Tardozzi: Stoner is the best rider in MotoGP

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bunyip @ Jan 15 2010, 05:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>'He reckoned he could understand what Rossi and Lorenzo were doing with their M1s but Casey's speed passeth comprehension'





there,s a crack in the record.........

Sorry boppers, but I just love that quote. Just sums it up perfectly.
Have you started drinking during the day as well.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bunyip @ Jan 14 2010, 09:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think this article passes some real light onto the issue.

by Julian Ryder

Ben Spies' opinion on Casey Stoner is representative of most people here: He's from a different planet.
'He reckoned he could understand what Rossi and Lorenzo were doing with their M1s but Casey's speed passeth comprehension'

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2009/Nov/091107rydernotes.htm

Casey rides at another level it would seem.......................


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (inam @ Jan 14 2010, 09:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah he could understand what Rossi and Lorenzo were doing with their M1 because he himself was riding M1 you noob!!!!!

You have an ability to miss the point there inam. Of course Ben is saying this because he was riding an M1. He is saying that he knows how bloody good and easy the M1 is to ride so he can understand how Rossi and Lorenzo can be so fast. But he has also seen what the Ducati is like to ride and that no one has a right to ride that bike so fast.

Fixed it for you
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Jan 14 2010, 11:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I still trust his eye for talent, even if his integrity is in question. Especially regarding riders I am a fan of

No, seriously I think everyone is amazed regarding Stoner's speed relative to the lack of speed for the other Ducati riders. It's something there and it's beyond comprehension.

Tardozi translates that into "the fastest" but not everyone are so convinced, even quite a few Stoner fans. There is no guaranty that stoner can translate his technique, overcomming the ducati difficulties, into an even faster ride on a "better" bike. The general consensus seems to be that the yamaha right now are the best bike. Few outside the Stoner boopers belive that Stoner will be much faster on a yamaha.
Lets do the math the boopers do:
Hayden are generally 1.5 - 2sec slower than Stoner and he is as fast as any Ducati rider except Stoner.
On a Honda (made for midgets) he would be .5 - 1 sec slower. On a yamha < .5 slower.
If we put Stoner on a yamaha he sould regain his lead, right? He should become 2 sec faster again meaning that he would be 1.5 - 2 sec faster than anyone else, right? NOT

All the top guys are pushing their equipment to the limit. The "equipment" is here frame, engine, suspension, brakes and tires and a few less important items. My point is that it doesn't matter how much better Stoner ultizise the frame and the engine compared the other Ducati riders. He will still be constrained by suspension, tires and brakes and those items are "off the self" items from other companies and are more or less identical to what the other riders use. These items are just as much part of the limitations for "a theoretical best lap time" possible today as the factorie's items.

What stoner does is to get on the same level as the other top riders by working/adjusting around what shortcommings the frame/engine must have and even use some of their advantages as well. The engine is not all bad, we know it's very strong but it might have some issues (cloesely tied to the electronics) at mid corner where stoner shines compared the the other ducati riders.
While his workaround works wonders on his Ducati ride there is no reason to belive that this can be translated into an even faster ride on another bike. It might be en easier ride, a more consistent ride, less crash prone..... but in raw speed there is little to gain. Who knows, he could even be slower?

Ojectivly there are few to no numbers supporting the "Stoner is fastest" theory.
Rossi won by a margine, and he won the BMW award and he did so in'08 as well.
What is left is a rider that won a race at the end of the season. In my contry we have a famous quote from soccer: "he was the best player without the ball". To most people that is close to totally meaningless and so is Stoners results from practice. He was fastest when it didn't count. That's got little to do with his illness as it was the same in '08. And in no way does "fastest when it doesn't count" translate into fastest. That can only be deserved thorugh competion when there is something worth winning, and warm up lap does NOT count

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 15 2010, 01:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Fixed it for you


No, seriously I think everyone is amazed regarding Stoner's speed relative to the lack of speed for the other Ducati riders. It's something there and it's beyond comprehension.

Tardozi translates that into "the fastest" but not everyone are so convinced, even quite a few Stoner fans. There is no guaranty that stoner can translate his technique, overcomming the ducati difficulties, into an even faster ride on a "better" bike. The general consensus seems to be that the yamaha right now are the best bike. Few outside the Stoner boopers belive that Stoner will be much faster on a yamaha.
Lets do the math the boopers do:
Hayden are generally 1.5 - 2sec slower than Stoner and he is as fast as any Ducati rider except Stoner.
On a Honda (made for midgets) he would be .5 - 1 sec slower. On a yamha < .5 slower.
If we put Stoner on a yamaha he sould regain his lead, right? He should become 2 sec faster again meaning that he would be 1.5 - 2 sec faster than anyone else, right? NOT

All the top guys are pushing their equipment to the limit. The "equipment" is here frame, engine, suspension, brakes and tires and a few less important items. My point is that it doesn't matter how much better Stoner ultizise the frame and the engine compared the other Ducati riders. He will still be constrained by suspension, tires and brakes and those items are "off the self" items from other companies and are more or less identical to what the other riders use. These items are just as much part of the limitations for "a theoretical best lap time" possible today as the factorie's items.

What stoner does is to get on the same level as the other top riders by working/adjusting around what shortcommings the frame/engine must have and even use some of their advantages as well. The engine is not all bad, we know it's very strong but it might have some issues (cloesely tied to the electronics) at mid corner where stoner shines compared the the other ducati riders.
While his workaround works wonders on his Ducati ride there is no reason to belive that this can be translated into an even faster ride on another bike. It might be en easier ride, a more consistent ride, less crash prone..... but in raw speed there is little to gain. Who knows, he could even be slower?

Ojectivly there are few to no numbers supporting the "Stoner is fastest" theory.
Rossi won by a margine, and he won the BMW award and he did so in'08 as well.
What is left is a rider that won a race at the end of the season. In my contry we have a famous quote from soccer: "he was the best player without the ball". To most people that is close to totally meaningless and so is Stoners results from practice. He was fastest when it didn't count. That's got little to do with his illness as it was the same in '08. And in no way does "fastest when it doesn't count" translate into fastest. That can only be deserved thorugh competion when there is something worth winning, and warm up lap does NOT count
No excuses for 2008 and 2009, rossi is the fastest and best in those years since he won those world championships, rather handily, and stoner's health problems in 2008 were after he had already effectively lost the championship and were not used as an excuse by him at least for losing the world championship as far as I am aware; he in fact won races whilst he had his putative wrist problem, after a second and two dnfs when he did not have the problem. If his 2009 championship challenge was affected by illness it was up to him to present himself on the grid fit and does not detract from the performance of others.

Unusually I do not quite follow the logic of your main argument however; without getting into whether stoner is rossi's equal which I don't think I have ever claimed rossi is also constrained by the limits of engineering so his superiority must be due to factors beyond this. Whatever the capabilities of the 2007 ducati stoner at least for a year rode basically perfectly with hardly a significant rider error in a race; perhaps this required an amount of luck and a level of sustained focus which is not repeatable, but I don't think he was "fastest when it does not count" during that season.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TP70 @ Jan 15 2010, 10:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You have an ability to miss the point there inam. Of course Ben is saying this because he was riding an M1. He is saying that he knows how bloody good and easy the M1 is to ride so he can understand how Rossi and Lorenzo can be so fast. But he has also seen what the Ducati is like to ride and that no one has a right to ride that bike so fast.
You have an ability to miss the bus TP70, i know exactly what he meant no need to explain to me, i am just having some fun with you guys. .

The thing with all the great riders like Rossi Doohan Spencer et al is their ability to tweak the bike to get more out of it than other good riders can. Rossi went from Honda to Yamaha(tI thought at the time, it was the most insane move) and took what had been a relatively uncompetitive bike and made it competitive. Stoner has done the same with the Ducati. Doohan always got more out of his bike, than anyone else on the Honda. Its what great riders do. No one even gets close to getting what Stoner does out of the Ducati, on any other Ducati.

peace

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jan 15 2010, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No excuses for 2008 and 2009, rossi is the fastest and best in those years since he won those world championships, rather handily, and stoner's health problems in 2008 were after he had already effectively lost the championship and were not used as an excuse by him at least for losing the world championship as far as I am aware; he in fact won races whilst he had his putative wrist problem, after a second and two dnfs when he did not have the problem. If his 2009 championship challenge was affected by illness it was up to him to present himself on the grid fit and does not detract from the performance of others.

Unusually I do not quite follow the logic of your main argument however; without getting into whether stoner is rossi's equal which I don't think I have ever claimed rossi is also constrained by the limits of engineering so his superiority must be due to factors beyond this. Whatever the capabilities of the 2007 ducati stoner at least for a year rode basically perfectly with hardly a significant rider error in a race; perhaps this required an amount of luck and a level of sustained focus which is not repeatable, but I don't think he was "fastest when it does not count" during that season.

Well, I guess what I'm saying is that the best riders are equally fast. There is minor differences depending on setup, form of day bla bla.. but they are very close and that's because they are on very similar equipment and they all race it to the maximum (with the help of advanced electronics of course). The differences must be found elsewhere as you say and that's strategy, race craft or even spesial setup's that go against conventional visdom.

Regarding 2007 it's still my belief that he had the fastest bike thanks to the exceptional Ducati engine and with that breathing space to take of that littel notch to ensure a string of fault free races.
The season where nothing less than a demolition of the competition and Stoner are good but not that good. I still think the title were deserved and he might have won without the advantage but there is nothing before or after 2007 that suggest that stoner destroyed the rest of the field by his own. He had assistance and it's caled Desmo.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 16 2010, 02:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well, I guess what I'm saying is that the best riders are equally fast. There is minor differences depending on setup, form of day bla bla.. but they are very close and that's because they are on very similar equipment and they all race it to the maximum (with the help of advanced electronics of course). The differences must be found elsewhere as you say and that's strategy, race craft or even spesial setup's that go against conventional visdom.

Regarding 2007 it's still my belief that he had the fastest bike thanks to the exceptional Ducati engine and with that breathing space to take of that littel notch to ensure a string of fault free races.
The season where nothing less than a demolition of the competition and Stoner are good but not that good. I still think the title were deserved and he might have won without the advantage but there is nothing before or after 2007 that suggest that stoner destroyed the rest of the field by his own. He had assistance and it's caled Desmo.

But what of the glaring evidence that its not the Duc. ie. everybody else makes it look pretty bad

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 15 2010, 10:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Fixed it for you


No, seriously I think everyone is amazed regarding Stoner's speed relative to the lack of speed for the other Ducati riders. It's something there and it's beyond comprehension.

Tardozi translates that into "the fastest" but not everyone are so convinced, even quite a few Stoner fans. There is no guaranty that stoner can translate his technique, overcomming the ducati difficulties, into an even faster ride on a "better" bike. The general consensus seems to be that the yamaha right now are the best bike. Few outside the Stoner boopers belive that Stoner will be much faster on a yamaha.
Lets do the math the boopers do:
Hayden are generally 1.5 - 2sec slower than Stoner and he is as fast as any Ducati rider except Stoner.
On a Honda (made for midgets) he would be .5 - 1 sec slower. On a yamha < .5 slower.
If we put Stoner on a yamaha he sould regain his lead, right? He should become 2 sec faster again meaning that he would be 1.5 - 2 sec faster than anyone else, right? NOT

All the top guys are pushing their equipment to the limit. The "equipment" is here frame, engine, suspension, brakes and tires and a few less important items. My point is that it doesn't matter how much better Stoner ultizise the frame and the engine compared the other Ducati riders. He will still be constrained by suspension, tires and brakes and those items are "off the self" items from other companies and are more or less identical to what the other riders use. These items are just as much part of the limitations for "a theoretical best lap time" possible today as the factorie's items.

What stoner does is to get on the same level as the other top riders by working/adjusting around what shortcommings the frame/engine must have and even use some of their advantages as well. The engine is not all bad, we know it's very strong but it might have some issues (cloesely tied to the electronics) at mid corner where stoner shines compared the the other ducati riders.
While his workaround works wonders on his Ducati ride there is no reason to belive that this can be translated into an even faster ride on another bike. It might be en easier ride, a more consistent ride, less crash prone..... but in raw speed there is little to gain. Who knows, he could even be slower?

Ojectivly there are few to no numbers supporting the "Stoner is fastest" theory.
Rossi won by a margine, and he won the BMW award and he did so in'08 as well.
What is left is a rider that won a race at the end of the season. In my contry we have a famous quote from soccer: "he was the best player without the ball". To most people that is close to totally meaningless and so is Stoners results from practice. He was fastest when it didn't count. That's got little to do with his illness as it was the same in '08. And in no way does "fastest when it doesn't count" translate into fastest. That can only be deserved thorugh competion when there is something worth winning, and warm up lap does NOT count

You have such an amazing talent fish being able to determine exactly how much faster Hayden would be on bikes he hasn't ridden and then usine this prophetic information to discredit any notion that Stoner could be equally faster on those same bikes.

Then you use this same talent to reveal that their is no more room in the physics of tyre technology among other technology for someone to go perhaps 2% quicker per lap than the fastest lap.

I guess in your world where you believe that it is not possible for someone to be more talented than your idol you must assume that due to the greatness of your ideal there is no room left in physics for more speed to be possible because if there were he would be using it. See this is where your logic fails because you are allowing a deep held belief to have too much influence over how you see MotoGP.

We have heard of late, people with greater insight into the physics of, or what is possible on a MotoGP bikes say that they believe Stoner is the best. I believe they are saying this with less FAN IDOLISM then all of us on this forum as the people they talk of are no enigma to them as they are to us. So really your's and my arguments will always be rooted in a personnal belief that our man is better but to not accept this when posting arguments trying to suggest them as being grounded in some solid facts as you have above is just childish.

I accept that my opinion is that Stoner is the best rider in MotoGP and I have never tried to back this up by fact because I have no access to any data that I could use to substantiate calling it fact. So no doubt you will try to respond with some comment about me being a Stoner Booper which will have no impact on me because I am a proud Stoner fan and I <u>think</u> he is the best.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TP70 @ Jan 16 2010, 10:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You have such an amazing talent fish being able to determine exactly how much faster Hayden would be on bikes he hasn't ridden and then usine this prophetic information to discredit any notion that Stoner could be equally faster on those same bikes.
You missed the point by a mile if you assume that the number even have to be accurate. First of all I did not at all use exact numbers, secondly we have numbers from Hyadens years with Honda to make educated guesses. Honestly I didn't even check because the point doesn't require accurate numbers.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Then you use this same talent to reveal that their is no more room in the physics of tyre technology among other technology for someone to go perhaps 2% quicker per lap than the fastest lap.
What do you mean? They use control tires and usually use the exact same tires.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>I guess in your world where you believe that it is not possible for someone to be more talented than your idol you must assume that due to the greatness of your ideal there is no room left in physics for more speed to be possible because if there were he would be using it. See this is where your logic fails because you are allowing a deep held belief to have too much influence over how you see MotoGP.
Quite the oposite, during the last three years I have seen the other aliens come up to speed with Rossi. They are very close in performance today while, lets say 2002-2003 Rossi played with any "competition" he had at will. His cat and mouse hunt, famous by now were refined in those days
I sure belive Rossi are among the fastest if not the fastest by a small margine. The difference between you and me is that your stand is based purly on belief, while I have very solid numbers to back up my standpoint. Who have a deep held belief that have too much influence over how one see things did you say?

Of course there are those that are faster than Rossi from time to time but up to now he seems to end on top in the majority of times. Again, the numbers give you a pretty clear idea about who's the faster, but sure if we start to put relgious "logic" to things that could all change quickly. Who knows, with the right prayers mabe even Hayden will win again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>We have heard of late, people with greater insight into the physics of, or what is possible on a MotoGP bikes say that they believe Stoner is the best. I believe they are saying this with less FAN IDOLISM then all of us on this forum as the people they talk of are no enigma to them as they are to us. So really your's and my arguments will always be rooted in a personnal belief that our man is better but to not accept this when posting arguments trying to suggest them as being grounded in some solid facts as you have above is just childish.

We hear those expert opinions every day and make NO MISSTAKE they are 99% on an agenda of one sort or the other and that tend to color their answere even if they are not traditional fans like us, and they end up different all the time. I honestly don't think you would want anyone to count up the pro Stoner vs pro Rossi.

When I talk about facts it is of course the results of last season. Then there are some physical laws that come into play. To suggest that Stoner would gain as much time on a better bike as Hayden lost going from Honda to Ducati show a total lack of uderstanding of physic laws and/or a grave underrating of the rest of the riders. The pysics are hard facts the numbers are just aproximations but they are a hell of a lot better than your big empty void of arguments. Let others decide what is childish.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>I accept that my opinion is that Stoner is the best rider in MotoGP and I have never tried to back this up by fact because I have no access to any data that I could use to substantiate calling it fact. So no doubt you will try to respond with some comment about me being a Stoner Booper which will have no impact on me because I am a proud Stoner fan and I <u>think</u> he is the best.

Of course you have no fact simply because there are none, so, beliveing Stoner is the best require something close to a religious belief. No, seriously there are a few arguments suggesting stoner are the fastest, but the last two years it has usually been (eraly) in practice and or follwed by crashes or other incdents. That doesn't make him the fastest in my eyes becuase others can also be faster if they went out 110% on every practice stint. Results in competition is the only measure and casey has not been on top frequently enough to earn the "title" the fastest.
You are in your full right to belive so of course and no one deny you that right, but so should you without calling me childish for actually giving my arguments some weight.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 16 2010, 03:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Quite the oposite, during the last three years I have seen the other aliens come up to speed with Rossi. They are very close in performance today while, lets say 2002-2003 Rossi played with any "competition" he had at will. His cat and mouse hunt, famous by now were refined in those days
I sure belive Rossi are among the fastest if not the fastest by a small margine. The difference between you and me is that your stand is based purly on belief, while I have very solid numbers to back up my standpoint. Who have a deep held belief that have too much influence over how one see things did you say?

When I talk about facts it is of course the results of last season. Then there are some physical laws that come into play. To suggest that Stoner would gain as much time on a better bike as Hayden lost going from Honda to Ducati show a total lack of uderstanding of physic laws and/or a grave underrating of the rest of the riders. The pysics are hard facts the numbers are just aproximations but they are a hell of a lot better than your big empty void of arguments. Let others decide what is childish.
The corollary of your argument in this and your previous post would seem to be that rossi has often had mediocre opposition and/or a bike advantage, since he has seemed to be comfortably in excess of a second faster than his opposition including team-mates (if he needed or wanted to be) over most of his career . In truth your argument that rider talent is likely to have more impact when a bike is difficult to ride is rather hard to fault logically though.

As I have said previously I personally would not pick this particular point in time to claim that stoner is the best rider; apart from anything else similar lack of grace towards a well deserved titleholder annoyed me in 2007.

I do hope that if stoner does manage another title particularly against valentino the bike advantage thing will not be raised again though; apart from the unquestionably major difficulty of the current requirement of beating valentino rossi as an explanation for stoner not having repeated his championship win as yet, the last 35 years of premier class history would suggest that riding a factory honda or yamaha is rather an advantage in becoming a multiple champion (unless you are barry sheene).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jan 17 2010, 08:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The corollary of your argument in cthis and your previous post would seem to be that rossi has often had mediocre opposition and/or a bike advantage, since he has seemed to be comfortably in excess of a second faster than his opposition including team-mates (if he needed or wanted to be) over most of his career . In truth your argument that rider talent is likely to have more impact when a bike is difficult to ride is rather hard to fault logically though.
Well, I would never called the oposition medicore but rather compliment Rossi and the other aliens of today. They are all a generation or two after Rossi and they have seen him raising the bar without anyone being close to follow. So for these guys the goal has never been to beat Edwards or Hayden or Capirossi but to beat/keep up with Rossi. In raw speed I feel that they are there now. Anyone of these four can set a new lap record on any day if they have a good setup. They don't need it perfect and to do a one off perormance but are constantly up there fighting with Rossi.
It's not so much that rider talent has more impact with a difficult bike, allthough that's true but with todays extrodinary talent end clever electronic we have four riders that are able to push the suspension and tires to the limit all the time.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>As I have said previously I personally would not pick this particular point in time to claim that stoner is the best rider; apart from anything else similar lack of grace towards a well deserved titleholder annoyed me in 2007.

I do hope that if stoner does manage another title particularly against valentino the bike advantage thing will not be raised again though; apart from the unquestionably major difficulty of the current requirement of beating valentino rossi as an explanation for stoner not having repeated his championship win as yet, the last 35 years of premier class history would suggest that riding a factory honda or yamaha is rather an advantage in becoming a multiple champion (unless you are barry sheene).

I've been open for the suggestion that Rossi sometimes have had an advantage in machinery. Lesser riders have been on the same equipment but his hardest competition were somtimes not.
That was valid in periods in the years 2001 to 2003. But his display of superiority where of such calibre that there were no real discussion wether he deserved the titles or not.
But just as I agree that Rossi did have better equipment at occations, Stoner fans should have done the same in'07. That would have killed most of the debate because he did show a similar speed and skill as Rossi did in previous years and the two factors, rider and bike totally destroyed the competition. But any suggetion of Stoner having a faster bike where met with a storm of accusations of "no respect" .....
I said then and I say now that he did have an equipement advantage but that he probably would have won even without it allthough that include a lot of ifs that sadly were impossible to discuss on this forums at the time.

As for the historical equipment advantage there is only one thing that has been proven by time and that is that the advantage change. Books are full of factories with a proud racing history and most will never come back. We never know when Honda's time is up but if 100 years of racing results is of any use it would suggest that their time is soon up.

Maybe Tardozzi is just trying to do Stoner a favour, and boost his value as a rider leading up to contract negotiation time.

Tardozzi had access to the Ducati telemetry and data, and probably Ducati has some data on other bikes and riders for comparrison. Its hard to argue with his informed opinion.
The gurus on here see what you want to see to form an opinion based arguement, that cannot possibly be backed up.

I don't know whether Stoner is faster than Rossi, and neither does anyone else here, and probably it changes week to week. Unless you can get both riders on identical bikes, it will never be known.
People's opinions will always be twisted to favour their favorite rider. There will never be agreement on this arguement, and in the end who really cares. What is remembered is who the World Champ is.
Move on.

Lets see who wins in Qatar and Montego in April. That is far more interesting.
Hopefully there will be good racing in 2010, and plenty of competative bikes fighting for wins.

Well I have to agree with Jum and others that this is pretty much 10 pages of ...., but I won't be adding anymore, I'll let someone who has more experience winning in MotoGP than anyone, let alone WSBK Team Managers, instead.

Quote-Ring of Fire-Rick Broadbent Interviewing Jerry Burgess

Broadbent- 'What makes Rossi so good?'

Burgess- 'What sets any sportsman above his peer group? Its the little things driving the section of the brain that processes information. The electric pulses that send messages to Valentino, Tiger Woods and Rodger Federer are faster than in you and me. If he started playing Tennis when he was three and Federer had a bike then the results would be same but the names would be different. Until we know how fast these signals are being sent then these guys will have an advantage'

'I don't think there is such a thing as natural ability, I think its about mental application. You can learn anything, or at least you should be able to. Rossi, Woods and Federer can be beaten on any day but they have the skills AND focus. The guys I've worked with finish their careers and have the intelligence to compete in the Business world.'

'Sport is a constant correction of small mistakes, but you have to know you're moving into a small mistake before you can begin the correction process. Valentino goes around a track at Phenomenal speed and can be a bit wide or a fraction off on the brakes. I don't see the mistake, but he feels it instinctively. No two snowflakes are the same and no two laps on a motorcycle are the same, but the closer they are to each other the more information a rider has and so he knows what is expected of him.'

'The day he (VR) comes in and says he is happy with the bike and happy to come second is the day we start going downhill. Riders are like light bulbs. When they start to flicker you take them out and screw in another one. My whole career I've worked with riders who are expected to win. Two thirds of the grid hope to win, we expect it because we have a multi-world champion and a very good team. I look around. Dani has brains and skill. At the moment he is not comfortable with the bike, but that will change. Casey's interesting. He's got an arrogance about him and Mick had a lot of that. They're good, but I think Valentino is better'

Burgess also said Clicky

“Casey came back and showed some pretty impressive form. If he turns up next year with good body strength and an understanding of what his body is capable of then he’ll run anybody close, if not beat them."


Of course he (JB) is going to say Rossi is the best, as he has been vital part of much of Rossi's success, but he is also saying Stoner should be a force this year. Only time will tell but it seems those who should know take Stoner very seriously


peace

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Talpa @ Jan 18 2010, 12:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well I have to agree with Jum and others that this is pretty much 10 pages of ...., but I won't be adding anymore, I'll let someone who has more experience winning in MotoGP than anyone, let alone WSBK Team Managers, instead.

Quote-Ring of Fire-Rick Broadbent Interviewing Jerry Burgess

Broadbent- 'What makes Rossi so good?'

Burgess- 'What sets any sportsman above his peer group? Its the little things driving the section of the brain that processes information. The electric pulses that send messages to Valentino, Tiger Woods and Rodger Federer are faster than in you and me. If he started playing Tennis when he was three and Federer had a bike then the results would be same but the names would be different. Until we know how fast these signals are being sent then these guys will have an advantage'

'I don't think there is such a thing as natural ability, I think its about mental application. You can learn anything, or at least you should be able to. Rossi, Woods and Federer can be beaten on any day but they have the skills AND focus. The guys I've worked with finish their careers and have the intelligence to compete in the Business world.'

'Sport is a constant correction of small mistakes, but you have to know you're moving into a small mistake before you can begin the correction process. Valentino goes around a track at Phenomenal speed and can be a bit wide or a fraction off on the brakes. I don't see the mistake, but he feels it instinctively. No two snowflakes are the same and no two laps on a motorcycle are the same, but the closer they are to each other the more information a rider has and so he knows what is expected of him.'

'The day he (VR) comes in and says he is happy with the bike and happy to come second is the day we start going downhill. Riders are like light bulbs. When they start to flicker you take them out and screw in another one. My whole career I've worked with riders who are expected to win. Two thirds of the grid hope to win, we expect it because we have a multi-world champion and a very good team. I look around. Dani has brains and skill. At the moment he is not comfortable with the bike, but that will change. Casey's interesting. He's got an arrogance about him and Mick had a lot of that. They're good, but I think Valentino is better'

Now I have to agree that Burgess is a fairly informed insider but as highlighted this is all what he thinks and therefore opinion just like Dominceli and Tardozzi.

Also how old is this interview as there is no reference to Lorenzo? Other comments have been made at the conclusion of the 2009 season where Stoner put on a display of riding that even Rossi was enthused with.

Last I heard Talpa JB was an Engineer and not a biophysist. So I think we can put JB's comments down to opinion the same as everyone else. He is not of course going to come out and say that another rider is better than his is he?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TP70 @ Jan 18 2010, 12:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Now I have to agree that Burgess is a fairly informed insider but as highlighted this is all what he thinks and therefore opinion just like Dominceli and Tardozzi.

Also how old is this interview as there is no reference to Lorenzo? Other comments have been made at the conclusion of the 2009 season where Stoner put on a display of riding that even Rossi was enthused with.

Last I heard Talpa JB was an Engineer and not a biophysist. So I think we can put JB's comments down to opinion the same as everyone else. He is not of course going to come out and say that another rider is better than his is he?

Isn't this whole thread about someone's opinion? And I do note, someone who doesn't even work in Motogp......

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 17 2010, 03:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well, I would never called the oposition medicore but rather compliment Rossi and the other aliens of today. They are all a generation or two after Rossi and they have seen him raising the bar without anyone being close to follow. So for these guys the goal has never been to beat Edwards or Hayden or Capirossi but to beat/keep up with Rossi. In raw speed I feel that they are there now. Anyone of these four can set a new lap record on any day if they have a good setup. They don't need it perfect and to do a one off perormance but are constantly up there fighting with Rossi.
It's not so much that rider talent has more impact with a difficult bike, allthough that's true but with todays extrodinary talent end clever electronic we have four riders that are able to push the suspension and tires to the limit all the time.


I've been open for the suggestion that Rossi sometimes have had an advantage in machinery. Lesser riders have been on the same equipment but his hardest competition were somtimes not.
That was valid in periods in the years 2001 to 2003. But his display of superiority where of such calibre that there were no real discussion wether he deserved the titles or not.
But just as I agree that Rossi did have better equipment at occations, Stoner fans should have done the same in'07. That would have killed most of the debate because he did show a similar speed and skill as Rossi did in previous years and the two factors, rider and bike totally destroyed the competition. But any suggetion of Stoner having a faster bike where met with a storm of accusations of "no respect" .....
I said then and I say now that he did have an equipement advantage but that he probably would have won even without it allthough that include a lot of ifs that sadly were impossible to discuss on this forums at the time.

As for the historical equipment advantage there is only one thing that has been proven by time and that is that the advantage change. Books are full of factories with a proud racing history and most will never come back. We never know when Honda's time is up but if 100 years of racing results is of any use it would suggest that their time is soon up.

As I hope you know, I have never had an issue with you; you are an admitted rossi fan as I am an admitted stoner fan, but your basic stance which seems to be that rossi is the best but this does not preclude stoner still being very good and a deserving world champion is not an unreasonable one and more fair-minded than most who are keen fans of a particular rider (possibly including me). I realised after I had made the post that I had included some general arguments about matters in this thread in a post replying specifically to you.

What irritated me was the many who gave him no credit at all and the prevailing theory in 2007 that the bike rode itself when it has since emerged that the bike is more likely quite difficult to ride. I was being deliberately mischievous in pointing out to those who cite the historical record as evidence that stoner could not possibly be as fast as rossi that the historical record also suggests that a bike from a 3rd string manufacturer is unlikely to be as fast as a factory yamaha. As you imply, when a faster bike does turn up, history becomes irrelevant . I would also say this applies to riders, not that this is of much relevance to rossi at present given that he has actually just won the last 2 world championships.

I have absolutely no problem with bike advantages gained within the rules in what has been for most of the time I have followed it a prototype formula in practice to some extent as well as in theory (and have no complaint about valentino having a bike advantage for the last 2 years if he has had one), just with those who detract from stoner when every one else who has won 10 races in a season very likely had a conveyance of fair to middling quality as well .

Fish & Michael congrats on a couple of gems in a sea of crap...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Jan 18 2010, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As I hope you know, I have never had an issue with you; you are an admitted rossi fan as I am an admitted stoner fan, but your basic stance which seems to be that rossi is the best but this does not preclude stoner still being very good and a deserving world champion is not an unreasonable one and more fair-minded than most who are keen fans of a particular rider (possibly including me). I realised after I had made the post that I had included some general arguments about matters in this thread in a post replying specifically to you.

What irritated me was the many who gave him no credit at all and the prevailing theory in 2007 that the bike rode itself when it has since emerged that the bike is more likely quite difficult to ride. I was being deliberately mischievous in pointing out to those who cite the historical record as evidence that stoner could not possibly be as fast as rossi that the historical record also suggests that a bike from a 3rd string manufacturer is unlikely to be as fast as a factory yamaha. As you imply, when a faster bike does turn up, history becomes irrelevant . I would also say this applies to riders, not that this is of much relevance to rossi at present given that he has actually just won the last 2 world championships.

I have absolutely no problem with bike advantages gained within the rules in what has been for most of the time I have followed it a prototype formula in practice to some extent as well as in theory (and have no complaint about valentino having a bike advantage for the last 2 years if he has had one), just with those who detract from stoner when every one else who has won 10 races in a season very likely had a conveyance of fair to middling quality as well .
ARRGH
Destoying a perfectly good fight with reason.
Seriously, not much to argue against there Michael and I understood what was general and what was aimed at me in your post.