Rossi grumbling

[mrgrn]

Originally Posted by sqd8r

Read the Dennis Noyes article discussing the Ducati straight line speed superiority and you'll see what I mean. Noyes breaks it down to the percentile, including how long they remain at full throttle and how much of an impact the straight line ability has over the course of the season.

Hayden for 2006 had the measure of Rossi. Ultimately a title decides that. That doesn't mean Hayden is the better rider but if the leg humpers are going to insist it's the rider and not the entire package then that is the result.

You can't have it both ways bud.

Bottom line, if it was just the rider when Rossi went over to Yamaha then answer me this; why did Rossi need to take the most successful Moto GP team manager and his entire multi-title Honda winning crew with him? Then consider that Jeremy Burgess is not in favour of the one tire rule... Seems to me that it isn't the tires.

it clearly is not just the tires, it also is the bike the ducati makes more power, the TC is better and the tires are better and stoner is not bad either that does not mean all of the sudden rossi sucks and has lost some of his step cause look at the nearest yamy after that and the great HRC team blows all in all.

[sqd8r]

Originally Posted by mrgrn

answer me this then. even if he did not NEED Jerry why would he not want to take him? Honda was talking crap and trying to control him so he left and took his friend and team, what is the point? if jerry did not want to go he would not have

Are you saying Rossi did Jeremy Burgess, the winningest team manager in Moto GP, and his mutliple title winning team a favour by taking them along. Rossi brought Burgess and company along because he didn't want his "friend" to suffer under the Honda regime. Ever heard the saying better to have them as a friend than an enemy?

Rossi was doing the calculated move of not leaving behind the most dangerous person on the grid, the most integral component to Rossi's success. Head to head Rossi is the class of the field, until 2007, but Rossi cannot "beat" Burgess and company, few have. Even Honda with Hayden's title win can be said to have benefitted from the legacy of Burgess' developments of the 990. Notice how far off the mark Honda currently are with the new 800. You are seriously underestimating the importance of a mind like Burgess if you think this was done out of friendship. Look at the significant developments made to the Yamaha when Burgess went over. Do you really think the mind that brought Honda multiple world titles didn't have a significant input into the Yamaha we see today? Can you come up with another rationale besides goodwill for Rossi bringing Burgess and company over? This is why I laugh when people say what a turd the current Yamaha is. Look at the parties integral to its development and look at the company behind it and think again.

And the point is... it's not the rider. It's not the bike. It's the team, it's always been the team. The team of Hayden and Honda beat Rossi and Yamaha. The team of Stoner and Ducati beat the team of Rossi and Yamaha. Just like the team of Rossi and Honda won multiple titles. Not Rossi, on a Honda or Yamaha, but the team and not without Jeremy Burgess.

[mrgrn]

OK, if you say so

[XFBO]

Originally Posted by sqd8r

You can't have it both ways bud.

Oh yeeesss he can!!!

Those were two excellant posts sqd8r!!!!

[Jami6989]

DAMN, the Rossi Leghumper Nation is working overtime to spin the blame from this horrible season away from Rossi. When will the excuse generator expire? Shouldn't you clowns check the valves? After all, you're abusing the generator. Lets just ask Nicky how many seasons it's been since Rossi held the title:

[mrgrn]

Another stunning year from Nicky Hayden, top notch. from champ to chump in fellow lump.

[Jami6989]

Originally Posted by mrgrn

Another stunning year from Nicky Hayden, top notch. from champ to chump in fellow lump.

His drought is 1 year, Rossi's is TWO..........AND COUNTING!

[bsess]

Originally Posted by 247

Stoner is on the best bike.
Stoner has the best tires, and is also the best Bridgestone rider.

He is also arguably the best rider right now as well. You put that together with everything else and a title is inevitable.

Rossi has been the best rider for quite a while now. No one who isn't blowing smoke out of his ass can say for sure whether or not Stoner has reached Rossi's level of ability. Its impossible to say for sure but very easy to debate.

I definitely don't believe that the M1 is or has been a crap bike. Since his switch from Honda, the M1 has always been tailor-made to Rossi's preferences by the best tailor in MotoGP (JB).

[nomo]

I still think Rossi is the most talented racer in the world--who else has repeatedly come through the field from 10th or 11th to win ? He seems to be able to adapt to the particular characteristics of any bike, and get the most out of it. However, I agree wholeheartedly that in this season and in 06, he has been broken mentally, too much pressure too often. I mean, what was that fiasco 2 weeks ago ? He gives the race away b/c he thinks his mechanics left something loose on the bike ?! He didn't know the fresh front tire would feel strange until warmed up ?! Doesn't make any sense. In the end , though, we're watching a bunch of millionaires racing the finest bikes money can buy, the most fun I can imagine ! Poor Rossi. Why do you think he's smiling all the time ?

[247]

No. Because that would be stupid.

Originally Posted by sqd8r

Yes, but do you see anyone saying it was Stoner and not the package. That's my point.

[bsess]

Originally Posted by mrgrn

ANybody who says rossi only wins on the best package must not have watched the first two years he was on the yammy that bike was CLEARLY way sub par in bike terms and he rode around EVERY issue and rode hard and won two championships against better teams and better bikes.

Really? Rather than impolitely imply you clearly don't know what you're talking about, please explain (in bike terms of course) how Rossi's bike was subpar during his first two years on it and kindly describe the manner in which he rode around every issue. What were those issues? I sincerely look forward to reading your explanation of the Yamaha's shortcomings. I'd be especially grateful if you could also explain how the other teams were better during that time period you are referring to. Thanks!

[247]

You certainly could argue it, his results this year have been outstanding.

That's the fun of bench racing to me.
Handicapping rider, tires, bike, laptimes and trends and trying to figure out what's going to happen next.

Those who feel that Stoner is the best rider on the grid should explain-
1- why/how he has been able to instantly vault over Dani, who beat him consistently in 2005 on 250s and last year.
2- how did he go from 119 points last year to 322+ points this year, if it's not in large part the bike/tires?

Originally Posted by bsess

He is also arguably the best rider right now as well. You put that together with everything else and a title is inevitable.

Rossi has been the best rider for quite a while now. No one who isn't blowing smoke out of his ass can say for sure whether or not Stoner has reached Rossi's level of ability. Its impossible to say for sure for easy to debate.

I definitely don't believe that the M1 is or has been a crap bike. Since his switch from Honda, the M1 has always been tailor-made to Rossi's preferences by the best tailor in MotoGP (JB).

[nomo]

I think that FOR ROSSI, the M1 hasn't been a terrible bike, but if it were an excellent machine, other teams (and even Rossi's team mate) would have done better with it.

[Turbo329]

Originally Posted by 247

You certainly could argue it, his results this year have been outstanding.

That's the fun of bench racing to me.
Handicapping rider, tires, bike, laptimes and trends and trying to figure out what's going to happen next.

Those who feel that Stoner is the best rider on the grid should explain-
1- why/how he has been able to instantly vault over Dani, who beat him consistently in 2005 on 250s and last year.
2- how did he go from 119 points last year to 322+ points this year, if it's not in large part the bike/tires?

Maybe he's on Steroids?!

I know Toseland is.

[mrgrn]

Originally Posted by Jami6989

His drought is 1 year, Rossi's is TWO..........AND COUNTING!

yet Rossi has gotten second place two years in a row and then i think 5 first places in the championships, what has Nicky gotten??????????????

Nicky was a fluke, a one time wonder and it now shows

[mrgrn]

Originally Posted by bsess

He is also arguably the best rider right now as well. You put that together with everything else and a title is inevitable.

Rossi has been the best rider for quite a while now. No one who isn't blowing smoke out of his ass can say for sure whether or not Stoner has reached Rossi's level of ability. Its impossible to say for sure for easy to debate.

I definitely don't believe that the M1 is or has been a crap bike. Since his switch from Honda, the M1 has always been tailor-made to Rossi's preferences by the best tailor in MotoGP (JB).

not true. the first two years i read numerous articles from people who rode all the GP bikes and broke down the motors and their characteristics and they ALL mentioed how hard the M1 was to ride and how far behind it was so pleez, let's be honest

[mrgrn]

Originally Posted by bsess

Really? Rather than impolitely imply you clearly don't know what you're talking about, please explain (in bike terms of course) how Rossi's bike was subpar during his first two years on it and kindly describe the manner in which he rode around every issue. What were those issues? I sincerely look forward to reading your explanation of the Yamaha's shortcomings. I'd be especially grateful if you could also explain how the other teams were better during that time period you are referring to. Thanks!

it is not MY opinion it was articles written by writers and riders who rode the bikes. pleeze let's keep this non personal BS as i never implied anything and stop trying to say it said it, i said i read it in some UK mags as well as elsewhere. i can go dig up the articles and scan them if you like but you will only discredit them so why bother

it is common fact the Honda Hicky rode was a better bike the first two years Rossi left in many aspects and it is not a opinion made by me just shared by me

[mrgrn]

Originally Posted by bsess

Really? Rather than impolitely imply you clearly don't know what you're talking about, please explain (in bike terms of course) how Rossi's bike was subpar during his first two years on it and kindly describe the manner in which he rode around every issue. What were those issues? I sincerely look forward to reading your explanation of the Yamaha's shortcomings. I'd be especially grateful if you could also explain how the other teams were better during that time period you are referring to. Thanks!

BETTER was in inference to more money alloted and spent on a particular bike. i read again that HRC was dumping way more money into their camp as far as bikes were concerned than the yamaha so they would have had a advantage there no?

[bsess]

Originally Posted by mrgrn

it is not MY opinion it was articles written by writers and riders who rode the bikes. pleeze let's keep this non personal BS as i never implied anything and stop trying to say it said it, i said i read it in some UK mags as well as elsewhere. i can go dig up the articles and scan them if you like but you will only discredit them so why bother

it is common fact the Honda Hicky rode was a better bike the first two years Rossi left in many aspects and it is not a opinion made by me just shared by me

With all due respect, I'd love to read those articles as well as to see who wrote them. Unless they were written by a racer with recent top level (i.e. MotoGP) experience, they are basically useless because bike journalists and retired ex racers have nowhere near the necessary ability levels to explore and evaluate the performance characteristics of prototype equipment at or near the limit. That is a plain fact. Even the opinion of someone like Kevin Schwantz would be essentially valueless because he is no longer capable of top level pace.

Back when he was the top dog, Mick Doohan would frequently complain/ reject chassis/suspension equipment being developed by HRC and its development riders. While HRC would give him new parts that they assured him would offer measurable improvements to his current set up, Doohan, more often than not, would reject the new equipment/mods by saying that since the development riders were incapable of matching either his pace or his style, the value of their recommendations were more often than not a waste of time. His arguments were always supported by his own testing of said recommended equipment/mods. Doohan once politely buried a retired Schwantz's year end appraisals of bikes on the 500 grid for the same reasons stated above. At the time, Doohan specifically stated that if someone couldn't ride within a tenth or two of his pace, their evaluation/analysis of a bike would hold little, if any, credibility/value for him (and Schantz, btw, completely agreed.) He reinforced his point by saying that certain bikes whose designs/set ups he felt were were fundamentally flawed could be absolutely pure and smooth sweethearts when running a 1:25.00 second a lap pace but dangerously unpredictable and unrideable at a pace even a tenth or two quicker. He also stated that the converse could be applicable whereby a bike that was deemed unrideable at the limit of a development riders abilities could become sweet handling at a higher pace that only he could achieve. When Doohan swapped his Big-Bang engines for the old style screamers, the development riders became even less relevant than they already were because they lacked Doohan's rare ability to manage the shortcomings and exploit the strengths offered by that engine's configuration.

Rossi's M1 was also proclaimed by many journos as the sweetest handling bike on the grid but, once again, this means nothing as well. The M1s that Rossi rode to two championships were specifically developed in accordance with his particular abilities and preferences. During his championship reign, he endlessly praised the M1's performance so for you or anyone to deride that bike as being inferior is pointless and irrelevant. The results speak for themselves. In Rossi's hands, the M1 was an exceptional handling bike with more than enough power and acceleration to dominate the other bikes on the grid. Even on the big horsepower tracks where the V5 Hondas were expected to dominate.

Many like to say that the M1 was a dog and point to the performance of other riders of the M1 to reinforce that view but the same can be said of the 800cc Ducati. In Stoner's hands, the Ducati, like the M1 during Rossi's Championship years, was a great bike. Rossi loved his M1 back then just as Stoner loves his Ducati now.

And for those who think that Rossi didn't complain in 2004 and 2005 just because he was winning races, I would suggest that he/she refer back to the latter portion of Wayne Rainey's championship run.

[XFBO]

Originally Posted by 247

Those who feel that Stoner is the best rider on the grid should explain-
1- why/how he has been able to instantly vault over Dani, who beat him consistently in 2005 on 250s and last year.
Consistently?!?! Dani won in 2005 by what 50 points?
And he won 3 more rounds than Casey that yr, barely the dominance you make it sound like.
Last yr? Dani was on what is arguably the BEST bike in the paddock and he couldnt even beat a lowly champion like Nicky.


2- how did he go from 119 points last year to 322+ points this year, if it's not in large part the bike/tires?

Uhhhhh.........NON factory ride vs FACTORY ride maybe? Ya think that has anything to do with it??? When was the last time a privateer won a chmpionship?

squid8r hit the nail on the head with you [and others] you guys want every angle available in an argument. You guys can never be wrong. lol


Lets see if I got this right:
You want to put Dani above Stoner for the past two yrs ('05&'06) cuz Dani outranked him........each time, mind you, on superior machinery.

But yet, you make BOATLOADS of excuses for Rossi for the last two seasons who has also been outranked.