Motorcycle Forums

???

I can take it no problem, it's only a shitty website populated by wankers like you anyway. I just pop on here every now and again to abuse fuckwits like you and to try and hammer another nail into the coffin that was Mostly Cretins and Nobheads.

stoner's crashes

Your argument concerning stoner being crash prone  due to poor judgement hinges on 1 crash, wosi, sachsenring 2012, and I am sure you would not judge rossi's career on his one crash in the last race of 2006.
I agree stoner's focus wasn't what it should have been in 2012 anyway, but then again perhaps this is part of why he decided he should retire. To be dnf free riding like he does would I think require enormous focus, and I don't disagree that lorenzo's and valentino's methods are more conducive to longevity.

Nevertheless Stoner has when on the right bike demontstrated the ability to ride dnf free, as he did in 2007 and 2011, and 2009 for that matter ( he did dns several times that year of course).  

Otherwise with the ducati the question is whether you would prefer 4th with 3 or 4 wins, or 6th with less crashes and no wins. As I keep saying, there is no evidence that the bike could be ridden at a competitive pace by any method other than stoner's, and as someone has said you guys by saying he should have done better than he did are more or less arguing he is better than rossi, even including that he apparently should have been able to ride around chatter, whereas I am lead to believe chatter which was solely yamaha's responsibility is the reason valentino lost the 2006 championship.   

Mr Krabs

You can fuck off too you prick. Wosi, you don't need to continue demonstrating what a brain dead oxygen thief you are as we got it a couple if years ago.

Lorenzo

There was also the little matter of the tyres Lorenzo was using in his crash-fest 2008 debut year.

He was on the Michelins that Rossi had decreed as inferior and dumped in favour of the Bridgestones following 2007. Pedrosa also dumped Michelin for Bridgestone. So it's fair to say that if the Michelins were inferior to the Bridgestomes, then Lorenzo would have to take more risks to achieve the same lap and race times as Rossi on the same bike with superior tyres.

In 2009 they all got the same tyre and he crashed less. Was that because he had 'matured' or because he wouldn't have had to push harder on tyres that weren't on a par with anyone else.

Seems a reasonable assumption

As for middle of the road, I'd disagree. As said elsewhere, he wants to win and badly, just like the others. If he thinks he can win he'll push and make a fight of it. When Pedrosa was passing him in the latter half of the season, you have to assume Lorenzo had no answer and 2nd was the only option, a win being out of reach. That's different from not challenging for the win and playing safe.

So he won the title yes, but how much must it gnaw at him that he was beaten in all but one race in the latter half of the season - and in that one race Stoner was missing and Pedrosa was taken out.

Interesting that Stoner gets called immature or lacking racecraft for pursuing wins and Lorenzo is looked on as more complete - or at least that's how it is at the moment. When Lorenzo 'failed to challenge' Stoner in Jerez last year, he was criticised for 'settling for second' and 'gifting Stoner the win'

Not double standards again surely...

2010 crashes

I don't forget the 2010 crashes at all wosi, I attribute them to the bike, as does carlo pernat, and I think you may find valentino rossi.

We have had this discussion before. You are arguing rather selectively yourself, attributing rossi's performances on the ducati to the bike (with which I agree) and stoner's problems on the 2010 ducati to stoner. He actually showed he could ride it conservatively to 3rd or 4th after his early season crashes, then decided to go for wins later in the season and had more crashes as well. Given that I don't believe anyone could have won a championship on either the 2010 or the 2011 ducati, it comes down to philosophy. I think most teams and riders would prefer a few wins if the championship is not in prospect.  

Again, we have also discussed the 2008 championship, where rossi rode brilliantly particularly at laguna seca other than when he nearly took both of them out at the corkscrew. Crashing in the 2 races after the corkscrew did not cost stoner the 2008 championship, it was already gone after rossi left laguna seca 25 points ahead with 7 races to go and jorge and dani not in any condition to take points away from rossi. Getting behind early in the season which was not due to crashes, and losing at laguna seca, which was not due to him pushing too hard, are what cost him the championship.

Mental scarring is balderdash; you can perhaps apply it to the 2 races post laguna seca if you like, but I don't see how it applies otherwise. As I have argued win it or bin it was not an unreasonable strategy in those races anyway, and laguna seca demonstrated that he could not dogfight with rossi (due to the ducati having the turning characteristics of a horse and dray, not any  inability of stoner to mix it imo) particularly if there were no restrictions on what rossi could do in such a dogfight.

No-one is without flaws, and I don't argue stoner has none, and as I have said the way he rode was probably never going to be consistent with longevity. He did prove capable of riding 2 flawless seasons, as good as anyone has ever had, and the obvious fact rossi has had rather more such seasons is a credit to rossi rather than diminishing what stoner did . And trying to fault his riding of the ducati, when all evidence from the performance of others is  that he massively over achieved, is fairly ridiculous imo.