<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Jan 10 2010, 08:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's an unlikely goal, I'll concede that. But it is possible. I think Stoner is the strongest of himself, Lorenzo and Pedrosa and foresee multiple championships and race wins once Rossi leaves. It's too early to tell with Spies, like you mentioned, but based on the riders within the series today bar Rossi, I don't think there is anyone as strong as Stoner. I suppose that's the basic disagreement between you and I on the subject.
Fair enough. He's looked every bit as composed as Rossi in the races he started since his comeback and racing intelligence wasn't entirely necessary considering his unmatched pace in his two wins and his decision to settle for a comfortable second when Lorenzo's pace in Estoril was too quick.
Just a few points; when only in "for the fun" on the last few races it's not to hard to look composed. It's championship fight that tell men from mice.
You consider him as fast as they get, and I don't totally disagree but how fast is he if he keeps on crashing or making grave mistakes? Stoner had a few self inflicted problems last season and they came from his own desire to be fastest, not first over the line but fastest around the track at all time, any time. I agree that it has partly to do with experience and race craft but doesn't it say a thing or two about his speed.
In my eyes he risk too much, especially in practice, and as good as these guys are they can pretty close calculate speed vs crash risk. I strongly suspect that two or even tree riders often constrain their speed more than Stoner do to minimize their risk of crashing and they are still in the fight for victories.
The results of last year indicate that they might hit a better balance?
So, Stoners speed is well documented and undeniable but is it really a relevant factor IF it cause him to crash too often/too hard? I MHO it should at least be downplayed to the level that there are currently four riders that can be fastest on race day and take a convincing win.
Fair enough. He's looked every bit as composed as Rossi in the races he started since his comeback and racing intelligence wasn't entirely necessary considering his unmatched pace in his two wins and his decision to settle for a comfortable second when Lorenzo's pace in Estoril was too quick.
Just a few points; when only in "for the fun" on the last few races it's not to hard to look composed. It's championship fight that tell men from mice.
You consider him as fast as they get, and I don't totally disagree but how fast is he if he keeps on crashing or making grave mistakes? Stoner had a few self inflicted problems last season and they came from his own desire to be fastest, not first over the line but fastest around the track at all time, any time. I agree that it has partly to do with experience and race craft but doesn't it say a thing or two about his speed.
In my eyes he risk too much, especially in practice, and as good as these guys are they can pretty close calculate speed vs crash risk. I strongly suspect that two or even tree riders often constrain their speed more than Stoner do to minimize their risk of crashing and they are still in the fight for victories.
The results of last year indicate that they might hit a better balance?
So, Stoners speed is well documented and undeniable but is it really a relevant factor IF it cause him to crash too often/too hard? I MHO it should at least be downplayed to the level that there are currently four riders that can be fastest on race day and take a convincing win.
