Lorenzo to Ducati!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Aug 21 2009, 02:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I repeat... he was willing to be #2 under Rossi for bigger bucks - why not at Ducati as well?
If he's willing to give up the most rideable bike in MGP for a bigger payday - then obviously
the money is what he needs to prop up his ego. And besides if he sees himself as being
successful on the Duc - you'd think that he'd enjoy the opportunity to beat the one guy
everyone hails as the only one to tame the beast.Because he not a rookie looking to make his name anymore, his demands show how high his opinion of his own talents are. & Has it not been Lorenzo's style in the past to dominate a team? His team mentality at Yamaha is the very thing that has been out of the ordinary for Jorge.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Aug 22 2009, 06:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>.... me, what a fantasy. I bet you got a hard on when you wrote that !
I'll try and get you some good pics next week compa. This way we can all .......... on the forum.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 22 2009, 02:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1. First of all brotha, this highlights and underscores the importance of tires (now that our history revisionists are in full swing, and apparently Michelin was being blocked by Honda, but Yamaha had no clout? Ask BlackKnight, he's the one saying it).

2. Tell me V. Moving from Yamaha to Honda or vis versa today, is there really a 'earth chattering' difference in performance? I'd say very small. As was in 04. (Again, les you forget one year removed that both brands had equal representation in the top 6, three a piece--the top two being one of each brand no less). So you're gonna try and convince me that Yamaha & Honda were more like switching to a 2nd tier machine like Ducati/Suzuki/Kawasaki? Oh wait, you're still stuck on Ducati winning, right? Hahaha, looking at the Ducatis no ridden by Stoner then you must realize that even Suzuki looks better than Ducati. But you are trying and have been failing to convince me that the 04 switch was like Vale going to a 2nd tier machine. You see buddy, not sure if you can't see what I'm saying here but there is a two fold point. A. Stoner made the difference on a bike that otherwise was very ....... B. To support this, I point to the performance of others on the same or near the same machine.

No amigo, I am not trying to say that moving from Honda to Yamaha was like moving to Ilmor by any means… Obviously Rossi is not stupid, his undertaking was to challenge Big H, so being Yamaha the ‘Best’ option to do it, and having Yamaha a philosophy that acquainted more to his, and being a smart rider, he chose Yamaha. That in itself is a smart achievement.

My questions are, and I will ask again (and answer because nobody did):

1.- How many riders in the History of our Sport have wan Back to Back ‘Championships’ when Changing Manufactures (even from the top two Makes)?

TWO Riders in ‘All’ History, and one being Rossi. (Remember that there have been 318 riders with at least one win in ‘All’ History since 1949, which makes the two very special).


So if 2/318 is not ‘earth shattering’ enough, here comes the second question:


2.- How many riders in the History of our Sport have wan Back to Back ‘Races’ when Changing Manufactures (even from the top two Makes)?

And the answer out of 318 winners of ‘All’ times is ‘earth shattering’: Rossi.

In case anybody is curious about who those 318 riders with at least one win are:

Abe, Norick. Agostini, Duilio. Agostini, Giacomo. Ahearn, Jack. Alzamora, Emilio. Ambrosini, Dario. Amm, Ray. Anderson, Fergus. Anderson, Hugh. Andersson, Kent. Anscheidt, Hans-Georg. Aoki, Haruchika. Aoki, Nobuatsu. Aoyama, Hiroshi. Armstrong, Reg. Auinger, August. Aureal, Jean. Azuma, Masao. Bald╔, Jean Francois. Ballerini, Andrea. Ballington, Kork. Barbera, Hector. Barrington, Manliefe. Barros, Alex. Bautista, Alvaro. Bayliss, Troy. Beattie, Daryl. Bell, Artie. Bergamonti, Angelo. Bertin, Guy. Biaggi, Max. Bianchi, Pierpaolo. Bolle, Jacques. Bonera, Gianfranco. Bradl, Helmut. Bradl, Stefan. Braun, Dieter. Brett, Jack. Brigaglia, Domenico. Bruins, Jan. Bryans, Ralph. Buscherini, Otello. Cadalora, Luca. CaÐellas, Salvador. Caldarella, Benedicto. Campbell, Keith. Cann, Maurice. Capirossi, Loris. Card┌s, Carlos. Carpenter, Phil. Carruthers, Kel. Carter, Alan. Casanova, Bruno. Casoli, Paolo. Cecchinello, Lucio. Cecotto, Johnny. Celso-santos, Adu. Checa, Carlos. Chevallier, Olivier. Chili, Pierfrancesco. Coleman, Rod. Colnago, Giuseppe. Conforti, Pier Luigi. Copeta, Angelo. Cornu, Jacques. Corsi, Simone. Crafar, Simon. Creith, R.. Criville, Alex. Czihak, Edmund. Dale, Dickie. Daniell, Harold. De Angelis, Alex. De Puniet, Randy. De Radigues, Didier. De Vries, Jan. Debon, Alex. Degner, Ernst. Di Meglio, Mike. DÍrflinger, Stefan. Dodds, John. Doohan, Mick. Doran, William. Dovizioso, Andrea. Drapal, Janos. Duff, Mike. Duke, Geoff. Ekerold, Jonnie. Elias, Toni. Emmerich, Ingo. F▄gner, Horst. Faubel, Hector. Felgenheier, Roland. Fernandez, Patrick. Ferrari, Virginio. Ferri, Romolo. Filice, Jim. Findlay, Jack. Foster, Bob. Freymond, Roland. Frith, Freddie. Frutschi, Michel. Gadea, Sergio. Gandossi, Alberto. Gardner, Wayne. Garriga, Juan. Gianola, Ezio. Gibernau, Sete. Goi, Ivan. Gould, Rodney. Graf, Ulrich. Graham, Leslie. Graham, Stuart. Gramigni, Alessandro. Grant, Mike. Grassetti, Silvio. Grau, Benjamin. Gresini, Fausto. Guilleux, Herve. Gustafsson, Leif. Haas, Werner. Hailwood, Mike. Hansford, Greg. Harada, Tetsuya. Hartle, John. Hartog, Wil. Hasegawa, Horoshi. Hayden, Nicky. Hennen, Pat. Herrero, Santiago. Herreros, Manuel. Herron, Tom. Herweh, Manfred. Hocking, Gary. Hollaus, Rupert. Huberts, Jan. Iannone, Andrea. Ireland, Dennis. Ito, Fumio. Itoh, Mitsuo. Ivy, Bill. Jacque, Olivier. Jansson, Borje. Jefferies, Tony. Jenkner, Steve. Kafka, Gerd. Kallio, Mika. Kanaya, Hideo. Kassner, Helmut. Katayama, Takazumi. Katayama, Yoshimi. Kato, Daijiro. Kavanagh, Ken. Kissling, Jorge. Kneub▄hler, Bruno. Kobayashi, Masaru. Kocinski, John. Korhonen, Pentti. Koyama, Tomoyoshi. Laconi, Regis. Lansivuori, Teuvo. Lavado, Carlos. Lawson, Eddie. Lazzarini, Eugenio. Lega, Mario. Leoni, Gianni. Leoni, Guido. Liberati, Libero. Locatelli, Roberto. Lodewijkx, Paul. Lomas, Bill. Lorenzetti, Enrico. Lorenzo, Jorge. Lucchi, Marcellino. Lucchinelli, Marco. Luthi, Thomas. M▄ller, Hermann Paul. Magee, Kevin. Mamola, Randy. Manako, Tomomi. Mang, Anton. Marsovszky, Gyula. Martinez, Jorge. Masetti, Umberto. Mccandless, Cromie. Mcconnachie, Ian. Mccoy, Garry. Mccullough, Ray. Mcintyre, Bob. Mcwilliams, Jeremy. Melandri, Marco. Mendogni, Emilio. Middelburg, Jack. Milani, Alfredo. Minter, Derek. Miyazaki, Osamu. Molloy, Ginger. Monneret, Pierre. Morishita, Isao. Mortimer, Chas. Mudford, Ken. Nakano, Shinya. Nash, Godfrey. Newbold, John. Newcombe, Kim. Nieto, Angel. Nieto, Fonsi. Nieto, Pablo. North, Alan. Oettl, Peter. Okada, Tadayuki. Pagani, Alberto. Pagani, Nello. Palazzese, Ivan. Palomo, Victor. Parlotti, Gilberto. Pasini, Mattia. Pasolini, Renzo. Pedrosa, Dani. Perris, Frank. Perugini, Stefano. Pesek, Lukas. Phillis, Tom. Pileri, Paolo. Poggiali, Manuel. Pons, Sito. Porto, Sebastian. Prein, Stefan. Provini, Tarquinio. Puig, Alberto. Rainey, Wayne. Raudies, Dirk. Read, Phil. Redding, Scott. Redman, Jim. Reggiani, Loris. Reitmaier, Fritz. Ricci, Fausto. Rittberger, Herbert. Robb, Tommy. Roberts Jr, Kenny. Roberts, Kenny. Rolfo, Roberto. Romboni, Doriano. Rossi, Graziano. Rossi, Valentino. Roth, Reinhold. Rougerie, Michel. Ruffo, Bruno. Ruggia, Jean Philippe. Rutter, Tony. Saarinen, Jarno. Sakata, Kazuto. Sala, Guido. Sandford, Cecyl. Sanna, Simone. Sarron, Christian. Sarron, Dominique. Saul, Eric. Scalvini, Gianluigi. Schneider, Bert. Schurgers, Jos. Schwantz, Kevin. Selini, Jean Claude. Sheene, Barry. Shepherd, Alan. Simmonds, Dave. Simon, Julian. Simoncelli, Marco. Smith, Barry. Smith, Bradley. Spaan, Hans. Spaggiari, Bruno. Spencer, Freddie. Stastny, Franta. Stoellinger, Edi. Stoner, Casey. Surtees, John. Taira, Tadahiko. Takahashi, Kuninitsu. Takahashi, Yuki. Talmacsi, Gabor. Tamada, Makoto. Tanaka, Kenjiro. Taveri, Luigi. Terol, Nicolas. Thurow, Gerhard. Timmer, Theo. Toersen, Aalt. Tokudome, Masaki. Tormo, Ricardo. Torrontegui, Herri. Tournadre, Jean Louis. Tsujimura, Takeshi. Ubbiali, Carlo. Ueda, Noboru. Ui, Youichi. Ukawa, Tohru. Uncini, Franco. Van Dongen, Cees. Van Dulmen, Boet. Van Kessel, Henk. Van Zeebroeck, Julien. Venturi, Remo. Vermeulen, Chris. Villa, Walter. Vincent, Arnaud. Vitali, Maurizio. Waibel, Gerhard. Waldmann, Ralf. West, Anthony. Wheeler, Arthur. Williams, Charlie. Williams, John. Williams, Peter. Wimmer, Martin. Wood, Tommy. Zeelenberg, Wilco.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 22 2009, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'> I'll try and get you some good pics next week compa. This way we can all .......... on the forum.
i look forward to it compa the pics that is,not the thought of you spanking the monkey

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Aug 22 2009, 03:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Lets just throw another statistic into the mix for comparison - for fun only of course

In 2004 Valentino Rossi moved from Honda to Yamaha where his team mate was Carlos Checa, the results of that year are below (16 rounds of the championship).

Rider Championship:
1st. Rossi - 307 points
7th. Checa - 117 points

Constructor Championship:
2nd. Yamaha - 328 points (Honda were first with 355 points)

Team Championship
1st. Gauloise Fortuna Yamaha (Rossi/Checa) - 421 points

Source: - http://resources.motogp.com/files/results/...ld+standing.pdf

Fast forward to 2007 for the comparison where Stoner won on the Ducati (18 rounds of the championship)

Rider Championship:
1st. Stoner - 367 points
7th. Capirossi - 166 points

Constructor Championship:
1st. Ducati - 394 points

Team Championship
1st. Marlboro Ducati (Stoner/Capirossi) - 533 points

Source:- http://resources.motogp.com/files/results/...ld+standing.pdf

Now, why throw this out there?

Glad I asked.

Well (correct me here Jumkie if I am wrong), Jumkie is saying that Stoner made the difference with the Ducati and is an exceptional rider (personally, I agree), whilst others seem hung up with what Rossi achieved in 2004 with Yamaha and say it was a grander achievement. So I thought a few statistics would be in order and this is what I turned up when comparing 2004 with 2007 and of course it leads to some ponderings which of course I have to throw into the mix simply to cause more angst.

The similarities between both years are, for me quite striking as VR/Stoner both won whilst their team-mates were 7th with a similar percentage of points when compared to the title winners (26% for Checa and 32% for Capirossi).

So, is it fair to say that these statistics seem to indicate that if Rossi's year was extrordinary in 2004 for what he achieved with Yamaha who had finished 3rd in the previosu years Conbstructor title, then Stoners was as extrodinary an achievement (Ducati finished 3rd in 2006)?

Is it therefore fair to say that if Rossi was the difference in 2004 (comparison against team and bike results for 2004 and 2003), then the statistics would indicate that Stoner was the difference in 2007 with the same comparison to team and bike results ?

To extrapolate this further, if the 2004 Yamaha inherited by Rossi was 'crap' and he was able to win the title despite of the bike, not because of it, then again the statistics seem to make similar aspersions towards Stoner in 2007.

Discuss away.

Gaz

Of course Gaz… The difference being as in a 'Whole' Championship… It is not who wan 'One' race… that is an achievement. But who can win a lot and make more points is what makes the greats.

So by your logic, Stoner has only done it once, in a year (2007) where 'Planets aligned':

A.- Ducati a great bike that got the first 800cc right, Bridgestones getting better than Michelins, Yamaha getting first 800cc wrong. And we concur that the 'One and Only' rider that could get the Ducati was Stoner.

B.- As I said before, just once in 2007. The thing that makes the greats is doing more than once, several and a lot of times make it greatest.

Riders with wins 2007: Stoner (10), Rossi (4), Pedrosa (2), Vermulen (1) and believe or not Capirossi (1) in Motegi with Ducati.

My point is that Rossi has achieved 11 wins in a Season 4 times… That makes Rossi as constant as any rider needs to be to win one Championship… But throughout Seasons and Seasons.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Aug 22 2009, 03:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Edit: Wasn't sure which thread to post this in so gave up and placed here as it isn;t worth a thread of its own or cross posting across many threads

Gaz

Please Ben, someone… Merge the four threads together… it's all the same topic!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 10:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1.- How many riders in the History of our Sport have wan Back to Back ‘Championships’ when Changing Manufactures (even from the top two Makes)?

TWO Riders in ‘All’ History, and one being Rossi. (Remember that there have been 318 riders with at least one win in ‘All’ History since 1949, which makes the two very special).Your numbers are wrong, or at least your list is. Just glancing at it, Olivier Jacque caught my eye. His only victories were in the lower classes. I don't think lower-class winners necessarily belong in this discussion, particularly in recent times. If you insist on including them, then the list of people who switched teams and won back to back championships or races expands Biaggi comes to mind as doing both on 250s. In any case, the relevant number isn't the number of race winners, it's the number of championship winners who switched teams after winning. Sticking with the premier class, that number is pretty small. Rossi, Lawson, Lucchinelli,Agostini, Hailwood. A relatively large percentage of them won the next championship.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 10:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So if 2/318 is not ‘earth shattering’ enough, here comes the second question:It's not 2/318, it's 2/5. 318 is a nonsense number - there are people in that list who never even contested a premier-class race, yet you use it to make a premier-class accomplishment look more impressive!<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 10:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>2.- How many riders in the History of our Sport have wan Back to Back ‘Races’ when Changing Manufactures (even from the top two Makes)?

And the answer out of 318 winners of ‘All’ times is ‘earth shattering’: Rossi.Here the 318 makes slightly more sense (although it's doubtful many of them switched makes following a victory). However, if you're using that number your answer is wrong. Rossi was the only rider to do it in the premier class, but not the only one to do it. Biaggi did it, Nieto did it, and probably others as well. They both won championships after switching bikes as well. Also, anyone who won a class as a class-rookie could be said to have switched bikes.

Your numbers are BS.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ Aug 22 2009, 12:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Your numbers are wrong, or at least your list is. Just glancing at it, Olivier Jacque caught my eye. His only victories were in the lower classes. I don't think lower-class winners necessarily belong in this discussion, particularly in recent times. If you insist on including them, then the list of people who switched teams and won back to back championships or races expands Biaggi comes to mind as doing both on 250s. In any case, the relevant number isn't the number of race winners, it's the number of championship winners who switched teams after winning. Sticking with the premier class, that number is pretty small. Rossi, Lawson, Lucchinelli,Agostini, Hailwood. A relatively large percentage of them won the next championship.
It's not 2/318, it's 2/5. 318 is a nonsense number - there are people in that list who never even contested a premier-class race, yet you use it to make a premier-class accomplishment look more impressive!Here the 318 makes slightly more sense (although it's doubtful many of them switched makes following a victory). However, if you're using that number your answer is wrong. Rossi was the only rider to do it in the premier class, but not the only one to do it. Biaggi did it, Nieto did it, and probably others as well. They both won championships after switching bikes as well. Also, anyone who won a class as a class-rookie could be said to have switched bikes.

Your numbers are BS.

Ok Mat, let me get my foot out of my mouth… let's stick to Premier Class because I got my numbers mixed up with all clases, sorry.

Out of 101 winners in the Premier Class (500 & MotoGP), Only Rossi has wan Back to Back Races on different makes… Do you concur? 1/101 is still an 'earth shattering. Those corrected 101 riders would be:

Abe, Norick. Agostini, Giacomo. Ahearn, Jack. Amm, Ray. Anderson, Fergus. Armstrong, Reg. Barros, Alex. Bayliss, Troy. Beattie, Daryl. Bergamonti, Angelo. Biaggi, Max. Bonera, Gianfranco. Brett, Jack. Cadalora, Luca. Caldarella, Benedicto. Capirossi, Loris. Carpenter, Phil. Cecotto, Johnny. Checa, Carlos. Chili, Pierfrancesco. Colnago, Giuseppe. Crafar, Simon. Creith, R.. Criville, Alex. Czihak, Edmund. Dale, Dickie. Daniell, Harold. Doohan, Mick. Doran, William. Dovizioso, Andrea. Duke, Geoff. Elias, Toni. Ferrari, Virginio. Findlay, Jack. Frutschi, Michel. Gardner, Wayne. Gibernau, Sete. Graham, Leslie. Grant, Mike. Hailwood, Mike. Hartle, John. Hartog, Wil. Hayden, Nicky. Hennen, Pat. Herron, Tom. Hocking, Gary. Ireland, Dennis. Kanaya, Hideo. Katayama, Takazumi. Kavanagh, Ken. Kissling, Jorge. Kocinski, John. Laconi, Regis. Lansivuori, Teuvo. Lawson, Eddie. Liberati, Libero. Lomas, Bill. Lorenzo, Jorge. Lucchinelli, Marco. Magee, Kevin. Mamola, Randy. Masetti, Umberto. Mccandless, Cromie. Mccoy, Garry. Mcintyre, Bob. Melandri, Marco. Middelburg, Jack. Milani, Alfredo. Monneret, Pierre. Mortimer, Chas. Nash, Godfrey. Newbold, John. Newcombe, Kim. Okada, Tadayuki. Pagani, Alberto. Pagani, Nello. Pedrosa, Dani. Puig, Alberto. Rainey, Wayne. Read, Phil. Redman, Jim. Roberts Jr, Kenny. Roberts, Kenny. Rossi, Valentino. Saarinen, Jarno. Sarron, Christian. Schwantz, Kevin. Sheene, Barry. Shepherd, Alan. Simmonds, Dave. Spencer, Freddie. Stastny, Franta. Stoner, Casey. Surtees, John. Tamada, Makoto. Ukawa, Tohru. Uncini, Franco. Van Dulmen, Boet. Venturi, Remo. Vermeulen, Chris. Williams, John.

I forgot to filter it, sorry again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 12:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ok Mat, let me get my foot out of my mouth… let's stick to Premier Class because I got my numbers mixed up with all clases, sorry.

Out of 101 winners in the Premier Class (500 & MotoGP), Only Rossi has wan Back to Back Races on different makes… Do you concur? 1/101 is still an 'earth shattering. Those corrected 101 riders would be:

Abe, Norick. Agostini, Giacomo. Ahearn, Jack. Amm, Ray. Anderson, Fergus. Armstrong, Reg. Barros, Alex. Bayliss, Troy. Beattie, Daryl. Bergamonti, Angelo. Biaggi, Max. Bonera, Gianfranco. Brett, Jack. Cadalora, Luca. Caldarella, Benedicto. Capirossi, Loris. Carpenter, Phil. Cecotto, Johnny. Checa, Carlos. Chili, Pierfrancesco. Colnago, Giuseppe. Crafar, Simon. Creith, R.. Criville, Alex. Czihak, Edmund. Dale, Dickie. Daniell, Harold. Doohan, Mick. Doran, William. Dovizioso, Andrea. Duke, Geoff. Elias, Toni. Ferrari, Virginio. Findlay, Jack. Frutschi, Michel. Gardner, Wayne. Gibernau, Sete. Graham, Leslie. Grant, Mike. Hailwood, Mike. Hartle, John. Hartog, Wil. Hayden, Nicky. Hennen, Pat. Herron, Tom. Hocking, Gary. Ireland, Dennis. Kanaya, Hideo. Katayama, Takazumi. Kavanagh, Ken. Kissling, Jorge. Kocinski, John. Laconi, Regis. Lansivuori, Teuvo. Lawson, Eddie. Liberati, Libero. Lomas, Bill. Lorenzo, Jorge. Lucchinelli, Marco. Magee, Kevin. Mamola, Randy. Masetti, Umberto. Mccandless, Cromie. Mccoy, Garry. Mcintyre, Bob. Melandri, Marco. Middelburg, Jack. Milani, Alfredo. Monneret, Pierre. Mortimer, Chas. Nash, Godfrey. Newbold, John. Newcombe, Kim. Okada, Tadayuki. Pagani, Alberto. Pagani, Nello. Pedrosa, Dani. Puig, Alberto. Rainey, Wayne. Read, Phil. Redman, Jim. Roberts Jr, Kenny. Roberts, Kenny. Rossi, Valentino. Saarinen, Jarno. Sarron, Christian. Schwantz, Kevin. Sheene, Barry. Shepherd, Alan. Simmonds, Dave. Spencer, Freddie. Stastny, Franta. Stoner, Casey. Surtees, John. Tamada, Makoto. Ukawa, Tohru. Uncini, Franco. Van Dulmen, Boet. Venturi, Remo. Vermeulen, Chris. Williams, John.

I forgot to filter it, sorry again. Still, how many of those riders won the last race of a season and switched makes? How many won back to back races? How many won multiple races at all?

Almost half of your list won only a single race. Even winning one race is a huge accomplishment. Winning 2 is even more impressive. Winning successive races in the first place is a big deal. We know this and I don't think anyone doubts it. The problem with throwing out such numbers as you are is that they don't really illustrate much. Out of the 50-odd people who won 2 or more races, how many won the last race of the season? How many then switched teams? I really doubt that there are many points of comparison. The relative greatness in accomplishing something isn't really illustrated by comparing to a bunch of people who never had the chance to even attempt that feat.

I'm not going to attempt to sort through them all and see how many people even had the opportunity to duplicate the back-to-back win thing. Rossi, Barros, and Lawson are the only riders to start a year on a different bike following a season-ending win in the past 20 years. Yes, it's an impressive accomplishment, but not one that's highlighted by the statistics you choose.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ Aug 22 2009, 10:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Your numbers are wrong, or at least your list is. Just glancing at it, Olivier Jacque caught my eye. His only victories were in the lower classes. I don't think lower-class winners necessarily belong in this discussion, particularly in recent times. If you insist on including them, then the list of people who switched teams and won back to back championships or races expands Biaggi comes to mind as doing both on 250s. In any case, the relevant number isn't the number of race winners, it's the number of championship winners who switched teams after winning. Sticking with the premier class, that number is pretty small. Rossi, Lawson, Lucchinelli,Agostini, Hailwood. A relatively large percentage of them won the next championship.
It's not 2/318, it's 2/5. 318 is a nonsense number - there are people in that list who never even contested a premier-class race, yet you use it to make a premier-class accomplishment look more impressive!Here the 318 makes slightly more sense (although it's doubtful many of them switched makes following a victory). However, if you're using that number your answer is wrong. Rossi was the only rider to do it in the premier class, but not the only one to do it. Biaggi did it, Nieto did it, and probably others as well. They both won championships after switching bikes as well. Also, anyone who won a class as a class-rookie could be said to have switched bikes.

Your numbers are BS.
NAILED IT. saves me lots of typing. Btw Matt, u nailed a few other posts recently too.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MdubSTYLIE @ Aug 21 2009, 09:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Because he was a rookie. Would you rather be the number two rider to vale, casey, or pepe? He had no choice to be a #1 rider before. I can't see him going to duke with casey there either. When one person makes 13 mil and the other 3 or 4 mil there is no doubt who is the #1 rider. Casey would take it as a slap in the face. Ducati next year Jorge & Mika thats what I see. Something must have change since his offer from honda. Maybe it was not for the same amount of money, but a one man team for telefonica was a way better deal than going to be teammates with sour-puss on a bike with turrets. That alone makes me think cs is outie.

He has already stated categorically that he would be happy to stay at Yamaha as #2 <u>in 2010</u> - if the money was right. If he is willing to do everyone the giant favor of suffering #2 status for millions of dollars at Yamaha (in 2010) - I repeat - why would it be any different at
Ducati (where he'd allegedly be paid much more.)?

As to which Ducati rider will be out - it's a crapshoot. I can come up with a zillion reasons
why either one could be in or out.

Demoting Stoner to #2 would be a PR nightmare. If he comes back to the next race healthy
and again competitive - there's no way on God's green earth his lawyers would allow Ducati
to give him sloppy seconds in the parts update dept.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Of course Gaz… The difference being as in a 'Whole' Championship… It is not who wan 'One' race… that is an achievement. But who can win a lot and make more points is what makes the greats.

So is Stoner a great in your judgement as he got more points across the season?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So by your logic, Stoner has only done it once, in a year (2007) where 'Planets aligned':

What logic - facts remain that Stoner won the world title in 2007

My logic as shown by statistics is that if it was a remarkable achievement for Rossi to move from Honda to Yamaha and win the title in 2004, thence the statistics would indicate it to have been just as remarkable an achievement for Stoner in 2007.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>A.- Ducati a great bike that got the first 800cc right, Bridgestones getting better than Michelins, Yamaha getting first 800cc wrong. And we concur that the 'One and Only' rider that could get the Ducati was Stoner.

Nope.

Ducati - the unknown quantity.

Bridgestones were not getting better than Michelins at the time of the swap and if they were so superior how did Michelin runners win some races (fact). Yes, Michelin did not cope with the change well but the bigger theory is that Bridgestone remained stagnant whilst Michelin dropped - not that Bridgestone got better,


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>B.- As I said before, just once in 2007. The thing that makes the greats is doing more than once, several and a lot of times make it greatest.

Is Schwantz a great?

He remains to this day a single championship winner and the only man to have had his number retired by the governing body.

Oh, and by the way, it is you who things this is a discussion aboy whether Stoner is a great - I have answered my thoughts there many moons ago.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Riders with wins 2007: Stoner (10), Rossi (4), Pedrosa (2), Vermulen (1) and believe or not Capirossi (1) in Motegi with Ducati.

Which proves what exactly?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>My point is that Rossi has achieved 11 wins in a Season 4 times… That makes Rossi as constant as any rider needs to be to win one Championship… But throughout Seasons and Seasons.

Again, which proves what exactly?

To me all that shows is that Rossi dominates seasons in the same way that Stoner did in 2007, no more no less. The fact he does it consistently is why he wins championships and having won 6 in the premier class and 8 in total one would expect him to be the person who wins most across a season.





See my argument point is simple (or so I thought).

If VR's achievement in 2004 are considered to be remarkable by switching manufacturer then going on a winning spree to the world title, why are later riders who achieve remarkably similar statistics not talked of in the same manner for that season. Note again that I am talking a season to season comparison, not championships but will say that if championships.






Gaz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Aug 23 2009, 12:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Is Schwantz a great?

He remains to this day a single championship winner and the only man to have had his number retired by the governing body.

Gaz
But that's largely due to the fact that his achievements off the track were considerably greater than his achievements on the track. Honestly Gaz, I read that once, and it's true.


















That one's almost strained as much mileage as the 'Hopper is .....' chestnut Pete.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Aug 22 2009, 05:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Two thumbs up -- very refreshing to read.
Never mind the double post, you could have posted this 30 times and still it wouldn't have been too much -- and maybe not enough to make some people see the light
I see you have found support for your campaign on vilafying the latest Rossi rival. (Funny, but from an unlikely source too, a Stoner fan no less). Anyway, I thought TP70's post was also very enlightening, but perhaps for different motives as yours. I found myself agreeing with it, just like you. I wonder if you will continue to agree with it once you evalute a bit further...

Keep in mind the following: The theme of TP70's post was: 'Lorenzo is not that special, since his previous success has come on superior machines against his rivals'. Very true, right J4rno? So here is what I can extrapulate from that, perhaps you will also agree with my evaluation. Follow along:

Lorenzo has been easily Rossi's near equal and closest rival this year. (FACT).
Lorenzo has beaten Rossi twice as his two wins indicate. (FACT).
Lorenzo has twice been beaten by Rossi in a spectacular dual to the finish, by mere milli seconds. (FACT).
Lorenzo has crashed from the last two races while leading, so has Rossi, once. (FACT).
Lorenzo's Yamaha is by all accounts a superior package to other rivals, yet not as updated as Rossi's. (FACT).

Now J4rno, with all these facts, what does this say about the rider who is nearest Lorenzo's rival on the "same" (some might say 'slightly better') machine as Lorenzo's? Think now J4rno. Think very hard, take a moment if you need it. You see, we both agree that TP70 made a very insightful post. That is, Lorenzo looks far better than he really is while on superior equipment, right? Interesting don't you think? Especially when you consider that 'not so special' rider is day in day out Rossi's shadow.

I know you and a few reading this will have trouble making the connection; would you like me to spell out a meaningful evaluation to the above facts? Here is some food for thought, perhaps Lorenzo's teammate 'is not that special since his previous success has come on superior machines against his rivals'.

You still agree that Lorenzo is "not that special"?


Thanks J4rno.

Jumkie,

I still think Lorenzo is special. Most of the field is special thatis why th are in MotoGP. I just don't think he is as special as he is currently being made out to be.

The question is when evaluating how special he is and how special the bikes is - who could ride that bike and get that close to Rossi? I reckon probably 7 of the current riders. I won't name them because it will just divert the arguement.

Your subtle comments in the last paragraph. Well I think it is not considered enough when looking at 46's accomplishments. I honestly think he still would have won as many championships but his rivals would have stolen more race wins away then they have been allowed in the last 6 years.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Aug 22 2009, 06:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If VR's achievement in 2004 are considered to be remarkable by switching manufacturer then going on a winning spree to the world title, why are later riders who achieve remarkably similar statistics not talked of in the same manner for that season. Note again that I am talking a season to season comparison, not championships but will say that if championships.

Gaz

Ok Gaz… sorry I kept not getting your point. If Stoner changed bikes and won a Title, why is this not seen as Rossi doing so in 2004… I guess it is because Rossi was winning 3 Championships in a row when he let go of it, to take on a Challenge that he stipulated, and that had a big risk of not achieving. It would have been something like if Doohan changed manufactures after 3 World Titles and win right away (both races and Championships).

Stoner did not let go anything like winning really, 2007 it is a great achievement no doubt, but not exactly the same.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 23 2009, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ok Gaz… sorry I kept not getting your point. If Stoner changed bikes and won a Title, why is this not seen as Rossi doing so in 2004… I guess it is because Rossi was winning 3 Championships in a row when he let go of it, to take on a Challenge that he stipulated, and that had a big risk of not achieving. It would have been something like if Doohan changed manufactures after 3 World Titles and win right away (both races and Championships).

Stoner did not let go anything like winning really, 2007 it is a great achievement no doubt, but not exactly the same.


Sorry, to me I do not see why Rossi already having championships should raise his achievement or diminish that of Stoner as it could well be argued that each had nothing to lose, and/or nothing to gain.

Rossi was already a multiple times World Champion and irrespective of his success with Yamaha would have gone down in history as just that, a legend due to the multiple championships. Of course he wanted to s'show the man' (Honda) and he managed this but as was shown by the 2006/2007, failing to win a championship has npt and will not diminish his status within the sport.

What Rossi had to win was simple, win races and the title to secure the legendary staus - he id and we know the rest.

Stoner stood to lose a lot by the move to Ducati as firstly he was said to not be the first choice plus was on a one year deal. He had shown pace but consistency was an issue so he stood to either make or lose a reputation as if he toddled around mid-pack I suspect that in 2008 he woudl not have had a ride (remember that he does not bring money to a team). Again, we know what happenned and history will judge him accordingly.

The point for me now based on your commenst is why should the results of each year be looked at differently because Rossi had already won titles whereas Stoner had not.

Both went to a bike that was an unknown quantity (to them), both went to different manufacturers with the resulting changes to personel and processes - both then produced remarkably similar results across the year to win the title.

For me, both those years are achievements of equal proportion (as is Eddie Lawson's switch to the title) and they should be looked at accordingly with neither diminished by what the respective riders did before or since






Gaz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Aug 23 2009, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But that's largely due to the fact that his achievements off the track were considerably greater than his achievements on the track. Honestly Gaz, I read that once, and it's true.

What part is true - that you read it once or that the status was bestowed because of off-track activities?

Not arguing either as I have heard that his personality and the way he conducted himself played a part in the decision as was the audience that he bought to the races (ie. somewhat of a forerunner to VR)



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Aug 23 2009, 12:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That one's almost strained as much mileage as the 'Hopper is .....' chestnut Pete.

So has the old chestnut that you cannot be a great by only winning one championship and yet Schwantz proves different which is entirely my point.






Gaz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Aug 22 2009, 03:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Lets just throw another statistic into the mix for comparison - for fun only of course

In 2004 Valentino Rossi moved from Honda to Yamaha where his team mate was Carlos Checa, the results of that year are below (16 rounds of the championship).

Rider Championship:
1st. Rossi - 307 points
7th. Checa - 117 points

Constructor Championship:
2nd. Yamaha - 328 points (Honda were first with 355 points)

Team Championship
1st. Gauloise Fortuna Yamaha (Rossi/Checa) - 421 points

Source: - http://resources.motogp.com/files/results/...ld+standing.pdf


Fast forward to 2007 for the comparison where Stoner won on the Ducati (18 rounds of the championship)

Rider Championship:
1st. Stoner - 367 points
7th. Capirossi - 166 points

Constructor Championship:
1st. Ducati - 394 points

Team Championship
1st. Marlboro Ducati (Stoner/Capirossi) - 533 points

Source:- http://resources.motogp.com/files/results/...ld+standing.pdf


Now, why throw this out there?

Glad I asked.

Well (correct me here Jumkie if I am wrong), Jumkie is saying that Stoner made the difference with the Ducati and is an exceptional rider (personally, I agree), whilst others seem hung up with what Rossi achieved in 2004 with Yamaha and say it was a grander achievement. So I thought a few statistics would be in order and this is what I turned up when comparing 2004 with 2007 and of course it leads to some ponderings which of course I have to throw into the mix simply to cause more angst.

The similarities between both years are, for me quite striking as VR/Stoner both won whilst their team-mates were 7th with a similar percentage of points when compared to the title winners (26% for Checa and 32% for Capirossi).

So, is it fair to say that these statistics seem to indicate that if Rossi's year was extrordinary in 2004 for what he achieved with Yamaha who had finished 3rd in the previosu years Conbstructor title, then Stoners was as extrodinary an achievement (Ducati finished 3rd in 2006)?

Is it therefore fair to say that if Rossi was the difference in 2004 (comparison against team and bike results for 2004 and 2003), then the statistics would indicate that Stoner was the difference in 2007 with the same comparison to team and bike results ?

To extrapolate this further, if the 2004 Yamaha inherited by Rossi was 'crap' and he was able to win the title despite of the bike, not because of it, then again the statistics seem to make similar aspersions towards Stoner in 2007.


Discuss away.



Edit: Wasn't sure which thread to post this in so gave up and placed here as it isn;t worth a thread of its own or cross posting across many threads







Gaz
Best post of the thread, Gaz. Thanks.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Aug 22 2009, 12:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Of course Gaz… The difference being as in a 'Whole' Championship… It is not who wan 'One' race… that is an achievement. But who can win a lot and make more points is what makes the greats.

So by your logic, Stoner has only done it once, in a year (2007) where 'Planets aligned'
V, you generally have your head on straight when it comes to all this but this is the stuff that drives the rest crazy. No one is saying that Stoner is the GOAT, no one is saying Stoner is even close to that level. What is being argued is that Stoner's title is very impressive, comparable to Rossi's title in 2004. And here is a Rossi fan essentially saying, "Yeah, OK, he won one title. Valentino has done it six times." Just another in a long line of Rossi fans trying to belittle Hayden and Stoner's accomplishments. This is exactly why there are targets on your backs.

Let's look at this from another prospective. Lorenzo is trying to beat Rossi, on the Yamaha or maybe the Ducati. He is not only trying to beat Rossi the current World Champion, but trying to beat the best rider of all time (some might say).

Pull down the dividing wall, treat Rossi as a team mate and take time to learn what can be achieved.

My 'Give Us Stoner Back' campaign is based on the persuasion that Stoner IS the real heir to Rossi's crown (then of course he will not be the next Rossi, for the simple fact that he is and will be Stoner...).

I pray every day that this sport does not lose Stoner. I am puzzled at how many fans are dismissing Stoner so quickly, and are so ready to declare Jorge the real deal, these days. Bah. Stoner is the only rider to have beaten Rossi fair and square for a championship. That's sufficient for me to have no doubts...

Some say it was the Duc or the electronics or the tyres, but nobody else has been capable to beat Rossi on the same Duc and with the same tyres and electronics... Take out Stoner from the 2007 WC, and you have another Rossi domination year (Pedrosa would have been left well behind Rossi, had Stoner not been there 'stealing' so many victories s to Valentino). This is what I'd call facts.

Where does all this leave Lorenzo? It leaves him behind Rossi (of course) but also well behind Stoner. Mind you, at this level 'behind' can mean just a few meters or even centimeters behind... still, behind. In the (illustrious) company of his peers, Pedrobot, Dovi, old Capirex, etc.

Give us Stoner back