This one has been peddled before and doesn't wash
Here one for you, Casey had two very dominant seasons in the 800 era ,and that where the bulk of his win totals come from. with the machine advantage he had both thoses years the wins declined 6,4,3
I hate to be repetitive but Capirossi is irrefutable proof that the GP7 was not the best bike otherwise he, as a rider who was close to winning the 2006 title but for injury, would have been winning on it too. If they had regular 1 - 2 podiums I'd agree. They didn't. When Senna and Prost won 15 of 16 races in the McLaren you could call it the best car. Not the GP7
Capirossi suffered the same fate then as Rossi has now, going from a proven race winner into utter oblivion. The only difference is that with Rossi it is all down to the bike being crap. With Capirossi, all sorts of reasons are given from becoming a father to losing interest to whatever. The truth is, the bike was just as difficult to get the best out of then as it is now. Stoner could do it, no-one else can. Only Hayden got close.
Again, we have one rule for Rossi, a different set for everyone else.
The only thing the GP7 had over other bikes was top speed for a while. Top speed does not win races. A fact Burgess used to harp on about in the pre-Doohan era when Honda used to go all out for power. Stoner has incredible ability to fire out of corners which as you'll know, helps top speed down a long straight. He's shown it over and over, again this weekend when the line and speed he came out of the last turn with to take Lorenzo was incredible - yet Eurosport muppets just refer to the speed of the Honda - no mention of Dovi easily keeping pace with two Hondas on the pit straight of course, lap after lap.
Stoner rode the balls off that Ducati like no-one else could and one day people may accept that it was no easy ride on the 'best bike'.