Ducati going traditional?

michaelm · Aug 10, 2011

Mr Squiggle said:
Your ability predict the future is as good as mine or any other poster on this forum....however saying Stoner "would be lucky to be mid-pack and maybe challenge for the odd podium at his strongest circuits" defies logic and belittles his past achievements on the Ducati....check out Ducatis recent history MINUS Stoners results and EVERYONE ELSE is mid pack at best but ususally nearer the rear of the field.

RARELY did any other Ducati rider get near the podium over the last four years and Rossi can now be included in the list of riders to fail miserably on the Ducati. Stoner had 9 podiums last year and three wins....the GP10 Stoner rode and the currrent GP11 are VERY similar bikes and the Bridgestone rubber is EXACTLY the same as last year - unless you give creedence to conspiracy theories sourced by the likes of Talpa who has zero credibility

Stoner may have crashed more than Rossi if he was on the Ducati this year but he would have been striving for wins on a bike no one can get near a podium and if past history is anything to go by he probably would have had similar results to last year....hardly what you would call "lucky to be mid-pack and maybe challenge for the odd podium at his strongest circuits".... which is a crap statement IMO - but what would I know I cant predict the future anymore than you

double

michaelm · Aug 10, 2011

Mr Squiggle said:
Your ability predict the future is as good as mine or any other poster on this forum....however saying Stoner "would be lucky to be mid-pack and maybe challenge for the odd podium at his strongest circuits" defies logic and belittles his past achievements on the Ducati....check out Ducatis recent history MINUS Stoners results and EVERYONE ELSE is mid pack at best but ususally nearer the rear of the field.

RARELY did any other Ducati rider get near the podium over the last four years and Rossi can now be included in the list of riders to fail miserably on the Ducati. Stoner had 9 podiums last year and three wins....the GP10 Stoner rode and the currrent GP11 are VERY similar bikes and the Bridgestone rubber is EXACTLY the same as last year - unless you give creedence to conspiracy theories sourced by the likes of Talpa who has zero credibility

Stoner may have crashed more than Rossi if he was on the Ducati this year but he would have been striving for wins on a bike no one can get near a podium and if past history is anything to go by he probably would have had similar results to last year....hardly what you would call "lucky to be mid-pack and maybe challenge for the odd podium at his strongest circuits".... which is a crap statement IMO - but what would I know I cant predict the future anymore than you

I think there are 2 different arguments where the 800 ducati is concerned .

There is the period beginning in 2007, and imo extending through 2009, where the bike was competitive with the factory yamahas and hondas, arguably better in 2007 if you could ride it. These bikes operated well in a very narrow window and required a distinct riding method that only stoner of all who assayed the challenge could meet. Presiozi in 2007 as has been re-iterated in the recent discussion on david emmett's site said stoner rode the bike exactly as it was meant to be ridden. Although doubtless helped by the bridgestone tyres with which it was co-designed particularly in 2007 I am not sure the bike's design was fundamentally flawed, just extreme. Whether the design was sensible or wise for the long term is a different question; I think ducati got the mistaken impression riders capable of exploiting the bike were easily obtainable when their 4th choice 2006 rookie crasher signing immediately melded with the thing. Whether valentino rossi with the possibility of race and championship wins would have been able to ride it a la stoner we will never know; I strongly suspect not as well, but then I would say that.

The 2010 bike and its successors are different, and are unpredictably unstable pigs.The 2010 bike could be ridden fast by casey stoner (not contentedly), and even win, if he was prepared to accept random crashes and frequent dnfs. Or ridden more conservatively to finish midpack, a little closer to the front when stoner adopted this strategy than rossi has finished adopting the conservative strategy with the 2011 bike(s). No way could anyone, not stoner, not rossi, not agostini, doohan, hailwood or anyone else you care to name win a championship against the quality of the 2010 and 2011 opposition on the 2010 or 2011 ducatis. I give credence to the control bridgestone tyre unsuitability hypothesis, but imo they did something else drastically wrong with their re-design to make the 2010 bike more "generally rideable", whether the change to the bigbang engine, changing the balance of the bike by "improving" the weight distribution or rear grip or whatever.

Jumkie · Aug 10, 2011

birdman said:
Exactly what point did Honda leap forward? Was it from the Valencia test last year? When did the Ducati go backwards all of a sudden? Was it Valencia last year? Thats an amazing coincidence. Since then has anything much changed? No, the Honda leaped forward and stayed there, the Ducati slumped backward and stayed there. Why?

Lets make it a multiple choice question:

A. The Tooth Fairy

B. Global Warming

C. Elvis

D. Casey Stoner

povol · Aug 10, 2011

Jumkie said:
Lets make it a multiple choice question:

A. The Tooth Fairy

B. Global Warming

C. Elvis

D. Casey Stoner

12704:Richard dawson.jpg]

Survey says

Mental Anarchist · Aug 10, 2011

michaelm said:
I think there are 2 different arguments where the 800 ducati is concerned .

There is the period beginning in 2007, and imo extending through 2009, where the bike was competitive with the factory yamahas and hondas, arguably better in 2007 if you could ride it. These bikes operated well in a very narrow window and required a distinct riding method that only stoner of all who assayed the challenge could meet. Presiozi in 2007 as has been re-iterated in the recent discussion on david emmett's site said stoner rode the bike exactly as it was meant to be ridden. Although doubtless helped by the bridgestone tyres with which it was co-designed particularly in 2007 I am not sure the bike's design was fundamentally flawed, just extreme. Whether the design was sensible or wise for the long term is a different question; I think ducati got the mistaken impression riders capable of exploiting the bike were easily obtainable when their 4th choice 2006 rookie crasher signing immediately melded with the thing. Whether valentino rossi with the possibility of race and championship wins would have been able to ride it a la stoner we will never know; I strongly suspect not as well, but then I would say that.

The 2010 bike and its successors are different, and are unpredictably unstable pigs.The 2010 bike could be ridden fast by casey stoner (not contentedly), and even win, if he was prepared to accept random crashes and frequent dnfs. Or ridden more conservatively to finish midpack, a little closer to the front when stoner adopted this strategy than rossi has finished adopting the conservative strategy with the 2011 bike(s). No way could anyone, not stoner, not rossi, not agostini, doohan, hailwood or anyone else you care to name win a championship against the quality of the 2010 and 2011 opposition on the 2010 or 2011 ducatis. I give credence to the control bridgestone tyre unsuitability hypothesis, but imo they did something else drastically wrong with their re-design to make the 2010 bike more "generally rideable", whether the change to the bigbang engine, changing the balance of the bike by "improving" the weight distribution or rear grip or whatever.

Michael,

I find it strange with your scientific background that you would argue that in 2007 - 2009 the Ducati was competitive with the Factory Yamaha and Honda. How do you explain that only 1 of the sample of 4 or more bikes was at the front when the rest were at the back consistently? The other riders weren't dogs. Loris has been credited with potentially winning the 2006 title had it not been for a certain front straight incident with his team mate. Melandri was no hack either.

I remember Presiozi comments that Stoner rode the bike as it was intended. But why did he design a bike that no other rider in the history of the sport and certainly current riders had displayed a style that would suit it and the only rider who could ride that way was way down the list of riders they were looking to sign that year.

In my opinion, they lucked out with Stoner and if they had not signed him then they would be a Suzuki or a Kawasaki by now.

Do you think if Stoner was still on the Ducati, winning the odd race and crashing out just as often the general consensus would be that NOW the Ducati is a POS and the Bridgestones are POS or do you think it would be Stoner who had been mentally broken by Rossi, Lorenzo and Pedrosa or what ever crap could be brought up to blame everything on Stoner? Remember that the view would not have changed in that the rest of the Ducati riders would still be running at the back because that has not changed. The only change is that the lead rider is no longer running at the front but is back in the mid pack with the rest of them.

Now it is my view that the Ducati has always been a POS so I am not passing judgement on Rossi. What I am judging is that the general opinion is that the Ducati is only now a POS where as previously as you stated it was competitive with the Honda's and Yamaha's.

Mackie · Aug 10, 2011

birdman said:
Exactly what point did Honda leap forward? Was it from the Valencia test last year? When did the Ducati go backwards all of a sudden? Was it Valencia last year? Thats an amazing coincidence. Since then has anything much changed? No, the Honda leaped forward and stayed there, the Ducati slumped backward and stayed there. Why?

The off season is long and at Qatar we all saw these changes to name a few.

The seamless shift gearbox combined with the revised swingarm to alleviate the rear-pumping issues they faced through most of last season.

The revised Engine, which was already the most reliable and lost the least HP through wear making it a much more stable consistent platform under the Engine reg.

I'm not sure, but I believe I read they also altered the chassis and engine mounting point to improve the balance on corner entry, combined with a revised triple clamp for faster change of direction.

And of course, a completely revised electronics package to work with the new gearbox and swingarm, to improve corner exit.

All of this with four of the top six riders in the world at present on their factory machines plus more I'm sure adds up to leap forward. Many a journalist and insider, even the other manufactures have commented on Honda's fairly large improvements

this season, it seems only arm-chair observers who happen to be rather bias towards a specific rider disagree.

Personally, I believe that Casey's move to Honda was a masterstroke, it seems he made the move at the exact right time, Honda's combination a small and large alterations has resulted in a weapon this season,

and now it also seems that Honda have the wood on the competition next season also, Brno test should help to shed some more light on this. Part of what makes a great rider is his choice of mount and manipulation in the paddock

Rossi has proven this well of the years, and now it appears he has made the biggest blunder of his career.

Bigguy · Aug 10, 2011

Honda had a strong bike last season, they simply didn't have a healthy Pedrosa. Remember how all of a sudden Dovi was a front-runner?

birdman · Aug 10, 2011

Mackie said:
The off season is long and at Qatar we all saw these changes to name a few.

The seamless shift gearbox combined with the revised swingarm to alleviate the rear-pumping issues they faced through most of last season.

The revised Engine, which was already the most reliable and lost the least HP through wear making it a much more stable consistent platform under the Engine reg.

I'm not sure, but I believe I read they also altered the chassis and engine mounting point to improve the balance on corner entry, combined with a revised triple clamp for faster change of direction.

And of course, a completely revised electronics package to work with the new gearbox and swingarm, to improve corner exit.

All of this with four of the top six riders in the world at present on their factory machines plus more I'm sure adds up to leap forward. Many a journalist and insider, even the other manufactures have commented on Honda's fairly large improvements

this season, it seems only arm-chair observers who happen to be rather bias towards a specific rider disagree.

Personally, I believe that Casey's move to Honda was a masterstroke, it seems he made the move at the exact right time, Honda's combination a small and large alterations has resulted in a weapon this season,

and now it also seems that Honda have the wood on the competition next season also, Brno test should help to shed some more light on this. Part of what makes a great rider is his choice of mount and manipulation in the paddock

Rossi has proven this well of the years, and now it appears he has made the biggest blunder of his career.

People are getting confused with Honda. Last year there were 2 Repsol Honda's. This year there are 3 Repsol Honda's. So when a race starts we see 3 Repsol Honda's at the front instead of 2, and get the impression the Honda has leaped forward. But then just take out the 3rd Repsol Honda that was added in Valencia. Once this is done, Lorenzo is comfortably leading the championship, Pedro is fast but gets injured as usual, Dovi is consistent but not challenging for wins as usual. Well thats not a lot different to last year. Of course the Honda has improved this year and I would bet it has improved every year, but without the 3rd rider the improvement is not so impressive.

By comparison the Yamaha first appeared no match for Honda. Lorenzo even got overtaken by Rossi on the Duc in one race. Since then Lorenzo and Yamaha have managed to turn it around and now are mounting a serious challenge to Stoner and Honda. The great leap forward has been matched. The major problem seams to be that Ducati have not gone forward at all, and the only reasonable explanation is that Honda has taken a great leap that cant be matched?

povol · Aug 10, 2011

birdman said:
People are getting confused with Honda. Last year there were 2 Repsol Honda's. This year there are 3 Repsol Honda's. So when a race starts we see 3 Repsol Honda's at the front instead of 2, and get the impression the Honda has leaped forward. But then just take out the 3rd Repsol Honda that was added in Valencia. Once this is done, Lorenzo is comfortably leading the championship, Pedro is fast but gets injured as usual, Dovi is consistent but not challenging for wins as usual. Well thats not a lot different to last year. Of course the Honda has improved this year and I would bet it has improved every year, but without the 3rd rider the improvement is not so impressive.

By comparison the Yamaha first appeared no match for Honda. Lorenzo even got overtaken by Rossi on the Duc in one race. Since then Lorenzo and Yamaha have managed to turn it around and now are mounting a serious challenge to Stoner and Honda. The great leap forward has been matched. The major problem seams to be that Ducati have not gone forward at all, and the only reasonable explanation is that Honda has taken a great leap that cant be matched?

Agree

It was debated here that the Honda was the best bike on the grid the last half of 2010.

michaelm · Aug 10, 2011

Bigguy said:
Honda had a strong bike last season, they simply didn't have a healthy Pedrosa. Remember how all of a sudden Dovi was a front-runner?

Mackie said:
The off season is long and at Qatar we all saw these changes to name a few.

The seamless shift gearbox combined with the revised swingarm to alleviate the rear-pumping issues they faced through most of last season.

The revised Engine, which was already the most reliable and lost the least HP through wear making it a much more stable consistent platform under the Engine reg.

I'm not sure, but I believe I read they also altered the chassis and engine mounting point to improve the balance on corner entry, combined with a revised triple clamp for faster change of direction.

And of course, a completely revised electronics package to work with the new gearbox and swingarm, to improve corner exit.

All of this with four of the top six riders in the world at present on their factory machines plus more I'm sure adds up to leap forward. Many a journalist and insider, even the other manufactures have commented on Honda's fairly large improvements

this season, it seems only arm-chair observers who happen to be rather bias towards a specific rider disagree.

Personally, I believe that Casey's move to Honda was a masterstroke, it seems he made the move at the exact right time, Honda's combination a small and large alterations has resulted in a weapon this season,

and now it also seems that Honda have the wood on the competition next season also, Brno test should help to shed some more light on this. Part of what makes a great rider is his choice of mount and manipulation in the paddock

Rossi has proven this well of the years, and now it appears he has made the biggest blunder of his career.

I have actually accepted many of your arguments which are usually reasonable even from my stoner fan perspective. You now imo start to get towards the ground which annoys non-rossi fans, even those who are (or see themselves to be) reasonable, this being that any success by anyone other than valentino can be explained by bike advantages, which he presumably has never had.

The salient question is not only when any improvement made by the honda occurred, but what the quality of the bike was before and after improving. I could argue if I chose with equal conviction and no less evidence that the honda was previously inferior and holding dovi back and finally reached parity with the yamaha. The argument is similar with the 2007 ducati, which may have had an advantage for a rider who could ride it (if so far from easily employed), but based on historical precedent ducati having a huge advantage over honda and yamaha is at least as unlikely as stoner and rossi being similarly talented, whether or not they are.

michaelm · Aug 10, 2011

Mental Anarchist said:
Michael,

I find it strange with your scientific background that you would argue that in 2007 - 2009 the Ducati was competitive with the Factory Yamaha and Honda. How do you explain that only 1 of the sample of 4 or more bikes was at the front when the rest were at the back consistently? The other riders weren't dogs. Loris has been credited with potentially winning the 2006 title had it not been for a certain front straight incident with his team mate. Melandri was no hack either.

I remember Presiozi comments that Stoner rode the bike as it was intended. But why did he design a bike that no other rider in the history of the sport and certainly current riders had displayed a style that would suit it and the only rider who could ride that way was way down the list of riders they were looking to sign that year.

In my opinion, they lucked out with Stoner and if they had not signed him then they would be a Suzuki or a Kawasaki by now.

Do you think if Stoner was still on the Ducati, winning the odd race and crashing out just as often the general consensus would be that NOW the Ducati is a POS and the Bridgestones are POS or do you think it would be Stoner who had been mentally broken by Rossi, Lorenzo and Pedrosa or what ever crap could be brought up to blame everything on Stoner? Remember that the view would not have changed in that the rest of the Ducati riders would still be running at the back because that has not changed. The only change is that the lead rider is no longer running at the front but is back in the mid pack with the rest of them.

Now it is my view that the Ducati has always been a POS so I am not passing judgement on Rossi. What I am judging is that the general opinion is that the Ducati is only now a POS where as previously as you stated it was competitive with the Honda's and Yamaha's.

Having a scientific background and not taking any available opportunity to denigrate valentino rossi are not necessarily incompatible. When I had my scientific training, admittedly quite a while ago, a guiding principle was to look at both sides of any argument, and also to accept arguments I can't refute.

if you want to argue stoner was unfairly vilified by rossi fans, particularly in 2009, you will get no argument from me. If you wish to argue that valentino hides on-track ruthlessness behind his off track grace and charm, or even that he uses his political skills to manipulate things to suit himself and has tacitly encouraged campaigns of vilification against major rivals you might also be correct. What I don't accept, which you and others seem to be arguing, is that his enormous success over such a long period on 5 out of 6 (thus far) different types of bikes for 3 out of 4 (thus far) different manufacturers, including his 125 and 250 days and his debut season on the honda 500, was all down to preferment.

I know you don't read my posts because you consider them too diplomatic, but it might be a good idea to actually read those to which you choose to reply since you have essentially reiterated my arguments. My point is not that the bikes prior to 2010 would have been competitive in rossi's hands ( I fairly specifically if diplomatically said I didn't think he could have ridden them as well as stoner), but that the 2010 and 2011 bikes are inherently unstable and not championship capable whomever might be riding.

It would seem you believe the mentally broken hypothesis for stoner's 2009 travails which I with my scientific training emphatically do not. I make the bold assumption that casey actually was telling the truth when he said that the bike was good enough when he was healthy enough to ride it to its potential, which seemed to be proven by his late season performances when he was healthy. I have absolutely no doubt that he had insufficient physical endurance when he was ill to ride the bike out for a whole race.

birdman · Aug 10, 2011

Time, earth and the heavens all shifted around a certain event.

Prior to 2011, Ducati were seen as a preseason favourite, if not THE preseason favourite each year from 2008 and including 2010. Stoner was expected to win the championship. Anything less was certain failure, afterall he had a weapon at his disposal. This is the central theme of the debate, because ever since that moment in time that earth and the heavens shifted into an alternate alignment, a new absolute weapon has appeared on the grid, which cant be denied by even the biased armchair observers.

But alas the weapon still has a weakness - RADIATION, hence he is afraid to go to Japan!

Mackie · Aug 10, 2011

michaelm said:
I have actually accepted many of your arguments which are usually reasonable even from my stoner fan perspective. You now imo start to get towards the ground which annoys non-rossi fans, even those who are (or see themselves to be) reasonable, this being that any success by anyone other than valentino can be explained by bike advantages, which he presumably has never had.

The salient question is not only when any improvement made by the honda occurred, but what the quality of the bike was before and after improving. I could argue if I chose with equal conviction and no less evidence that the honda was previously inferior and holding dovi back and finally reached parity with the yamaha. The argument is similar with the 2007 ducati, which may have had an advantage for a rider who could ride it (if so far from easily employed), but based on historical precedent ducati having a huge advantage over honda and yamaha is at least as unlikely as stoner and rossi being similarly talented, whether or not they are.

Well actually the question was just that, and Honda made big improvements for 2011. I apologize for any annoyance, but my argument is not Pro-Rossi or Pro-anyone. I'm actually Pro-Stoner and Pro-Rossi but I find it silly that so many fans of both riders are

completely removed from reality, I happen to be arguing with the Stoner fans at present as they are just as annoying if their view as Rossi fans, and as there doesn't seem to be any Rossi fans around here at the moment. Not accepting the state of the current Honda

compared to 2010 and attributing all of its success this season to the signing of Casey Stoner is extremely fanboyish and worthy of rebuttal with the facts of the matter.

There is much evidence that Honda has made the improvements I've stated above, which have added to the bikes consistency and overall speed compared the 2010,

in the hands of Stoner and a fit Dani Pedrosa it is near on unbeatable at present, and both of them have taken wins off each other. Without these improvements they would struggle to beat Jorge consistently as they did last season no matter who is riding it.

No one well-informed or unbias is denying this.

Mackie · Aug 10, 2011

Mackie · Aug 10, 2011

michaelm said:
Having a scientific background and not taking any available opportunity to denigrate valentino rossi are not necessarily incompatible. When I had my scientific training, admittedly quite a while ago, a guiding principle was to look at both sides of any argument, and also to accept arguments I can't refute.

if you want to argue stoner was unfairly vilified by rossi fans, particularly in 2009, you will get no argument from me. If you wish to argue that valentino hides on-track ruthlessness behind his off track grace and charm, or even that he uses his political skills to manipulate things to suit himself and has tacitly encouraged campaigns of vilification against major rivals you might also be correct. What I don't accept, which you and others seem to be arguing, is that his enormous success over such a long period on 5 or so different types of bikes for 4 different manufacturers, including his 125 and 250 days and his debut season on the honda 500, was all down to preferment.

I know you don't read my posts because you consider them too diplomatic, but it might be a good idea to actually read those to which you choose to reply since you have essentially reiterated my arguments. My point is not that the bikes prior to 2010 would have been competitive in rossi's hands ( I fairly specifically if diplomatically said I didn't think he could have ridden them as well as stoner), but that the 2010 and 2011 bikes are inherently unstable and not championship capable whomever might be riding.

It would seem you believe the mentally broken hypothesis for stoner's 2009 travails which I with my scientific training emphatically do not. I make the bold assumption that casey actually was telling the truth when he said that the bike was good enough when he was healthy enough to ride it to its potential, which seemed to be proven by his late season performances when he was healthy. I have absolutely no doubt that he had insufficient physical endurance when he was ill to ride the bike out for a whole race.

With this I completely agree.

michaelm · Aug 11, 2011

Mackie said:
Well actually the question was just that, and Honda made big improvements for 2011. I apologize for any annoyance, but my argument is not Pro-Rossi or Pro-anyone. I'm actually Pro-Stoner and Pro-Rossi but I find it silly that so many fans of both riders are

completely removed from reality, I happen to be arguing with the Stoner fans at present as they are just as annoying if their view as Rossi fans, and as there doesn't seem to be any Rossi fans around here at the moment. Not accepting the state of the current Honda

compared to 2010 and attributing all of its success this season to the signing of Casey Stoner is extremely fanboyish and worthy of rebuttal with the facts of the matter.

There is much evidence that Honda has made the improvements I've stated above, which have added to the bikes consistency and overall speed compared the 2010,

in the hands of Stoner and a fit Dani Pedrosa it is near on unbeatable at present, and both of them have taken wins off each other. Without these improvements they would struggle to beat Jorge consistently as they did last season no matter who is riding it.

No one well-informed or unbias is denying this.

Fair enough. It is not your fault but there was voluminous discussion about how the 2007 ducati rode itself, and no acknowledgement of a contribution from stoner, and also trenchant criticism of stoner's riding abilities which it would now seem would have been better addressed to the ducati bike. I agree the pendulum has over-swung the other way in regard to rossi and stoner and have posted to this effect.

Not so much on here, but the same argument about stoner having a vast bike advantage as he was said to have in 2007 is being promulgated again, an argument which only ever seems to be applied to him, and not to riders riding the same bike as him nor to riders of other bikes whom it is presumably possible have bike advantages at times as well.

I had the same argument with a rossi fan in 2008 after they junked the 2008 ducati engine and changed the electronics following which stoner's performances improved in the races leading up to laguna seca; sure they improved the ducati but it does not necessarily logically follow that they improved it to be better than the yamaha, it may have been behind the yamaha previously. I personally think the honda was behind the yamaha for most of the 800 era; dani had his occasional days out but he does that. It is still not perfectly sorted to dani's satisfaction in terms of the smoothness of the power delivery and stoner has had his issues getting a good set-up at some tracks as well. Stoner being prepared to push the bike regardless of faults and the other honda riders of necessity following his practice is at least contributing to honda's performance this year imo.

birdman · Aug 11, 2011

Mackie said:
Well actually the question was just that, and Honda made big improvements for 2011. I apologize for any annoyance, but my argument is not Pro-Rossi or Pro-anyone. I'm actually Pro-Stoner and Pro-Rossi but I find it silly that so many fans of both riders are

completely removed from reality, I happen to be arguing with the Stoner fans at present as they are just as annoying if their view as Rossi fans, and as there doesn't seem to be any Rossi fans around here at the moment. Not accepting the state of the current Honda

compared to 2010 and attributing all of its success this season to the signing of Casey Stoner is extremely fanboyish and worthy of rebuttal with the facts of the matter.

There is much evidence that Honda has made the improvements I've stated above, which have added to the bikes consistency and overall speed compared the 2010,

in the hands of Stoner and a fit Dani Pedrosa it is near on unbeatable at present, and both of them have taken wins off each other. Without these improvements they would struggle to beat Jorge consistently as they did last season no matter who is riding it.

No one well-informed or unbias is denying this.

Lorenzo is 20 points behind and came very close to winning Leguna, in which case he would be 6 points behind. So where is all this talk of unbeatable bike weaponry coming from? Who knows whether the Yamaha or Honda is better, and by how much, on any given circuit, at any given track temperature, fuel load, tire wear, suspension setting etc etc. I have no idea, I've not ridden them. Do you and a bunch of commentators know more by watching them on tv?

If Lorenzo jumped on the Honda at the next round and wiped Stoners ..., then maybe we might be able to conclude something.

I'm not trying to argue a pro Stoner view at all. A typical fanboy comment is I love Stoner, Rossi sucks. This is a debate. There's no clear evidence any one rider out of Lorenzo, Stoner or Rossi is better. Throw in Pedro as well injury free. But Stoner is obviously working very hard, and nothings being handed to him on a plate. There's no garantee Stoner will win the title just because he has the leaping forward Honda. Do you think Stoner is cruising around thinking yippee, I have the Honda its clearly the best bike because Mackie and Birdman who ride motogp bikes all the time have said so? Does it look that easy to you?

Mr Squiggle · Aug 11, 2011

I think that at the start of the 2007 season the Ducati was certainly competitive if not slightly better than both the Yamaha and Honda machines....especially the electronics package and Bridgestone tires specifically designed around the Ducati strengths - but by mid way through the season the Yamaha and Honda had caught and perhaps even surpassed the Ducati as the better bikes. The opinion of Alan Cathcart who tested all three factory bikes at the end of the 2007 season (and in fact won a journalism award for this story) suggests that the Yamaha and Honda were both better overall packages than the Ducati which he described as a fearsome motorcycle to ride and a very difficult beast to master...his admiration for Casey Stoners riding talents were readily apparent within the body of text contained in these articles.

I think the strong power delivery of the GP07 engine combined with the unique ability of Stoner to get on the throttle far earlier than any other rider (particularly evident on corner exit acceleration) lead many punters to believe the Ducati had some enormous horsepower advantage over the other bikes....however extract Casey Stoners results from the equation and no-one with any rationale could possibly make the assumption that the Ducati was a self-guided missile....the other factory rider (another ex world champion whos career and reputation was severely tarnished by the Duc800) simply didnt have the ability to extract the same performance required to make the bike competitive let alone regularly win on it.

After 2007 both Honda and Yamaha continued to steadily improve their bikes and Ducati's previous monopoly on Bridgestone tires was unfairly taken away ensuring the bike/tire synergy that both parties had worked so hard to establish was gradually eroded. Due to Bridgestone having to develop tires to suit both the idiosyncrasies of the Duke and also the more conventional handling behaviour of the Yamaha and Hondas it lead to a situation that meant Yam/Hon were moving forward whilst Ducati stagnated.

The only advantage that perhaps remained with Ducati for 2008 (apart from their number one rider) was the high revving desmodromic powerplant but both Honda and Yamaha had an answer to that problem as well......with the introduction of the pneumatic valve systems on both of their newly designed engines it now meant the only ace Ducati had up their sleeve had now completely evaporated......the rider who had previously been able to overcome the inherent handling deficiencies of the idiosyncratic Ducati by talent, brute force and sheer willpower was now fighting an uphill battle and losing......after yet another extremely talented ex world champion rider was signed on (with a more lucrative reimbursment package than their current world champion) the factory team was confident that both riders would be competitive....but yet again the second factory rider struggled all year to get even mediocre results and the problematic nature of the Ducati was now becoming all too apparent.

Enter 2009 and the final nail in coffin for Ducati was their effort to tame the bike which involved neutering the Ducatis screamer powerplant in favour of the easier and more manageable power delivery of a big bang engine coinciding with the move to a radical carbon fibre chassis designed to replace and update their aging steel tubed trellis frame - an old but proven technology. The bike was no longer able to be ridden as aggresively and the vague front end issues which have plagued the motorcycle for some time now were beginning to surface. The team has been in search of a solution for these handling issues ever since but have seemingly gone around in circles trying to find an answer to these problems.

Since mid way through 2007 both the Honda and Yamahas have been a superior overall package to the Ducati with the Yamaha probably laying claim to best bike of the 800cc era....both at present are quite equal in overall terms but each has their own strengths and weaknesses which can be exploited at different tracks....no doubt the Honda is a great bike but I doubt it is lightyears ahead of the Yamaha as some now seem to suggest....the fact that the moment Stoner arrived on the Honda and started dominating it was again deemed to be best bike on the grid is a timely reminder that history is being repeated ala 2007 and machine advantage is yet again being touted as the reason to explain away Casey Stoners exceptional results thus far.....coincidence? I think not........its all just a little bit of history repeating.

michaelm · Aug 11, 2011

Mr Squiggle said:
I think that at the start of the 2007 season the Ducati was certainly competitive if not slightly better than both the Yamaha and Honda machines....especially the electronics package and Bridgestone tires specifically designed around the Ducati strengths - but by mid way through the season the Yamaha and Honda had caught and perhaps even surpassed the Ducati as the better bikes. The opinion of Alan Cathcart who tested all three factory bikes at the end of the 2007 season (and in fact won a journalism award for this story) suggests that the Yamaha and Honda were both better overall packages than the Ducati which he described as a fearsome motorcycle to ride and a very difficult beast to master...his admiration for Casey Stoners riding talents were readily apparent within the body of text contained in these articles.

I think the strong power delivery of the GP07 engine combined with the unique ability of Stoner to get on the throttle far earlier than any other rider (particularly evident on corner exit acceleration) lead many punters to believe the Ducati had some enormous horsepower advantage over the other bikes....however extract Casey Stoners results from the equation and no-one with any rationale could possibly make the assumption that the Ducati was a self-guided missile....the other factory rider (another ex world champion whos career and reputation was severely tarnished by the Duc800) simply didnt have the ability to extract the same performance required to make the bike competitive let alone regularly win on it.

After 2007 both Honda and Yamaha continued to steadily improve their bikes and Ducati's previous monopoly on Bridgestone tires was unfairly taken away ensuring the bike/tire synergy that both parties had worked so hard to establish was gradually eroded. Due to Bridgestone having to develop tires to suit both the idiosyncrasies of the Duke and also the more conventional handling behaviour of the Yamaha and Hondas it lead to a situation that meant Yam/Hon were moving forward whilst Ducati stagnated.

The only advantage that perhaps remained with Ducati for 2008 (apart from their number one rider) was the high revving desmodromic powerplant but both Honda and Yamaha had an answer to that problem as well......with the introduction of the pneumatic valve systems on both of their newly designed engines it now meant the only ace Ducati had up their sleeve had now completely evaporated......the rider who had previously been able to overcome the inherent handling deficiencies of the idiosyncratic Ducati by talent, brute force and sheer willpower was now fighting an uphill battle and losing......after yet another extremely talented ex world champion rider was signed on (with a more lucrative reimbursment package than their current world champion) the factory team was confident that both riders would be competitive....but yet again the second factory rider stuggled all year to get even mediocre results and the problematic nature of the Ducati was now becoming all too apparent.

Enter 2009 and the final nail in coffin for Ducati was their effort to tame the bike which involved neutering the Ducatis screamer powerplant in favour of the easier and more manageable power delivery of a big bang engine coinciding with the move to a radical carbon fibre chassis designed to replace and update their aging steel tubed trellis frame - an old but proven technology. The bike was no longer able to be ridden as aggresively and the vague front end issues which have plagued the motorcycle for some time now were beginning to surface. The team has been in search of a solution for these handling issues ever since but have seemingly gone around in circles trying to find an answer to these problems.

Since mid way through 2007 both the Honda and Yamahas have been a superior overall package to the Ducati with the Yamaha probably laying claim to best bike of the 800cc era....both at present are quite equal in overall terms but each has their own strengths and weaknesses which can be exploited at different tracks....no doubt the Honda is a great bike but I doubt it is lightyears ahead of the Yamaha as some now seem to suggest....the fact that the moment Stoner arrived on the Honda and started dominating it was again deemed to be best bike on the grid is a timely reminder that history is being repeated ala 2007 and machine advantage is yet again being touted as the reason to explain away Casey Stoners exceptional results thus far.....coincidence? I think not........its all just a little bit of history repeating.

Carbon fibre chassis 2009, bigbang not till 2010.

Mental Anarchist · Aug 11, 2011

Mackie said:
Well actually the question was just that, and Honda made big improvements for 2011. I apologize for any annoyance, but my argument is not Pro-Rossi or Pro-anyone. I'm actually Pro-Stoner and Pro-Rossi but I find it silly that so many fans of both riders are

completely removed from reality, I happen to be arguing with the Stoner fans at present as they are just as annoying if their view as Rossi fans, and as there doesn't seem to be any Rossi fans around here at the moment. Not accepting the state of the current Honda

compared to 2010 and attributing all of its success this season to the signing of Casey Stoner is extremely fanboyish and worthy of rebuttal with the facts of the matter.

There is much evidence that Honda has made the improvements I've stated above, which have added to the bikes consistency and overall speed compared the 2010,

in the hands of Stoner and a fit Dani Pedrosa it is near on unbeatable at present, and both of them have taken wins off each other. Without these improvements they would struggle to beat Jorge consistently as they did last season no matter who is riding it.

No one well-informed or unbias is denying this.

I am not sure of when or how you earned the right to suggest that everyone else's opinion is fanboyish and your opinion is fact. I have read only opinion from you but you continue to write as though it is fact. You have tried to use time comparisons from previous seasons and heresay from commentators and PR jargon from insiders to try to justify your opinion as fact.

You suggest you are Pro Stoner but all of your 'Pro Stoner' comments are prefaced with a but ..... Until you outline your resume that includes stints as team boss for Yamaha, Ducati and Honda or a rider of all three MotoGP bikes across all the years you wish to reference it would be wise to remember that your view is simply that ... a view of events. It has no more validity then mine, Talpa's, Jumkie's or any other member that offers up an opinion on this forum. You by no means have to agree with anyone's opinion but you do have to respect the right of everyone to have one.

Ducati going traditional?

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

michaelm

michaelm

Jumkie

povol

Attachments

Mental Anarchist

Mackie

Bigguy

birdman

povol

michaelm

michaelm

birdman

Mackie

Mackie

Mackie

michaelm

birdman

Mr Squiggle

michaelm

Mental Anarchist

Similar threads

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions