Motorcycle Forums

All his main rivals beat him more often than not..so where does this total domination theory come from?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did they? Really? I'm guessing that the facts and most of the worlds media are wrong in 'wosi world'.

Nothing changes.

you gone and hurt my feelings now :( http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w79/Kevinsand/double-facepalm.jpg

Realistically speaking..

Look you Numbskulls..them's the facts. I know you don't like it, but tough shit.

You can carp on about Rossi all you like but it's not just him who, more often than not, finished higher in the championship than Stoner throughout Casey's career is it? Both Dan & Jorge have a better head-to-head record too.

Wins are great and I'm not disputing all riders get a buzz from stepping up on the top spot, it's the reason Rossi left Ducati. But for you lot to consistently turn a blind eye to what really matters - the title - because it don't suit purpose, just underlines what dumbarse and selective fanboys you are.

Putting together a season is a lot more difficult than winning a race. Riding like Lorenzo did last year and taking the crown, when your two main rivals are winning races twice as often as you, takes a lot of doing. You have to ride with a cool head, be able to soak up pressure and to think on your feet..he did a great job and his job was to fight for the title and bring the bacon home. Mission accomplished.

For Stoner to make out all he was interested in was wins, and the championship was just a bonus at seasons end, shows a naive and slightly immature attitude which however much you sing his praises for wanting to beat his rivals on a Sunday, ultimately cost him the chance of being able to say with true authority that he did in actual fact dominate.

On his day he was probably the flat-stick fastest, but IMO those days didn't come often enough for his fans to say he dominated the Seven seasons he rode in GP. It's patently obvious he didn't. He dominated the Two seasons he won the title - which account for over half his total race wins - but that's all.

Almost Wosi

I agree with you in the main

I think dominate is the wrong word to use. It can be applied if you use the appropriate set of stats, use another set and it's inaccurate.

From a personal viewing perspective, I'd rather see a rider going for the win if it looks at all possible - or just trying to pass the guy in front. If they really aren't fast enough to catch and attempt a pass then they have to settle for second,  or whichever place they're in, they've no choice.

You mention Lorenzo playing it with a cool head and giving a masterclass in how to win a title but let's not kid oursselves. Do you really think he wasn't going for wins, like he did in Brno? There is no way he would settle for second unless he had no chance of winning. The more likely explanation for settling for second is that he just couldn't get close enough to Pedrosa to challenge. He may have the title to his name but he can't be happy in the way he achieved it, with barely a win since July

Winning the title just means you have more points than anyone else at the end of a season. It doesn't tell the story of how you got them. Lorenzo can't be happy with not winning since July. It's possible to win a title with 0 wins. Who really, if they were honest about it, would be happy with that?

ffs wosi

who cares.
No one dominated the past 7 years of motogp, it has been one of the most competitive eras with several riders of the highest quality. The fact rossi didn't dominate it as he did in the early part of his career is rather testament to this, and if he is as good as you think he is , which he probably is, it makes lorenzo and stoner pretty good as well, and pedrosa not too shabby either but not able to be ranked with the other 3 imo without a title.

Titles are the currency, and lorenzo probably rates highest here with 2 titles from only 6 years rather than 7, although he has never had to ride a ducati or an lcr honda on non-srs michelins.

Lorenzo probably does best in terms of positions in the championship other than 1st as well, again with the same caveats .

Stoner and rossi had 2 titles each, rossi finished ahead in the championship 4:3, stoner had 38 wins to 26. I don't know about lorenzo or particularly pedrosa, but I don't think stoner and rossi care much about positions in the championship other than first, as rossi demonstrated in 2007 when he didn't seem to try very hard to finish 2nd rather than 3rd. I think both rossi and stoner would prefer the 12 extra race wins over the period, but this is a matter of opinion and speculation. I am happy to call the overlap of their careers fairly even, which hardly damns stoner.

If stoner had won last year he would have had the clear advantage, he had the opportunity to do so, but didn't, as you have (rather often) said. If lorenzo or rossi win this year, then whoever wins is the leading rider of the post 990 era, assuming rossi retires if he does win; I don't think he will beat lorenzo in the future if he doesn't this year.