Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Racing' started by yooperbikemike, Nov 11, 2012.
You're lookin' for a noose around your neck saying things like that around here.
Ducati has been a real career-killer for so many riders... the only exception is Stoner, and what happens with Rossi, remains to be seen.
What I´ve never really got is that Rossi should have won on the -11 (or -12) bike, BECAUSE Stoner won on the -07 bike??? They had a very long downward spiral in the time between those two seasons. And as was rightly pointed out, it´s not so much that they went backwards, it´s more that they stood still, while Honda & Yamaha fixed the problems they had, and moved forward.
I thought they had the same HP as the previous years bike.
All of the bikes were 30+ hp down on '06, and riding with tires built to handle the extra power. Top end is overrated. The Ducati is still probably the most powerful bike, and has been probably since they entered the series.
Meh. He is just grinding his axe. All I was saying is that Hayden matched up to Rossi quite well on the same bike. And, of course, he also excludes the one most important stat in the last 10 years that puts Hayden in an exclusive category. And one which makes him one of the very few who has toppled the GOAT.
Shall I compare Hayden to Stoner and see who's defense he comes to?
Stoner's last few races on the Ducati:
Rossi's last few races on the Yamaha:
In the test the day after the final race Stoner was fastest on a Honda. Rossi was what? 15th was it?
Same bike that Stoner finished second on the day before and Rossi was fit enough to podium in the previous 5 races.
Rossi should have won on the '11 bike because Stoner won on the '10 bike. They weren't that different. Instead, he was on average 10 or more seconds slower than Stoner's times from the year before.
Can't really compare 2012, as the bike was significantly different then. The only comparison that you can make is to say that Ducati weren't prepared to listen to Rossi, just as they had not been prepared to listen to Stoner before him.
You hit the nail on the head, in 2011 the bike was virtually the same...Ducati is stagnant, they stuck with the same thing with the assumption that no one was moving forward. The now retired 27 year old head case didnt win a championship on the 2010 bike so it shouldnt be a forgone conclusion that Rossi was supposed to win on the 11' bike....maybe if Honda and Yamaha decided to drink beer and eat cheetos instead of developing a championship earning M1 in late 2010 then the Ducat would have been worth a damn.
Agree completely. Stoner's talent, if it wasn't obvious before, was illustrated clearly in the difference in Ducati's results between '10 and '11.
However, when Stoner is given credit as the sole reason why he won the 2007 championship (and not the power/fuel consumption advantage of the desmo Ducati vs. spring-valved Hondas and Yamahas, and not the Bridgestones), that doesn't gibe with Stoner's deteriorating results from '08-'10. In fact (although of course there are various factors to consider), Stoner got more points with the 2007 Ducati than he did with the 2011 Honda -- to say that the 2007 Ducati was not superior to the Japanese bikes is nuts.
Loris Capirossi, Alex Barros, Alex Hoffman, and Chaz Davies might tell you that Stoner made the difference. It was obviously a competitive bike (for Stoner). Superior?
As much as i like and respect those riders, Loris was on his down slope, the alex's never were a serious contender in MotoGP and Chaz Davies couldnt even win in AMA racing.
Well, that didn't last long. Shame.
You could sort of do that with any of the aliens: [insert second-tier-riders here] might tell you that [Lorenzo/Rossi/Pedrosa] made the difference.
That Rossi demanded the Bridgestones, and that Stoner was pissed off about it, says everything necessary about their benefit at the time.
Yes. Capirex only almost won the WC the year before.
And Chaz Davies was WSS World Champion in 2011.
Alex Barros, 7 premier class wins and 32 podiums.
Capirossi finished 3rd...by that virtue Randy Mamola should get an honorable mention for "Almost Winning" in the guinness book of world records
WSB or WSS doesn't equate to a positive motogp career, if that was the case James Toseland and Ben Spies should have had more success.
Alex Barros raced in the premier rank for 17 years and earned 7 race wins....so less than .5 race wins a year?
Those guys should be mentioned right up there with the greats!:huh
Stoner wasn't the sole reason for the championship. Ducati got a jump in terms of horsepower and fuel consumption, and they still had a front tire that worked (the big change in 2008 was Rossi getting Bridgestones, and the tires being moved away from Ducati-spec, and then 2009 saw the spec tire and the end of Ducati's real competitiveness altogether.
However, as mdubya points out, Capirossi was in with a serious shout for the '06 title. In '07, he was a sideshow. That doesn't happen to riders overnight.
I think it's reasonable to say that the '07 Ducati was good enough to be competitive with the Yamaha and the Honda. But both Honda and Yamaha picked it up, by Barcelona, they had changed direction and were different bikes. By then, Stoner had a strong lead, and it was too late to catch him. The bike was not superior in any way, But it wasn't the turnip truck it turned into by the time Stoner left and Rossi arrived.
And all of this nonsense makes the 07 Ducati superior to the Honda and Yamaha how?
The bike was competitive. It didn't ride itself.
Dude, he got more points on "the bike that was not superior in any way" than he did on the '11 Honda. C'mon.
if you watched any of the 07 season atleast at the beginning the ducati was leaps and bounds ahead of its counter parts...saying that the other bikes werent near the front and then mentioning the b class riders that were on the bike is almost comical.
Casey rode the shit out of the ducati that year and all the years he was on the ducati (i understand that) but eluding to the fact that the other manufacturers bikes were on par doesnt make sense.
Im not taking a shot at Stoner on this, he is a two time world champion and he earned it but the ducati's of now and the ducati's on then are worlds apart. On second thought, they are not worlds apart the other bikes are just much better. If the Ducati was the best bike then why did Casey Stoner leave? Rossi went there because he got booted from Yamaha.
If Stoner had retired with a second WC on the Honda, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation because it'd be self-evident Stoner was completely hampered by the '08-'10 Ducati. But since in 2012 he was getting beat by Pedrosa even before the injury at Indy, it's a lot more arguable that Stoner had great seasons and not-so-great seasons, and wasn't always able to ride around any problem. I don't know if it should be characterized as the Ducati going backward or the Japanese going forward, but the relative motion seemed clear.