Julian Bond wrote:

> In both cases, they're work on developing the machine has resulted in
> something so relatively user friendly that lesser riders can get awfully
> close them. But despite everything, Rossi (with Burgess) still have a
> stack of points in hand.

<joke>

Maybe both Rossi and Doohan are crap and it's really *Burgess* that's the
God?

</joke>

-Dirt-

Burgess was also the man behind Gardner when he was at his most
competitive also.

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 11:46:48 -0700, "Mark N" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>"Julian Bond" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:CLul0LgC+za$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Mark N <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >But he doesn't seem to consider that
>> >maybe the machine has made the man in the case of Rossi already
>
>> You could argue quite persuasively that the man made the machine as
>> well.
>
>> >just as they had done with Doohan,
>
>> As you could with Doohan.
>> In both cases, they're work on developing the machine has resulted in
>> something so relatively user friendly that lesser riders can get awfully
>> close them. But despite everything, Rossi (with Burgess) still have a
>> stack of points in hand.
>
>I don't know that I'd agree. In Doohan's case, the machine that worked was
>the '92 NSR, and I think Doohan was pretty early in his career with Honda to
>have influenced that in a massive way. After that Doohan mostly rejected
>revisions, as the story goes. The revisions that took place right after he
>left, for the '00 machine, certainly didn't improve it. In Rossi's case, he
>was about the business of trying to win his first 500 title and was a
>lifetime two-stroke guy when the RCV was being developed, and it was great
>right out of the box. Anyone knowing anything about the sport knew that
>Honda would have a huge leg up when they switched to four strokes, and it
>won its first nine GPs. That Ukawa won the second GP in '01 may say
>something about who had spent more development time on the bike. That Ducati
>has challenged Honda so quickly might even speak to Rossi's failings as a
>development guy, although that's certainly been much more of a power issue
>than handling. The problem is, if you're always handed the best machine on
>the grid, development almost becomes a non-issue. That's why you couldn't
>put him in the same league as, say, Eddie Lawson as a development rider -
>there's really no evidence to support it.
>

"Mark N" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "T3" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:VNFab.9906$(E-Mail Removed). ..
>
> > Yes, it makes for great speculation BUT the bottom line is money. I
doubt
> > that Ducati can afford Rossi, what they've done so far is remarkable, I
> just
> > don't think they have the bucks that it's going to take to land his
> > Rossiness, that and the cigarette thing will be a show stopper. No
matter
> > how much animosity he may have for Honda(remember when he walked out of
> > contract negotiations last time) and yes, being Italian, he probably
> really
> > wants to ride the Duc but it always comes down to money. Ducati is in
the
> > "big times" now, if they really want the best,they'll have to dig really
> > deep to afford the best and make no mistake Rossi is the best, period...
>
> Well, the money thing is up to Marlboro, isn't it? They are the biggest
> spenders in motorsports and if they want him badly enough they could
afford
> it. Regarding the cigarette angle, will Rossi turn down 4 or 5 million on
> that ethical position? What if the Marlboro name appeared on the bike only
> and not on his leathers, he didn't have to do any promotion, etc.? Spencer
> had a similar attitude, and I believe that's why he ran in HRC colors in
> '87, but he was back with Rothmans in '88 before he retired, then on to
> Marlboro Yamaha. Regarding Rossi being the best, I'm not so certain that
> it's as clear as you think. I'd vote for him, but tentaively, since he's
> always had the best machinery and has mostly been racing against only
> Biaggi, Capirossi and the best Japan and Spain have to offer to this
point.
> Let's wait another year or two before closing the book on that...
>
I felt the same as you do until I watched him break the lap record on the
last lap of the race on shot tires, impressive...That and that fact that in
qualifying he seems to be able to pull a half second out of his ass anytime
it's needed but you do have a point on the ethics angle. I just think that
in the end, not only does Honda have the best equipment and logistics they
also have the deepest pockets. I, like about 20 million Italians would love
to see him on the Duc, I just think it's a long shot at best, we'll
see...OBTW, I didn't mean to imply he was the best ever,I believe he's the
best that's racing right now , granted on the very best equipment also.


T3

Mark N <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>In Rossi's case, he
>was about the business of trying to win his first 500 title and was a
>lifetime two-stroke guy when the RCV was being developed, and it was great
>right out of the box.

There were numerous stories about the late 2001, early 2002 period that
the RCV was pretty nasty to ride. It wasn't until Rossi put the R&D and
testing work in that it started to reach it's potential. Now given that
the origin of these stories is Rossi and Burgess and that they
consistently play up their own strengths, you have to take them with a
pinch of salt.

--
Julian Bond Email&MSM: (E-Mail Removed)
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/
M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 T: +44 (0)192 0412 433

Na, na, na... do you want to bet? Rossi goes to Yamaha, directly dealing
with Japan at this moment, probably announced in Malaysia GP if Rossi gets
the championship in that race

"Julian Bond" <(E-Mail Removed)> escribió en el mensaje
news:B$QlZ0k$yWb$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mark N <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >In Rossi's case, he
> >was about the business of trying to win his first 500 title and was a
> >lifetime two-stroke guy when the RCV was being developed, and it was
great
> >right out of the box.
>
> There were numerous stories about the late 2001, early 2002 period that
> the RCV was pretty nasty to ride. It wasn't until Rossi put the R&D and
> testing work in that it started to reach it's potential. Now given that
> the origin of these stories is Rossi and Burgess and that they
> consistently play up their own strengths, you have to take them with a
> pinch of salt.
>
> --
> Julian Bond Email&MSM: (E-Mail Removed)
> Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/
> Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/
> M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 T: +44 (0)192 0412 433

"Mark N" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:fsKdnQfphegh0PaiU-(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Julian Bond" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:CLul0LgC+za$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Mark N <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > >But he doesn't seem to consider that
> > >maybe the machine has made the man in the case of Rossi already
>
> > You could argue quite persuasively that the man made the machine as
> > well.
>
> > >just as they had done with Doohan,
>
> > As you could with Doohan.
> > In both cases, they're work on developing the machine has resulted in
> > something so relatively user friendly that lesser riders can get awfully
> > close them. But despite everything, Rossi (with Burgess) still have a
> > stack of points in hand.
>
> I don't know that I'd agree. In Doohan's case, the machine that worked was
> the '92 NSR, and I think Doohan was pretty early in his career with Honda
to
> have influenced that in a massive way. After that Doohan mostly rejected
> revisions, as the story goes.

I read that he was the first to be able to reject and change revisions on
the Honda 500s. He was the one to demand Brembo brakes when Honda insisted
on using their own and so forth. This was a contribution to his success.

> The revisions that took place right after he
> left, for the '00 machine, certainly didn't improve it. In Rossi's case,
he
> was about the business of trying to win his first 500 title and was a
> lifetime two-stroke guy when the RCV was being developed, and it was great
> right out of the box.

"Liftime two-stroke guy"? As a driver you don't need more than som basic
feel for engines to quickly convert from two-stroke to multi-sylinder four
strokes to twin four strokes and visa verca. Again look at doohan and Rossi.
Racing superbikes and endurance bikes never seemed to be a problem, even if
it was only for a race or two in the season.

> Anyone knowing anything about the sport knew that
> Honda would have a huge leg up when they switched to four strokes, and it
> won its first nine GPs. That Ukawa won the second GP in '01 may say
> something about who had spent more development time on the bike. That
Ducati
> has challenged Honda so quickly might even speak to Rossi's failings as a
> development guy, although that's certainly been much more of a power issue
> than handling.

Only if one asume that Honda had to be miles better than any one else in
developing an exelent four stroke GP bike. To me it rather seems to show the
failings of Yamaha, Suki and Kawa.

> The problem is, if you're always handed the best machine on
> the grid, development almost becomes a non-issue. That's why you couldn't
> put him in the same league as, say, Eddie Lawson as a development rider -
> there's really no evidence to support it.

Well, you certainly didn't give any evidence to opposite.

/MBE