Preziosi: Rossi is the greatest rider of all time

esco said:

KROPO i have a question about the overnight delivery tires and would like to know your insight...

Were the tires only for Rossi? I seem to remember That not only Rossi but the top honda riders of that time were also getting the tires. I ask cause every time they talk about overnight deliveries the haters only seem to throw Rossi under the bus

. I could be wrong but i thought a few riders received them, the top riders. I also remember someone saying that this did not happen every race but maybe a few times in the season..

Click to expand...

The accusation (widely borne out, though never proved) was that Michelin basically decided on Saturday afternoon who would get the good tires for Sunday. It was always a group of maybe four or five riders, often Hondas, because Hondas have always been at the front of the grid. Once the tire limits came in, effectively ruling out the overnight specials, that killed the tire wars. Bridgestone could never ship the overnight specials in, so they had to make tires that would work in as broad a range of conditions as possible. Michelin was used to making tires that worked for the conditions they knew would prevail (they were working with 24 hours notice), and so didn't have a clue about producing tires that worked across a broad range of temperatures.

Talpa said:

The conclusion I draw from the accusation is that Rossi has leveraged 'unfair' advantages, and if the advantage is gained whilst abiding by the rules as they stand then can it be considered to be unfair?



So based on this then, what conclusions can be drawn from the accusations on his achievements? And can the advantages you mentioned above considered unfair?

Click to expand...

"Unfair advantages" are what ever manufacturer, every team and every rider are pushing for whenever they can. Nobody is interested in fair competition (no matter what they say), they want to win too much. If they were interested in fair competition, they would have taken up amateur bowls.



Some of Rossi's achievements are definitely down to having an unfair advantage. However, you don't win 9 world titles just by having an unfair advantage. Some modicum of talent may be required.

Talpa said:

No actually just give me a straight answer now. Can you apply your Rossi's unfair advantage theory to Stoner's overwhelming dominance in 2007? Simple

Click to expand...

This is the crux of the issue; overwhelming dominance by rossi in your view is entirely due to him, whereas overwhelming dominance by stoner in 2007 (you brought it up this time) is obviously due to a bike advantage for which you also do not present proof, and by lorenzo this year is due to problems rossi had. I am led to understand that nicky's less dominant win was also due to valentino's bike being no good, apparently entirely due to yamaha rather than in rossi's championship years when the quality of the bike is due to him; I concede that you yourself don't detract from nicky much.



I argue on this occasion for the fun of it; I actually agree that arguing about whether rossi's championships would have been less dominant is a fairly tenuous topic and fairly patently an attempt to detract from his achievements. However rather than advancing the obvious argument that he has had mutiple massive championship wins to only one by lorenzo and stoner at this stage you have gone back to denigrating another rider's championship which is what has provoked much of the attitude towards rossi, or perhaps more so to some of his fans, in the first place. You have also decided to argue against what you would like your opponent's argument to be, ie that rossi is a cheat, rather than against the actual argument. The over night tyres were arguably unfair, but not cheating. (In reality gibernau and biaggi, the main opponents in most of rossi's massive wins also had access to the tyres anyway, and also changed to different bikes mutiple times without any difference in results. This does make it hard to argue that they were as good as rossi's current opponents though ).



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 .

Rossi hurt his shoulder and broke his leg on purpose this year to have an excuse to lose the championship against Whore-Hey Lorentho. Think about it.... Rossi's NEVER been injured throughout his LONG MotoGP career up until this year. You people might not believe me but I really think Rossi would go this far and hurt himself purposely just so as not to tarnish his reputation. The clown wanted Lorenzo out, and even gave Yamaha an ultimatum. Yamaha knew better and kept Lorenzo onboard rather then Rossi...... Yamaha knows who they are dealing with. Rossi won them how many wins and championships yet they still chose Lorenzo over Rossi, you kids figure it out.



It's a win win situation right now with Rossi that coward. Even if he loses out on Lorentho next year it's going to be due to the 'machine'. Sneaky ....... that Rossi is.

Kropotkin said:

The accusation (widely borne out, though never proved) was that Michelin basically decided on Saturday afternoon who would get the good tires for Sunday. It was always a group of maybe four or five riders, often Hondas, because Hondas have always been at the front of the grid. Once the tire limits came in, effectively ruling out the overnight specials, that killed the tire wars. Bridgestone could never ship the overnight specials in, so they had to make tires that would work in as broad a range of conditions as possible. Michelin was used to making tires that worked for the conditions they knew would prevail (they were working with 24 hours notice), and so didn't have a clue about producing tires that worked across a broad range of temperatures.

Click to expand...

Thanks KROP... I thought much but wasn't sure.

cangaceiro said:

Talpa,



The point Jumkies trying to make is valid. Rossi's a talent, but if the machinery were more equal, he would not be as dominant. That I definitely believe. What we may see in 2011 is Rossi struggle if ducati can't make a ymacati in time as I would think their focus would already be looking to design for their 2012 machine. I just don't see them making big changes in 2 months. I would love to see Rossi beat Lorenzo.. Then we'd have a battle. But I think it will mostly be spies , stone r & Lorenzo up front in 2011.

Click to expand...

Ignoring the years where Rossi totally dominated whether it be for the reason that he was on the 990cc bike or had overnight specials or whatever, he has also dominated when he has been fit and has had equal treatment as well. 2008 is one - although Stoner grabbed a healthy points total, Rossi did set a points record that year and he did not have the advantages that you have argued for other years. The other year was 1997 where he didn't have the advantages and was head and shoulders above the rest.



These show that Rossi when fully fit can potentially dominate a season without advantages. The years where Rossi supposedly had the advantages, he generally flogged the opposition - partly because the opposition wasn't of the same calibre as the Stoners, Lorenzos and Pedrosas. I would have thought that without advantages, he should have come out convincingly on top anyway.



He's had to work hard these last few years and will have to work harder in the future (due to the exponential increase in the skill level of the opposition) however I don't think you can say he wouldn't have been dominant against the likes of Biaggi and Gravelplow if he hadn't had advantages. If you were to take this line, understanding that Rossi well and truly beat Stoner in 2008, does that mean Biaggi and Gravelplow could have done the same to Stoner. I think both Rossi and Stoner are better riders than that.



I actually don't think anyone will consistently dominate in the current era. On a single year basis, it is possible, but over a 5 year period, I think the level of competition is too high such that going into a new year, failure to sort out your bike from the first race may put you far enough behind for the championship. There are a lot of race winners and world championship winners at present so if you are not on your game every round, someone will beat you.

SuperShinya56 said:

Rossi hurt his shoulder and broke his leg on purpose this year to have an excuse to lose the championship against Whore-Hey Lorentho. Think about it.... Rossi's NEVER been injured throughout his LONG MotoGP career up until this year. You people might not believe me but I really think Rossi would go this far and hurt himself purposely just so as not to tarnish his reputation. The clown wanted Lorenzo out, and even gave Yamaha an ultimatum. Yamaha knew better and kept Lorenzo onboard rather then Rossi...... Yamaha knows who they are dealing with. Rossi won them how many wins and championships yet they still chose Lorenzo over Rossi, you kids figure it out.



It's a win win situation right now with Rossi that coward. Even if he loses out on Lorentho next year it's going to be due to the 'machine'. Sneaky ....... that Rossi is.

Click to expand...

You do not deserve the oxygen that you steal. Please return it and stop taking it from everyone sane.

Rossi is nothing more then a marketing tool for Dorna. His place as the 'poster child' is coming to an end with the emergence of new young blood. No more special tires for the guy, he's losing leverage that he used to have before now. No more tires built around him.

SuperShinya56 said:

Rossi is nothing more then a marketing tool for Dorna. His place as the 'poster child' is coming to an end with the emergence of new young blood. No more special tires for the guy, he's losing leverage that he used to have before now. No more tires built around him.

Click to expand...

1. He is a marketing tool for Dorna as is every rider, some more so than others.

2. He is also a rider who has talent and has performed well over his career.

3. It may be the case that his "poster child" time is coming to an end. He is getting to the end of his career and his competition is stronger than ever. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have been a poster child. There will be others who fulfill the same role. Professional sport is business.

4. Yes I would agree that he will not get special tyres under the current rules - noting that others also received special tyres per previous posts.

5. I also agree that he has less leverage than before. Times are moving, there is a changing of the guard. The question is when. I believe he still has some fight left in him and he could still win a championship. Whether he does or not will give me many weekends of intrigue, beer and bourbon.

Talpa said:

He has been accused of cheating here on PS many times, with Dorna in his back pocket-back room deals-the works, albeit this is not the Motogp press core, but it is certainly a public forum.



I'm glad you've shed light on your views of the over-night specials, I've always proclaimed that VR wasn't alone in receiving these despite being challenged every inch on it.



The conclusion I draw from the accusation is that Rossi has leveraged 'unfair' advantages, and if the advantage is gained whilst abiding by the rules as they stand then can it be considered to be unfair?



So based on this then, what conclusions can be drawn from the accusations on his achievements? And can the advantages you mentioned above considered unfair?



If others had the over-night special option, then this can hardly be considered to be unfair. No doubt the detractors will now state that VR's overnighters were more special. If he pressured his manufacturer to give him better equipment, well doesn't everyone do that? That's the aim of the game. The Bridgestone issue, if true, seems very unfair, if he actively sort to prevent Jorge from getting Bridgestones in 2008 then this is certainly an unfair advantage and requires investigation.

Click to expand...

Talps, its getting very tiring with you. I'm really about to give up as I'm talking to a brick wall. When Arrabi had these long exchanges with BM about backing it in, I kinda marveled at what would posses him to debate and debate and say the same thing over and over, needlessly, since the truth was falling onto deaf ears. You have proven to be no different. You are exactly the type of member that when debating, simply does not either have the capacity to understand what is said or you just ignore it (I think you just refuse to accept it). This is another classic example. Shed light? hahahha You act like this hasn't been covered countless times. Kropo didn't add anything to this arguement, which as a matter of record, has been said on the forum probably 50+ times. But its you who fail to accpet to recognize it. Notice he said "strictly speaking". You don't even understand the implication do you? Amazing. Anyway Talps, yes, Pedro got them later, this is hardly news. Infact, this was the result of Rossi given Bstones after the company had publicly stated it did not want to (what on earth could have changed their mind...). You continue to try and frame the discussion as "cheating" to pad your ignorant argument. You simply cannot accept the truth, that Rossi is a powerful figure in MotoGP and has had the benefit of its political power to impact his career.



Dude, really, discussion over. I've notice Mental Anarchist has got suckered into debate, and its of no greater value than ours here. Really, to be debating something here that if by now you haven't accepted what was behind it several years ago when it was fresh, what possibility do I now have to convince you when you've revised the history?

1. 'The importance of tires cannot be underestimated in this sport, it is everything.' paraphrasing Rossi.

2. Saturday night specials, they existed. It was an "exclusive" arrangement with the top riders, especially Rossi. It was offered to others, but they had to pay for the service.

3. Bridgestones, Rossi used his influence to get them. You won't read it in an official press release. This ushered in the spec tire.

4. The spec tire, once it was introduced, Rossi became one of the primary rider's to cue its development. This became detrimental to others.

5. Rossi is the most powerful figure in the sport, he has benefited from this influence while other have had no such advantage. This speaks to the lack of authenticity of the competition. Deal with it.

Kropotkin said:

"Unfair advantages" are what ever manufacturer, every team and every rider are pushing for whenever they can. Nobody is interested in fair competition (no matter what they say), they want to win too much. If they were interested in fair competition, they would have taken up amateur bowls.



Some of Rossi's achievements are definitely down to having an unfair advantage. However, you don't win 9 world titles just by having an unfair advantage. Some modicum of talent may be required.

Click to expand...

Convincing people of what you just said above has proven to be impossible.

Talpa said:

Thanks Krop, it is you Jum that needs to stop imagining.

Click to expand...

Kropo has said nothing that I haven't repeated several times for several years. You want to know why? Because I've read just about everything he's written. Its you who has refused to accept the advantages gained by such a powerful figure that is Rossi. When its pointed out, you turn to terms such as "hating" or saying I'm accusing him of "cheating". I've repeatedly said, that its up to him to ask, hell he could as for an extra few cc, its up to the governing body to maintain even parity, something that has been questionable when it comes to its golden goose. Not the goose's fault, right? But I wouldn't exactly call it good faith either.

You know in 'general terms'........yes indeed, Video evidence, affidavits? lets see it and let me decide then?

Click to expand...

Most everything has been played out in the media, mainly because when dealing with the particular human element, specifically ego, some journalist have managed to get these guys to say what they were really feeling. Rare, but it happens, like for example, Rossi publicly pressuring Yamaha to can Lorenzo. You will never read in an official press release, but most thinking sane people can connect the dots. You obviously lack this capacity.

No actually just give me a straight answer now. Can you apply your Rossi's unfair advantage theory to Stoner's overwhelming dominance in 2007? Simple

Click to expand...

As if this hasn't been debated on this forum, right? You don't do well with nuance, do you. It’s high-level order thinking, something that is routinely lost with you Talps. You are in no position to demand anything, since its you who have ignored the countless explanations by more eloquent members here than me. But here is for those following the thread. Stoner was the third choice for Ducati in 2007. What does this tell you about his influence on the development of the GP7 and the tires that drove its development? Very near zero. The tire that had been developed in concert by Bridgestone and Ducati was a long road with the plan to develop a tire that worked under a wide range of conditions (I've said this way before this thread). They forewent immediate gratification by giving up results in exchange of developing a tire. (Incidentally, those claiming Lorenzo benefited from the laurels of Rossi development as if it were a crime, and as if this had been completely the case, must recognize that Rossi benefited from years of Bridgestone development that he got in an instant during a fit of demand).



This development resulted in an excellent tire in 2007. This again had zero to do with Stoner. However, in 07, Stoner benefited from this tire that was at the time not exactly head and shoulders above the Michelin, though many have tried to claim this. One need only look to the second race of that season, where the podium had three Michelin riders. So it was still a work in progress (though some would like us to believe the Bstone was some magical silver bullet). Talpas would like to point to the Bstone as the "unfair advantage" but the reality is, it was still a tire developing, if anything was near par. The difference was Stoner's ability to adapt to a tire and motorcycle with fierce success! (Today, any remaining detractors need only look back a few weeks for evidence). It really is amazing that we would need to rehash this for you Talps, but one only need to look at the performance of the other Ducati's to have an idea what made the difference--Stoner. All the Ducati's were fitted with the same Bristones, and they were all on top of the speed trap charts. But only one dominated!



Now here is the meat and potatoes. The question is posed above, was this a consequence of an unfair advantage, similar to those of Rossi. The answer is NO! Stoner did NOT lobby for these changes nor participate in its development (fact); the reverse is true in the advantages that Rossi benefited from. The development of the Saturday-Night-Special was specifically from Rossi’s feedback. It was an exclusive arrangement for top riders, and it was a service that was offered to others at a price that limited its participation. Even then, when others paid, they felt they had not received "the good stuff". So many teams opted out, as they felt it was fixed. This is of historical record how the teams felt, though you will not find it in an official Michelin press release, however, journalist such as Randy Mamola have said as much in his Alpinestar articles.



Now what Talps? How are you going to deny it or not accept the truth? Will you overlook the nuance of one man have no participation in garnering the advantage while the other decidedly lobbied for it? This is not new, I’ve said it before. You just want to have people repeat it to you right? Ok, here it is. Now go on and burry your head in the sand, or twist what I just said.

Kropotkin said:

"Unfair advantages" are what ever manufacturer, every team and every rider are pushing for whenever they can. Nobody is interested in fair competition (no matter what they say), they want to win too much. If they were interested in fair competition, they would have taken up amateur bowls.



Some of Rossi's achievements are definitely down to having an unfair advantage. However, you don't win 9 world titles just by having an unfair advantage. Some modicum of talent may be required.

Click to expand...

Everyone pushes for advantages with their packages. What makes them "unfair"? I think there were advantages but not "unfair" as everyone wants to achieve the same themselves. If everyone is attempting to do the same, it should simply be referred to as pushing for advantages.



I think your last statement should be:



"Some of Rossi's achievements are definitely down to having an advantage. However, you don't win 9 world titles just by having an advantage."



'Unfair' taints that statement into a negative light when all riders are attempting to do the same. Should all riders therefore be tainted in the same light? You've got to remember this is prototype racing and therefore it is inevitable that different manufacturers etc will be able to create advantages from year to year with their machinery. The trick is to get onto the machine with an advantage or get the gear that does what you want it to do.



The reality of motorsport is that everyone wants to get that little bit more power or better handling to give them an advantage so that they can win. The sport is based on the ability to differentiate your machine from another and then to use your skill set to win the event. Just because one driver manages to get an advantage does not mean that it is unfair. That is the essence of the sport.

woody996 said:

Everyone pushes for advantages with their packages. What makes them "unfair"? I think there were advantages but not "unfair" as everyone wants to achieve the same themselves. If everyone is attempting to do the same, it should simply be referred to as pushing for advantages.



I think your last statement should be:



"Some of Rossi's achievements are definitely down to having an advantage. However, you don't win 9 world titles just by having an advantage."



'Unfair' taints that statement into a negative light when all riders are attempting to do the same. Should all riders therefore be tainted in the same light? You've got to remember this is prototype racing and therefore it is inevitable that different manufacturers etc will be able to create advantages from year to year with their machinery. The trick is to get onto the machine with an advantage or get the gear that does what you want it to do.



The reality of motorsport is that everyone wants to get that little bit more power or better handling to give them an advantage so that they can win. The sport is based on the ability to differentiate your machine from another and then to use your skill set to win the event. Just because one driver manages to get an advantage does not mean that it is unfair. That is the essence of the sport.

Click to expand...

Both are great answers. Why all the testing and upgrades if not to gain some form of advantage over your competition.

J4rn0 said:

My suggestion was not that: what I said is that the issue of who stays at Yamaha and who goes was decided, and could have been decided only, by results on the track. Not by imaginary ultimatums and a even more imaginary loss of face, which is your very personal theory. Have a look at the video of the farewell conference to Valentino by Yamaha, represented by Furusawa and Jarvis -- did they look disgusted with him, or you see a Rossi who just lost face?

Your latest suggestion is like comparing pears with apples, because there can never be any relation between 1) Rossi not wanting Lorenzo as teammate, and 2) Rossi wanting Bridgestone tires for 2008, after a 2007 season that had clearly shown him (and not others; Burgess wasn't convinced for instance) that there was no way to win the title on Michelins. I call that clarity.

You put these two events side by side only on the basis of your imaginary ultimatums. With such a theory of ultimatums, you should wonder what ultimatum Puig and Honda issued to Dorna and Bridgestone, to get them to supply Pedrosa in the middle of the season, in breach of an active contract with Michelin. But Pedrosa is not such an interesting target as Rossi, is he... No fuss on that one.

P.S.: answer to the last question: they did not have to issue any ultimatum. Bridgestone, for all their little drama of pretending to be forced to supply other teams and riders, were even more happy to supply Honda as well, after Yamaha. The talk about not having the resources to supply more teams, and preferring competition instead of monopoly, has been belied by facts: they promptly supplied more riders without any problem, and promptly signed the single supplier contract. Or is there anybody who thinks that all those "Bridgestone" big stickers on every bike are undesirable as publicity (with the Michelin name completely disappeared from the scene)

Click to expand...

How is this direct quote from Rossi in a BBC interview qualify as imaginary? It's right under your nose in black and white.

I've largely enjoyed your posts but that you keep pretending that this interview and quote is "imaginary" forces me to

conclude that you're loonie. It's right there in your face and keep telling us that it's imagined. You're as whack as

the the flat-earthers, the ones who deny the Holocaust, and those who think no-one has been to the moon.



Valentino Rossi



Switching teams 'unfaithful' - Rossi



World champion Valentino Rossi has hinted he will leave Yamaha if they do not drop Jorge Lorenzo in 2011.



Italian Rossi, who won his ninth world crown this year, has also revealed he could switch allegiance to Ducati.



Lorenzo recently signed a new one-year deal with the Japanese firm but Rossi does not think there is room for the two riders in the same team.



"Yamaha have to decide between me and Jorge for 2011," Rossi told BBC Two. "I have a great option to join Ducati."



BBC Interview



FFS answer my question or shut up.

esco said:

Both are great answers. Why all the testing and upgrades if not to gain some form of advantage over your competition.

Click to expand...

You and woody are of course absolutely correct that developing advantages is the essence of the sport, particularly since it has been by design from its inception, and is at least theoretically still, a prototype formula.



This argument has been thoroughly belaboured not least by me and does not deserve further threads, but from my point of view and I think from jumkie's it has been reversed, with the original argument being against rossi fans complaining about other riders having advantages. I think this aspect is still valid. Rossi is supposed to attempt to obtain advantages, has sometimes had advantages, when he has had such advantages they have often been mainly through the application of his talent, but surely it is at least ungracious for (some of) his fans to detract from other riders by attributing any success they may have had to advantages.

michaelm said:

You and woody are of course absolutely correct that developing advantages is the essence of the sport, particularly since it has been by design from its inception, and is at least theoretically still, a prototype formula.



This argument has been thoroughly belaboured not least by me and does not deserve further threads, but from my point of view and I think from jumkie's it has been reversed, with the original argument being against rossi fans complaining about other riders having advantages. I think this aspect is still valid. Rossi is supposed to attempt to obtain advantages, has sometimes had advantages, when he has had such advantages they have often been mainly through the application of his talent, but surely it is at least ungracious for (some of) his fans to detract from other riders by attributing any success they may have had to advantages.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything you say here michaelm...they all would want and probably try to have some form of advantage and switch bikes sometimes just for that reason.

Jumkie said:

Talps, its getting very tiring with you. I'm really about to give up as I'm talking to a brick wall. When Arrabi had these long exchanges with BM about backing it in, I kinda marveled at what would posses him to debate and debate and say the same thing over and over, needlessly, since the truth was falling onto deaf ears. You have proven to be no different.

Click to expand...

Well no there is a huge difference ........ Talpa is wrong, and I was/am right on the "skidding it into corners" thing

michaelm said:

You and woody are of course absolutely correct that developing advantages is the essence of the sport, particularly since it has been by design from its inception, and is at least theoretically still, a prototype formula.



This argument has been thoroughly belaboured not least by me and does not deserve further threads, but from my point of view and I think from jumkie's it has been reversed, with the original argument being against rossi fans complaining about other riders having advantages. I think this aspect is still valid. Rossi is supposed to attempt to obtain advantages, has sometimes had advantages, when he has had such advantages they have often been mainly through the application of his talent, but surely it is at least ungracious for (some of) his fans to detract from other riders by attributing any success they may have had to advantages.

Click to expand...

The sad truth is that life is not fair. My opinion is that Stoner is the fastest guy in Moto GP, yet I doubt that he would be if everyone in the world had an equal chance. And yes, I know how hard he and his family worked.



However, we can only take into account those who have provided a sample of performance that can be considered statistically significant. In recent times this would be Rossi, Stoner, Pedrosa, Lorenzo and, at a pinch, Dovizioso. I've narrowed the bunch to those in with a shot of the title of "the best". Of these guys, I immediately discount the Honda men, simply because of their lack of results. So we have Rossi, Lorenzo, Stoner. The comparison to people on the same bike seems to point to Stoner, yet rider ability has now taken such importance that it's impossible to make any clear differentiation between these three riders.



That's why these tests and 2011 will answer a lot of questions.

Who the hell wrote that crap above me? Maybe if I have another it will make sense...