It's an accepted truth that Bagnaia lost the championship through his frequent falls, but deeper analysis of his and Martin's results prove otherwise: Mat Oxley presents a Christmas Day debate
Everyone seems to agree that Pecco Bagnaia missed out on a hat-trick of MotoGP crowns because he crashed out of too many races. Ergo Jorge Martin won the championship mostly because his rival made too many mistakes.
Bagnaia tumbled out of three grands prix and four sprints, while Martin crashed in two GPs and two sprints (once remounting to finish outside the points), so the consensus seems correct.
But is it?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario