Qatar round 1 2010. RACE

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 09:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Funny, biaggi said the same thing but when he went on the "superior equipment" and rossi went on his bag of nails we all saw what the magic part of the equipment really was.
Bag of nails. hahaha, I love this place bro. No doubt, Rossi is much of the magic. As we said in 07, the Ducati didn't ride itself...right?

So here we go again... back to the A-B-C

A) It has always been Honda the main recipient of all preferential treatments, and as a Honda rider Rossi no doubt benefited from it, mainly with reference to Michelin; but that lasted only as long as he was a Honda rider, i.e. until 2003). Afterwards the beneficiary of Honda's status has been mainly Gibernau, who was transformed into a top rider overnight thanks to Michelin special supplies. Then came Pedrosa, and Honda even had an entire new formula approved for him. Now, if anybody thinks having Honda against you in MotoGP is an advantage, well...

B) The Bridgestone 2008 drama was such a laughing matter, it was all show because B'stone didn't want to look bad vis a vis their previous formal and informal commitments to Ducati, so it had to look like they were kind of pushed -- but they were overjoyed to supply Rossi. Even apart from this, the Bridgestone move did not give Rossi any advantage on Stoner and Ducati, who already had the Jap tyres and knew them much better.

C) Remaining with Michelin would have been a marked disadvantage for Rossi. Moving to Bridgestones was a field leveling move, quite the opposite of "gaining an unfair advantage". And remember, Rossi and Burgess had to earn them by laboriously setting up the bike to suit the new tyres. It was a risky bet in the opinion of many -- it wasn't something like a magic wand

Bottom end: whoever says Rossi wins because of unfair advantages, is just like those who say Stoner wins only because of TC or some other funny idea. There is no difference between these two categories. All these ideas aim at taking credit away from two most incredible riders, and as such I can only reject them totally.

Amen

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Apr 16 2010, 06:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So here we go again... back to the A-B-C

A) It has always been Honda the main recipient of all preferential treatments, and as a Honda rider Rossi no doubt benefited from it, mainly with reference to Michelin; but that lasted only as long as he was a Honda rider, i.e. until 2003). Afterwards the beneficiary of Honda's status has been mainly Gibernau, who was transformed into a top rider overnight thanks to Michelin special supplies. Then came Pedrosa, and Honda even had an entire new formula approved for him. Now, if anybody thinks having Honda against you in MotoGP is an advantage, well...

B) The Bridgestone 2008 drama was such a laughing matter, it was all show because B'stone didn't want to look bad vis a vis their previous formal and informal commitments to Ducati, so it had to look like they were kind of pushed -- but they were overjoyed to supply Rossi. Even apart from this, the Bridgestone move did not give Rossi any advantage on Stoner and Ducati, who already had the Jap tyres and knew them much better.

C) Remaining with Michelin would have been a marked disadvantage for Rossi. Moving to Bridgestones was a field leveling move, quite the opposite of "gaining an unfair advantage". And remember, Rossi and Burgess had to earn them by laboriously setting up the bike to suit the new tyres. It was a risky bet in the opinion of many -- it wasn't something like a magic wand

Bottom end: whoever says Rossi wins because of unfair advantages, is just like those who say Stoner wins only because of TC or some other funny idea. There is no difference between these two categories. All these ideas aim at taking credit away from two most incredible riders, and as such I can only reject them totally.

Amen
& The winner of sensible post of the month is...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 16 2010, 08:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>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:

Not only did Bstone not want to supply anyone else, Bstone actually blamed Rossi for the control tire initiative in 2007. Ezpeleta said that the control tire was a non-starter and that nearly everyone in the paddock rejected the idea out of hand. Yamada suggested that Ezpeleta pursued the idea anyway b/c Rossi had Carmelo's ear. Pretty damning accusation, imo. I think it's more likely that a portion of IRTA was pushing quitely behind the scenes w/o publicly rebuking Michelin; however, Yamada still considered Rossi to be the ringleader.

Let's not forget that they also made some kind of pact that would trigger a control tire. I believe each manufacturer had to maintain at least 40% of the entire grid. We all remember the rumor about Ducati and Kawasaki trying to switch to Michelin b/c they did not want a control tire.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Apr 16 2010, 10:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So here we go again... back to the A-B-C

A) It has always been Honda the main recipient of all preferential treatments, and as a Honda rider Rossi no doubt benefited from it, mainly with reference to Michelin; but that lasted only as long as he was a Honda rider, i.e. until 2003). Afterwards the beneficiary of Honda's status has been mainly Gibernau, who was transformed into a top rider overnight thanks to Michelin special supplies. Then came Pedrosa, and Honda even had an entire new formula approved for him. Now, if anybody thinks having Honda against you in MotoGP is an advantage, well...

B) The Bridgestone 2008 drama was such a laughing matter, it was all show because B'stone didn't want to look bad vis a vis their previous formal and informal commitments to Ducati, so it had to look like they were kind of pushed -- but they were overjoyed to supply Rossi. Even apart from this, the Bridgestone move did not give Rossi any advantage on Stoner and Ducati, who already had the Jap tyres and knew them much better.

C) Remaining with Michelin would have been a marked disadvantage for Rossi. Moving to Bridgestones was a field leveling move, quite the opposite of "gaining an unfair advantage". And remember, Rossi and Burgess had to earn them by laboriously setting up the bike to suit the new tyres. It was a risky bet in the opinion of many -- it wasn't something like a magic wand

Bottom end: whoever says Rossi wins because of unfair advantages, is just like those who say Stoner wins only because of TC or some other funny idea. There is no difference between these two categories. All these ideas aim at taking credit away from two most incredible riders, and as such I can only reject them totally.

Amen

Fairy tale, imo.

Bridgestone were not fake upset that Ezpeleta and Rossi were pushing for a control tire. Bridgestone were not the least bit happy that their brand spanking new 2007 tire that finally won them a world championship was thrown out (only logical explanation for the departure of the tire).

Bridgestone didn't want Rossi. Rossi was an enormous liability, he had been dumping on Michelin for 2 years, and he gave Yamaha hell b/c they made a bike that was only capable of winning 4 races.

Now Rossi is demanding that the entire MSMA switch to 1000cc and abandon electronics b/c he says so. I happen to agree with the 1000cc part and maybe some electronic devices, but the entire situation is ridiculous. I hope Rossi succeeds in his bid to change the formula, but I'm well aware that he is doing what he wants to do. He is not pursuing fairness or virtue, he is simply attempting to get what he wants at any cost like every other overly competitive person on this planet.

In 2008 Rossi sought to attain an unfair advantage by using his star power to be the first rider in history to contract with a tire company. Plenty of other riders who wanted Bridgestones were stuck on Michelin. It was not a fair arrangement no matter how you try to spin it. Life isn't fair, and I certainly don't blame Rossi. But I'm not going to sit around and pretend like Rossi is full of roses and light when he clearly has a very dark, egotistical, self-centered dimension to his personality.

If Boppers can't accept that Rossi is a very complex character, what's the point of all of this---studying the nuances of the sport? If all you wanna do is chug Kool-Aid, just tune into the major TV broadcasts or read the words of the cheerleading media pundits who live in Dorna's back pocket.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Did all this come to you in a vision or were you just high on crack lex ? How the hell can you spout this tripe as facts ?

Also what about all the diverse conditions in which Rossi has won? Were they all made to suit him since ever?

…"Rossi has won (as not only in Races, but Championships) in 125, 250, 500, 990 and 800. With Aprilia, Honda and Yamaha. With Dunlop, Michelin and Bridgestones. In 27 different tracks all along. With rain, dry, heat. Battling it out, with last turn overtakes, off tracks, comebacks"...

And somehow managed to break most Records to be broken. Yeah right, sure it was setup for him!!!

While Rossi was with another Team, Ducati did not want to lose any advantage over him, much the less a great advantage as tires!

Brigestone was not capable of supplying another Rider, yet they did supply another Rider and then the whole grid!

Oh, and remember Tamada kicked Rossi bottom not only by winning Motegi 04, but declaring he was going to win before the race! Guess what rubber? A sure sign that Bridgestones were catching up quickly and even getting better, they already had some better tracks than Michelins and conquering more a more since then.

Here let me dumb it down into numbered bullet points you might actually read.

Rossi has a yin and yang to his personality.

1. The yin is the guy who dumps on Michelin and Yamaha for 2006 and 2007, then uses his star power via the commercial rights holder to obtain tire contracts. Now he publicly shames the MSMA into creating the formula he wants.

2. The yang is the great champion who puts on a fantastic display of riding skills while including the fans in the experience of great on track battles.

Yellow glasses and blinkered eyes only allow you to see one dimension of his personality. You're missing out.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 11:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Did all this come to you in a vision or were you just high on crack lex ? How the hell can you spout this tripe as facts ?

Oh, but you were willing to say "good post mate" to J4rno's spin revision of the Bstone debacle? So only if J4rno spins visions and tripe in favor of Rossi, its a great post, right?

How's that ash cloud buddy? Hahahaha

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Apr 16 2010, 10:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>B) The Bridgestone 2008 drama was such a laughing matter, it was all show because B'stone didn't want to look bad vis a vis their previous formal and informal commitments to Ducati, so it had to look like they were kind of pushed -- but they were overjoyed to supply Rossi.

Bstone said publically that they didn't want to supply another rider, but we are suppose to believe you right? Perhaps you are a Bstone executive?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Even apart from this, the Bridgestone move did not give Rossi any advantage on Stoner and Ducati, who already had the Jap tyres and knew them much better.

Except for the pesky little fact that they scrapped the 07 tire. Ooops.

As far as your "non preferential treatement" claim, uhm, how many other riders were allowed to move tire manufactures who had requested it other than Rossi at the time? Answer: ZERO.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>C) Remaining with Michelin would have been a marked disadvantage for Rossi. Moving to Bridgestones was a field leveling move, quite the opposite of "gaining an unfair advantage".

Incorrect. Michelin dominated at some tracks. There is a difference in working through issue and abandoning the work because you know you have Dorna's ear to make a switch. Perhaps we should put an astrix on the 08 title then, since all Michelin riders have a fair grievance?


And if you agree, then perhaps we should astrix all the titles Rossi on Saturday night specials?

Of course it all depends on your POV.

J4rno has a great point, any riders who have the talent to request specific tyres for race day were given them. I believe Michelin or BS would have supplied special tires to any of their riders if asked......to request a specific tyre for a specific track takes not only an amazing rider but an amazing team, imagine getting a tyre the morning of the race and hoping it works-this takes talent and balls, of course not all were at this level.

I am very sad that Michelin aren't in the competition. After so many years of dominance it was a great shame to see them implode, had they remained who knows.

Some want to believe that BS didn't want rossi-rubbish this is absurd. Rossi's move to level the playing field in 08 was a massive gamble for which they had to rethink and redevelop the bike, vr's style and thinking, all of this while competing with ducati and cs who already had a year up their sleeve. Some believe this is preferential treatment, don't forget a popular belief was that rossi made a huge mistake by switching to BS including myself, I still believe michelin would have sorted it.

So if you are to consider this special treatment to give an unfair advantage that's fair enough, everyone has their POV and as I've said before alleigences influence everybodies opinion and powerslide is the best example of this......

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 16 2010, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Bstone said publically that they didn't want to supply another rider, but we are suppose to believe you right? Perhaps you are a Bstone executive?

Except for the pesky little fact that they scrapped the 07 tire. Ooops.

As far as your "non preferential treatement" claim, uhm, how many other riders were allowed to move tire manufactures who had requested it other than Rossi at the time? Answer: ZERO.

Incorrect. Michelin dominated at some tracks. There is a difference in working through issue and abandoning the work because you know you have Dorna's ear to make a switch. Perhaps we should put an astrix on the 08 title then, since all Michelin riders have a fair grievance?

And if you agree, then perhaps we should astrix all the titles Rossi on Saturday night specials?

But ‘Saturday Night Specials’ were there even for Edwards, whom did not like to use them! Were there more so for Pedrosa too!