<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 17 2009, 11:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You dont really have to - oh fark, now I am doing it.
Now hope you are sitting down because ....................
I do not now and actually never have denied that Rossi has made a huge impact on the sport in terms of spectator numbers (and of course that means sponsorship dollars), thus my continual comparisons between him and Tiger Woods who is the nearest I can think of in todays market in terms of sport impact.
But where we differ here (and again this is a bias and I will cover it later for you) is that I actually do not support one rider, nor actively wish one rider more success than the other, but I do watch the entire sport for all it offers.
I say this as for me, watching a guy ride of into the distance and battle a machine (ie. CS 2007) is as entertaining for me as watching JL take it to Rossi as he has done often this year. That is not 'blind love' for Stoner but my bias is simply enjoying watching these guys battle the bikes, themselves, the track and the conditions.
Personally I was not bored througout 2007, just as I wasn't through the Doohan era nor do I consider that type of racing less 'watchable' for me personally. I do now and always have accepted the comments that some will find it boring, less inspiring or whatever and I can't argue their opinion on that, just that I do not find in any less entertaining.
Be fair here.
It is not quite there but there is a 'what goes around comes around' and yes some are tearing strips off VR just as many with allegiances to VR tore strips of Hayden, CS etc. It happens as people get defensive or seek an opportunity to 'cyber bully' (as opposed to debate) and it will continue till the days when the internet is replaced with some other technological marvel to make millionaires.
The best bike argument I used was (correct me) based on numbers which are hard irrefutable facts and were within the context of the discussion with V (initially).
You are of the opinion that the CS Ducati (as opposed to Melandri's) was the best bike in 2008 - fine, you are welcome to that opinion but as I say, numbers do not back that opinion up. And as I have said elsewhere (not sure if this thread or not), numbers are facts and can be used to form opinions but by themselves can be misleading (ie. in 2007 the team with the two highest pointscoring riders was Suzuki - waas it the best bike?).
Now, you will also have noted that I stated and will again that the Ducati/CS combination of Stoner was IMO the better package early in the year (proved by championship standings) but it is my opinion that by the end of 2008 Rossi/Yamaha had developed the better package. Thats all it is, an opinion, not fact.
You want my bias - ok here we go.
The last rider I truly supported and would watch the racing to watch the rider, was Garry McCoy and still do as often as possible. He is everything I like about a racer and to me I admire what he has achieved given the various setbacks he has endured.
I also rate him amongst the most talented Australian racers I have seen - and it may surprise you but Stoner is not in my top few.
Now, my bias is that I prefer the 500cc era and as such I prefer the racing of those days, the fighting of bucking machines that just want to launch a rider to the stratosphere. With the racing I also like the no-nonsense personalities of those days, the aggression shown by each, the toughness of that era, the lack of trickery to make the bikes rideable - the old school stuff.
So (and this is for you) how does Stoner fit in (just remove your feelings and current Stoner situation there for a second if ok) to my liking the old school?
Well to me his approach to racing is ideal, he turns up, rides balls out, finishes, has a whinge or whatnot and goes back to his camper to get ready to relax before the next hit. He is 'old school' in his approach and not very media savvy just as the old era weren't (there were exceptions).
The fact he is an Aussie actually means little to me as I have openly defended Biaggi as well (personal experiences there) and will continue to do so for other riders as needed. Just that at the moment the 'heat' is all on Stoner and in many cases I think it is unfairly so at this stage (ie. until we know more of the illness).
Haven't heard to much displeasure and don't read the Aussie rags (only good for one thing) so won't challenge your comments in total.
But as for Ducati's displeasure it would be interesting (as I have asked elsewhere) to find out who really drove the 'buy Lorenzo' approach (ie. Phillip Morris or Ducati or both).
But I will say that I do think it unfortunate the article regarding Stoner's whereabouts etc as within the current climate it was not really an 'ideal' look.
Nice dig by the way.
I doubt in all honesty if anyone wants him to fail as I do think people realise that in some ways the two man show has been boring (oops sorry, that word) given it is the same factory involved and people want variety
Geez, don't mention Brooksey in the UK at the moment - he is persona non grata to many in their racing circles give his recent troubles.
Mate, and this is serious at the moment and not intended to argue but here goes.
I do struggle to see how people can have the attitude they do without knowing the full facts of the situation and I say that as someone who's family has experienced members with mental illness and/or depression which resulted in suicide, thus I take a different more holistic approach as I will not judge until facts are know. That said, I can see how and why people are taking your (and others) approach but I cannot accept or agree with it for the reason I mention.
Years ago I would have been on the bandwagon but I the experiences of my family have changed my approach and now I much prefer to make sound judgements based up on facts - and at this stage there are no hard facts either way.
Does that mean your approach is wrong, not for you so no, nor does it mean my approach is wrong as it is the one I am taking.
Now, if in the future it turns out that the absence was a 'dummy spit' (and it will need credible sources) than I will criticise Stoner as he will deserve it, but only if it turns out that way, not before.
Just got to say this again - a fast bike does not make a race winner, just like one fast lap does not make a better rider (am sure we agree there).
As for the psyche out side, I do not think CS has been outpsyched by Rossi, but happy to agree that he is his own worst enemy as I do (and have said) believe that.
Mate, if you read many of my posts in the manner in which they are intended (ie. remove any search for 'digs' at riders) I make lots of admissions but just as I am often accused of 'twisting' or 'reading into thing' the affliction can apply to others.
And as an aside - if you really want to search you will find numerous comments from me regarding my thoughts as to which was the better rider CS vs CV.
Pleasure discussing with you.
Gaz
Good Stuff, very enjoyable this one, we are all getting to civilized and semi-agreeing everywhere. somethings wrong!!! Wheres the Pink one, quick!!!!1
Now hope you are sitting down because ....................
I do not now and actually never have denied that Rossi has made a huge impact on the sport in terms of spectator numbers (and of course that means sponsorship dollars), thus my continual comparisons between him and Tiger Woods who is the nearest I can think of in todays market in terms of sport impact.
But where we differ here (and again this is a bias and I will cover it later for you) is that I actually do not support one rider, nor actively wish one rider more success than the other, but I do watch the entire sport for all it offers.
I say this as for me, watching a guy ride of into the distance and battle a machine (ie. CS 2007) is as entertaining for me as watching JL take it to Rossi as he has done often this year. That is not 'blind love' for Stoner but my bias is simply enjoying watching these guys battle the bikes, themselves, the track and the conditions.
Personally I was not bored througout 2007, just as I wasn't through the Doohan era nor do I consider that type of racing less 'watchable' for me personally. I do now and always have accepted the comments that some will find it boring, less inspiring or whatever and I can't argue their opinion on that, just that I do not find in any less entertaining.
Be fair here.
It is not quite there but there is a 'what goes around comes around' and yes some are tearing strips off VR just as many with allegiances to VR tore strips of Hayden, CS etc. It happens as people get defensive or seek an opportunity to 'cyber bully' (as opposed to debate) and it will continue till the days when the internet is replaced with some other technological marvel to make millionaires.
The best bike argument I used was (correct me) based on numbers which are hard irrefutable facts and were within the context of the discussion with V (initially).
You are of the opinion that the CS Ducati (as opposed to Melandri's) was the best bike in 2008 - fine, you are welcome to that opinion but as I say, numbers do not back that opinion up. And as I have said elsewhere (not sure if this thread or not), numbers are facts and can be used to form opinions but by themselves can be misleading (ie. in 2007 the team with the two highest pointscoring riders was Suzuki - waas it the best bike?).
Now, you will also have noted that I stated and will again that the Ducati/CS combination of Stoner was IMO the better package early in the year (proved by championship standings) but it is my opinion that by the end of 2008 Rossi/Yamaha had developed the better package. Thats all it is, an opinion, not fact.
You want my bias - ok here we go.
The last rider I truly supported and would watch the racing to watch the rider, was Garry McCoy and still do as often as possible. He is everything I like about a racer and to me I admire what he has achieved given the various setbacks he has endured.
I also rate him amongst the most talented Australian racers I have seen - and it may surprise you but Stoner is not in my top few.
Now, my bias is that I prefer the 500cc era and as such I prefer the racing of those days, the fighting of bucking machines that just want to launch a rider to the stratosphere. With the racing I also like the no-nonsense personalities of those days, the aggression shown by each, the toughness of that era, the lack of trickery to make the bikes rideable - the old school stuff.
So (and this is for you) how does Stoner fit in (just remove your feelings and current Stoner situation there for a second if ok) to my liking the old school?
Well to me his approach to racing is ideal, he turns up, rides balls out, finishes, has a whinge or whatnot and goes back to his camper to get ready to relax before the next hit. He is 'old school' in his approach and not very media savvy just as the old era weren't (there were exceptions).
The fact he is an Aussie actually means little to me as I have openly defended Biaggi as well (personal experiences there) and will continue to do so for other riders as needed. Just that at the moment the 'heat' is all on Stoner and in many cases I think it is unfairly so at this stage (ie. until we know more of the illness).
Haven't heard to much displeasure and don't read the Aussie rags (only good for one thing) so won't challenge your comments in total.
But as for Ducati's displeasure it would be interesting (as I have asked elsewhere) to find out who really drove the 'buy Lorenzo' approach (ie. Phillip Morris or Ducati or both).
But I will say that I do think it unfortunate the article regarding Stoner's whereabouts etc as within the current climate it was not really an 'ideal' look.
Nice dig by the way.
I doubt in all honesty if anyone wants him to fail as I do think people realise that in some ways the two man show has been boring (oops sorry, that word) given it is the same factory involved and people want variety
Geez, don't mention Brooksey in the UK at the moment - he is persona non grata to many in their racing circles give his recent troubles.
Mate, and this is serious at the moment and not intended to argue but here goes.
I do struggle to see how people can have the attitude they do without knowing the full facts of the situation and I say that as someone who's family has experienced members with mental illness and/or depression which resulted in suicide, thus I take a different more holistic approach as I will not judge until facts are know. That said, I can see how and why people are taking your (and others) approach but I cannot accept or agree with it for the reason I mention.
Years ago I would have been on the bandwagon but I the experiences of my family have changed my approach and now I much prefer to make sound judgements based up on facts - and at this stage there are no hard facts either way.
Does that mean your approach is wrong, not for you so no, nor does it mean my approach is wrong as it is the one I am taking.
Now, if in the future it turns out that the absence was a 'dummy spit' (and it will need credible sources) than I will criticise Stoner as he will deserve it, but only if it turns out that way, not before.
Just got to say this again - a fast bike does not make a race winner, just like one fast lap does not make a better rider (am sure we agree there).
As for the psyche out side, I do not think CS has been outpsyched by Rossi, but happy to agree that he is his own worst enemy as I do (and have said) believe that.
Mate, if you read many of my posts in the manner in which they are intended (ie. remove any search for 'digs' at riders) I make lots of admissions but just as I am often accused of 'twisting' or 'reading into thing' the affliction can apply to others.
And as an aside - if you really want to search you will find numerous comments from me regarding my thoughts as to which was the better rider CS vs CV.
Pleasure discussing with you.
Gaz
Good Stuff, very enjoyable this one, we are all getting to civilized and semi-agreeing everywhere. somethings wrong!!! Wheres the Pink one, quick!!!!1
