The next step for Ducati is an alien

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Stoner is subject to stress, we know. Stress can be a cause of allergic symptoms as much as the allergene itself, and he was surely stressed in 2009. The Ducati was already basically a scrxxed project. Why?

One aspect that is often forgotten (but that was and is very present in the mind of people working at Borgo Panigale) is that the rule freezing the number of engines (and the engine themselves) was basically the final nail in the coffin of Preziosi's Ducati -- as it was the only bike using the engine as a stressed member.

After the single tire rule, the ability to change frame stiffness and weight distribution became mandatory to adjust to the new specs, and Ducati found themselves fuXXed.

They should have done what Dall'Igna did last year immediately, but went the wrong way (also the rules didn't help then). They wasted the Rossi years trying to work around the problem, when what was actually needed was a completely new chassis AND a smaller and lighter engine, to fit into the new frame in the proper way with a possibility to adjust its position properly.

This is a key to understand what really happened, and is consistently ignored by our forum gurus. There are others keys as well. Of course it's easy to tell now, it wasn't along the way.
I agree that the bike was eventually screwed by the control tyre which mainly became apparent in retrospect as you say, and the whole integrated chassis concept became completely unviable anyway when they brought in the engine number limitations.

Disagree about 2009. He had no dnfs that year (he had I DNS after the warm-up lap off in the last race attributed to a faulty tyre warmer) . He won Qatar handily, had competitive pace but not the physical endurance to finish races till his break, then more than competitive pace and no problems with physical endurance on his return.

You are in fact buying into the Ducati narrative which he has said both in his book and on other occasions was, along with I am sure the moderately widespread spitefulness towards him during his travails, the major cause of his disillusionment with both Ducati and the sport. He clearly believes his problem was mainly a physical one, and there is no evidence that it was otherwise.

I am a physician myself, and on first impression considered lactose intolerance a rather prosaic explanation, but it did eventually all hang together medically. If it was "stress", why did he have no physical endurance problems in 2010 when the bike was undeniably terrible and he was putting it down frequently?
 
Fantastic post Mike. I dismissed J4rno's idea that stress and pressure got to CS entirely, you're a patient man to give it any kind of noteworthy discussion. Stoner and ALL the riders are in pressure cooker scenario 100% of the season. I still resent all this that added insult to injury by the experts second guessing (worst for me were his fellow colleagues and support staff in the paddock) when Casey became ill. Almost without exception, our vast "expert" pundits and pseudo jounolists got this episode dastardly wrong, yet they still drive our sport's narrative. Why so many of us give them carte blanche to offer explanations that our own eyes and analysis refute is beyond me. I guess it's just human nature to trust "experts" I guess.
 
Last edited:
The thing that gets overlooked with Stoner imo is he did not perfectly gel or immediately feel comfortable and go fast on the 2007 Duc like it was a match made in heaven. In fact if I remember correctly in his book he says his first impression of the Ducati was pretty much the same as every other rider, including Rossi, probably "F&%K!!!!", though he says it more politically correctly as "oh dear what have I got myself into?"

So to answer J4rn0, talent? Stoner initially cant ride the Ducati any better than Rossi on first impression. So if not talent then what else can we say it was that enabled him to find a way to ride it? Because this is the crux of the situation. He initially couldn't ride it well or fast at all and thought he'd made a monumental .... up leaving Honda. I disagree with your opinion it didn't understeer in 2007, he says it handled like a pig then just as it did later.

So he says he tried something radical that the whole team initially disagreed with. He doesn't elaborate what, he says that with an open mind and by throwing away all preconceived ideas or habits that this is how a motorcycle should be and this is how its to ridden he found a way, a radical way, found a set-up, that no other rider has been able to duplicate. We could say without Gabbarini and co he wouldn't have been able to do it and this is why its not talent alone that decides anything, it is after all a team effort.

But before going overboard on Stoner love like any human he has weaknesses so sure Lorenzo, Rossi have beaten him. As MM is currently proving all to well there is no ultimate alien roaming around out there ready to perform miracles for us all to marvel at.
 
The thing that gets overlooked with Stoner imo is he did not perfectly gel or immediately feel comfortable and go fast on the 2007 Duc like it was a match made in heaven. In fact if I remember correctly in his book he says his first impression of the Ducati was pretty much the same as every other rider, including Rossi, probably "F&%K!!!!", though he says it more politically correctly as "oh dear what have I got myself into?"

So to answer J4rn0, talent? Stoner initially cant ride the Ducati any better than Rossi on first impression. So if not talent then what else can we say it was that enabled him to find a way to ride it? Because this is the crux of the situation. He initially couldn't ride it well or fast at all and thought he'd made a monumental .... up leaving Honda. I disagree with your opinion it didn't understeer in 2007, he says it handled like a pig then just as it did later.

So he says he tried something radical that the whole team initially disagreed with. He doesn't elaborate what, he says that with an open mind and by throwing away all preconceived ideas or habits that this is how a motorcycle should be and this is how its to ridden he found a way, a radical way, found a set-up, that no other rider has been able to duplicate. We could say without Gabbarini and co he wouldn't have been able to do it and this is why its not talent alone that decides anything, it is after all a team effort.

But before going overboard on Stoner love like any human he has weaknesses so sure Lorenzo, Rossi have beaten him. As MM is currently proving all to well there is no ultimate alien roaming around out there ready to perform miracles for us all to marvel at.
I think there are several different issues. Stoner clearly did something exceptional on the Ducati. I actually agree with J4rn0 that his riding style may not have suited a Yamaha, although this is speculative while his Ducati performance is not. Also agree with your last paragraph, he didn't beat Lorenzo in 2012 despite being on a factory Honda and even MM is now looking not to be an "ultimate alien" who can overcome the limitations of any bike. Rossi does stand apart as Mick Doohan has said because he has managed to ride at the very top for so long, for even longer now than when Mick made his statement.

I continue to believe Stoner and his doctors about his health issues in 2009, however.
 
Last edited:
I have read often this notion of machine characteristics suiting a rider. I think its ........ and it's never actually been proven. Stoner killed on a decent Ducati, killed on decent Honda, and would have just the same killed on decent Yamaha. Peeple have been claiming Marquez "style " was perfect for Honda UNTIL it's not. What happened to this notion? DEBUNKED!

Ive always felt that Yamaha does require a certain style to win on. It seems that the only blokes that have success on M1's are former 250 riders.

Marquez's style is suitable for coffins and gravel pits.

Michael M. Do you have a flashing red light in your house that starts blinking whenever someone on the internet starts to criticize Stoner?:D
 
Ive always felt that Yamaha does require a certain style to win on. It seems that the only blokes that have success on M1's are former 250 riders.

Marquez's style is suitable for coffins and gravel pits.

Michael M. Do you have a flashing red light in your house that starts blinking whenever someone on the internet starts to criticize Stoner?:D

To an extent, although the attitude of some towards his issues in 2009 is something which particularly annoys me (and him it would seem) as do claims that he somehow failed at Ducati rather than them having unprecedented success in his time there.

This is a fan forum as far as I am aware, and I am very definitely an unabashed Stoner fan. Do you ever post about riders you admire in threads which concern them? Stoner is a rider whom some would classify as an "alien" who rode for Ducati.

I have absolutely no problem with J4rn0 btw; he has always been one of the most erudite/well informed posters on here, and also one of the fairest, as well as being a long time admirer of Stoner and what he did at and for Ducati, and I certainly don't classify him with those who gleefully gloated about Stoner when he had his issues back in 2009.
 
Last edited:
#22, you asked, how many championships did it [Ducati] burn? That is a fantastic question and one I've pondered. Ducati isn't all to blame, as I think Dorna did more to put them on the back foot by taking away their hard earned package with Bridgestone. So I would ask, how many championships did Dorna burn for Ducati--had they continued to develop their bike along with Ducati?

So the irony is then that karma got to Rossi in one form or another. He demanded the Brisgestone tyres to beat Ducati which effecteively made Dorna force Michelin out of the sport, then Rossi went to Ducati when he threw his toys out of Yamaha's pram and was ...... by? The Ducati's inability to work with control tyres!

Love it.
 
Thank god for Carmelo Clause, had it not been fir him Rossi would have been forced to stay at Ducati or retire.
 
I agree that the bike was eventually screwed by the control tyre which mainly became apparent in retrospect as you say, and the whole integrated chassis concept became completely unviable anyway when they brought in the engine number limitations.

Disagree about 2009. He had no dnfs that year (he had I DNS after the warm-up lap off in the last race attributed to a faulty tyre warmer) . He won Qatar handily, had competitive pace but not the physical endurance to finish races till his break, then more than competitive pace and no problems with physical endurance on his return.

You are in fact buying into the Ducati narrative which he has said both in his book and on other occasions was, along with I am sure the moderately widespread spitefulness towards him during his travails, the major cause of his disillusionment with both Ducati and the sport. He clearly believes his problem was mainly a physical one, and there is no evidence that it was otherwise.

I am a physician myself, and on first impression considered lactose intolerance a rather prosaic explanation, but it did eventually all hang together medically. If it was "stress", why did he have no physical endurance problems in 2010 when the bike was undeniably terrible and he was putting it down frequently?

You may remember I wasn't giving much credit to the theory of Stoner hit by stress back then; but now, after he retired declaring he found many aspects of life as a professional racer stressful, I can't help thinking that stress played a part also in that period.

The understeer problems of the Ducati began with the CF chassis; again, Stoner with his skill may have compensated a lot for it, but that is when it began. Then tire changes and engine regulations compounded the problem.

Stoner himself stated that he felt the stress; that's the reason he gave when he retired.
 
You may remember I wasn't giving much credit to the theory of Stoner hit by stress back then; but now, after he retired declaring he found many aspects of life as a professional racer stressful, I can't help thinking that stress played a part also in that period.

The understeer problems of the Ducati began with the CF chassis; again, Stoner with his skill may have compensated a lot for it, but that is when it began. Then tire changes and engine regulations compounded the problem.

Stoner himself stated that he felt the stress; that's the reason he gave when he retired.

You could perhaps ask Stoner about the handling/turning of the 2008 bike at the Spanish and Portuguese races in that year.

This is hard to discuss at this remove in time (and probably boring for others as has been said), after considerable revisionism, not least by Stoner himself, whom even I would not claim is incapable of being self serving. Outside of that however I do believe the influence of the tyre changes was major as you have said and was not as well appreciated at the time, and his perspective on the Ducati doubtless also changed when he got on the HRC bike.

Being competitive at all at any time against Honda and Yamaha when Ducati /Ducati Corse were on their own was remarkable, and to be able to dominate as they did in 2007 whoever was riding the bike was even more so. I have no doubt the 2007 bike was relatively better than its successors as you also say. They do though now have a bike which seems to handle and brake fairly well , and would definitely appear to have a power advantage given they have more fuel and can run their engines harder, but is still not winning, hence the topic of this thread.

I do have what I believe is a fairly nuanced view on Stoner's health issues in 2009, partly based on details perhaps mainly reported only in Australia regarding the investigations he had and by whom he was investigated, and it seems fairly clear that what he ended up with was an electrolyte disturbance which affected his endurance rather significantly. Given this the bike being rather demanding doubtless didn't help.
 
Last edited:
You can't blame Stoner for feeling stressed. He was single handedly winning on a bike that WAS .... (no arguments, it burned 3 other WC's before many admitted it) but then whenever he was struggling, his bosses to whom he delivered their only championship were looking for other riders and the press were labelling him 'weak'.

No, if he had been treated like Marquez has been this year (i.e. riding like a complete .... and being excused by most because the RCV has apparently overnight been attacked by Nazi Gremlins) then maybe he'd have stuck around.
 
You could perhaps ask Stoner about the handling/turning of the 2008 bike at the Spanish and Portuguese races in that year.

This is hard to discuss at this remove in time (and probably boring for others as has been said), after considerable revisionism, not least by Stoner himself, whom even I would not claim is incapable of being self serving. Outside of that however I do believe the influence of the tyre changes was major as you have said and was not as well appreciated at the time, and his perspective on the Ducati doubtless also changed when he got on the HRC bike.

Being competitive at all at any time against Honda and Yamaha when Ducati /Ducati Corse were on their own was remarkable, and to be able to dominate as they did in 2007 whoever was riding the bike was even more so. I have no doubt the 2007 bike was relatively better than its successors as you also say. They do though now have a bike which seems to handle and brake fairly well , and would definitely appear to have a power advantage given they have more fuel and can run their engines harder, but is still not winning, hence the topic of this thread.

I do have what I believe is a fairly nuanced view on Stoner's health issues in 2009, partly based on details perhaps mainly reported only in Australia regarding the investigations he had and by whom he was investigated, and it seems fairly clear that what he ended up with was an electrolyte disturbance which affected his endurance rather significantly. Given this the bike being rather demanding doubtless didn't help.

What you say is true -- still the bike got worse when they replaced trellis with CF, and the tire changes certainly played a big part. CF, on paper, allows better fine tuning of stiffness in precise areas, and they hoped to be able to adjust to the single tire better using CF; but for some reason I don't now they also changed the engine mounting points dramaticallyat the same time, and that, many believe, changed the overall behavior of the bike for the worse.

The fact that the current Ducati, now finally out of that long tunnel, is still not winning, is not so surprising given the youth of the project; although I believe that riders do matter and that a Stoner in decent form would have already won on it. As good as Dovi is, I also have the impression that Rossi would have won that duel with him at Qatar even on swapped bikes. Ducati may be missing that tiny bit more that only some riders can give.
 
CF, on paper, allows better fine tuning of stiffness in precise areas, and they hoped to be able to adjust to the single tire better using CF;

As I'm sure you will agree J4rn0 my friend, it's a black art. Remember the Cagiva?
 
As I'm sure you will agree J4rn0 my friend, it's a black art. Remember the Cagiva?

Yes. But Ducati with the new single tire rule didn't have much choice, as they were not yet ready to redesign the entire engine and adopt a brand new twin spar aluminum frame (as they eventually had to do); and nevertheless they needed a way to play with stiffness levels better than what trellis would allow, in order to adjust to new tires no more tailored for their bike.

That was Preziosi's bet. Still it's difficult to understand why contextually he changed the engine mounting points so radically, shortening the front sub-frame dramatically and introducing more variables into an already complicated equation. As a result, the front end became unreliable.

They had some success with the black art though -- they are still using a CF swingarm after all.
 
What you say is true -- still the bike got worse when they replaced trellis with CF, and the tire changes certainly played a big part. CF, on paper, allows better fine tuning of stiffness in precise areas, and they hoped to be able to adjust to the single tire better using CF; but for some reason I don't now they also changed the engine mounting points dramaticallyat the same time, and that, many believe, changed the overall behavior of the bike for the worse.

The fact that the current Ducati, now finally out of that long tunnel, is still not winning, is not so surprising given the youth of the project; although I believe that riders do matter and that a Stoner in decent form would have already won on it. As good as Dovi is, I also have the impression that Rossi would have won that duel with him at Qatar even on swapped bikes. Ducati may be missing that tiny bit more that only some riders can give.

This.
 
You can't blame Stoner for feeling stressed. He was single handedly winning on a bike that WAS .... (no arguments, it burned 3 other WC's before many admitted it) but then whenever he was struggling, his bosses to whom he delivered their only championship were looking for other riders and the press were labelling him 'weak'.

No, if he had been treated like Marquez has been this year (i.e. riding like a complete .... and being excused by most because the RCV has apparently overnight been attacked by Nazi Gremlins) then maybe he'd have stuck around.

I thought only the engine on Ducatis were stressed members. I didnt realize the riders were as well.
 
I dont believe anyone else would have won on that 2007 bike but he was given somewhat of an advantage due to Honda designing the mass centralization pedrocycle where mass centralization apparently meant putting their brains inside their arsehole. While I dont believe the Ducati had an overwhelming advantage (albiet somewhat of one) in 07, its success was in no doubt aided by honda and yamahas missteps.

He was given an advantage because Honda somehow managed to .... up the formula they themselves championed so adamantly for?

If you want to say he had an advantage on the Ducati—which I would argue is debatable considering his teammate did nothing on the bike until the flyaway rounds when there were no Saturday Night Specials to save the Michelin men—then that advantage would be his ability to find a setup and a technique that he could utilize to win races.

Whine? He finally spurred Ducati to begin changing the bike in order for it to be where it is now. Do you think if they would have stuck with the frameless design, they would be where they are now? Probably not

The FACT that Rossi and his TEAM were able to win championships with two different manufacturers is a testament not only to his riding ablilty, but also their INPUT means that Ducati finally had the impetus to change. Something SToner and his team were never able to do. So .... Rossi what a ..... punk

So your argument is that Rossi should be credited for his spectacular failure—and "spectacular failure" could be applied to any factory Ducati rider's tenure post-990, but the hype surrounding Rossi's switch made his failure more spectacular than most—because it made Ducati realize that they had to change?

I guess, but I don't really follow the plot from Point A to Point B. That's like a school bully taking credit for motivating a scrawny, Pedrosa-sized freshman to hit the gym. (Kind of. Maybe a bad analogy, but you get the gist.)

What seems more likely to me—from an outsider's perspective, and perhaps J4rno can shed some light on this—is that Audi entered the frame, witnessed this disaster and proceeded to tear Corse apart and piece it back together with Dall'Igna at the helm.

hell even Burgess and Rossi had assessed Stoner to be incompetent, and would go in to fix the Ducati in 80 secs

That proved to be a very ill-advised comment, but I don't think Burgess ever thought Stoner was incompetent. Burgess lobbied (unsuccessfully) to get Stoner a seat at Yamaha in 2006. Maybe it was nationalism, but I recall his admiration of Stoner to be quite genuine. Although I suppose that could've changed after 2008.

They should have done what Dall'Igna did last year immediately, but went the wrong way (also the rules didn't help then). They wasted the Rossi years trying to work around the problem, when what was actually needed was a completely new chassis AND a smaller and lighter engine, to fit into the new frame in the proper way with a possibility to adjust its position properly.

I don't disagree with you, but wouldn't that have been a pretty massive investment considering there was, what, one or two years of the 800 formula left?
 
Last edited:

Recent Discussions

Recent Discussions

Back
Top