2011 Silly Season

[derby]

i don't exactly buy that it doesn't make any difference.

now i don't doubt that burgess/rossi, et al could make up for "lost time" and still be competitive at losail next march, but they certainly do get a two month head start on their development vs having to wait until january.

[gm2]

IMO...

it represents his influence/dominance over the GP world...

and he stared down Furusawa san.

yeah.  and read the penultimate paragraph in the motomatters article re 80 seconds.

true to form i think jb is overstating a little.  but i bet it mattered more to rossi on principle: honda didn't let me test; i helped you kick honda's ass: you don't want to be honda, do you?

..to jb's point, testing with a bum shoulder is not super-helpful in the level setting dept.  but on the other hand, it does get him on the bike sooner than later.

[Speeddog]

Rossi's finished on the podium 5 out of the 8 races since he came back from breaking his leg.
And he won in Malaysia.

I find it difficult to accept that Rossi/Burgess can't get significant information from Rossi testing at his current level of fitness.
If Rossi were struggling to finish mid-pack, I'd believe it.

[zooom]

well...it goes to say, how much of Rossi's shoulder is REALLY bothering him right now?...supposedly Sepang and PI are supposed to be easier for the shoulder in how pressure is applied for him...but I guess in reality, it could be that Rossi is playing the spectre's for to get the best spin...eventually we'll know what the reality of things is and where they really lay...it is the offtrack game as much as the on track game that Val does love to play!

[Jester]

well...it goes to say, how much of Rossi's shoulder is REALLY bothering him right now?...supposedly Sepang and PI are supposed to be easier for the shoulder in how pressure is applied for him...but I guess in reality, it could be that Rossi is playing the spectre's for to get the best spin...eventually we'll know what the reality of things is and where they really lay...it is the offtrack game as much as the on track game that Val does love to play!

Considering they are claiming the need to re-attach the tendon and do some bone work, I'd guess its bothering him to some degree.  He can certainly ride with it, but I don't see the leg as being any issue at all right now.  Its healed, and he's just not quite on the pace.  Rossi at 90% is better than most of the field, but its that 10% that keeps you fighting for 1st.

[gm2]

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2010/Oct/101020feature.htm

[OT]

Poor Yamaha.....

Had the 'worst' bike in 2003 .  Since then, they have: developed the best bike, won five of seven MotoGP championships, and added Yourgey and Ben as riders....
All imo directly and solely attributable to the doctor & co....he owes them nothing.

FWIW - Fast by Ferracci started selling Yamaha around 2004/5, but has since dropped them (about a year ago, I think).  Wonder if Eraldo knew something that we didn't way back then   

[derby]

Poor Yamaha.....

Had the 'worst' bike in 2003 . 

i wouldn't say that...

up until 2003 they easily had the best bike that wasn't a honda.

the constructor's standings for 2003 are misleading since yamaha really didn't have anybody riding for them.

honestly, rossi wouldn't have done to yamaha if it was a turd.

[ZLTFUL]

honestly, rossi wouldn't have done to yamaha if it was a turd.

I sort of agree...and I sort of don't.

Let's say the Suzuki and the Yamah were equal that year (for speculation sake). Now Suzuki offers you $x but little say in the development of the bike outside of your weekly practice/race input. They want to have a say in all development decisions.

Now Yamaha offers you the same $x but gives you full input into the development of the bike and a huge say in the overall team decisions.

Which one would you rather ride for?

Not saying that was the motivating factor for the switch in '04 as the main one there was bending Honda over and giving it to them greasy Italian style. But if 2 equal teams come to you and offer you essentially the same deal but one team also offers you more control over how the bike is developed, which would you be most likely to choose?

Just my thoughts.

[OT]

i wouldn't say that...

up until 2003 they easily had the best bike that wasn't a honda.

You know the history better than I do....one podium all year?  OK, that could be attributable to the rider(s)...although much of what's been published seems to imply that no one wanted to ride the yamaha circa 2003....

Is this the case?  Or do you see it more like the riders that fled Ducati (Capi?) because the GP7(?) bike was, to them, unrideable?

[derby]

well, the way i remember it, honda was the bike to be on... if you couldn't be on a factory honda, you wanted to be on a satellite honda... about midway through the satellite honda ranks (right before you got down to the tier running bridgestones), the yamaha started to look attractive.

i seem to remember 7-10 hondas on the grid back then.

[gm2]

i seem to remember 7-10 hondas on the grid back then.

i was about to say 8

[gm2]

http://motomatters.com/news/2010/10/20/honda_silly_season_update_three_repsols_.html

[Spidey]

After all that wrangling, they finally just go with three repsols.  Sheesh.  With three factory riders, there are going to be some serious spats in the Honda camp.  I don't expect that they'll be running anything like the sort of open garage that Ducati does.  The interesting thing is that usually, with each additional rider, the sponsor gets less and less return in terms of exposure.  But when there are so few bikes on the grid, to have three of the top 7 bikes is likely to pay off for them. 

[derby]

The interesting thing is that usually, with each additional rider, the sponsor gets less and less return in terms of exposure.  But when there are so few bikes on the grid, to have three of the top 7 bikes is likely to pay off for them. 

back in the doohan days, repsol honda had 3-4 bikes on the grid, and they were pretty much all near the front.