Joined Feb 2008
2K Posts | 0+
home
How was it dumb when you just admitted to being a boner with your very last post, and in that second proved my categorising of yourself........"think mcfly think."
I don't see where I have admitted to anything there, perhaps you could point it out. But I'll play along, no problem. I'm guessing your use of the word 'boner' signifies that someone is a Stoner fan. That I most certainly am, so I have no problem with being called one, even if the terminology is a bit degratory.
But having established how you categorize me, I'm still left wondering how this makes my arguments in this threat invalid.
Come on, you can do it!
The best overall package wins..........its hard for a great rider to win on ...., and vice versa.
Its not always that clear cut.
But where you are heading with this is pointless land, because neither the 2007 duc or the 2011 duc are the best bikes.
I cant do better than the .... up you made in the last page or so......i am literally laughing.
As for further replys i cant be arsed with you mate, nothing personal its just that its taking enough time actually discussing the thread proper, without having to go into other silly disputes.
Thanks for the laughs though buddy.
Joined Feb 2008
2K Posts | 0+
home
Help me out here, what .... up are you referring to? I'm glad you're laughing though, I always love to put a smile on someone's face!
You see, the problem is, if you don't take the trouble of arguing your points its not a discussion, it's just you spouting out random words like some kid with tourette's syndrome.
Also, I would argue that nullifying the arguments of a rather significant number of forum members on the basis of your subjective categorization calls for some explaining. I find it rather perplexing that you would call that a silly dispute.
Thanks for the laughs though buddy.
No problem little man, I aim to please.
I agree woody of course.....although stoner came from nowhere and handled the duc where other respected and experienced riders did/could not.
What i want to get back to in the main though is that my argument is and always has been that the 2007 ducati was stronger over its grid than the 2011 duc.
In power
In rubber
In lack of front end issues
My opinion was and still is that with the kind of huge power the duc had in 2007 over yamaha, honda, suzuki, and kawasaki........that kind of extra grunt could have seen rossi podium in qatar....as for rossi's comments, they were regarding this seasons bike, a totally different playing field surrounds the current bike.
With the rubber too, and taking away the dodgy front end....i am absolutely convinced he would.
People can argue cornering which i actually appreciate, but the three differences i keep mentioning between the two ducs are factual and well documented......to say or suggest that rossi would do no better with these three things in mind is simply wrong.
Like saying capi would do no worse if he was had a front end issue, or used michelins, or lacked engine power in 2007......remember how competitive lorenzo became in 2009 after he had done with michelin?.......thats just tyres!
Anyway i am repeating myself
Joined Feb 2009
3K Posts | 2+
siebenbürgen süße heimat!
backpedalling is not repeating
i also do not get woodies argument
stoner won on the thing for 4 years ,rossi just "dared" moving to ducati after not getting his way with yamaha.
and if anything ,that is more of a hint that stoner would be able to look good on the suzuki than it is an accolade to the brave burro
i also do not get woodies argument
stoner won on the thing for 4 years ,rossi just "dared" moving to ducati after not getting his way with yamaha.
and if anything ,that is more of a hint that stoner would be able to look good on the suzuki than it is an accolade to the brave burro
Joined Oct 2006
25K Posts | 4K+
Your Mom's House
The last three four pages of this thread should be ample evidence to anyone that debating Talpa and Rob is completely useless.
Mr. S, your post (page 34, #640 LINK) is one of the best refutes the detractor's thinking on the subject personified by Rob/Talpa. It was a pleasure to read for its perfect myth busting and relevance over a topic that has been debated for years. Yet, pages and pages later, it has failed to persuade said detractors into conceded their folly. The reason is NOT because the evidence doesn't support it, but because we are simply debating people incapable of following elementary logic and analysis. You certainly painted them into a corner, and notice how they simply disregarded it as irrelevant, even though it actually is exactly the crux of the point. They don't see it, and they are incapable of seeing it. It is completely useless debating these fools. We debate them because we see them type words, so we are tricked into thinking they are capable following simple logic, but I repeat, this is a fallacy! We are the wrong ones for thinking they (Talps, Rob, etal) can follow a debate to its logical conclusion.
This should be a warning to all those here attempting to debate Talps & Rob etal. Ask yourself this question, would you be so fervent in your post formulation if you knew you were debating a typical child or a mentally incapacitated person? I imagine not. Its the same thing I must remind myself when debating these two and others they represent. They've learned to type words, but without the necessary meaning and logic to have meaningful debate and dialogue. Its really that simple gentz. I will add though, that the value of reading the well formulated posts which have refuted the Stoner detractors here have been a pleasure to read. The value for me is the knowledge and evidence it compiles and the beauty of its logic. This I'm sure is the same for others who have read it and understand it.
For any more debate on the subject of power/speed advantage regarding Stoner vs the world while on a Ducati, I will refer to this LINK.
--A post which basically highlights the statements by two world champions who would be in the best and unique position to know, Capirossi (a Ducati rider and once teammate to Stoner) and Rossi, the standard (a Ducati rider currently on Stoner's bike) stating in no uncertain terms that it is in fact the ability and capacity of Casey Stoner, as a rider, and rider of the Ducati to account for its performance while stating they cannot duplicate as of yet this unique Stoner phenomena.
Mr. S, your post (page 34, #640 LINK) is one of the best refutes the detractor's thinking on the subject personified by Rob/Talpa. It was a pleasure to read for its perfect myth busting and relevance over a topic that has been debated for years. Yet, pages and pages later, it has failed to persuade said detractors into conceded their folly. The reason is NOT because the evidence doesn't support it, but because we are simply debating people incapable of following elementary logic and analysis. You certainly painted them into a corner, and notice how they simply disregarded it as irrelevant, even though it actually is exactly the crux of the point. They don't see it, and they are incapable of seeing it. It is completely useless debating these fools. We debate them because we see them type words, so we are tricked into thinking they are capable following simple logic, but I repeat, this is a fallacy! We are the wrong ones for thinking they (Talps, Rob, etal) can follow a debate to its logical conclusion.
This should be a warning to all those here attempting to debate Talps & Rob etal. Ask yourself this question, would you be so fervent in your post formulation if you knew you were debating a typical child or a mentally incapacitated person? I imagine not. Its the same thing I must remind myself when debating these two and others they represent. They've learned to type words, but without the necessary meaning and logic to have meaningful debate and dialogue. Its really that simple gentz. I will add though, that the value of reading the well formulated posts which have refuted the Stoner detractors here have been a pleasure to read. The value for me is the knowledge and evidence it compiles and the beauty of its logic. This I'm sure is the same for others who have read it and understand it.
For any more debate on the subject of power/speed advantage regarding Stoner vs the world while on a Ducati, I will refer to this LINK.
--A post which basically highlights the statements by two world champions who would be in the best and unique position to know, Capirossi (a Ducati rider and once teammate to Stoner) and Rossi, the standard (a Ducati rider currently on Stoner's bike) stating in no uncertain terms that it is in fact the ability and capacity of Casey Stoner, as a rider, and rider of the Ducati to account for its performance while stating they cannot duplicate as of yet this unique Stoner phenomena.
Joined Aug 2007
11K Posts | 3K+
Pomona NY
Actually chunks i tackled Mr S' post head on and not only explained, but gave good example why i didnt agree.
As for the rest of your post....oh no not another "boppers have no logic" rant, its funny you must have that paragraph saved so you can rinse it at every opportunity lol.
Funny you talk about logic yet when hit with the notion that engine power is about more than just top speed charts you dodged, and continue to dodge the point. The last time you dodged it was so blatant too.....you basically clammed up.
You try and ride the debate by greasing people up when you read what you like, along with the odd "boppers have no logic" rant....thrown in here and there when things dry up......whilst all the while constantly and blatantly dodging stuff you dont like to admit.
Oh and by the way as for that other thread, i was in no way suggesting you are "phat"
You know what your no fun anymore.
Joined Feb 2008
2K Posts | 0+
home
Actually chunks i tackled Mr S' post head on and not only explained, but gave good example why i didnt agree.
As for the rest of your post....oh no not another "boppers have no logic" rant, its funny you must have that paragraph saved so you can rinse it at every opportunity lol.
Funny you talk about logic yet when hit with the notion that engine power is about more than just top speed charts you dodged, and continue to dodge the point. The last time you dodged it was so blatant too.....you basically clammed up.
You try and ride the debate by greasing people up when you read what you like, along with the odd "boppers have no logic" rant....thrown in here and there when things dry up......whilst all the while constantly and blatantly dodging stuff you dont like to admit.
Oh and by the way as for that other thread, i was in no way suggesting you are "phat"
You know what your no fun anymore.
Yes, shame on you Jumkie! You shouldn't behave like that, it's not very nice!
Right Rob?
Joined Oct 2006
25K Posts | 4K+
Your Mom's House
Actually chunks i tackled Mr S' post head on and not only explained, but gave good example why i didnt agree.
As for the rest of your post....oh no not another "boppers have no logic" rant, its funny you must have that paragraph saved so you can rinse it at every opportunity lol.
Funny you talk about logic yet when hit with the notion that engine power is about more than just top speed charts you dodged, and continue to dodge the point. The last time you dodged it was so blatant too.....you basically clammed up.
You try and ride the debate by greasing people up when you read what you like, along with the odd "boppers have no logic" rant....thrown in here and there when things dry up......whilst all the while constantly and blatantly dodging stuff you dont like to admit.
Oh and by the way as for that other thread, i was in no way suggesting you are "phat"
You know what your no fun anymore.
Do you have a performance parameter to describe acceleration? No you don't do you. So why even debate it, if it’s clear you will like Talps come up with some ........? I know power is not only a reflection of top speed, that's not even a noteworthy point to make as we all know this; but we actually have this speed chart to give us a great clue, unfortunately you do not posse the ability to make correlations. Speed is a great correlation to power, this is very elementary. If fact, you will see it mostly describe as a "speed advantage" correlated to a "power advantage". Tell me something; do you also have a parameter to give us an idea of bike handling? No, you don’t either. The posting of the speed charts have been lost on you for obvious reasons, you have NOT the ability to follow logic or analyze, or make correlations. You didn't "tackle" ...., you answered it as well as Talps, that is with complete ........ and child like reasoning. You are useless but very amusing. You are my toy. And I’ve managed to .... with you while making you look stupid. I move the strings and you react. I command you to move little puppet.
The world according to Rob:
11827:Yellow.png]
Attachments
Dont just take my word for it chunks
Look at laguna 2008 an explain why when exiting corners slower in parts, stoner is back up rossi's backside at the very next corner.....and the 2008 duc didnt have .... over the rest compared to 2007.
The video did not lie, neither did real time commentary to go along with the video.
2007 itself was absolutely and totally obvious to everyone including every commentator i heard at the time.....all you needed was a pair of eyes.
I'd say thats plenty enough of a chart.
I guess that wont be enough to convice a total self important egotist like you.....and stop fooling yourself into thinking that you were "swimming" in those clothes.
Yawn...
Same link again lol?.....i guess that means your done.
The only thing you are the pupeteer of is those manboobs......Replying is just what people do on forums so sorry if you were trying to be clever with that puppet crap.
Similar threads
