Yamaha deny Valentino Rossi ultimatum

cliche guevara · Nov 28, 2010

J4rn0 said:
Why not... here is my 5 cents:

Lorenzo's style is pure 250 style: really smooth and with probably the best corner speed in the series. His "porfuera" reputation comes from that: he was negotiating corners so much faster than most, in 125 and 250, that he could often overtake them on the outside.

When the premier class was made of 500cc 2-strokers, the word was that if you tried to ride a 500 in 250 style you were very fast, but you crashed. Lorenzo was in fact very fast from the beginning, but crashed a lot. The 800cc with electronic aids are more forgiving than the old 500s, but not enough.

Eventually Lorenzo learned. In the Yamaha he found the ideal bike for his style -- he did not have to adapt much, but he had to learn how to keep his corner speed style while avoiding the crashes. In that, I think Forcada has helped him a lot tuning his bike, and related electronics, in the best way to that end.

Rossi's style is different. He became smoother when he switched to Yamaha, to adapt to the qualities of the bike; but Rossi was never a corner speed smooth rider, not even when he was racing 250s. His natural style was more aggressive, more like Simoncelli to give an example. In fact one can see that he did exceedingly well on the 500s and the 990s, less with the 800cc that are the bikes that he likes the least (corner speed with the 800cc has increased a lot compared to old 500 and 990).

Still, so far (with Stoner) he has been the most successful rider of the 800cc era. That could change next year, Lorenzo could overtake both Rossi and Stoner... we'll see.

If Rossi can adapt to the Ducati, or adapt the Ducati to himself, I think that's a bike that will suit his natural style because it has lots of power and traction and calls for aggressive riding. Rossi has to find that additional front-end grip and feel he needs for his trademark corner entries on the brakes. It depends on that.

sure rossi did well back then but i think that more aggressive style was required by the nature of the machine and he woudlnt have won that many races if he wasn't able to adapt to whatever motorcycle

i think the more power a bike has (without better tyres that is...) the more you have to point and shoot because acceleration beats corner speed in that respect...at least that used to be the case in 990

not sure however about simoncellis style,i've always thought that his riding was very 250-ish and that hes one of the guys that carry loads of corner speed.but maybe thats just me comparing him to melandri

johnnyvvc · Nov 28, 2010

I think manufacturers look as ever for results but i think they look at more in the moden day business of racing.

They want the reuslts

They want the sales cred

They want the development of their bikes as a whole not just the race machines

I think this is where Rossi really is gold to them, he is i think (Correct me if im wrong though), the only rider on the grid today that has a solid history of all 3 of the above.

He has ridden everything from 2 stroke singles, twins & V-four 500 smokers through 990 monsters to 800 playstations & pretty much everything in between. He knows how to evolve a bike, ride & race a bike & to command more sales clout than probably half the entire grid.

I dont think however he could of gotten where he is today without the genius that is Jerry Burgess at his side. Infact now i come to think about it, maybe JB is worth more to a Mfr than Rossi is!

Keshav · Nov 28, 2010

J4rn0 said:
Here is another one who does not even read what he replies to

1) I never said there was no # 1

2) What I said is the #1 rider leads the development

3) I said Yamaha does not give preferential treatment to #1, but #1 leads the development, so objectively the bike is designed on his inputs.

PS: You want me to mention Rossi's titles? I never need to mention them. Maybe your mind is like your name -- a cliché

Are you familiar with the legend of Ouroboros? If leading the development is not preferential I don't know what is.

J4rn0 · Nov 28, 2010

Keshav said:
Are you familiar with the legend of Ouroboros? If leading the development is not preferential I don't know what is.

Really, you do not know?

1) Getting preferential treatment means that rider #1 gets the most updated material during the season, rider #2 gets it only later, or never.

2) Leading the development means that both riders get the same updates at the same time (so, same treatment), but the updates are made mostly on the inputs of the #1 rider.

Most teams do not do 1) nowadays, I think; but all teams do 2) as a regular practice, with the possible exception of Honda that insist they'll develop the bike separately for each rider.

cliche guevara · Nov 28, 2010

J4rn0 said:
Really, you do not know?

1) Getting preferential treatment means that rider #1 gets the most updated material during the season, rider #2 gets it only later, or never.

2) Leading the development means that both riders get the same updates at the same time (so, same treatment), but the updates are made mostly on the inputs of the #1 rider.

Most teams do not do 1) nowadays, I think; but all teams do 2) as a regular practice, with the possible exception of Honda that insist they'll develop the bike separately for each rider.

dude seriously i really don't mean to be rude but this is getting ridiculous. theres no use twisting it ,rossi left and it had NOTHING to do with him not having the same opportunitys in the team as lorenzo. if anything ,most people would agree it was about his unwillingness to share number 1 status within the team. theres no shame in it, many riders and drivers openly state they can do their best if the team is centered around them. rossi wanted to keep it that way,yamaha didn't ,so they decided not to continue together.

and as keshav said, the only ridiculous thing is how his fans try to find excuses for something he himself openly stated (which is like i said perfectly fine)

Keshav · Nov 28, 2010

J4rn0 said:
Really, you do not know?

1) Getting preferential treatment means that rider #1 gets the most updated material during the season, rider #2 gets it only later, or never.

2) Leading the development means that both riders get the same updates at the same time (so, same treatment), but the updates are made mostly on the inputs of the #1 rider.

Most teams do not do 1) nowadays, I think; but all teams do 2) as a regular practice, with the possible exception of Honda that insist they'll develop the bike separately for each rider.

Your #1 point is good but does not invalidate the primary proposition which (as Hayden will attest) is that it's absolutely paramount for

the rider in question - to be the beneficiary of changes in the bike that are designed according to that rider's desired specifications.

You yourself pointed out that Rossi's desire to not be at Yamaha was largely fueled by his dissatisfaction over the prospect of riding a bike

altered to meet Lorenzo's specs.

michaelm · Nov 28, 2010

cliché guevara said:
dude seriously i really don't mean to be rude but this is getting ridiculous. theres no use twisting it ,rossi left and it had NOTHING to do with him not having the same opportunitys in the team as lorenzo. if anything ,most people would agree it was about his unwillingness to share number 1 status within the team. theres no shame in it, many riders and drivers openly state they can do their best if the team is centered around them. rossi wanted to keep it that way,yamaha didn't ,so they decided not to continue together.

and as keshav said, the only ridiculous thing is how his fans try to find excuses for something he himself openly stated (which is like i said perfectly fine)

I have to say I think things in this thread and generally of late have gone beyond retribution for unfair previous hayden (and stoner) bashing to rossi-bashing for its own sake, and he whilst not the world's first (or second depending on your religious persuasion) perfect man is an utterly fantastic bike rider and does not warrant much bashing, even if some of his fans can be annoying.

I think his move is partially motivated by ego, but he has quite a deal of justification for having a healthy ego, and if he wants to be a lead rider rather than a number 2 or dual number 1 rider, presumably at least partly because he realises he is running out of time and sees ducati as the best chance to fulfil his remaining ambitions in motogp which would seem likely to be winning more championships and possibly breaking ago's win record, then surely it is allowable for him to make that choice. He has never made any secret of wanting to be the lead rider in any team he has been in throughout his career, and his attitude whether admirable or not was the same when he was uninjured and dominant. I can't see that he is bound to take a particular challenge such as beating lorenzo in the same team (which he has already done when uninjured anyway) just because some people (it seems mainly fans of other riders) want him to. I also as a mick doohan fan can't criticise him if he believes lorenzo is getting a free ride on the back of his development , since I was on mick's side for having the same attitude to alex criville. In fact he has set jorge a challenge for next year, that of beating him and the others on a bike which jorge has developed . He may even think a jorge-derived yamaha will not be competitive against a resurgent honda for the next two years; this is unlikely imo but jorge goes into 2011 in a similar position to alex criville going into the 2000 season after his 1999 championship win, although he appears to be better than alex.

michaelm · Nov 28, 2010

double

BarryMachine · Nov 28, 2010

You all talk as if "ego" is a bad thing, even you Michael.

I'd say Rossi has a very useful ego, but not an "objectionable ego". His ego seems more tuned to giving him a drive to win ...... hence useful.

That "ego" is something that I would argue mysteriously dissapeared from Hayden at the end of 06 and is in part why he has not gone too well since then.

michaelm · Nov 29, 2010

BarryMachine said:
You all talk as if "ego" is a bad thing, even you Michael.

I'd say Rossi has a very useful ego, but not an "objectionable ego". His ego seems more tuned to giving him a drive to win ...... hence useful.

That "ego" is something that I would argue mysteriously dissapeared from Hayden at the end of 06 and is in part why he has not gone too well since then.

"Ego is not a dirty word" indeed barry, I agree. The song even sprang to mind when I made the post.

Keshav · Nov 29, 2010

michaelm said:
I have to say I think things in this thread and generally of late have gone beyond retribution for unfair previous hayden (and stoner) bashing to rossi-bashing for its own sake, and he whilst not the world's first (or second depending on your religious persuasion) perfect man is an utterly fantastic bike rider and does not warrant much bashing, even if some of his fans can be annoying.

I think his move is partially motivated by ego, but he has quite a deal of justification for having a healthy ego, and if he wants to be a lead rider rather than a number 2 or dual number 1 rider, presumably at least partly because he realises he is running out of time and sees ducati as the best chance to fulfil his remaining ambitions in motogp which would seem likely to be winning more championships and possibly breaking ago's win record, then surely it is allowable for him to make that choice. He has never made any secret of wanting to be the lead rider in any team he has been in throughout his career, and his attitude whether admirable or not was the same when he was uninjured and dominant. I can't see that he is bound to take a particular challenge such as beating lorenzo in the same team (which he has already done when uninjured anyway) just because some people (it seems mainly fans of other riders) want him to. I also as a mick doohan fan can't criticise him if he believes lorenzo is getting a free ride on the back of his development , since I was on mick's side for having the same attitude to alex criville. In fact he has set jorge a challenge for next year, that of beating him and the others on a bike which jorge has developed . He may even think a jorge-derived yamaha will not be competitive against a resurgent honda for the next two years; this is unlikely imo but jorge goes into 2011 in a similar position to alex criville going into the 2000 season after his 1999 championship win, although he appears to be better than alex.

I have said before - that ego is healthy, but vanity is very much a different thing altogether.

A good deal of the focus of "the bashing" has been on the Rossi fans and the terrific vanity they exude

when trying to put a positive spin on Rossi's move to Ducati - which on the face of it seems a horrendous error in judgement

given that no-one in the last three years, other than Stoner, has been able to ride them with any real confidence.

Seeing as Rossi is best rider all 'round - it just seems logical that his best hopes for winning in 2010 would be

on the Yamaha - despite Lorenzo leading development. If Rossi's performance on the Duc is poor compared to

what some speculate it would be on the Yamaha - then we can be forgiven for thinking the departure from Yamaha was

largely due to his vanity.

If he does well - it's a win win situation for all. We'd all love to see Rossi with his legendary development skills

create a Ducati that is user friendly for all the others riding them - as it would make the whole field more competitive, fueling more mid-pack battles and less of the current nonsense with Ducati pilots who fluctuate between tentatively feeling their way around the track and constantly crashing in luckless attempts to emulate the successes of Mr.Stoner.

Jumkie · Nov 29, 2010

cliché guevara said:
dude seriously i really don't mean to be rude but this is getting ridiculous. theres no use twisting it ,rossi left and it had NOTHING to do with him not having the same opportunitys in the team as lorenzo. if anything ,most people would agree it was about his unwillingness to share number 1 status within the team. theres no shame in it, many riders and drivers openly state they can do their best if the team is centered around them. rossi wanted to keep it that way,yamaha didn't ,so they decided not to continue together.

and as keshav said, the only ridiculous thing is how his fans try to find excuses for something he himself openly stated (which is like i said perfectly fine)

U hav proven to be a very level headed memeber. Great take above.

Jumkie · Nov 29, 2010

BarryMachine said:
You all talk as if "ego" is a bad thing, even you Michael.

I'd say Rossi has a very useful ego, but not an "objectionable ego". His ego seems more tuned to giving him a drive to win ...... hence useful.

That "ego" is something that I would argue mysteriously dissapeared from Hayden at the end of 06 and is in part why he has not gone too well since then.

U mistake ego for vanity and arrogance.

Also, i think J4rnos presumption that Yamaha would no longer be taking Rossis cues for development had he stayed is laughable at best.

J4rn0 · Nov 29, 2010

Jumkie said:
U mistake ego for vanity and arrogance.

Also, i think J4rnos presumption that Yamaha would no longer be taking Rossis cues for development had he stayed is laughable at best.

Did I ever say that?

At least read before laughing, Jum

.

I said Lorenzo would be leading the development as WC -- that does not mean Yamaha would ignore the inputs of a man like Rossi. But again, why should Rossi stay in that position? "Helping" his rival developing the bike to his liking, making less mistakes?

Let me have a good laugh myself

Tom · Nov 29, 2010

J4rn0 said:
I said Lorenzo would be leading the development as WC -- that does not mean Yamaha would ignore the inputs of a man like Rossi. But again, why should Rossi stay in that position? "Helping" his rival developing the bike to his liking, making less mistakes?

Well if Rossi wants development to focus on him he could always try to perform better than Lorenzo. But perhaps he realized this year that it was much harder than he wanted. And besides, if Rossi is to be believed riding a bike that someone else developed is much easier and a bit of a gift/advantage.

Jumkie · Nov 29, 2010

J4rn0 said:
Did I ever say that?

At least read before laughing, Jum

.

I said Lorenzo would be leading the development as WC -- that does not mean Yamaha would ignore the inputs of a man like Rossi. But again, why should Rossi stay in that position? "Helping" his rival developing the bike to his liking, making less mistakes?

Let me have a good laugh myself

Ah man, dude, are you gonna deny what you said now? You just made a whole defense in this thread sugarcoating why Rossi "really" left by saying he left because he was no longer gonna be driving development at Fiat Yamaha. I'm saying this is laughable because 'everybody' knows what a great developer Rossi is. So for you to suggest he left because the development would no longer be based on his cues going forward is funny at best. At worst, its plumb dumb.

Honestly J4rno, do you believe that? Come on dude, Rossi is by far the most influential man on any team, even at the Lorenzo/Rossi Yamaha squad. The question was not that he would or would not be driving development, but whether he had bought into this year's suggestion that Lorenzo is only good because he rests on the laurels of Vale's development. At least that's what is most closely related in this particular thread (because on others its been that Rossi couldn't stand Yamaha paying him lots of money that, according to a particular perspective, was taken from the mouth of Rossi.

J4, buddy, pal, how many of these apologies for Rossi's less than lofty reasons why he left Yamaha will we have to read?

Jumkie · Nov 29, 2010

I know you are not laughing, but let me entertain the rest of us reading this thread that will be sure to make them laugh at your logic.

You said earlier in this thread:

J4rn0 said:
Try to think more instead of laughing too much then

But as a matter of fact rider #1 will lead the development, and it is likely that a development led by Lorenzo and Forcada would objectively be tailored on Lorenzo's style which is different from Rossi's.

That is, Rossi would be hampered by the development being decidedly for Lorenzo. BUT you also said:

J4rn0 said:
Did I ever say that?

At least read before laughing, Jum

.

I said Lorenzo would be leading the development as WC -- that does not mean Yamaha would ignore the inputs of a man like Rossi. But again, why should Rossi stay in that position? "Helping" his rival developing the bike to his liking, making less mistakes?

Let me have a good laugh myself

Classic!

Ok, so let us get this logic straight. On one hand you tell us Rossi left because Yamaha would develop a bike away from Rossi, but on the other hand you tell us Lorenzo would have some kind of advantage if Rossi continued developing a bike for Rossi, so Rossi left? Hahaha, wow, that is some convoluted .... you put us through just so you can rationalize some benign sugarcoated reason why Rossi actually left. Why can't you just admit he left Rossi hated the fact that despite giving Yamaha a very public ultimatum (the one that has suddenly become invisible) it wanted to keep both great riders, and resigned Lorenzo, an act of defiance that Rossi would not stand for, hence him leaving. Why can't you admit he left because he just couldn't stand being beat by a guy on the same machine (you know, that bike that was designed for Rossi, but is now according to you an advantage for Lorenzo).

BarryMachine · Nov 29, 2010

Jumkie said:
U mistake ego for vanity and arrogance.

Also, i think J4rnos presumption that Yamaha would no longer be taking Rossis cues for development had he stayed is laughable at best.

No I am fully aware of vanity and arrogance. Folks here were lumping them with ego, it was I who indicated that perhaps a distinction should be made

Vanity can also be a good thing, as too can arrogance.

Keshav · Nov 29, 2010

BarryMachine said:
No I am fully aware of vanity and arrogance. Folks here were lumping them with ego, it was I who indicated that perhaps a distinction should be made

Vanity can also be a good thing, as too can arrogance.

Care to elucidate?

Jumkie · Nov 29, 2010

BarryMachine said:
No I am fully aware of vanity and arrogance. Folks here were lumping them with ego, it was I who indicated that perhaps a distinction should be made

Vanity can also be a good thing, as too can arrogance.

I think u r confusing vanity & arrogance with determination. The latter, Hayden has in spades.

Any positive connotation u r attempting to assign vanity & arrogance, i think if u visit the dictionary u will find an actual English word that describes the quality. I think u may b searching for words like assertive, and confident.

Search

Search

Yamaha deny Valentino Rossi ultimatum

cliche guevara

johnnyvvc

Keshav

Attachments

J4rn0

cliche guevara

Keshav

michaelm

michaelm

BarryMachine

michaelm

Keshav

Jumkie

Jumkie

J4rn0

Tom

Jumkie

Jumkie

BarryMachine

Keshav

Jumkie

Similar threads

Recent Discussions