[Rossi]..."at bottom of the slope." Doohan

Talpa · Apr 14, 2011

Jumkie said:
Fact: Not only didn't a fully fit Valentino Rossi win at Qatar on the best handling bike in 2007 but he didn't win the title either. What's your point?

No but he came a close second at qatar and was the 'ONLY' challenger for the win. It was hardly a 8-way fight.....

OK so explain to us then how riding the best handling bike in 2007 makes the title a given. Just as you argue that Top Speed and acceleration can't be used in an argument for/against advantage, how is it that the best handling bike with Serious power deficiencies over its chief competition can win-consistently enough to gain the title? How do you measure the best handling bike? By how much was it better at handling than the others? And what does this better handling equate in advantage in lap time over the others? Is it as easy to 'take' advantage of a better handling bike when it has a power deficiency?

What is sacrificed for this better handling? What effect does the higher corner speeds/higher corner entry speeds associated with a better handling bike have on the tyres side walls over race distance? And how does this then effect the ability to get the power to the ground early enough and not spin up the rear wheel?

Mr Squiggle · Apr 14, 2011

Talpa said:
Yet the fully fit Valentino Rossi at 28 years of age wouldn't have even scored a podium on the 2007 Ducati in 2007????

Prove me wrong!

Talpa said:
Backpedal Much! 'Complete' is not encompassing enough.....This takes you to all new level of idiocy.....Some ignore reality, whilst other don't know what it is! You most definitely fall into the latter.

So reality to you is ......

stating categorically that you are correct in your assertions that going back in time (theoretically impossible.....or at the very least highly improbable) to a PURELY HYPOTHETICAL scenario is PROOF I am DENYING REALITY.....

Thanks Einstein......BTW - how is that time machine coming along?

Talpa · Apr 14, 2011

Mr Squiggle said:
Prove me wrong!

So reality to you is ......

stating categorically that you are correct in your assertions that going back in time (theoretically impossible.....or at the very least highly improbable) to a PURELY HYPOTHETICAL scenario is PROOF I am DENYING REALITY.....

Thanks Einstein......BTW - how is that time machine coming along?

Actually the original origin for these hypothesis was your 'Master of Puppets'......the irony of this, all things considered, is very amusing

Mr Squiggle · Apr 14, 2011

Talpa said:
Actually the original origin for these hypothesis was your 'Master of Puppets'......the irony of this, all things considered, is very amusing

I must admit Talps you do make me laugh.....at you - not with you

Tekniqs · Apr 14, 2011

never seen the 07 qatar race til now...but wow @ the ducati's speed compared to the yamaha down the straight.

with that said...night race > day race for qatar i think

Mr Squiggle · Apr 14, 2011

Tekniqs said:
never seen the 07 qatar race til now...but wow @ the ducati's speed compared to the yamaha down the straight.

with that said...night race > day race for qatar i think

or alternatively......

never seen the 07 qatar race til now...but wow @ Stoners ability to exit the final corner onto the main straight and get that bike accelerating early on compared to Rossi on the yamaha..

Jumkie · Apr 14, 2011

Talpa said:
No but he came a close second at qatar and was the 'ONLY' challenger for the win. It was hardly a 8-way fight.....

OK so explain to us then how riding the best handling bike in 2007 makes the title a given. Just as you argue that Top Speed and acceleration can't be used in an argument for/against advantage, how is it that the best handling bike with Serious power deficiencies over its chief competition can win-consistently enough to gain the title? How do you measure the best handling bike? By how much was it better at handling than the others? And what does this better handling equate in advantage in lap time over the others? Is it as easy to 'take' advantage of a better handling bike when it has a power deficiency?

What is sacrificed for this better handling? What effect does the higher corner speeds/higher corner entry speeds associated with a better handling bike have on the tyres side walls over race distance? And how does this then effect the ability to get the power to the ground early enough and not spin up the rear wheel?

Uve asked a lot of questions there buddy. I guess u dont know much about anything.

Jumkie · Apr 14, 2011

Tekniqs said:
never seen the 07 qatar race til now...but wow @ the ducati's speed compared to the yamaha down the straight.

with that said...night race > day race for qatar i think

Teks my friend, please tell me ur kidding. Uve only seen it til now? Its a great race, eh. Btw, now that uve seen it, ur not of the opinion that Stoner won becuz of superior speed r u?

Talpa · Apr 14, 2011

Jumkie said:
Uve asked a lot of questions there buddy. I guess u dont know much about anything.

Oh .... I forgot who I was dealing with, let me try to simplify them for you, I was thinking multiple choice but that's probably too much, so I'll make it so a simple Yes or No will suffice.....

Tekniqs · Apr 14, 2011

dude, i told you, i became a fan china race 2008..i just so happened to walk into my cousin's house and he was watching it and i was instantly hooked, even though that place was empty as hell. not saying that's the only reason he won, seeing as qatar is somewhat of a windy (whine-dy) track, but the extra grunt did show. pretty nice race

although i would say, my favorite, at least from that season, is catalunya ...that's a freaking classic

Mr Squiggle · Apr 14, 2011

Tekniqs said:
dude, i told you, i became a fan china race 2008..i just so happened to walk into my cousin's house and he was watching it and i was instantly hooked, even though that place was empty as hell. not saying that's the only reason he won, seeing as qatar is somewhat of a windy (whine-dy) track, but the extra grunt did show. pretty nice race

although i would say, my favorite, at least from that season, is catalunya ...that's a freaking classic

Catalunya has indeed provided generally the best quality races over the past few years.

michaelm · Apr 14, 2011

Talpa said:
Oh .... I forgot who I was dealing with, let me try to simplify them for you, I was thinking multiple choice but that's probably too much, so I'll make it so a simple Yes or No will suffice.....

They were all pretty much what is known in the trade as leading questions. This is why people who don't necessarily hate rossi, or did not start off hating him, get exasperated with you.

The starting point/bottom line is stoner won the race. You postulate various scenarios, some extremely hypothetical, in which rossi would have/could have/should have won the race, and if anyone then says stoner would still have won the race, you are indignant and claim it is proof that they are rossi-haters. We will never know whether he would have gone better with different coloured underwear, a more aerodynamic helmet, lighter leathers or whatever either, but as I have said the reasonable thing imo is to credit the guy who did win the race in actuality.

Mr Squiggle · Apr 14, 2011

michaelm said:
the reasonable thing imo is to credit the guy who did win the race in actuality.

Only problem with this idea is that Talpa would have to face REALITY...he is far from comfortable with this concept and prefers to deal in hypothetical conjecture punctuated with a liberal dose of .........

Talpa exists in a parallel world to other human beings.....he is proof of the existence of a multi dimensional universe.....or a "multiverse" if you like

projectmorf · Apr 14, 2011

spooky said:
Because you hit out with the same anti-rossi .... all the time ya old incontinent twurp!

dwoodhouse · Apr 14, 2011

Jumkie said:
Teks my friend, please tell me ur kidding. Uve only seen it til now? Its a great race, eh. Btw, now that uve seen it, ur not of the opinion that Stoner won becuz of superior speed r u?

Stoner won for two reasons. 1. He was the one who could ride round the bike's handling deficiencies the best. The other Ducati riders struggled.

2. Once he did ride around those deficiencies, the bike had the power/torque/traction to blow past on the straights.

EDITED:

Rossi lost for two reasons. 1. Although, he was the one who managed to get the most out of the handling of the Yamaha, once it came to the straights, he lost any gains he made due to a deficiency in that area.

2. He was finally up against a competitor that could ride around the deficiencies of their bike to fully take advantage of its strengths.

Essentially though, any given race on any given day is what it is. The combination of rider/handling/power/traction/tyres etc either wins or it doesn't. Rossi lost that day and that's the way the history book will read. Some tracks will advantage some bikes/rider styles and some will advantage others. In 2007, the Yamaha tended to have the advantage on the tighter tracks.

dwoodhouse · Apr 14, 2011

Having said the above, I believe Stoner got the maximum anyone could have out of the Ducati that race as did Rossi with the Yamaha. The difference was down to machinery rather than rider between those two.

BarryMachine · Apr 15, 2011

spooky said:
Because you hit out with the same anti-rossi .... all the time ya old incontinent twurp!

SO why do you have to sook about that

?

Talpa · Apr 15, 2011

michaelm said:
They were all pretty much what is known in the trade as leading questions. This is why people who don't necessarily hate rossi, or did not start off hating him, get exasperated with you.

The starting point/bottom line is stoner won the race. You postulate various scenarios, some extremely hypothetical, in which rossi would have/could have/should have won the race, and if anyone then says stoner would still have won the race, you are indignant and claim it is proof that they are rossi-haters. We will never know whether he would have gone better with different coloured underwear, a more aerodynamic helmet, lighter leathers or whatever either, but as I have said the reasonable thing imo is to credit the guy who did win the race in actuality.

In actual fact I never started the Hypothesis at all, I just was trying to extract how far some Stoner fans would go, and I got what I thought would be the answers, solidifying my theory that the bias is much more extreme than most think possible, and solidifying my theory on the hypocrisy surrounding a LOT of comment here......if your exasperated then don't bother, simple really.

At the very least you've calmed down from your post Jerez rage, which is good to see

For a while their you were up there with Baz, Mental and the newby Boner Puppet Squig.....

cliche guevara · Apr 15, 2011

woody996 said:
Having said the above, I believe Stoner got the maximum anyone could have out of the Ducati that race as did Rossi with the Yamaha. The difference was down to machinery rather than rider between those two.

pretty long version of the "stoner won because of a technical advantage" myth.

spooky · Apr 15, 2011

BarryMachine said:
SO why do you have to sook about that

?

Because i want to like you Barry......you just dont make it easy

[Rossi]..."at bottom of the slope." Doohan

Help Support MotoGP Forum:

Talpa

Mr Squiggle

Talpa

Mr Squiggle

Tekniqs

Mr Squiggle

Jumkie

Jumkie

Talpa

Tekniqs

Mr Squiggle

michaelm

Mr Squiggle

projectmorf

dwoodhouse

dwoodhouse

BarryMachine

Talpa

cliche guevara

spooky

Similar threads

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions