Qatar round 1 2010. RACE

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 08:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I doubt very much that rossi or any other rider had a say in it. From what i remember that was an HRC dorna deal which comically backfired on hrc and now dorna.

it has been a long time since 2006......I think they need to have some time on the couch, get it all out and get over it. It's not good to bottle it all in.

Rog, maybe we should reccomend some people they can go and see to deal with this issue, 4 years come on now guys-reach out........

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 15 2010, 03:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I doubt very much that rossi or any other rider had a say in it. From what i remember that was an HRC dorna deal which comically backfired on hrc and now dorna.

The deal was finalized in 2004, right?

Back then Rossi was just a young 3 time champion who made a brash move to spite Honda. I'm with you; I doubt anyone listened to him back then. It wasn't until his financial woes, imo, that Dorna actually starting taking a few orders from Rossi.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Apr 15 2010, 08:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Of course Rossi didn't need the 800's but nor was he opposed to it. We know what happens when their is something that Rossi doesn't like. You think that Rossi would have willingly gone along with a formula strictly being created for Pedrosa and not said a word.

He did not have much of a say with Honda by that time, did he? And Honda surely has more power over MotoGP than VR46. What could he have done. By the way, he wasn't too worried about Pedro and he had not yet seen what Stoner-Bridgestone-Ducati would be capable of. He was confident, -- we now know he was actually overconfident -- but that was the situation at that time.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 15 2010, 04:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>but none come up with any none circumstantial evidence to support it.

Like the time when they were having emergency technical meetings and Rossi managed to come away with Bridgestones after B-stone publicly said they weren't supplying anyone else?


No circumstantial evidence at all.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 15 2010, 05:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well Rossi's Michelin contract was up, was its dorna's right to force him to re-sign a contract for a product that was un-competitive un-wanted and the company as a whole was in disarray at board level ? Of course not, it was only right that he should be given a choise once his contract was up !

Now thats get back to HRC. Pedro's contract was not up and it was mid-way through a season yet the so called "struggeling to supply" Bridgstone were "forced" to supply him !

Yes, and HRC publicly condemned Pedrosa and Puig for ditching Michelin. At the time of Pedrosa's switch I think a control tire was basically a foregone conclusion and Ezpeleta was definitely trying to help it along.

Bridgestone went so far as to blame Rossi for the single tire proposal in 2007. Yamada said that Rossi had Ezpeleta's ear.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 08:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well Rossi's Michelin contract was up, was its dorna's right to force him to re-sign a contract for a product that was un-competitive un-wanted and the company as a whole was in disarray at board level ? Of course not, it was only right that he should be given a choise once his contract was up !

Now thats get back to HRC. Pedro's contract was not up and it was mid-way through a season yet the so called "struggeling to supply" Bridgstone were "forced" to supply him !


well this just destroyed his argument

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tekniqs @ Apr 15 2010, 06:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>well this just destroyed his argument

If you live in Roger's world where the rider signs a contract with a tire company and then the manufacturer simply accepts the rider's decision.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 15 2010, 08:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well Rossi's Michelin contract was up, was its dorna's right to force him to re-sign a contract for a product that was un-competitive un-wanted and the company as a whole was in disarray at board level ? Of course not, it was only right that he should be given a choise once his contract was up !

Now thats get back to HRC. Pedro's contract was not up and it was mid-way through a season yet the so called "struggeling to supply" Bridgstone were "forced" to supply him !
Was it Dorna's right to force Bridgestone to supply Rossi.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 15 2010, 10:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ducati were rolling on Bridgestone before it was the to tire to have. Hard to say that Ducati's obsession with top speed was unfruitful. More difficult to bring lessons learned during the tire war into the era of the control tire.
True enough. But I still think it says something for the "top speed isn't essential" argument.

And to say Rossi and Pedrosa's switches are anything other than preferential treatment is pure fantasy. Sure, Rossi at least was good enough of a guy to desert the company who catered to him since 2000 in the close season. Pedrosa forced his way through midseason. It's varying shades of tantrum, but tantrum nonetheless.

Cool now this has turned into a rossi bashing thread I don't need to use the "c" word!

Fact is rossi pays the bills in this tv show folks so he should get anything he wants - if I were him I would be.

ok lets close the thread

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 15 2010, 11:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I doubt very much that rossi or any other rider had a say in it. From what i remember that was an HRC dorna deal which comically backfired on hrc and now dorna.

Don't forget that Yamaha had their hand in it too! In fact it was their idea, and everyone except Ducati supported it

Rog 100

conspiracy theorists 0

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 08:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't think they did 'force' them. I think that was just for show. Think about it, What company would not want the great Valentino using their product. Its marketing gold. At the time everybody except Lorenzo wanted to ditch Michelin. As i said they were in disarray at board level and were talking about pulling out of racing all together. What they did not want was every rider wanting their rubber in that season. Bridgstone new way before Rossi switched that he has issues with Michelin and his contract with them was up. You think they didn't plan for that ? If supply was such an issue for them, how come they managed to not only supply Rossi but also pedrosa !
Exactly Rog you nailed it mate and on top of that now somehow they manage to supply tyres to whole paddock which clearly shows that was marketing stunt more than any thing on Bridgestone part.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (inam @ Apr 16 2010, 02:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Exactly Rog you nailed it mate and on top of that now somehow they manage to supply tyres to whole paddock which clearly shows that was marketing stunt more than any thing on Bridgestone part.
No, in fact what both michelin and bridgestone have said is that they wanted a competitor tyre wise; recent indications are that bridgestone will follow michelin out of the sport.

I actually had no problem with rossi going after the best tyres as anyone in his position would do as long as no forceable breaking of contracts was involved, and there are about five threads with hundreds of posts (not all from roger or me) where I supported his right to do so. What I object to as I have said repeatedly is those who complain about it being unfair for other riders to have advantages however temporary or theoretical and however obtained; the tyre episode demonstrates that rossi like anyone else will seek advantage where he can find it, in this case with no input from him in developing the advantage.

Interesting to read the revision of history by only the Rossi fans here. Bstone publicly stated it did not want to supply any other rider (this while Rossi made his demands). That means they wanted to maintain their already stable arrangement. The fact that they were later forced to supply Rossi doesn't in no way mean they wanted to since they had already stated the opposite. Dorna made a threat to go to the single tire supplier eyeing Michelin. That's an ultimatum to most thinking people. Having Rossi's contract up doesn't automatically mean that the other supplier wanted him, in fact they didn't since they explicitly stated the didn't want to supply any other riders subsequent to Rossi's public demand for them. In fact, at the time, it was argued that this idea would be a way for Bstone to become more credible in their product, what better marketing tool than to say we beat Rossi. During that time there was so much public posturing that it was laughable. It became clear to all reasonably people that this deal was executed in favor of Rossi by Dorna. We call that in English, preferential treatment. Nobody argued the idea of a rider going after the best gear as it fullishly has been made the debate, even less the very stupid lame argument that since he "pays the bills" that he should get whatever he wanted at the expense of authentic competition. That Bstone supplied Rossi means that they were forced to thin out their supply, and later more so with Pedrosa.

Rossi fans just don't want to accept the man gets preferential treatment. He has in the past and it continues today. Its not a level playing field when the league advocates for one rider over the others. Keep in mind others had also wanted to have Bstones.


EDIT: I forgot to add: