2006 Newsflash: Hayden--deserving; Rossi--crap

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ptk50 @ Mar 10 2007, 03:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You got one part right - Nicky - traditional 4th place. The rest of it is a brilliant exercise in reversed pancreatic logic.
Only one thing? Just one thing? What about all the nicknames?

Ah well, I'll try and do better next time.

I'm glad you really really liked it--you must have since you quoted the entire thing--but what exactly is 'reversed pancreatic logic'?

Thanks for all the kind words, people. I can see why that MotoGP News guy does it now. It was fun to write and half the jokes just write themselves.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ssiperko @ Mar 10 2007, 12:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No ..... he finished in 4th place (7 out of 17 rounds) 41% of the time in 2006 .... his career average is 6th.

SS
Huh? Jumkie quite correctly pointed out that Hayden only finished in 4th place just the ONE time.

Seems like VHMP01 has understood what you're saying, even if you... don't.

As for the "tradtional 4th" comment itself, it was just a throw away line. Hayden had got himself up to 4th at Brno and given how Pedrosa, Rossi and Capirossi were riding, that was all he could hope for that day, until his troubles started.

But I thought the comment might be irreristible to those on the polar extremes of the debate, and so it proved!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ssiperko @ Mar 10 2007, 12:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Bass - ackwards thinking perhaps?
Probably.
Strange way to say it, though. Maybe it's a common German phrase...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Mar 10 2007, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Quote: “The blame-the-bike logic is an interesting part of this ongoing message board battle. Many roll their eyes when Nicky's clutch problems are mentioned; however, the "...... Yamaha" excuse has been worn out in Rossi's defense”…

So I simply ask again, How many riders won on a Yamaha in '06, or all the 990cc era?
In the history of the 990cc Yamaha only the number one rider for that factory won races. What does that say about team orders, equal machinery, parts updates and rider skill?

The bike is crap vs. the rider is crap debate, be it Rossi last year, or any other rider is a frustrating one. The riders, the teams, the manufacturers themselves don't tell the truth and we're not in the pits, so how can we really know?

Biaggi won 2 races in 2002 on the 990cc Yamaha. But he won 2 races in 2003 on the 990cc Honda after that. Does that mean the Honda was as crap as the Yamaha?

There's so many ways of looking at it too. Rossi gets all the praise for everything that Yamaha have done since 2004, but it was Yamaha's fault for 2006. How about Yamaha built great bikes in 2004 and 2005? If Rossi is such a legend for taking a crap bike to back to back titles in his first two years, then why not three in a row?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Mar 10 2007, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Quote: “After the summer break 'The Doctor' was 51 points down. That's a lot of points”…

But in fact, he recovered 59 (not 51) in 5 races, to be in front by 8 in Valencia.
That he did, but it still doesn't change the fact that he was 51 points down after Laguna...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Mar 10 2007, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That is over 11 points per race; even great legends can’t keep up that pace forever… And: managed just “One win in 6 races... sad”… but is it ? He recovered more than 11 point per race, who else has done that in history? And even 1/6 is a better average than most riders get… means almost 3 wins per season!
Given that most of the stuff slung at Hayden is that he didn't win enough to deserve the title, I find it amusing that the winningest rider ever couldn't win when it counted.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Mar 10 2007, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Quote: “Would've been third, actually, if the rest of the world counted the same way Roberts Jr. does”…
A little mistake here too; cause one lap before the end Roberts went through first, but not Elias as second, it was Rossi, so “if the rest of the world counted the same way Roberts Jr. does” Rossi still would be second.
Heh, I stand corrected. I guess I was thinking about the end of straight on the final lap, where Rossi was third, because Elias passed both them. But I could be wrong on that too!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (richo @ Mar 10 2007, 01:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You should get in contact with that guy, mate. Your work has some things in common, it's about MotoGP and it's piss funny
Cheers. I figure he'll probably see it anyway. He posts on this forum sometimes, if I remember correctly.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rising Sun @ Mar 10 2007, 03:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Reading all these threads is almost making me start to dislike Rossi, and want to see Hayden do well at his expense. So it's time to take the bullseye away from Hayden, and stick it on Valentino.
Call it like it is, eh Bikergirl? What am I saying in this paragraph? Also, for everyone playing at home what was the thread title?

But if I wanted to <u>bash </u>Rossi, I'd've said something like: strange, bike-meditating, sticker fetishing, ridiculously superstitous, spoiled, ego maniac with a chip on his shoulder the size of a Repsol Honda.

Also, you can't resurrect something that's not dead. See: USA Today Nicky Hayden article thread, or the Worst Title Defence In GP History thread.

Ah well. 250s about to start.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Mar 10 2007, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i like the way to try to prop up haystack by "slagging off" rossi, but you dont really say anything about haystack and why you believe he was so deserving, the tatic you used her is called "spin"
Yeah, I didn't really say why I thought Hayden was deserving, did I? In fact, re-reading my first post, I wish I could change the title to 2006 Newsflash: Rossi--undeserving, crap. It would be more accurate reflection of the contents.

I didn't really set out to 'prop up' Hayden, just portray Rossi's season in a negative light--the way Hayden's title has so often been portrayed. Of course I used spin; it's common currency on this forum and on both sides of this debate.

For the record: why do I think Hayden was a worthy champion?

For the same reason that every other champion is worthy. Because he scored more points over a season than any other rider. That's it. That's how championships are decided. Not by poles, fastest laps, or--shock, horror--number of race wins.

Those who object with Hayden being champion seem to do so because of two things: he didn't win enough and/or he didn't beat Rossi head to head. That's nice, but you don't get bonus points for these things.

If race wins are what makes someone a true deserving champion, what's the cut off? 3 (Rainey 1991)? 4 (Lawson 1989)? 5? 6? 7?

If you had walked into the riders' meeting on Wednesday and said: What would you choose: 6 race wins in a year, or 2 race wins and a championship? How do you think the riders would answer?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Mar 10 2007, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>you post is nothing more than "flogging a dead horse" boring.
Thanks for reading it all the way through, though, and taking time to post a reply.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Mar 10 2007, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i think this season will prove a lot of points about vale and farmboy.
It won't prove anything about 2006.