*SPOILERS* Jerez Race Thread

[Jumkie]

Wow a list comprising mainly boners...



Not rocket sceince chunkie, just simple fact.



Furthermore my opinion is that if everyone else was sufficiently slower to make the grid like is was in 2007 for stoners debut season, then it could easily have elevated rossi's qatar finish to a podium.

Why bury your motivation to argue such a fundamentally flawed assertion in your post. This is why you've so desperately argued your ignorant point. You think that had the Ducati had more power at Qatar for Rossi (or the other bikes "slower", I'm assuming you mean horse power) this would have magically elevated Rossi to the podium?

I love it. I take pleasure in making you sound completely stupid. BTW, can you qualify "sufficiently slower"? I mean, are we talking reasonable slower or slower in the sense that would make this argument as silly as you have argued before? Are we talking a deficit of 3-12 kph (reasonable in terms of GP) or minus +-80 kph ("reasonable" in terms of Rob's mind)? I wonder how many peeps would agree with you here (since you neatly categorized the list of people who tried to impart knowledge to you as "boners".) Well then, lets see who would line up to support your premise here? I think there may be a few peeps here that would be sympathetic to your view of putting Rossi in a positive light if only he had more power (or the others less power) at Qatar round one 2011.



Ok, lets ask Talpa, Esco, Rossiofsky, inam, J4rno, Big46, etc.



If Rossi would have had more kph more at Qatar (or the other bikes slower by kph, relative to Stoner's advantage in 07) do you think he would have scored a podium?

 

[Talpa]

Why bury your motivation to argue such a fundamentally flawed assertion in your post. This is why you've so desperately argued your ignorant point. You think that had the Ducati had more power at Qatar for Rossi (or the other bikes "slower", I'm assuming you mean horse power) this would have magically elevated Rossi to the podium?

I love it. I take pleasure in making you sound completely stupid. BTW, can you qualify "sufficiently slower"? I mean, are we talking reasonable slower or slower in the sense that would make this argument as silly as you have argued before? Are we talking a deficit of 3-12 kph (reasonable in terms of GP) or minus +-80 kph ("reasonable" in terms of Rob's mind)? I wonder how many peeps would agree with you here (since you neatly categorized the list of people who tried to impart knowledge to you as "boners".) Well then, lets see who would line up to support your premise here? I think there may be a few peeps here that would be sympathetic to your view of putting Rossi in a positive light if only he had more power (or the others less power) at Qatar round one 2011.



Ok, lets ask Talpa, Esco, Rossiofsky, inam, J4rno, Big46, etc.



If Rossi would have had more kph more at Qatar (or the other bikes slower by kph, relative to Stoner's advantage in 07) do you think he would have scored a podium?

Of course he would have, it wasn't just KMPH (I had posted the figures recently-Stoner had 10-15Kmph average advantage at qatar), but relative acceleration which you need to add, NTM the tyres........

The Hondas were nowhere at that stage in 07, the Yamaha was a slug in comparison with only Rossi's Kamikaze efforts allowing any sort of hope, before Stoner blasted past on the straight again, and again......I suggest you watch Qatar 07 again Jum's.

 

[Mental Anarchist]

Of course he would have, it wasn't just KMPH (I had posted the figures recently-Stoner had 10-15Kmph average advantage at qatar), but relative acceleration which you need to add, NTM the tyres........

The Hondas were nowhere at that stage in 07, the Yamaha was a slug in comparison with only Rossi's Kamikaze efforts allowing any sort of hope, before Stoner blasted past on the straight again, and again......I suggest you watch Qatar 07 again Jum's.

You do realise that this is the bike and tyre that Rossi developed. How could they have been so bad if they were developed by Rossi? Did Rossi screw up or did Yamaha? I will be very interested to hear your answer to this question.

 

[Jumkie]

Of course he would have, it wasn't just KMPH (I had posted the figures recently-Stoner had 10-15Kmph average advantage at qatar), but relative acceleration which you need to add, NTM the tyres........

The Hondas were nowhere at that stage in 07, the Yamaha was a slug in comparison with only Rossi's Kamikaze efforts allowing any sort of hope, before Stoner blasted past on the straight again, and again......I suggest you watch Qatar 07 again Jum's.

Ok, so you agree with Rob and his logic that Rossi would have podiumed at Qatar this year given the extra kph, correct?



So then, if this speed deficit was so great in 07, how do you explain Rossi managed to post the 2nd fastest time, finished 2nd in the order, with a gap of only 2+ secs. You are suggesting this is what got Stoner the win, but not that his lap times were significant enough of an advantage to gap with several seconds at the finish. Rob is saying, (in which you now agree) that the extra power would have accumulated enough of a gap for Rossi to have scored a podium in 2011. You say the Honda's were no where near? Honda actually had the most representation in the top 5. Did you forget two Hondas finished in top 5, with one on the podium? That's a big stretch you will have to bridge. But by all means, try.



Then you will need to explain why the three Ducati's ahead of Stoner in the speed charts in 07 did not finish ahead of Rossi or Stoner.





Oh no, those pesky speed charts. Three Ducatis faster than Stoner. But finished well under Stoner and Rossi, explain using yours and Rob's logic in regards to speed/power.

11815:Speed Qatar 07.png]



Rossi, posted second fastest lap time. Explain using yours and Rob's logic how the extreme speed/power advantage of Stoner did not actually translate into a significant lap time deficit for Rossi (0.189 sec to be exact, not exactly earth shattering, eh).

11816:Fast Lap Qatar 07.png]



Rossi finished nearly 2.8 seconds off of Stoner, but remember, this was not an accumulation of gap since Rossi had actually passed Stoner as you say. So the gap at the finish accounts for something else, more likely he conceded victory on the last lap. So then, explain using yours and Rob's logic, how Casey extreme speed/power advantage did not translate into a significant gap at the finish.

11817:Finish order Gap Qatar 07.png]



Now, to the question, following this logic, please explain how a difference in speed/power, one as great as Stoner's in 07, for we see it did not actually translate into a large gap in finishing order, lap time, and gap at the finish; would have suddenly and magically translated into a gap of over 10+ secs to 3rd and 16+ secs to the lead at Qatar 2011.

11818:Qatar 2011.png]

 

[Talpa]

Watch the race again Jums. Do you believe that Rossi would have not got on the podium on that bike in that situation? Really?





And consider your POV with this hypothetical situation........How would Stoner have fared that day, that year even, on the Michelin equipped 2007 RC2-11V which the reigning world champ and pedders were riding.....?



Ducati and Bridgestone got the jump on the field in 2007, very simple common Knowledge.



Stoner is 2kms down on the Fastest overall, Stoner had no speed advantage over the other Ducati's, he just rode it much better than any of them, As Rossi was riding the Yamaha much better than anyone else. Stoner's competition on that day, and most of the season, was Rossi, and Stoner had a significant Speed advantage over him, with an average of 14kmph.

 

[povol]

i thought 250s were close to 100hp and moto2 about 150? its hard to get facts on that matter...i just know 50hp is supposed to be the maximum for a 125ccm two stroke and that supersport engines can top 130hp quite easily with a few mods , so 150 would seem fair to me



that moto2 would surpass the 250s eventually should be clear! after all its a 2 stroke ...not exactly very linear power delivery.

its really the other way around as opposed to the big bang vs screamer config.



that the 250s had much less power and were more difficult to ride and were still faster (or aren't very much off the pace now) was my point, and that they don't look bad compared to moto2 is down to handling and certainly not the engine

Top 250's were in the 105 to 110 range, and the Moto2 is 125. Top WSS engines are 150+. Let me clarify something, the Moto2 bike have surpassed the 250 for a qualifying run. Over race distance, the 250's are still superior. Huge weight difference between the 2 and the tires dont last on the Moto2 bike. The big difference between the 2, and the main reason the Moto2 can surpass the 250's, if only for a few laps is, torque. The 250's were in the the 40 flbs and the 600's in the 60 ftlbs range. Of course a lot depends on the track layout also.

 

[Jumkie]

Talps,



No, i dont think Rossi would hav podiumed. Ur basing ur premise on that Rossi can ride the Ducati. All evidence so far (3 test & 2 races) points to the fact Rossi struggles to ride a Ducati. And its exactly reminicent of all the other WC that hav tried. What do u base ur premise on that Rossi would fair like Stoner? R u basing it on that hes won multiple WCs? Fact is Rossi has run into a buzz saw at Ducati. Had he rode an exact replica of Stoners 07 bike at Qatar 2007, he would hav most likely faired as good as Capirossi.



About the Bridgestone jump. 2/3 of the podium finishers at Qatar wer on Michelins. 3/5 top 5 wher on Michelins. Wer do u get this idea that Bridgestone dominated Qatar 07?



As u say, the other Ducatis had speed advantage over Stoner. U conclude then that Stoner rode it better. But when u compare Stoner to Rossi, u conclude it was this speed advantage that accounts for Casey beating Vale. Talk about having it both ways. Ok, so what measure can u cite for handling? Can u point to an index? Because just as easily as u discount the speed advantage the other Ducatis had over Stoner (by simply stating, well Stoner rode better) i can make and equally baseless statement: Stoner beat Rossi because he rode better. I can simply discard any speed differential and simply say, Caseys bike handled like ...., which is why the other Ducatis wer so awful.

 

[Talpa]

Talps,



No, i dont think Rossi would hav podiumed. Ur basing ur premise on that Rossi can ride the Ducati. All evidence so far (3 test & 2 races) points to the fact Rossi struggles to ride a Ducati. And its exactly reminicent of all the other WC that hav tried. What do u base ur premise on that Rossi would fair like Stoner? R u basing it on that hes won multiple WCs? Fact is Rossi has run into a buzz saw at Ducati. Had he rode an exact replica of Stoners 07 bike at Qatar 2007, he would hav most likely faired as good as Capirossi.



About the Bridgestone jump. 2/3 of the podium finishers at Qatar wer on Michelins. 3/5 top 5 wher on Michelins. Wer do u get this idea that Bridgestone dominated Qatar 07?



As u say, the other Ducatis had speed advantage over Stoner. U conclude then that Stoner rode it better. But when u compare Stoner to Rossi, u conclude it was this speed advantage that accounts for Casey beating Vale. Talk a out having it both ways. Ok, so what measure can u cite for handling? Can u point to an index? Because just as easily as u discount the speed advantage the other Ducatis had over Stoner by simply stating, well Stoner rode better, i can make and equally valid statement, Stoner beat Rossi because he rode better. I can simply discard and speed advantage and simply say, Caseys bike handled like ...., which is why the other Ducatis wer so awful.

You didn't answer my hypothesis, how would Stoner have gone on the 2007 RC212V?



Well Loris was actually flying that day and catching the leaders until he crashed on lap 7

But Loris is not Rossi. And the other Ducks were Satelite efforts.



And your hypothesis is based on the spec of those bikes in 2007 so saying that VR wouldn't even have got a podium on that bike with the competition as it was is absolutely absurd. Jerez was in no way reminiscent of others efforts on that bike-up until the crash, your clutching mate.



Qatar 2007



Look at the passes, Lap 1 Stoner Passes Rossi-on the straight



Lap 5 Rossi passes Stoner into turn 15, then Stoner passes Rossi on the straight again



Lap 7 Rossi passes Stoner into turn 5, Stoner passes Rossi on the straight again.



Lap 18 Rossi passes Stoner into turn 8, Stoner passes Rossi on the straight......



Obviously you can't measure handling, for that needs to encompass set-up, tyres and rider talent. But we are talking about the straight line speed and acceleration advantage Stoner had in 2007 over his closest rivals, which is extremely evident, like I said watch it again.....



Here's another hypothesis for you, How would Stoner have gone on Rossi's M1 that day? Do you think he would have won the race if you took 15kmph off his Top speed on the Ducati? Once you negate the Top Speed advantage would he have been able to compete? Could he have taken full advantage of the M1's handling against Rossi? I would say no chance.....

 

[michaelm]

Talps,



No, i dont think Rossi would hav podiumed. Ur basing ur premise on that Rossi can ride the Ducati. All evidence so far (3 test & 2 races) points to the fact Rossi struggles to ride a Ducati. And its exactly reminicent of all the other WC that hav tried. What do u base ur premise on that Rossi would fair like Stoner? R u basing it on that hes won multiple WCs? Fact is Rossi has run into a buzz saw at Ducati. Had he rode an exact replica of Stoners 07 bike at Qatar 2007, he would hav most likely faired as good as Capirossi.



About the Bridgestone jump. 2/3 of the podium finishers at Qatar wer on Michelins. 3/5 top 5 wher on Michelins. Wer do u get this idea that Bridgestone dominated Qatar 07?



As u say, the other Ducatis had speed advantage over Stoner. U conclude then that Stoner rode it better. But when u compare Stoner to Rossi, u conclude it was this speed advantage that accounts for Casey beating Vale. Talk about having it both ways. Ok, so what measure can u cite for handling? Can u point to an index? Because just as easily as u discount the speed advantage the other Ducatis had over Stoner (by simply stating, well Stoner rode better) i can make and equally baseless statement: Stoner beat Rossi because he rode better. I can simply discard any speed differential and simply say, Caseys bike handled like ...., which is why the other Ducatis wer so awful.

As we are all aware, this whole engine power discussion thing is a proxy for again claiming that stoner didn't really win the 2007 world championship; even I am sick of talking about that championship, and find it interesting that talpa feels the need to discuss it again despite accusing others of being preoccupied with it.



Did stoner win the 2007 championship because of the straight line speed advantage of the ducati? Yes of course, I doubt very much whether he would have won without it since the bike was an absolute pig otherwise as the performance of riders other than him demonstrated, and it now seems likely particularly given the recent comments of one v.rossi, whom I for one regard as reasonably well informed, that the engine characteristics which gave the straight-line advantage militated against the overall performance of the bike , not apparently relevant to that particular bike unlike every other bike in gp racing history. The question is whether valentino rossi would have won the championship on it. We will obviously never know, but I think probably not, given that he does not like the characteristics of the current bike which doesn't even have the screamer engine.



The other question is whether the current bike would lap faster if it was more powerful, allowing it to be faster on the straights. The answer if the question is asked very carefully, "all else being equal" , is again yes. This is of course a nonsense question as the answer in practice is just as obviously no, given that by v.rossi esq.'s own testimony the chassis can't handle the current engine power and power delivery.



(EDIT I don't think stoner would have beaten rossi on the 2007 yamaha either, but I don't really see much relevance to this question given that it wasn't the championship winning bike).

 

[BarryMachine]

You didn't answer my hypothesis, how would Stoner have gone on the 2007 RC212V?

What's your point? its quite clear that Stoner would have doubled the points on Honda in 07.

 

[stiefel]

Wow a list comprising mainly boners(how many of these wrongly moaned about the laguna 2008 "shortcut" lol), and some others who actually made little to no reference to the argument.....furthermore at least 2-3 of those on the list agreed in principle that power is an advantage with no other bike issues.



So in all what a compelling reply.

Since I see my name on that list, could you please enlighten me in which of your categories I fall?

 

[Austin]

furthermore at least 2-3 of those on the list agreed in principle that power is an advantage with no other bike issues.

Stop the ....... presses! You mean to tell me that if given the choice between a sweet handling motorcycle with a strong motor and a sweet handling motorcycle with a very strong motor, people are choosing the very strong motor? Woah... Someone get JB on the horn, this guy's on to something.

 

[Arrabbiata1]

Since I see my name on that list, could you please enlighten me in which of your categories I fall?

+1

 

[LittleEgg]

Stop the ....... presses! You mean to tell me that if given the choice between a sweet handling motorcycle with a strong motor and a sweet handling motorcycle with a very strong motor, people are choosing the very strong motor? Woah... Someone get JB on the horn, this guy's on to something.

Well you kind of nailed it....but its more like this



A choice between a dog handling strong motor, and a dog handling very strong motor.

OR based on the recent duc front end issues, and taking away the bridgestone effect:



A choice between an extremely dog handling strong motor, and a dog handling extremely strong motor.

Also i'd like to pooint out that talps has picked up on what i have been mentioning for ages which people seem quite happy to utterly avoid....



Acceleration, lower/mid torque....etc



In chunkie land its all kph top speed that matters.



So laughable.

 

[LittleEgg]

and it now seems likely particularly given the recent comments of one v.rossi, whom I for one regard as reasonably well informed, that the engine characteristics which gave the straight-line advantage militated against the overall performance of the bike , not apparently relevant to that particular bike unlike every other bike in gp racing history. The question is whether valentino rossi would have won the championship on it. We will obviously never know, but I think probably not, given that he does not like the characteristics of the current bike which doesn't even have the screamer engine.



The other question is whether the current bike would lap faster if it was more powerful, allowing it to be faster on the straights. The answer if the question is asked very carefully, "all else being equal" , is again yes. This is of course a nonsense question as the answer in practice is just as obviously no, given that by v.rossi esq.'s own testimony the chassis can't handle the current engine power and power delivery.

Well i at least appreciate that you have taken on the points being made and addressed them directly without avoiding anything or trying to twist things out of context...



As for a few of your points, i still think stoner would have been at the top of the pack in 2007 had the duc not had all its own way in terms of power, just look at 2008 where the duc was still the fastest bike, but by a considerably smaller margin. He could have won had a couple of things gone differently.



Secondly I think its perfectly reasonable to question wether vale would have spoken out about the duc power, recently and in a negative sense, had this years bike had the overall grunt that the 2007 bike had over the rest of that grid.....it may not help in the current climate in the balance of handling/power, but its a fair guess that it may have been more of a positive with the bigger margin of 2007. This is only a thought that went through my head because of certain folks comparing 2007 to 2011 like there was no difference.



And lastly as for people getting involved with this overkilled and all but expired debate, this should never have turned into a stoner defence campaign in the first place, as i wasnt trying to take anything away from stoner........more like just trying to be fair to valentino who seems rather under fire, and rather unfairly when comparing the two debut seasons in every way.



95% of this has been about engine power, the bridgestone point has been largely ignored, and the front end issues which were not apparent until recent years has also been ignored.



And the fact that engine power is constantly looked at as only max kph

I think maybe we should just draw a line under this nonesense.

 

[Jumkie]

Backpedal-rob.

11819:Backpedal.jpg]

11820:Yellow.png]

 

[LittleEgg]

Backpedal-rob.

11819:Backpedal.jpg]

11820:Yellow.png]

Typical that the best reply from you is "backpedal", you have actually answered NONE of the points mentioned that you continue to avoid....despite many posts mentioning this.



Never mind the least from you the better.

 

[Jumkie]

.

 

[Jumkie]

Typical that the best reply from you is "backpedal", you have actually answered NONE of the points mentioned that you continue to avoid....despite many posts mentioning this.



Never mind i guess you will continue to cling onto your speed charts, and picture quotations.



Bless.

I have answered all of your points. Your points have moved, but not by much, just in circles while a bit conceding to what everybody has been telling you. That's called backpedalling. But all you have to do is look back through your posts to see where you started from. Partly moving only in a circle, as your first premise was that Rossi would have podium given more power, now you're saying, Rossi would have podiumed given more power +. But at least you have Talps trying to argue for you; but so far all you've produced is: Rossi would have podiumed given more power if he would have had a Bridgestone advantage. Both of you have reasoned nothing except a gut feeling. Granted, that gut feeling is based on your admiration for Rossi. Despite all evidence to the contrary. You've gone from absurd to just ridiculous. I suppose that's progress.

11821:Yellow.png]

 

[LittleEgg]

I have answered all of your points. Your points have moved, but not by much, just in circles while a bit conceding to what everybody has been telling you. That's called backpedalling. But all you have to do is look back through your posts to see where you started from. Partly moving only in a circle, as your first premise was that Rossi would have podium given more power, now you're saying, Rossi would have podiumed given more power +. But at least you have Talps trying to argue for you; but so far all you've produced is: Rossi would have podiumed given more power if he would have had a Bridgestone advantage. Both of you have reasoned nothing except a gut feeling. Granted, that gut feeling is based on your admiration for Rossi. Despite all evidence to the contrary. You've gone from absurd to just ridiculous. I suppose that's progress.

11821:Yellow.png]

Tell me exactly how i have backpedalled on what i am saying, if my opinion now is exactly the same as it was when i first mentioned the 2007 duc.



"your points have moved but not by much"

Oh and the bit about "i have answered all your posts" made me chuckle...to point out one thing, not so many posts ago i was taking the piss that you keep using top speed charts as sole guage of engine power.



I havent had a reply on that one yet, and i beleive tapla also touched upon this.....also without reply.



Furthermore you then posted MORE top speed charts!!!

Dear oh dear......