Is this really true?
What Marc Marquez has achieved goes beyond any other rider as a roockie. We are still following his adaptation to the 'big bikes' with much more to come...
2008 and Lorenzo made the same sort of impact, against Pedrosa, Rossi and Stoner who were all flying. Lorenzo was not on the same spec bike as Rossi and had the inferior (so labelled by all Rossi fans due to 2007) Michelin tyres. First race on pole, first three races on the podium, winning either the second or third, I can't remember. But then came the crashes trying to keep up on the lower spec bike.
Marquez is a superb talent no question and he won Indy fair and square, but he's on equal equipment to his team mate, a bike that is equal to the M1, so unlike Lorenzo there is no handicap with equipment. On form so far he has won once when both Pedrosa and Lorenzo have ridden against him uninjured. Of his latest two wins, one race didn't have either Pedrosa or Lorenzo in it, the other they were both riding injured leaving him with Rossi and satellite bikes to deal with. In both, a satellite bike has pushed him close to the finish. Not Marquez problem but would the result have been the same had they both been in those races fully fit.
The hype may be starting to build beyond reality. He's brilliant no doubt, but he's not necessarily any better than Lorenzo or Rossi in their first season. If Stoner had gone staright to a factory bike in his rookie year instead of a new to Motogp privateer bike, who knows what would have happened there.
The championship isn't done yet by a long way