<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (VHMP01 @ Jan 27 2007, 03:14 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So maybe Rossi “Not always” goes for the win. But in ’05 at the 13th race he had the Championship with 4 remaining races and ended up wining 2, one second and one third without the need. In ’04 at the 15th race he had the Championship with only one race remaining and he won without the need. In ’03 at the 14th race he had the Championship with only two races remaining and he won both without the need. In ’02 at the 12th race he had the Championship with four races remaining and he won one and 3 second places without the need. In ’01 at the 14th race he had the Championship with only two races remaining and he won both without the need. This sounds like those old LP records all scratched…
There's a difference between winning a lot and always going for the win. Pulling out stats is fine, but how did Rossi take all thouse wins you speak of, in his usual, methodical, calm way, or like a bull in a china shop? there's no denying that we wins a lot, and not just when he "needs" to. but that's not the point I was making. Rossi will rarely push at 100%, because that's when mistakes happen. The fact that he can win races like that is pretty amazing. He's clearly talented, but rider who always go for the win, in my book are the one who ride with their balls, like they're gonna die unless they win. If Rossi was in Hayden's postion at Valencia, he might have gone for the win, but he wouldn't have if he belived the risks were too great in pushing himself that hard, like Hayden did (remember, the championship was on the line). If I was Hayden, I'd be sweating buckets with the pressure, knowing that one mistake could cost me the championship. So, instead of brianlessly going for the win, I would pace myself and stay on the bike, even if people wouldn't respect me for defending my Championship postion.
Like I said, Rossi might have been capable of going for the win, but let me assure you that he WOULD NOT if he asessed it as too risky. To say that he would go for the win, regardless of the risks and what's at stake, as in always going for the win could be interpreted as an insult to Rossi's intelligence. You really think he would have gone for the win, with the championship at stake, assuming that he couldn't have won without going 100%?
