition to have the rule changed. The irony here is that they abided by the letter of the law and people are upset. 

1 lap penalty is for first offense, DQ is for subsequent offenses.

2
3
Shred
Posts
1524
Joined
10/21/2021
Location
Brighton, CO, USA
Fantasy
8/15/2025 7:33pm Edited Date/Time 8/15/2025 7:43pm

Here is what nobody on all the podcast talked about.  When Hand flinched both Jett AND Barcia went early.  This gives us a good demonstration of what it cost Bambam to pull back and let the gate drop(not breaking a rule), vs Jett going through and over the gate and gunning it.  Jett’s violation is clearly more egregious than Bambam not breaking a rule.  Therefore the penalty must theoretically be worse then the price Bambam paid in the horrible start…imo.  Bambam had to work through about 15 more riders than Jett did.  So….while a full lap penalty is ridiculous, it should certainly be more than 10 seconds.  If I were writing the rule I would say the rider, who clearly knows they hit the gate forward, can either shut it down enough to be the last rider, not counting any downed riders, across the holeshot line then race on.  If the rider continues to battle for position, as Jett did, then he shall be assessed a 30 second penalty, maybe even more, at the end of the race.  Hell, Jett would have still taken 5th.  He deserved a penalty.  1 lap is too harsh.  Saying it is already a self penalty…No.  Self penalty is just making any mistake in the race.  I self penalize multiple times a lap…lol.   Jett broke a rule from making a mistake.  Something more reasonable then 1 lap while still penalizing the breaking of a rule.

All jmho.

3
6
Rotaholic
Posts
1740
Joined
4/2/2013
Location
NZ
8/15/2025 10:26pm

Hardly Jetts fault that the gates were sourced from Temu, if the gate had of worked as intended he would have been stuck in it. 

1
5
8/16/2025 12:08am

Again, jumping or fouling the gate MAY result in a penalty. I guess it should depend if it seemed intentional and if the racer gained al advantage but it is not an obligation. So in the end, it depends on what the direction wants to do.

6
3
ando
Posts
4428
Joined
8/20/2009
Location
Perth, AU
8/16/2025 4:39am
Would love to see a Venn diagram of people crying in here that the penalty is unfair and should be reversed with the people that think...

Would love to see a Venn diagram of people crying in here that the penalty is unfair and should be reversed with the people that think RC should not have gotten his points back in 06

 

Makes you wonder if the penalty decision would be the same if the championship battle was close.  

1
2
8/16/2025 5:41am

If he would have known he's starting a lap down I wonder if he would have gone ballistic and tried to make it up? or just F it and pull off? IMO lame ass AMA shit 

1
3
shuggs
Posts
1809
Joined
8/6/2008
Location
Dunfermline, GB
8/16/2025 7:55am
I agree , and if You look another 20 pages into the rule book ( I posted screenshots of the rulebook with page numbers on page...

I agree , and if You look another 20 pages into the rule book ( I posted screenshots of the rulebook with page numbers on page 5 of this thread) it says first offense is a lap, second is DQ.   That is why I take the " may" to meen that there is a choice to penalize or not. And after You decide the rule was broken, the penalty is set. Otherwise why write it out that way?  

 

And Jett made a mistake. He wasn't trying to jump the gate. Not that the intent matters according to the rule book. But I really think that should have been factored into the decision of whether to penalize or not. 

 

Have read all the posts and the rule book screen show.  My take is that the ‘MAY’ implies that there is discretion in applying any penalty.  This MAY include the options of other teams appealing etc. The language is way too openly worded.

5
2
8/16/2025 12:38pm
Shred wrote:
Here is what nobody on all the podcast talked about.  When Hand flinched both Jett AND Barcia went early.  This gives us a good demonstration of...

Here is what nobody on all the podcast talked about.  When Hand flinched both Jett AND Barcia went early.  This gives us a good demonstration of what it cost Bambam to pull back and let the gate drop(not breaking a rule), vs Jett going through and over the gate and gunning it.  Jett’s violation is clearly more egregious than Bambam not breaking a rule.  Therefore the penalty must theoretically be worse then the price Bambam paid in the horrible start…imo.  Bambam had to work through about 15 more riders than Jett did.  So….while a full lap penalty is ridiculous, it should certainly be more than 10 seconds.  If I were writing the rule I would say the rider, who clearly knows they hit the gate forward, can either shut it down enough to be the last rider, not counting any downed riders, across the holeshot line then race on.  If the rider continues to battle for position, as Jett did, then he shall be assessed a 30 second penalty, maybe even more, at the end of the race.  Hell, Jett would have still taken 5th.  He deserved a penalty.  1 lap is too harsh.  Saying it is already a self penalty…No.  Self penalty is just making any mistake in the race.  I self penalize multiple times a lap…lol.   Jett broke a rule from making a mistake.  Something more reasonable then 1 lap while still penalizing the breaking of a rule.

All jmho.

Look at the photo in this thread, page 5 or so. Possible others. Barcia is about 20 feet behind Jett as they are leaving the gate.  Jett passed those extra riders in the first turn.  Jett normally starts better so it makes sense that he would still come out of the first turn better than Barcia even if they were exactly the same at the point the photo was taken.

 

 Jett was in 37th or so off the gate. He likely thought everybody had already gone when he got back on the gas. Perhaps he should have taken a quick look behind to see if anybody else was behind him still.  He waited for everybody who did NOT hit the gate to pass him before getting back on the gas.

 

Perhaps the AMA also should define jumping the start. If jumping the start and getting caught in the gate  is OK  but its not ok if Your bike leaves the start pad before the others. Say that. Otherwise how is a rider supposed to know what to do if his gate breaks like that? They need to at least rewrite the way the rule is written. To make it clear that the official either has a choice to penalize or not.  And adding in what should be taken into consideration might be a good idea, similar to how  the rule is for going off the track.  It defines when a penalty is appropriate and how to avoid getting a penalty for the rider if they find themselves going off the track.   

 

 They have a table that shows penalties' for each rule( 20 pages past the page the rule for jumping the gate is on).  So again, that word May , has to mean they can have discretion on giving a penalty or not. After they decide to give a penalty, the penalty is set . If Jet does it again and they decide to penalize him, he will be DQ'ed as per the rulebook. 

 

 They made the penalty so strict as a result of Jlaw jumping the gate and going for it. At the time the penalty was loss of a single spot. Pulp talked about it on a podcast way way back when they changed the penalty.They made a strict penalty to stop riders from doing in on purpose. 

 

4
8/17/2025 1:27pm
I agree , and if You look another 20 pages into the rule book ( I posted screenshots of the rulebook with page numbers on page...

I agree , and if You look another 20 pages into the rule book ( I posted screenshots of the rulebook with page numbers on page 5 of this thread) it says first offense is a lap, second is DQ.   That is why I take the " may" to meen that there is a choice to penalize or not. And after You decide the rule was broken, the penalty is set. Otherwise why write it out that way?  

 

And Jett made a mistake. He wasn't trying to jump the gate. Not that the intent matters according to the rule book. But I really think that should have been factored into the decision of whether to penalize or not. 

 

shuggs wrote:
Have read all the posts and the rule book screen show.  My take is that the ‘MAY’ implies that there is discretion in applying any penalty...

Have read all the posts and the rule book screen show.  My take is that the ‘MAY’ implies that there is discretion in applying any penalty.  This MAY include the options of other teams appealing etc. The language is way too openly worded.

According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see the page showing the penalties and I think he would have had a similar opinion .

  Honda could appeal it or could have I don't know how long they have to, I wonder if Jett would want them too though. Knowing it could take Hunter's win away.  If the interviews  that Hunter has talked about Jett feeling bad about beating him all the time are even remotely true, I feel like Jett would not want to appeal if it would take Hunter's win away. 

 

 We will see if the points loss impacts the SMX title. But most likely its only going to hurt Jett's average finish numbers for now. So it might end up doing more good than bad. It sounds like enough people who's' opinions matter , want it to be worded differently at the least. And perhaps the penalties changed. This attention the rule has gotten may clarify it so that the next time something happens like this, the rider and officials will know what to do differently or the same. And hopefully it will never impact a title if its a mistake that a rider tries to make good on like it appeared Jett did. 

 

  If I was involved in the penalty. I would  also add a clear way for a rider who made a mistake ,to be able to avoid a penalty by following a set proceder like when a rider  goes off the track.  That could also help clarify if it was a mistake . or done on purpose. And if done on purpose I think the current penalties are appropriate. There is just no clear way of knowing right now since its not defined in the rulebook and in my opinion , the AMA official/KTM  interpreted the rule wrong. 

 

 How funny would it be if it came out that it was really Hunter or his mechanic who called  Jett out on that start and not KTM?    

2
motomike137
Posts
8180
Joined
4/22/2010
Location
Fenton, MI, USA
8/17/2025 3:46pm
Shred wrote:
Here is what nobody on all the podcast talked about.  When Hand flinched both Jett AND Barcia went early.  This gives us a good demonstration of...

Here is what nobody on all the podcast talked about.  When Hand flinched both Jett AND Barcia went early.  This gives us a good demonstration of what it cost Bambam to pull back and let the gate drop(not breaking a rule), vs Jett going through and over the gate and gunning it.  Jett’s violation is clearly more egregious than Bambam not breaking a rule.  Therefore the penalty must theoretically be worse then the price Bambam paid in the horrible start…imo.  Bambam had to work through about 15 more riders than Jett did.  So….while a full lap penalty is ridiculous, it should certainly be more than 10 seconds.  If I were writing the rule I would say the rider, who clearly knows they hit the gate forward, can either shut it down enough to be the last rider, not counting any downed riders, across the holeshot line then race on.  If the rider continues to battle for position, as Jett did, then he shall be assessed a 30 second penalty, maybe even more, at the end of the race.  Hell, Jett would have still taken 5th.  He deserved a penalty.  1 lap is too harsh.  Saying it is already a self penalty…No.  Self penalty is just making any mistake in the race.  I self penalize multiple times a lap…lol.   Jett broke a rule from making a mistake.  Something more reasonable then 1 lap while still penalizing the breaking of a rule.

All jmho.

It's simple. Don't knock the gate over and you don't get penalized. JFC!

2
7
8/17/2025 3:51pm
According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see...

According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see the page showing the penalties and I think he would have had a similar opinion .

  Honda could appeal it or could have I don't know how long they have to, I wonder if Jett would want them too though. Knowing it could take Hunter's win away.  If the interviews  that Hunter has talked about Jett feeling bad about beating him all the time are even remotely true, I feel like Jett would not want to appeal if it would take Hunter's win away. 

 

 We will see if the points loss impacts the SMX title. But most likely its only going to hurt Jett's average finish numbers for now. So it might end up doing more good than bad. It sounds like enough people who's' opinions matter , want it to be worded differently at the least. And perhaps the penalties changed. This attention the rule has gotten may clarify it so that the next time something happens like this, the rider and officials will know what to do differently or the same. And hopefully it will never impact a title if its a mistake that a rider tries to make good on like it appeared Jett did. 

 

  If I was involved in the penalty. I would  also add a clear way for a rider who made a mistake ,to be able to avoid a penalty by following a set proceder like when a rider  goes off the track.  That could also help clarify if it was a mistake . or done on purpose. And if done on purpose I think the current penalties are appropriate. There is just no clear way of knowing right now since its not defined in the rulebook and in my opinion , the AMA official/KTM  interpreted the rule wrong. 

 

 How funny would it be if it came out that it was really Hunter or his mechanic who called  Jett out on that start and not KTM?    

Damn, its over Jett won the championship at Unadilla but you are still yammering on about this, give it a rest. I bet people walk away when they see you coming because you are the guy who wont shut up. 

1
8/18/2025 12:09pm
According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see...

According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see the page showing the penalties and I think he would have had a similar opinion .

  Honda could appeal it or could have I don't know how long they have to, I wonder if Jett would want them too though. Knowing it could take Hunter's win away.  If the interviews  that Hunter has talked about Jett feeling bad about beating him all the time are even remotely true, I feel like Jett would not want to appeal if it would take Hunter's win away. 

 

 We will see if the points loss impacts the SMX title. But most likely its only going to hurt Jett's average finish numbers for now. So it might end up doing more good than bad. It sounds like enough people who's' opinions matter , want it to be worded differently at the least. And perhaps the penalties changed. This attention the rule has gotten may clarify it so that the next time something happens like this, the rider and officials will know what to do differently or the same. And hopefully it will never impact a title if its a mistake that a rider tries to make good on like it appeared Jett did. 

 

  If I was involved in the penalty. I would  also add a clear way for a rider who made a mistake ,to be able to avoid a penalty by following a set proceder like when a rider  goes off the track.  That could also help clarify if it was a mistake . or done on purpose. And if done on purpose I think the current penalties are appropriate. There is just no clear way of knowing right now since its not defined in the rulebook and in my opinion , the AMA official/KTM  interpreted the rule wrong. 

 

 How funny would it be if it came out that it was really Hunter or his mechanic who called  Jett out on that start and not KTM?    

lostboy819 wrote:
Damn, its over Jett won the championship at Unadilla but you are still yammering on about this, give it a rest. I bet people walk away...

Damn, its over Jett won the championship at Unadilla but you are still yammering on about this, give it a rest. I bet people walk away when they see you coming because you are the guy who wont shut up. 

You are probably right on that I  never give up.

 

But For me its not Jett being penalized,  it was highly unlikely that it would impact this title anyway. 

  Its that the rule  has no clear way to comply if You jump by mistake .And is written in a way that the AMA official interpreted it incorrectly ( in the opinion of MANY) / did not consider the penalties section of the rulebook when they made the choice to penalize Jett.

And that when the penalty was put into place it was made to stop people from purposely  and literally jumping the gate.  It was never intended to punish somebody who made a mistake like that. So they were not acting in the spirit of the rule as well.  

 

 When KTM brought it up, they were doing it for SMX points not MX points.  Hoping to give Sexton any advantage they could. Before Chase crashed out , that ruling had given him the sway in points he needed to be ahead of Jett going into SMX. It was never about this title, it was to give Sexton the advantage going into SMX. And it worked until it didn't.  

 

 I've also disagreed with how the homologation rule has been written without a penalty that was put in words until the current rulebook. That rule has NEVER been enforced and I doubt it will ever be. It could potentially  give a rider a much larger advantage than jumping the gate would, yet the penalty is  just a little more than a single OVERALL win bonus.  I think that rule and its relatively light penalty ( now that they have put it into printed words) is more of a marketing tool ( for bike brands) than a rule with a real impact on racing. Perhaps there is more to the penalty than the money part, that I did not see since I did not read the entire book.   I'm sure that the manufactures want to keep that rule. Marketing, it helps sell more bikes if the teams are using more of the bikes that are what You can buy. It also keeps smaller brands from entering racing without a larger commitment. 

2
4
Press516
Posts
5704
Joined
9/11/2018
Location
Gilbert, AZ, USA
Fantasy
8/18/2025 6:09pm
According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see...

According to the Pulp show,KTM  brought it to the attention of Mike Pelletier .  I think he should have looked further into the rulebook to see the page showing the penalties and I think he would have had a similar opinion .

  Honda could appeal it or could have I don't know how long they have to, I wonder if Jett would want them too though. Knowing it could take Hunter's win away.  If the interviews  that Hunter has talked about Jett feeling bad about beating him all the time are even remotely true, I feel like Jett would not want to appeal if it would take Hunter's win away. 

 

 We will see if the points loss impacts the SMX title. But most likely its only going to hurt Jett's average finish numbers for now. So it might end up doing more good than bad. It sounds like enough people who's' opinions matter , want it to be worded differently at the least. And perhaps the penalties changed. This attention the rule has gotten may clarify it so that the next time something happens like this, the rider and officials will know what to do differently or the same. And hopefully it will never impact a title if its a mistake that a rider tries to make good on like it appeared Jett did. 

 

  If I was involved in the penalty. I would  also add a clear way for a rider who made a mistake ,to be able to avoid a penalty by following a set proceder like when a rider  goes off the track.  That could also help clarify if it was a mistake . or done on purpose. And if done on purpose I think the current penalties are appropriate. There is just no clear way of knowing right now since its not defined in the rulebook and in my opinion , the AMA official/KTM  interpreted the rule wrong. 

 

 How funny would it be if it came out that it was really Hunter or his mechanic who called  Jett out on that start and not KTM?    

lostboy819 wrote:
Damn, its over Jett won the championship at Unadilla but you are still yammering on about this, give it a rest. I bet people walk away...

Damn, its over Jett won the championship at Unadilla but you are still yammering on about this, give it a rest. I bet people walk away when they see you coming because you are the guy who wont shut up. 

You are probably right on that I  never give up. But For me its not Jett being penalized,  it was highly unlikely that it would impact this...

You are probably right on that I  never give up.

 

But For me its not Jett being penalized,  it was highly unlikely that it would impact this title anyway. 

  Its that the rule  has no clear way to comply if You jump by mistake .And is written in a way that the AMA official interpreted it incorrectly ( in the opinion of MANY) / did not consider the penalties section of the rulebook when they made the choice to penalize Jett.

And that when the penalty was put into place it was made to stop people from purposely  and literally jumping the gate.  It was never intended to punish somebody who made a mistake like that. So they were not acting in the spirit of the rule as well.  

 

 When KTM brought it up, they were doing it for SMX points not MX points.  Hoping to give Sexton any advantage they could. Before Chase crashed out , that ruling had given him the sway in points he needed to be ahead of Jett going into SMX. It was never about this title, it was to give Sexton the advantage going into SMX. And it worked until it didn't.  

 

 I've also disagreed with how the homologation rule has been written without a penalty that was put in words until the current rulebook. That rule has NEVER been enforced and I doubt it will ever be. It could potentially  give a rider a much larger advantage than jumping the gate would, yet the penalty is  just a little more than a single OVERALL win bonus.  I think that rule and its relatively light penalty ( now that they have put it into printed words) is more of a marketing tool ( for bike brands) than a rule with a real impact on racing. Perhaps there is more to the penalty than the money part, that I did not see since I did not read the entire book.   I'm sure that the manufactures want to keep that rule. Marketing, it helps sell more bikes if the teams are using more of the bikes that are what You can buy. It also keeps smaller brands from entering racing without a larger commitment. 

A jump by mistake or a jump on purpose is entirely irrelevant.  You are completely missing the point.  You are wrong…. PERIOD.  A jumped start is a jumped start.  A fouled gate is a fouled gate….  PERIOD.

The penalty is way out of whack with the infraction, yes.  But had Jett let everyone go, there wouldn’t have been a penalty.  It’s on Jett, nobody else.

1
5

Post a reply to: 450 gate twitch? JETT DOCKED 1 LAP

The Latest