Qatar round 1 2010. RACE

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Talpa @ Apr 16 2010, 11:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Of course it all depends on your 'POVOL'.



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.
Firstly, point well made about Rossi's move to Bridgestone being perceived as a huge mistake at the time - it initially looked as though he'd shat it. I don't believe that Rossi and crew lacked the self belief though and I don't even think that they perceived it as a gamble. Rossi, Burgess, Briggs and Stephens are the best there is. As the nucleus of that garage, they are unrivalled in the paddock. It was simply a matter of time before they adapted the M1 to the stones, which was achieved by China as I recall.

I would certainly liked to have seen Michelin respond to Bridgestone but they appeared to loose the will to be there. Rog posted something earlier that encapsulated exactly the difference between the two tyres. Bridgestone had concentrated development on a comprehensive trye which would work everywhere. From initial successes at Motegi or Rio, they began to expand their territory. Michelin's entire ethos was based on their reliance on the overnight special as opposed to an all round generic tyre, so when the regulations on allocation changed in '07 they were hit very acutely. They lost the comparative advantage. Being unable to operate within these new parametres lead to the huge errors of judgement at Clermont Ferrand - remember the Laguna debacle where they wholly miscalculated the range of compound because of the previous years freak heatwave? I also believe that the departure of Nicolas Goubert was hugely significant with no disrespect to his replacement Jean Philipe Weber.Perhaps you are right Talpa, Michelin would have sorted their .... out, but in the face of the new limitations and the oerwhelming success of Bridgestone, it would have taken a major change in philosophy and a very long time.

Totally agree arri, that year at laguna was also the year they resurfaced I believe as well. It is interesting to note that when BS gained the advantage the racing spectacle took a holiday, of course many other factors were to blame but it could be said the nature of the stones don't lend themselves to close racing. IMO due mainly to their longevity.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Talpa @ Apr 14 2010, 11:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It really depends on if your scientific and realistic or if you want to beleive that the powers that be are conspiring to make rossi win because you have a deep seeded hatred for him or overly successful people in general.......
Must be a different talpa on this thread, one who does judge people's lives by what they say on internet forums.

My point on the other thread was mainly that stoner is an overly successful person by any criteria except yours; if you have had success in life equivalent to his, congratulations, and you are certainly much more successful than I am. I did throw in a little personal abuse, for which I plead guilty of descending to your level rather than anyone else's.

Show me all the posts where I criticise all aspects of rossi's life and character and constantly detract from any achievements he has made, often with a quite nasty edge, as you do in almost every post in regard to stoner.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Apr 17 2010, 11:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Must be a different talpa on this thread, one who does judge people's lives by what they say on internet forums.

My point on the other thread was mainly that stoner is an overly successful person by any criteria except yours; if you have had success in life equivalent to his, congratulations, and you are certainly much more successful than I am. I did throw in a little personal abuse, by which I plead guilty of descending to your level rather than anyone else's.

Show me all the posts where I criticise all aspects of rossi's life and character and constantly detract from any achievements he has made, often with a quite nasty edge, as you do in almost every post in regard to stoner.
As usual you will only see what you want in an inept attempt that makes you feel right, you quoted a post of mine which was extremely general and not aimed at anyone unlike yours.

Some of us throw pebbles and other boulders, for some reason you feel more justified slinging your pov......good luck

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Talpa @ Apr 16 2010, 09:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As usual you will only see what you want in an inept attempt that makes you feel right, you quoted a post of mine which was extremely general and not aimed at anyone unlike yours.

Some of us throw pebbles and other boulders, for some reason you feel more justified slinging your pov......good luck

Well, it's nice to see you're back. I too thought you were tempering your posts with a healthy dose of critical thinking.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Talpa @ Apr 17 2010, 04:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As usual you will only see what you want in an inept attempt that makes you feel right, you quoted a post of mine which was extremely general and not aimed at anyone unlike yours.

Some of us throw pebbles and other boulders, for some reason you feel more justified slinging your pov......good luck
Yes, a general post but specifically directed to sackwack, and the one which prompted my earlier post to which you took exception.

You really have no idea about irony (or much idea about english) do you?

The trouble with the pebbles, boulders or other objects you throw is that they are commonly wildly off target and rebound to hit you in the face, which come to think of it wouldn't be all that painful since to extend the metaphor what you throw is more along the lines of gravel or sand.

QUOTE (Talpa @ Apr 14 2010, 11:58 PM)
It really depends on if your scientific and realistic or if you want to beleive that the powers that be are conspiring to make rossi win because you have a deep seeded hatred for him or overly successful people in general.......

Huh, so now it's scientific and realistic - what happened to riding in heaven?

I really hope BB's not off the meds again...

Hi Peoples,

I'm a newbie that has followed this forum for probably 2 years now without posting.
I am a Rossi fan but I also believe Stoner is a bloody good rider, even if I can't stand the bugger. As to who is better, the only way to know is to put both of the on the same bike setup equally well and let them race it out - like Catalunya 09 with Lorenzo. Noone could lose the other during the race so it guaranteed a tight finish.

I would be a Stoner fan however I've followed Rossi for so long (since 125s) so I don't believe it's right to jump on the Stoner wagon just because I'm Australian. I was a huge fan of Mick Doohan until his nasty exit from the sport (don't believe he could have retired of his own choice).

Anyway, I'm sure I will get labelled pretty quickly based on this post.

This year is shaping up to be very interesting, with Spies and Hayden doing well in the first race at least.

Lex - your posts are always very entertaining, I think I need to change dealers.

On to the thread subject - Rossi has definitely used his weight to get what he wants. The important point to note is that in respect of tyres, it was only ever to get onto a level playing field with Stoner. Once he was on that level playing field, there was no guarantee that he would win. The Michelans were rubbish at the end - I know, no more overnight specials. The problem is that in the international sporting arena, it is dog eat dog. They were not up to scratch and got dumped very quickly. That's the nature of the top level in anything. Why should Rossi or anyone else persist with substandard suppliers. I know in my office, I would cut a supplier who gave me rubbish in a heartbeat.

Nice to meet you all anyway.

Woody

Welcome woody

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 11:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1. As to who is better, the only way to know is to put both of the on the same bike setup equally well and let them race it out - like Catalunya 09 with Lorenzo. Noone could lose the other during the race so it guaranteed a tight finish.

2. I was a huge fan of Mick Doohan until his nasty exit from the sport (don't believe he could have retired of his own choice).


3. On to the thread subject - Rossi has definitely used his weight to get what he wants.

1. Do you not think that the scenario you have chosen (entertaining as it might be) would not determine who was the better rider, but just who was the best in a scrap? I'd say being the better rider would also include consistency over a variety of tracks and conditions, setup ability, development skills and getting the most from your team, and of course raw speed. Did you chose a sngle dogfight because you consider that to be the single most significant attribute in your judegement of how good a rider is, or just an oversight?

2. Do you think he would have kept on even if he had eventually stopped winning/being a title contender?

3. i agree. I don't think Rossi fighting to get 'equal' equipment really changes anything. If a rider was to say he'd quite if Yamaha didn't supply him a bike i don't think we'd be saying fair enough, he doesn't want an advantage! I can see why people have a problem with Rossi trying to pull strings to get what he wanted, but as a competitor i don't think its right to hold it against him for doing so. Don't hate the player hate the game, and so on.

Cheers

I over-simplified it I know. One track on its own is not decisive. Catalunya was a good example because it highlighted at that point in time that Rossi had Lorenzo's number in riding skills. Not saying that Lorenzo won't ever beat Rossi but at the time of that particular race, it highlighted the areas that Lorenzo still had to improve on. Braking was one of those areas.

What makes the best rider?? I think the one with the best riding skills makes the best rider. What's been the age old way of testing that? Grab a bunch of riders who think they are fast, give them a number of tracks to race around and the one who finishes first the most is the best (in that year).

Setup is necessary to go quick but for illustration of riding skills, you don't want one person to be hampered by their equipment and the other not. You want all things equal with just the one variable - the rider, their riding skills and the decisions they make in a race.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 01:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I over-simplified it I know. One track on its own is not decisive. Catalunya was a good example because it highlighted at that point in time that Rossi had Lorenzo's number in riding skills. Not saying that Lorenzo won't ever beat Rossi but at the time of that particular race, it highlighted the areas that Lorenzo still had to improve on. Braking was one of those areas.

What makes the best rider?? I think the one with the best riding skills makes the best rider. What's been the age old way of testing that? Grab a bunch of riders who think they are fast, give them a number of tracks to race around and the one who finishes first the most is the best (in that year).

Setup is necessary to go quick but for illustration of riding skills, you don't want one person to be hampered by their equipment and the other not. You want all things equal with just the one variable - the rider, their riding skills and the decisions they make in a race.
Revive the glorious chaos that was the Yamaha Pro-Am series.

Take Vale, Jorge, Dani, Casey, along with the rest of the field to Cadwell Park, line up a bunch of identical RD350 lc's and fling the keys in a hat. Retire a safe distance and let battle commence.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 17 2010, 01:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well, it's nice to see you're back. I too thought you were tempering your posts with a healthy dose of critical thinking.

Fat chance.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Apr 17 2010, 01:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Revive the glorious chaos that was the Yamaha Pro-Am series.

Take Vale, Jorge, Dani, Casey, along with the rest of the field to Cadwell Park, line up a bunch of identical RD350 lc's and fling the keys in a hat. Retire a safe distance and let battle commence.
Ooohhh, yes please!!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 04:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi Peoples,

I would be a Stoner fan however I've followed Rossi for so long (since 125s) so I don't believe it's right to jump on the Stoner wagon just because I'm Australian. I was a huge fan of Mick Doohan until his nasty exit from the sport (don't believe he could have retired of his own choice).

Nice to meet you all anyway.

Woody

Welcome Woody, more opinions and diverse point of views are never bad…

Anyway, I have followed Rossi mainly since 2000 (or Top Class), and one important point is that he earned his status through great racing, something usually overseen by other Rider's fans and obviously by detractors. Rossi showed he was a great Rider to be since lower classes, but no more than Capirossi, Biaggi, Pedrosa, etc. And he was at the right place at the right time if you may, but much less than the spot that was prepared for Pedrosa to sit on when he got to Top Class. In other words, Rossi got a chance and exploited it to the maximum, a chance that has been given to many more Riders that seemed on their way to be the greatest, and that have not filled the spot of 'Best Rider' in all aspects as well as Rossi. So I think that when any other good and even great Rider is compared to Rossi, and put above him, their fans have a really hard time to achieve their points and the discussions heats up. One obvious way usually used by detractors is to downgrade Rossi achievements, and could also be said the other way around against Rossi fans too, but it has to be considered that the Rider with lower past achievements will always sound as being demoted by the supporters of the Rider with better record by the simple reason in itself.

Added Note: 'Past achievements' are from Qatar 2010 and backwards!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 04:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>On to the thread subject - Rossi has definitely used his weight to get what he wants. The important point to note is that in respect of tyres, it was only ever to get onto a level playing field with Stoner.

Yet 'using your weight' and 'getting it' don't always go hand in hand. I totally agree that with Bridgestons it leveled the playing field with Stoner at that time. But a single Rider´s weight against the whole show with Spanish Organization, Direction and Politics obviously wanting a Spanish Champion… Remember 4/18 races are in Spain in 2010 and before there were 3 when USA did not have a single one... And Big H and their resources backed up by Spanish Repsol to change the whole formula affecting other Manufactures and Privateers that threw the towel? I think not!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 04:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Once he was on that level playing field, there was no guarantee that he would win. The Michelans were rubbish at the end - I know, no more overnight specials. The problem is that in the international sporting arena, it is dog eat dog. They were not up to scratch and got dumped very quickly. That's the nature of the top level in anything.

Michelins way of doing things worked greatly for them for decades, it was a risky system but they had it pretty figured out. Until, a better adaptation to actual situations Manufacturer came along. The whole thing changed, and it was not on Michelins plan or scheme, so they could not keep up. As you say, it is the nature of this level in Sports (and Organizations). Perhaps they will come back.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 04:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Why should Rossi or anyone else persist with substandard suppliers. I know in my office, I would cut a supplier who gave me rubbish in a heartbeat.

Me too.

I personally dont think Bridgestone wanted anything to do with Rossi and here is why.Back in 2007,what was on the lips of every GP fan in the world, tires, specifically, Bridgestone tires. Stoner and the Bridgestones were taking it to Michelin and the greatest that ever rode.Things could not have been better. It was obvious to them and anyone with half a brain that if Rossi got the Stones, it would eventually lead to everyone wanting them and a defacto one tire supplier.Here we are 2 years later and no one talks about tires anymore. Unlike 07, your marketing now is , we are the sole supplier of tires to Moto Gp. Compare that to, we are the supplier to Casey Stoner and Ducati and just wiped the floor with Yamaha and Rossi. Bridgestone is losing there ... in this venture and Yamada said just the other day he wishes their was other tire suppliers involved because sport is a competition and as of now,there is no one to beat. Bridgestone is not committing to anything long term at the moment and i believe in just a couple of more years, they will bail on GP like they are bailing on F1.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Talpa @ Apr 16 2010, 10:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>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.
There was only one catch, and it was catch 22; you needed to be riding on the tyres to prove you were worthy of them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Big Woody @ Apr 17 2010, 03:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Hi Peoples,

I'm a newbie that has followed this forum for probably 2 years now without posting.

How can anyone read the inflammatory, biased, but well-researched opinions offered by the people on this message board without throwing their hat in the ring?

Surely, some of the posts over the last 2 years have raised your blood pressure enough to make you contemplate joining!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 16 2010, 09:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yup, then there's the over nighter debate. Fact is only a few rider's were capable of asking Michelin for a specific tyre, the rest were not consistent enough to benefit. Then there Bridgstone who were perfectly capable of supplying these overnight specials if they wished. They have factory's all over the world and could have done this with no real problems. Reason they didn't was because they realised the benefit was negligible and there focas was on a more general tyre rather than a specific tyre. There plan worked best in the end.
I have and had no problem with rossi going after the best tyres, he would have been foolish not to, but this to my knowledge is untrue. The overnight specials as I understand it were produced at great expense in a skunkworks, which being a michelin skunkworks was in europe. The tables were turned in the asian rounds where bridgestone provided overnight specials but michelin did not. I believe overnight specials were abandoned with michelin's consent because the expense was unsustainable, although as you say bridgestone were likely in the process of making them redundant.