(yet more coffee)
Thanks, Saturn-5 . . . though I certainly don't dismiss the riding expertise of expert riders.
I greatly admire it.
But some of the expert riders fall short of the expertise of explaining how they do what they do.
Remember when you were a kid riding a bicycle ?
Probably you soon got very good at it ~ maybe even became a Skid Kid ?
I daresay that you (and I) at that age had little or no understanding of the science of bicycle riding, nor could we explain it well to novices. It was just something you did, and did well.
Countersteering, resultant forces, mass, momentum . . . wozzat ?
The way forward was to practise, and take a few falls . . . practise, and fall, until you got really good.
That was adequate for bicycles . . . but not so much of a good idea for motorcycling.
Riding a motorbike is a level or two above that.
You are pushing the envelope in performance, traction, braking. And danger.
Best to know/understand where the limits are (before you pass over the threshold) so that the learning curve can be tackled as quickly and safely as possible. Otherwise, if a rider doesn't understand the basic science, then he ends up as [worst case] a rear-brake-only user, or suchlike.
Similarly, a rider can best advance his skills if he receives good scientifically-based instruction ~ and clear, well-thought-through terminology.
Fuzzy concepts don't belong, even if they have been around for years.
Take "weighting the inside/outside peg", for instance.
Is it literally a useful and accurate term, or is it actually just a shorthand or code-phrase for a whole group of actions which a rider does (or thinks he does) during cornering ?
That's an okay thing to say, if it's a group of expert riders talking among themselves and knowing what they [sort of] mean by it . . . but it's vastly less use in educating and explaining stuff to other riders who don't speak a da language.
Even worse, it is misleading if it's a phrase which is based on inaccurate concepts [which may . . . or may not . . . be the case with "weighting"].
Look at "Centre-of-Gravity" for example ~ a clearcut term with exact meaning for engineers. But look through this thread, and you will find a number of comments indicating that their posters have forgotten or never grasped, or have confused and overlapped it with other concepts ~ with the result that there's a lot of talk and heat, and only small progress.
* My apologies for all my wind-filled baggage (above) ~ but the topic is too complex to discuss by means of a short paragraph of a post.
And even with all that verbiage, I fear that I have not expressed fully and clearly the context of my humble inquiry about the so-called "weighting".