What's the POTENTIALLY best bike?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 8 2009, 08:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Easy;
Ducati have three really .... riders
Yamaha have only one.

hehehe thats a good one! tell another one!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PASSI @ Sep 8 2009, 09:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>hehehe thats a good one! tell another one!

Sorry, the joke is on J.
No one with a level head would suggest that mostly down to the bike how bad results the slow riders get as long as one rider are superfast on the same bike. Doesn't matter if the ratio is 100/1, if one rider can ride the bike fast against the toughest competition in world, then the bike is fast. I fully recognize Stoner's abilities but there is no evidence that he has super natural abilities and as long as he is human he need a very fast bike to decimate the field as he could do in '07. Even today he need a top bike to keep up with Rossi, Lorenzo and Pedrosa. As Suppo said, these riders are in a different class. They all have competitive bikes and are competitive race in race out.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 8 2009, 09:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Sorry, the joke is on J.
No one with a level head would suggest that mostly down to the bike how bad results the slow riders get as long as one rider are superfast on the same bike. Doesn't matter if the ratio is 100/1, if one rider can ride the bike fast against the toughest competition in world, then the bike is fast. I fully recognize Stoner's abilities but there is no evidence that he has super natural abilities and as long as he is human he need a very fast bike to decimate the field as he could do in '07. Even today he need a top bike to keep up with Rossi, Lorenzo and Pedrosa. As Suppo said, these riders are in a different class. They all have competitive bikes and are competitive race in race out.


So it can never be the rider and always must be the bike according to the highlighted line as if that rider can ride the bike fast, thence all should be able to wheich means their failure to do so is an individual thing.

So, in essence, it is the bike that makes a rider fast, not a rider making a bike fast.

Sorry Babel - don't see it.








Gaz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 8 2009, 09:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So it can never be the rider and always must be the bike according to the highlighted line as if that rider can ride the bike fast, thence all should be able to wheich means their failure to do so is an individual thing.

So, in essence, it is the bike that makes a rider fast, not a rider making a bike fast.

Sorry Babel - don't see it.
Gaz
Whilst I am very much not in the ducati rode itself in 2007 school as you know, babel's argument as I interpret it appears sound to me, and implies that stoner like rossi and lorenzo is an exceptional rider.

Nobody gets on a Hayate and wins ......

Very rarely does someone get on a Suzuki and win.... the other is mediocre

Occasionally one guy wins on a Honda all the others are upper mid pack

Regularly one guy wins on a Ducati, all the others are very low in the WC.

Very often one of two guys wins on a Yamaha, the rest are high midpack to midpack ..... usually ( its been that way since JB went to Yamaha

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 8 2009, 10:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So it can never be the rider and always must be the bike according to the highlighted line as if that rider can ride the bike fast, thence all should be able to wheich means their failure to do so is an individual thing.

So, in essence, it is the bike that makes a rider fast, not a rider making a bike fast.

Sorry Babel - don't see it.


Gaz

You really should stop smoking your socks, at least I hope that's what you've done
You forgot to higlight the part where I reffered to Suppo saying the four riders are in a league of their own. That's how much differences the rider does. Even now, with these computerized wonders the rider make 1-2 sec a lap difference even when you look at only the <20 riders in MotoGP now. It's a no brainer, it happens EVERY weekend. JT, Canepa and Talmacsi are ..... and their results prove it.
That way it's easy to see how it's easy to make bike look bad with a couple of slow riders, harder but possible to make a bike look very good with two or three top riders riding the same bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 8 2009, 03:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Sorry, the joke is on J.
No one with a level head would suggest that mostly down to the bike how bad results the slow riders get as long as one rider are superfast on the same bike. Doesn't matter if the ratio is 100/1, if one rider can ride the bike fast against the toughest competition in world, then the bike is fast. I fully recognize Stoner's abilities but there is no evidence that he has super natural abilities and as long as he is human he need a very fast bike to decimate the field as he could do in '07. Even today he need a top bike to keep up with Rossi, Lorenzo and Pedrosa. As Suppo said, these riders are in a different class. They all have competitive bikes and are competitive race in race out.
I would disagree with this. Clearly the Ducati is a very capable bike when in the hands of someone who can get the best out of it. As Hayden and Melandri have proven, getting the best out of it is very difficult to do. Melandri's results were consistently disappointing, Hayden's have improved but he's still not realizing his individual potential. He may not be the same rider on an 800, but his talent puts him at the best rider outside the fantastic four. Melandri is no slouch either, a world champion and consistently at the front with Rossi, Capirossi, Hayden and Pedrosa at the end of the 990 era.

The potential for the Ducati is there, Stoner clearly is able to get on with it. I understand that. But to say that Melandri's 17th and Hayden's current 14th place in the standings are accurate gauges of their talent is plain wrong. Pure and simple.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Sep 8 2009, 06:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I would disagree with this. Clearly the Ducati is a very capable bike when in the hands of someone who can get the best out of it. As Hayden and Melandri have proven, getting the best out of it is very difficult to do. Melandri's results were consistently disappointing, Hayden's have improved but he's still not realizing his individual potential. He may not be the same rider on an 800, but his talent puts him at the best rider outside the fantastic four. Melandri is no slouch either, a world champion and consistently at the front with Rossi, Capirossi, Hayden and Pedrosa at the end of the 990 era.

The potential for the Ducati is there, Stoner clearly is able to get on with it. I understand that. But to say that Melandri's 17th and Hayden's current 14th place in the standings are accurate gauges of their talent is plain wrong. Pure and simple.

Well I wouldn't argue against that, I'm just saying that the bike is fast with the right rider, just like you said yourself. Hayden is clearly faster than his current 14th but he has had his share of bad luck and a bad start that reflects on his standings. Only recently he has been improving on the Duc. Today, on the Duc I rate him behind Dovi, close to Edwards, typically fighting for 7th, with a friendlier bike maybe he would be up there fighting for 5th. (asuming the top 4 are all in the race of course) That's still about 1 sec off the leaders pace and doesn't really show case the bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Sep 8 2009, 02:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Whilst I am very much not in the ducati rode itself in 2007 school as you know, babel's argument as I interpret it appears sound to me, and implies that stoner like rossi and lorenzo is an exceptional rider.

You've missed what Babel was saying by a mile. How do I know, because you've said his argument is "sound" and that's impossible, simply that cannot be true. He assumes that the bikes are all the same in the same factory. Forgetting of course that Lorenzo has said they are not, while Rossi has both admitted it then denied it. But hey, it’s not the first time the boppers have stuck their head in the sand. Now we have Rossi saying that is "dangerous" to have two good riders on very near equipment getting the same advantages from the factory. He said this is a "new" strategy. So then he is saying that its common and accept to have only one successful rider. Perhaps his fear is that once they are on the same level playing field he won't look so heavenly? Yeah, very dangerous stuff I'd say. Geez we might have a mass suicide by babel and co. once they figure out he's not god after all.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 8 2009, 11:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You've missed what Babel was saying by a mile. How do I know, because you've said his argument is "sound" and that's impossible, simply that cannot be true. He assumes that the bikes are all the same in the same factory. Forgetting of course that Lorenzo has said they are not, while Rossi has both admitted it then denied it. But hey, it’s not the first time the boppers have stuck their head in the sand. Now we have Rossi saying that is "dangerous" to have two good riders on very near equipment getting the same advantages from the factory. He said this is a "new" strategy. So then he is saying that its common and accept to have only one successful rider. Perhaps his fear is that once they are on the same level playing field he won't look so heavenly? Yeah, very dangerous stuff I'd say. Geez we might have a mass suicide by babel and co. once they figure out he's not god after all.
In todays world of crap economy, you would think a little more about what having a ROssi and a Jorge on the same team means in terms of money. Plus the parts thing has to be an issue that will surly get up to the surface faster than you may think. If Vale only has a few more years to go in GP's and has now sewn the discontent seed, Yamaha might really be on the Jorge bandwangon to keep him there as long as they can.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 9 2009, 12:00 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You've missed what Babel was saying by a mile. How do I know, because you've said his argument is "sound" and that's impossible, simply that cannot be true. He assumes that the bikes are all the same in the same factory. Forgetting of course that Lorenzo has said they are not, while Rossi has both admitted it then denied it. But hey, it’s not the first time the boppers have stuck their head in the sand. Now we have Rossi saying that is "dangerous" to have two good riders on very near equipment getting the same advantages from the factory. He said this is a "new" strategy. So then he is saying that its common and accept to have only one successful rider. Perhaps his fear is that once they are on the same level playing field he won't look so heavenly? Yeah, very dangerous stuff I'd say. Geez we might have a mass suicide by babel and co. once they figure out he's not god after all.

Has BM stolen Jumkie's log in or did you have a too much tequila?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 8 2009, 03:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Has BM stolen Jumkie's log in or did you have a too much tequila?

I blame the tequila.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 9 2009, 12:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I blame the tequila.

That explains, a lot.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 8 2009, 04:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well I wouldn't argue against that, I'm just saying that the bike is fast with the right rider, just like you said yourself. Hayden is clearly faster than his current 14th but he has had his share of bad luck and a bad start that reflects on his standings. Only recently he has been improving on the Duc. Today, on the Duc I rate him behind Dovi, close to Edwards, typically fighting for 7th, with a friendlier bike maybe he would be up there fighting for 5th. (asuming the top 4 are all in the race of course) That's still about 1 sec off the leaders pace and doesn't really show case the bike.
You and I don't quite see eye to eye with regard to Hayden but I'm always wearing glasses (ever so small they may be) so I'll call it square. I personally think that on the right bike Hayden could potentially pull out the odd win and fighting for podiums pretty consistently. I rate him right around Pedrosa to be honest. Just my opinion of the guy, like I said though, glasses.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 8 2009, 12:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You really should stop smoking your socks, at least I hope that's what you've done
You forgot to higlight the part where I reffered to Suppo saying the four riders are in a league of their own. That's how much differences the rider does. Even now, with these computerized wonders the rider make 1-2 sec a lap difference even when you look at only the <20 riders in MotoGP now. It's a no brainer, it happens EVERY weekend. JT, Canepa and Talmacsi are ..... and their results prove it.
That way it's easy to see how it's easy to make bike look bad with a couple of slow riders, harder but possible to make a bike look very good with two or three top riders riding the same bike.


Tried smoking socks once, haven't been that drunk in years so may be worth another try as I can't remember the results

Now to the more serious.

I deliberately skipped the Suppo comments as I decided to focus on the comments that I highlighted as I stand by my comments in that your statement reads as the bike being the primary factor in a riders speed whereas I contend it to be the rider and really, Suppo supports this with his 'top four' comment.

It is likely that we mean the same thing but are saying it differently as to me you could put me on an M1 (is their a riders weight limit on these things?) and it would finish a GP sometime later that night whereas you put any of these guys on my super powerful DR650 and they woudl beat me in that same race. I strongly agree it is talent not the bike but again, that one line to me reads as ultimately the bike determines but hey, no harm done.

Back to the socks.





Gaz

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Sep 9 2009, 05:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Tried smoking socks once, haven't been that drunk in years so may be worth another try as I can't remember the results

Now to the more serious.

I deliberately skipped the Suppo comments as I decided to focus on the comments that I highlighted as I stand by my comments in that your statement reads as the bike being the primary factor in a riders speed whereas I contend it to be the rider and really, Suppo supports this with his 'top four' comment.

It is likely that we mean the same thing but are saying it differently as to me you could put me on an M1 (is their a riders weight limit on these things?) and it would finish a GP sometime later that night whereas you put any of these guys on my super powerful DR650 and they woudl beat me in that same race. I strongly agree it is talent not the bike but again, that one line to me reads as ultimately the bike determines but hey, no harm done.

Back to the socks.

Gaz

Socks rule.


To bring this back to topic:
No matter how good the rider is he need a (close to) top bike to be competitive. That's why I find the bike with the most potential to be Suzuki as they have the worst results. Pedrosa and Stoner proves that Honda and Ducati already are top notch bikes.
In other words, you can not rate a bike by the results of the slower riders, it can only be rated by how well the best rider does it and even there we might need adjustments. I think the Suzuki can be faster, it has potential. That was the point I was trying to get through in that post.
Is it the bike or the rider? The answer is to me obvious: Both
I don't know it that means 50/50 or 20/80 but they both have to be at top level today. 50/4o is just as bad as 80/10, neither will succeed.

Right now I feel that the top four have competitive material. May the best man win (as long as that's Rossi of course)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Sep 8 2009, 11:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You've missed what Babel was saying by a mile. How do I know, because you've said his argument is "sound" and that's impossible, simply that cannot be true.
From the biased perspective of a stoner fan I can see some validity in the argument that no-one else as exceptional as him has yet ridden the ducati, although jorge didn't seem inclined to test this despite being offered every possible inducement to do so .

I do agree with you that arguments about hayden in 2006 and stoner in 2007 having bike and/or tyre superiority or complaints about it anyway are difficult to sustain given that rossi has often had such advantages whether or not he needed them, and I initially posted on the forum to debate those detracting from stoner's success on these grounds.

Yamaha is the best bike and has the greatest potential.
Why? They have PASSION for racing, listen to their riders, and have brilliant engineers.

Has everyone seen the new 450 dirtbike?
That kind of engineering comes from passion.

Have you seen Spies's WSBK bike?
It already has the underseat fuel, revised airbox and stiffer swingarm. First year on track!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Sep 10 2009, 11:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yamaha is the best bike and has the greatest potential.
Why? They have PASSION for racing, listen to their riders, and have brilliant engineers.

Has everyone seen the new 450 dirtbike?
That kind of engineering comes from passion.

Have you seen Spies's WSBK bike?
It already has the underseat fuel, revised airbox and stiffer swingarm. First year on track!

I agree Clarky, I was thinking the same thing:

MotoGP Yamaha Rossi.Lorenzo
WSBK Yamaha Spies
WSBK Supersport Yamaha Crutchlow
AMA Superbike Yamaha (runner up) Hayes
AMA Supersport (DSB) Yamaha (runner up) ....
AMA Supercross (which means World SX) Yamaha Stewart

They are winning in every major form of two-wheel racing! THEY HAVE TAKEN OVER THE WORLD!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 7 2009, 01:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The potential in the Yamaha must be by far the lowest of them all if the bike is just half as good as you all suggest. Any better now and it will land graciously on the moon and that I doubt will happen.
Suzuki must be the one with potential, big potential.

I think the same way. Suzuki has the most potential. Next year things will be different. You can screw with and I4 to make it seem like a V4 but only so much.