All

Smells to me like they have a 350 coming out soon. Which would be a very smart move. That chassis with a good 350 motor would be a great bike.

Do you truly have all the facts? Have you talked with Rich? Were you there? Have you ridden the track? Did you ride it the day in question? you don’t have ll the facts. Neither do I. if you are going to try to compare my bias to KOOKsey then you need to at least know what you are talking about it. Don’t compare me to him. The only fact I have is the type of person rich is. You don’t keep being friends with someone for 30 years if they aren’t solid people. But- you are 100 correct. I...

Nope… Personally, I am on the side of knowing I take the risk every time I enter a track. My choice, my responsibility. However, having known Rich…. It had to be a grossly negligent situation. He’s been around longer than anyone and hasn’t done this before. Like I said everyone is entitled to make an opinion based on wether you believe a track should ever be sued. I’m fine with that. I just wish the correct facts and situation were brought to the Vital jury. They weren’t. A heavily formed hit piece was made with lots of facts and information...

This whole thing stinks only because KOOKsey with 1/3 facts right created a click bait title and video that got everyone riled up by painting a grossly false picture about cheating, signed waivers, cross dressing and calling rich names, claiming it was a Loretta’s qualifier (because of his hate for mxsports) only to release an edited video and then a follow up calling rich out to debate “the bad guy” (to only help this views) and drag his entire family by posting photos of them. I won’t debate anyone on their feeling on the facts and the bottom line is...

My two cents....... I've known Rich for many years and he is a stand up human. Having been in this sport on many levels there is no get out of jail card for a track that has not taken care to provide a safe race track. Motocross tracks and track owners vary so much. It's like the Wild West. There has to be responsibility and accountability. Personally I look at accidents and rate them as to how preventable they are. In this case the accident was 100% preventable. I applaud Rich for making the difficult decision to do the right...

Track is the track. Whats around it, or in this case not, is a different thing. Same reason you can't park track equipment a feet from the track, things can go bad. That would never have passed a serious track saftey review. Result would have been to put up a fence at the top of the berm, or cut it down. I would never have built It like that in the first place. As mentioned, if you run a track professionally, you got to take responsibility. ​​​​​

I haven't seen a cliff like that on a track in 20 years.Why would Rich need to walk the track? Rich Taylor probably hasn't seen something like that in 40 years in the sport on 3 times the tracks we have seen. Not walking the track is now negligence because now we need to look for cliffs? For the numerous people who are behind a keyboard and scared of moto tracks closing, its quite easy to bag on a guy who almost lost his son because a track owner made a bonehead decision to create a literally cliff on his...

I haven't seen any proof that the insurance company isn't behind all this....

I would bet that it is the insurance company that sued . Like others have said , its in every insurance contract. I had a friend crash and pass away at another friend's track. His life insurance sued the track. Even though his fiancée objected. I do not know any other details. I am going to give Rich the benefit of the doubt, and assume that its his insurance company that sued and NOT him. Cooksey's explanation seems to be missing info or presenting it in a way that gets attention and mostly for views. I don't watch a lot...

It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is a clause in your insurance policy that says you agree to subrogate your right to sue and recover damages if the injury was the fault of a third party. If you refuse to cooperate the insurance company won't pay the claim. I don't know for certain but there are some hints in the case that this is a subrogation claim.

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt end up in court over it.

Cookseys credibility is so low I would wait to hear the other side of the story

My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey tends to do. His entire schtick is nothing but hot takes, nothing more.

Typical Kooksey...put out half truths just to get the asylum riled up and create clicks...

I think it’s not worth my time with the gytr and pro circuit jetting. I’m going to try to find the ccl needle and #6 slide online (pray it’s available)