This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Preziosi: Rossi is the greatest rider of all time

BTW, I'm not a Rossi fan, but why are you so much negative about Rossi and Ducati? The guy have just ride the bike (and only one time), could you please await the modifications and changes be implemented before trolling every Rossi-Ducati thread with your opinion?



They have a site called the Yellow community where its all love and sugar coatings about Rossi. This site tends to be a bit more open minded, you might see posts etc. here that aren't what may beseen as "sugar puff fairytales" about the riders
<
 
Again just for fun it could be argued that he only massively defeated lorenzo because he had a tyre advantage , and has not done so since this has been redressed
<
.





Not really.

If i,m not mistaking, i remember in 2009 when Rossi and Lorenzo were both on bridgestones, Rossi won 13 to 5 from Lorenzo in 18 rounds.
 
exactly what ive been saying ever since he switched.. Dorna knew Michelin where have problems at board level as a company and so would have bridgstone. Dorna wanted them out so they could implement a single tyre rule. Rossi's contract was up with Michelin so was in effect a free agent as far as tyres were concerned. Trouble is the rossi haters here think rossi should have re-signed because Michelin had "given" him so many championships. They also believe he forced dorna to force Bridgstone into giving him the tyres because rossi said he would rather retire than re-sign with Michelin. Why should a rider be forced to sign a contract for equipment he doesn't want and it became clear that nobody wanted either. Dorna engineered this alongside Bridgstone imo because Dorna didn't want Michelin either. Far from Rossi using his stardom to force Dorna and Bridgstone, more like Dorna used rossi as a tool. It was very convenient Rossi's contract was up unlike Dani's.





well said,

While i believe between all the riders Rossi has the most power in and on Motogp, Dorna and some factories, but still i fail to see how Rossi with all that power couldn't change to the bridgestones in the middle of 2007 season, and Pedrosa could and did in 2008, though Most criticisers have had more problems with Rossi's move than Pedrosa's.
 
If Lorenzo had not got hurt, he would have won
<



You mean if Lorenzo hadn't crashed in 4 races in 2009?

I didn't know Lorenzo was injured in Barcelona, or in Germany, or Assen, or Brno where Lorenzo crashed under direct pressure of Rossi who had just overtaken him.



In how many rounds Lorenzo was injured in 2009? Did he race for 3/4 of the year with injured shulder or broken leg.

How many races did Lorenzo miss in 2009?

Compare all these with your numbers (i,m glad, you work with them too, though maybe not in this case preferably), then come and say he could win.
 
You mean if Lorenzo hadn't crashed in 4 races in 2009?

I didn't know Lorenzo was injured in Barcelona, or in Germany, or Assen, or Brno where Lorenzo crashed under direct pressure of Rossi who had just overtaken him.



In how many rounds Lorenzo was injured in 2009? Did he race for 3/4 of the year with injured shulder or broken leg.

How many races did Lorenzo miss in 2009?

Compare all these with your numbers (i,m glad, you work with them too, though maybe not in this case preferably), then come and say he could win.

lorenzo didnt crash in barcelona from what i know

nobody ever argued that because it is as stupid as saying rossi would have won this year if he hadnt got hurt
 
Not really angry. Just wanted you to answer my freakin' question.
<




Saying words are not important is a suitable sentiment if you're debating with the New York Language School Poets

- but our purposes words are important. They are the vehicle by which we convey intent.



Rossi said Yamaha had to make a choice. They chose to keep both riders. Rossi left anyhow.

Why? Because those were his terms. He insisted Yamaha choose one or the other and when

they would not comply - he exited stage left.



What is so terrible about being the #2 rider - if not the loss of face? Has it not been stated time and again

that the most important person to beat is one's teammate? Certainly no-one believes that Rossi was

going to receive inferior support in 2011 as a result of Lorenzo's championship.



Will you not concede that to be beaten by Lorenzo on the bike that Rossi has proclaimed as "his baby"

had to be humiliating? Rossi is a god on a bike - but lets face it - he's not an egoless zen master.

As Jum has said - connect the dots; there is no way that Rossi could swallow his pride and be number two

- so he made what at present appears to have been rash decision.



Your implication here is that those who represent my point of view on this are being melodramatic.

But look at the facts. Rossi left Yamaha and the bike he developed - to ride the idiosyncratic,

career-killing Ducati, in what will be his seniormost year in racing, while injured no less. That's

a pretty drastic, dare I say dramatic turn of events. The spurned lover metaphor seems

very much apropos.



I it is interesting that you call Rossi's 2010 season "humiliating". He certainly lost to Lorenzo (and Pedrosa) but under the circumstances his defeat wasn't humiliating at all.
huh.gif




What would have felt kind of humiliating, for Rossi, would have been to stay in the team as rider #2 -- that, yes. He surely has his pride. He wanted to win this year too and stay rider #1, and be in a strong position to negotiate the future. That didn't happen and I think it is when he had to give up hope for the title that he decided to change.



Your insistence on Rossi being "humiliated" and having to "swallow his pride" shows maybe a preference of yours, but hardly corresponds to facts.
 
I it is interesting that you call Rossi's 2010 season "humiliating". He certainly lost to Lorenzo (and Pedrosa) but under the circumstances his defeat wasn't humiliating at all.
huh.gif




What would have felt kind of humiliating, for Rossi, would have been to stay in the team as rider #2 -- that, yes. He surely has his pride. He wanted to win this year too and stay rider #1, and be in a strong position to negotiate the future. That didn't happen and I think it is when he had to give up hope for the title that he decided to change.



Your insistence on Rossi being "humiliated" and having to "swallow his pride" shows maybe a preference of yours, but hardly corresponds to facts.



Come on... I never said "the season" was humiliating. Clearly what I meant was that it was humiliating for Rossi

to be told he was no longer going to be number one at Yamaha. It was humiliating that he no longer was the

enfant terrible - whose every demand was met. It was humiliating for the multiple times WC to be told

he could stay on at Yamaha but not at a higher salary than his arch rival. It was humiliating to be told that if

he could not accept non-preferential treatment - he was free to go. If it makes anyone feel better,

you could replace the word humiliating - with humbling. As for me - I can't fit his name and the word

humble in the same sentence; and rightly so. All the best riders have huge healthy egos which are fed by victory

and you know it feels good when you win. The other side of the coin is not so shiny, and that's the one Rossi is looking at just now.
 
Come on... I never said "the season" was humiliating. Clearly what I meant was that it was humiliating for Rossi

to be told he was no longer going to be number one at Yamaha. It was humiliating that he no longer was the

enfant terrible - whose every demand was met. It was humiliating for the multiple times WC to be told

he could stay on at Yamaha but not at a higher salary than his arch rival. It was humiliating to be told that if

he could accept non-preferential treatment - he was free to go. If it makes anyone feel better,

you could replace the word humiliating - with humbling.



Great to know you didn't mean that. But this is what you wrote:



"[font=tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif]Will you not concede that to be beaten by Lorenzo on the bike that Rossi has proclaimed as "his baby" [/font][font=tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif]had to be humiliating?"[/font]

[font="tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif"]

[/font]

[font="tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][/font]

[font="tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][/font]

[font=tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif][/font]

How do you want me to understand it?
huh.gif
 
Great to know you didn't mean that. But this is what you wrote:



"[font=tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif]Will you not concede that to be beaten by Lorenzo on the bike that Rossi has proclaimed as "his baby" [/font][font=tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif]had to be humiliating?"[/font]

[font="tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif"]

[/font]

[font="tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][/font]

[font="tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][/font]

[font=tahoma, arial, verdana, sans-serif][/font]

How do you want me to understand it?
huh.gif



Yes - I was thinking as I hit the add reply button that I could have been more precise in my wording. I assumed that most people would follow the line of reasoning that tells us, you can't keep the throne if you don't wear the crown. I was, as is clear now, referring to the results of the season; specifically Rossi's demotion from number one rider now occupied by his young rival. That plus the fact that Lorenzo accomplished it on the bike developed by Rossi. The very definition of adding salt to the wound.
 
Yes - I was thinking as I hit the add reply button that I could have been more precise in my wording. I assumed that most people would follow the line of reasoning that tells us, you can't keep the throne if you don't wear the crown. I was, as is clear now, referring to the results of the season; specifically Rossi's demotion from number one rider now occupied by his young rival. That plus the fact that Lorenzo accomplished it on the bike developed by Rossi. The very definition of adding salt to the wound.



How do possibly reason that a rider who is seriously injured can be humiliated in defeat?



Finishing a very strong third in the title after to very serious injuries and missing 4 rounds is hardly humiliating. Maybe in your mind, yes. I believe Rossi's results in Germany, Laguna and San Marino, still very fresh after his broken leg are some of the best we've ever seen coming back from injury.



Humiliation is more like what happened to an Uninjured Jorge in 2009, and Stoner in 2008.



Unless you somehow feel that Rossi's one year tire advantage was more significant than a compound fracture of the lower leg.......
 
How do possibly reason that a rider who is seriously injured can be humiliated in defeat?



Finishing a very strong third in the title after to very serious injuries and missing 4 rounds is hardly humiliating. Maybe in your mind, yes. I believe Rossi's results in Germany, Laguna and San Marino, still very fresh after his broken leg are some of the best we've ever seen coming back from injury.



Humiliation is more like what happened to an Uninjured Jorge in 2009, and Stoner in 2008.



Unless you somehow feel that Rossi's one year tire advantage was more significant than a compound fracture of the lower leg.......

Humiliation is Hayden getting his ... handed to him by his rookie countryman on a non factory bike
<
<
 
How do possibly reason that a rider who is seriously injured can be humiliated in defeat?



Finishing a very strong third in the title after to very serious injuries and missing 4 rounds is hardly humiliating. Maybe in your mind, yes. I believe Rossi's results in Germany, Laguna and San Marino, still very fresh after his broken leg are some of the best we've ever seen coming back from injury.



Humiliation is more like what happened to an Uninjured Jorge in 2009, and Stoner in 2008.



Unless you somehow feel that Rossi's one year tire advantage was more significant than a compound fracture of the lower leg.......



Fer Chrissake - read my post S-L-O-W-L-Y... J4 and I have already gone past this mis-reading of my intent. I spelled it out

in no uncertain terms. I don't intend to answer the same misguided question twice.
 
Yes - I was thinking as I hit the add reply button that I could have been more precise in my wording. I assumed that most people would follow the line of reasoning that tells us, you can't keep the throne if you don't wear the crown. I was, as is clear now, referring to the results of the season; specifically Rossi's demotion from number one rider now occupied by his young rival. That plus the fact that Lorenzo accomplished it on the bike developed by Rossi. The very definition of adding salt to the wound.



No worries

smile.gif






 
Not really.

If i,m not mistaking, i remember in 2009 when Rossi and Lorenzo were both on bridgestones, Rossi won 13 to 5 from Lorenzo in 18 rounds.

As I said I was having some fun, but my wording was intended to be precise; rossi beat lorenzo decisively and well in 2009 but not massively, it was one of the closest of his championship wins. The topic under discussion , spurious as it was which I acknowledged, was whether advantages had contributed to some of rossi's wins being so massive; I would not argue against all of rossi's wins , massive or not, being due to the application of his talent.
 
Satisfaction (for Americans) is knowing Nicky was beat by the next WC
<



Nicky was beat by plenty of people, Its a fairly safe bet that the next world champ is one of them (Lorenzo, Stoner, Rossi or Pedrosa)
 
I'm not betting the house on it - but I'm not betting against Spies either. His first year

in MGP was very impressive. He's had few crashes and no major injuries - and

also - BTW - beaten Hayden numerous times. Just a gut feeling - but I think the guy

Spies will strain to beat, will be Stoner; in part because he's still in awe of him.
 
Spies could be the 2011 revelation -- we already know what the others can do and expect it, he's the one who might surprise everybody with another leap forward.
 

Recent Discussions