After 2011, who will be the GOATEE ?

[RatsMC]

But in order to use it you can not be lacking too much in the acceleration/speed department. I would say that anyone that says the Ducati did not have advantages over the Yamahas/Hondas in 2007 are lying or plain blind. Of course ithad disadvantages also.

Absolutely. As I said before, the Ducati was clearly the machine to have at the time - if you knew how to ride it. Preziosi designed it to do what it did and he did a great job.

But, it took something special in order to make the thing work as was demonstrated by Capirossi (a rider I have a huge amount of respect for, BTW).

I go back to my earlier comment: the two conditions that allowed Stoner to dominate that season are both true and not in any way mutually exclusive. Anyone trying to argue that it was exclusively one or the other is simply expressing their inner fan. Championships are no longer won on equipment alone nor are they won on talent alone.

[Gustav O]

Absolutely. As I said before, the Ducati was clearly the machine to have at the time - if you knew how to ride it. Preziosi designed it to do what it did and he did a great job.

But, it took something special in order to make the thing work as was demonstrated by Capirossi (a rider I have a huge amount of respect for, BTW).

I go back to my earlier comment: the two conditions that allowed Stoner to dominate that season are both true and not in any way mutually exclusive. Anyone trying to argue that it was exclusively one or the other is simply expressing their inner fan. Championships are no longer won on equipment alone nor are they won on talent alone.

I agree. Lawsons win on the Honda in 1989 is probably the last time a rider has won even though his machine was not as good as the oppositions.

[tom]

Apart from Rossi in his first year at Yamaha and i know i might be in the minority but I would still argue the Honda and Yamaha were better bikes than the Ducati in 07.

Thanks for that Doca. So there was 2-3kmph difference in the top speed for most of 07. Obviously there was some races especially in the early rounds where there was a huge difference but the the majority were no more than 2-3kmph difference.

[tom]

Roberts junior's title as well. I think the Honda at the time was better than the Suzuki.

[Gustav O]

Apart from Rossi in his first year at Yamaha and i know i might be in the minority but I would still argue the Honda and Yamaha were better bikes than the Ducati in 07.

regarding the Yamah in 04 it played to Rossis strengths as well as teh Ducati in 07. I guess it comes down to how you value that towards the other bikes etc. I understand your points and see what you are getting at but I don´t agree.

Roberts junior's title as well. I think the Honda at the time was better than the Suzuki.

A good point as well but the other bikes had severe problems with tire wear, Honda, and Yamaha had big problems that year. I think that in 2000 the Suzuki was a very good compromise and it´s less powerful engine worked well over race distance for the tires etc.
But I see your points and you could argue the bikes are not as good but their defecits wehere compensated for by other factors like, team, tire, rider combo.

And I guess we will never know the correct answers.

[Tourn46]

Thanks for that Doca. So there was 2-3kmph difference in the top speed for most of 07. Obviously there was some races especially in the early rounds where there was a huge difference but the the majority were no more than 2-3kmph difference.

It's not that straight forward is it though. The Ducati got out of the corners and accelerated/got the power to the ground better than the others - it's evident to see this if you just watch the races.

For arguments sake... say both the Ducati and the Yamaha maxxed out at 315kph.

The Ducati takes 8.9 seconds to hit this ceiling
The Yamaha takes 10 seconds to hit this ceiling

Which will reach the end of the straight first?

Of course, in reality the Ducati had that extra few kph (and more at some tracks) on top of their competition too so this scenario amplifies the difference greatly... you can't just look at the top speed and say "oh they were equal"... the Ducati in that aspect was awesome (compared to the Yamaha and Honda) that year and the grunt it had getting out of the corners was phenomenal to watch.

It may have been a twat of a bike to get around the corners, but if you were capable of doing it (like Stoner obviously was), they you could make the most of this advantage.

[Gustav O]

One more thing that amplifies the importance of this is the changes Yamaha made in order to beat the Ducati.

1. Get Bridgestones.
2. Improve the engine with regards to over all power and also less internal friction etc.
3. Alter the balance of the bike to suit the tires and gain better punch out of the corners.

Sadly for Ducati/Stoner they did not alter the bike enough to work on the bikes negative sides.

[Tourn46]

Sadly for Ducati/Stoner they did not alter the bike enough to work on the bikes negative sides.

Edited out... my mind had gone blank...

2008 we saw the carbon monocoque Ducati introduced... but how much was that altered between 2008-2011?

[Doca]

For arguments sake... say both the Ducati and the Yamaha maxxed out at 315kph.

The Ducati takes 8.9 seconds to hit this ceiling
The Yamaha takes 10 seconds to hit this ceiling

Which will reach the end of the straight first?

The Ducati did seem to have more punch off the corners, however what your saying here is not quite right. If the Yamaha gets to the same top speed in a longer amount of time but in the same distance then the Yamaha is accelerating much more at the end of the straight than the Ducati.

I think the reality is that the Ducatis had a little speed advantage, Casey was & is really aggressive at getting the power down coming off the turns and the different manufacturers were running different strategy's with fuel consumption.

You can only rob peter to pay paul, if you want to use extra fuel coming off the turns you have to save it else where in the lap which is why I think the argument that the Ducati was faster therefore better is nonsense.

It is well documented that for the opening few races the Japanese were too conservative with fuel consumption but it didn't take long for them to sort that out.

[chc-pr]

Have a look at the gap times between Stoner and the next Ducati in 07. It looks remarkably like Stoner/Rossi in 11.

With that in mind I think it is very hard to make the case that the 07 Ducati was the best OVERAL PACKAGE. No-one is saying that the 07 Duc didn't have a speed advanatge. The extent of that is less than is typically suposed as I believe is its overall benefit.

But go look at the numbers ... it is surprising. Much more than I expected.

[Tourn46]

For arguments sake... say both the Ducati and the Yamaha maxxed out at 315kph.

The Ducati takes 8.9 seconds to hit this ceiling
The Yamaha takes 10 seconds to hit this ceiling

Which will reach the end of the straight first?

The Ducati did seem to have more punch off the corners, however what your saying here is not quite right. If the Yamaha gets to the same top speed in a longer amount of time but in the same distance then the Yamaha is accelerating much more at the end of the straight than the Ducati.

Ummm, I really don't get your point... what use would it be to still be getting to that speed at the end of a straight when the other bike has been at that speed for a few seconds already continually pulling extra yards in front.

Say the straight is 800metres.

The Ducati hits max speed (315kph) at 500 metres
The Yamaha hits max speed (315kph) at 600 metres

The Ducati would have pulled out a gap on the Yamaha for the first 600 metres regardless of having the same top speed as in that time period it HAS been travelling faster, except in 2007 very rarely did the Yamaha ever reach the same top speed.

Where is it in any way beneficial or equal that the Yamaha takes longer to get there?

chc-pr, I'm not suggesting that people are ignoring the speed advantage, but people are looking at the top speed and seeing 3kph and thinking it made no difference, when it's far from true. I am just saying that looking at a top speed chart doesn't say the whole story... ie, it ignores how quickly the machines get to that speed which is equally as important.
MotoGP is by no means a drag race, but if you can get a good advantage from the punch a bike has out of the corner it's as valuable a tool as anything.

[Nachlauf]

The Ducati did seem to have more punch off the corners, however what your saying here is not quite right. If the Yamaha gets to the same top speed in a longer amount of time but in the same distance then the Yamaha is accelerating much more at the end of the straight than the Ducati.

Ummm, I really don't get your point... what use would it be to still be getting to that speed at the end of a straight when the other bike has been at that speed for a few seconds already continually pulling extra yards in front.

Your logic is wrong. You're assuming, that one bike (the Duc) hits a certain topspeed somewhere mid-straight and stays there. That would mean they hit the rev limiter, which would be a stupid way to setup the bike to begin with. In reality they set up their bikes to hit top speed at the end of the fastest straight.

Topspeed is not only down to power. In racing the straight is always after a corner. So the corner-speed and the bike's mechanical grip at corner exit are part of the topspeed at the end of the straight too. If you read the comments of Dovi and Rossi you'll understand, that there seem to be quite some differences between the bikes. Rossi repeatedly stated, that the Ducati accelerates out of turns very good. And Dovi stated, that the M1 doesn't accelerate as good as the Honda does. And last but not least electronics are involved too, although that's pretty much impossible to judge from the outside.

The uninformed masses spam the internet and newspapers about a "power advantage" (or disadvantage depending on their angle). But there's more to it. I refuse to believe, that Ducati could design a much more powerful engine than Yamaha or Honda in 2007. Imho they just built a bike that could accelerate better out of corners. They're still good at it if you believe Rossi's comments about his various versions of it.

[Albert]

The uninformed masses spam the internet and newspapers about a "power advantage" (or disadvantage depending on their angle). But there's more to it. I refuse to believe, that Ducati could design a much more powerful engine than Yamaha or Honda in 2007. Imho they just built a bike that could accelerate better out of corners. They're still good at it if you believe Rossi's comments about his various versions of it.

Sorry "Nachlauf" - I'm not using your quote for any other reason than it is the most recent to make the same comments that many others have made!

Arguments regarding Ducati/speed/power should (in theory) be ended by the quote below (from Ducati themselves) I presume!

When Ducati re-joined MotoGP in 2003, MotoGP had changed its rules to allow four-stroke 990cc engines to race. At the time Ducati was the fastest bike. In 2007, MotoGP reduced the engine size to 800cc, yet Ducati continued to be the fastest bike. Ducati continued that trend in 2007 with a bike that was markedly faster than its rivals as was displayed by Casey Stoner on tracks with long straights.

Origin and Source: - http://ducatimotorsitalia.blogspot.com/

[Nachlauf]

Sorry Albert, but what's your point? I think you misunderstood my post, if you even read it.

[chc-pr]

Albert, Tourn
I for one am not arguing about whether or not the Ducati was quick. The speed traps confirm it was. A blind man could have told that from the commentary at the time (and I recall vividly my own astonishment come Qatar that year too). It was very quick. But I also recall many many comments from various riders about what a truck it was to turn (pre 2007). That necessarily means slower corner entry and exit speeds. The package is much more than simple top speed.

The Ducati last year was still often one of the fast if not the fastest bikes - where did it get Rossi last year? Rossi was complaining of the same things that Troy Corser talked of so clearly it is/was in the bike's DNA.

If you want to argue that the 2007 Duc package was the best of that year you also have to say that the 2011 Duc package was also at least excellent for the same reasons (high or highest top speeds repeatedly). Now I would be the first to question that logic (and indeed that is exactly what I am doing) - but go and look at the gaps from Stoner to the other Ducs at race end in 2007. The average would have been 20-25 sec - ring any bells?

Either Rossi really is that crap (no, I don't think so either) or the 2007 Duc was demonstrably not the best package. I am not suggesting it was as poor as it appears last year's was, but it was probably roughly on a par with the 07 Suzuki, maybe a bit better. I don't care which way you want to go, but one should be consistent with one's benchmarks for a good bike.

[Albert]

Sorry Albert, but what's your point? I think you misunderstood my post, if you even read it.

I read it so please don't try to say that and don't get huffed about it! I only used it because of the part that said -

The uninformed masses spam the internet and newspapers about a "power advantage" (or disadvantage depending on their angle). But there's more to it. I refuse to believe, that Ducati could design a much more powerful engine than Yamaha or Honda in 2007. Imho they just built a bike that could accelerate better out of corners.

Ducati themselves contradict what many people have been saying for years!

chc - I've no intention of getting in too deep on this because we seem to be in agreement with the main points. There are two points that seem to get overlooked all to often. The main point is just how good Casey Stoner was on that bike. Let's not forget - he was "supposed" to be the class rookie when compared to his team-mate!
The second point that is often overlooked is just how sophisticated the electronics were on the '07 Ducati.

[Grahluk]

FFS folks are we really getting that crazy about the 2007 Ducati? Is it really that complicated or just another way to prolong the eternal rider fan fight? The 2007 Ducati had a speed advantage. Top speed, acceleration, software fuel management whatever. Ducati clearly got something more right than the competition for once at the opening of the 800 era (opera clap for Ducati for a change). I don't see that as debatable? It was the story of the season and starkly on display on several occasions. Did it make the Ducati the overall better package? No, the other guys had some advantages of their own. Stoner was the only one though who could ride the thing in a way to mitigate it's faults so that speed advantage could make a difference for him. It did. He won the championship. That's how that works. Ask any racer if they'd like a bike with better acceleration and top speed than their competition and tell me if any say "no thanks". We can keep going in circles about the minutia but history's opinion weighs heavily towards the known narrative. The Ducati 07 had a noticeable speed advantage. Stoner was able to make it count.

Championships are no longer won on equipment alone nor are they won on talent alone.

Oh my, that should be in bold at the head of every forum topic. Damn, You deserve a buxom goddess to plant a lusty kiss upon you for that one. To drag the original question of this whole flaming discussion back to center stage; who is the top dog of the 800 era? It's simple. It was Stoner. No need to delve into twisted stats and rationales about this or that season or bike or yadda yadda. Simple. Who had the most championships? Tie between Rossi and Stoner. Who had the most race wins? Stoner by a few. End of story. Forget injuries, illnesses, crap bikes, crap tires, yadda, yadda, yadda. It doesn't matter. The dust has settled. There are no "if's" in the past. It's done. We can all feel however we like about who we individually think is greater or should have the record reflect that but that's a different debate and one I doubt would ever be definitively settled.

[Nachlauf]

Sorry Albert, but what's your point? I think you misunderstood my post, if you even read it.

I read it so please don't try to say that and don't get huffed about it!-

Well apparently you didn't understand it then. I was talking about there being many reasons for high topspeed besides raw engine power. The supposed Ducati quote you came up with doesn't even contradict my reasons in any way. They simply stated, that they had the fastest bike in the speedtraps, which is blatantly obvious. They never talked about a power advantage. And righteously so, because they shouldn't even know the actual power of their competitor's engines.

Also your claim of Ducati's advantage in electronics is nothing more than an opinion. There is no conclusive data to prove that. As far as we know Stoner preferred to ride with the least amount of electronics possible. Maybe the possibility of few electronic restrictions was an advantage, but that's actually the opposite of your claim. Anyhow, there is no way to objectively compare Ducati's electronics to the other manufacturers. None of them would ever reveal their digital secrets to allow that. So if you come along and boldly claim something without any actual data I simply can't refrain from raising an eyebrow about your intentions...

May I furthermore point out, that I'm not one of the many others? I don't know what you mean by that, but I assume you're trying to bag my opinion with those of other people you categorized before. Please don't do that for your own sake. I'm pretty sure you're categorizing me wrongly.

[chc-pr]

FFS folks are we really getting that crazy about the 2007 Ducati? .

What your problem? Its the off season and this place is about unpicking details (or at least trying to) if its about anything. I'm sure we will have plenty more contemporay to consider come the season start. For me at least the analysis is even more interesting than the racing - but then I do admit to enjoying reading tech regs to try to find loopholes and advanatges.

[chc-pr]

Let's not forget - he was "supposed" to be the class rookie when compared to his team-mate!
[/b][/i]

Well yes - third choice actually IIRC. I also remember LC's manager saying that Stoner was very quick in testing but once the racing started he would find out the difference between racing and testing and Loris would help him adjust to the latter and be a good mentor for Stoner

To give him his due, Rossi seems to have spotted Stoner's talent sooner than anyone else (vetoing Stoner as a teammate).

[Zaphod]

Look.........this is all getting out of hand, and I feel, for the sake of restoring peace to the MotoGP community, that it is time I came clean.........


Since the late 80's, I have been supplying teams (determined by orders issued from the sports governing bodies) with a special part.

Yamaha, Honda and Suzuki all had the good grace and common sense to use this part in moderation, so as not to arouse suspicion.

Unfortunately, and rather immaturely, at the end of 2006 and for all of the 2007 season Ducati chose to overdose on the supplied part in an effort to secure their first world championship.

The instructions call for one, and only one, to be fitted to the motorcycle at any time.

Ducati ignored this advice in 2007, and instead chose to fit 17 of them to the motorcycle at once.........clearly arousing suspicions, and leading to all sorts of wild conspiracy theories.

In an effort to disspel any such further pointless arguments , I have now told MotoGP governing bodies, that as a result of Ducati's behaviour, I have no other option than to now sell the product on the open market.As a result of now being unable to obtain cash from manufacturers , in return for a guaranteed WC, DORNA and the like have now had to concoct this whole "CRT" thing.

For those who would like the "out of this world" performance of the 2007 Ducati, I am now supplying Motorcycle dealers world wide with the product.






I hope this ends all these arguments, and allows Motorcycle fans to once again become the friends with a common interest that they once were. Appologies for not coming clean sooner.

[RatsMC]

Well apparently you didn't understand it then. I was talking about there being many reasons for high topspeed besides raw engine power. The supposed Ducati quote you came up with doesn't even contradict my reasons in any way. They simply stated, that they had the fastest bike in the speedtraps, which is blatantly obvious. They never talked about a power advantage. And righteously so, because they shouldn't even know the actual power of their competitor's engines.

Also your claim of Ducati's advantage in electronics is nothing more than an opinion. There is no conclusive data to prove that. As far as we know Stoner preferred to ride with the least amount of electronics possible. Maybe the possibility of few electronic restrictions was an advantage, but that's actually the opposite of your claim. Anyhow, there is no way to objectively compare Ducati's electronics to the other manufacturers. None of them would ever reveal their digital secrets to allow that. So if you come along and boldly claim something without any actual data I simply can't refrain from raising an eyebrow about your intentions...

May I furthermore point out, that I'm not one of the many others? I don't know what you mean by that, but I assume you're trying to bag my opinion with those of other people you categorized before. Please don't do that for your own sake. I'm pretty sure you're categorizing me wrongly.

Alright, you can calm down, now. Albert stated clearly that he wasn't directing his comments at you, nor were they meant to be inflammatory. He was simply adding to the discussion, using your post as the intro.

Why does everyone feel the need to take an opposing opinion (or in this case, an agreeing opinion) so damn personally? What is wrong with you guys?

[Nachlauf]

Albert stated clearly that he wasn't directing his comments at you

Excuse me, but he quoted me and tried to argue what I wrote. Of course he didn't direct his post at me, but he clearly directed his post at mine. Don't worry, I'm not going to get unrested about anything.

[sir_nj]

I hope this ends all these arguments, and allows Motorcycle fans to once again become the friends with a common interest that they once were. Appologies for not coming clean sooner.

Couldn't initially see the image at the bottom due to only having a tiny window open on my screen at work but I just knew it was going to be a howler and I was laughing all the way down to the punch line. Nice one.

FFS folks are we really getting that crazy about the 2007 Ducati? Is it really that complicated or just another way to prolong the eternal rider fan fight? The 2007 Ducati had a speed advantage.

hey!! don't knock it, this is a relatively peaceful thread compared to the arguments about the 2011 Ducati and who's fault was it that it started the season like that and who's fault was it still that it finished the season like that?

[tom]

Cheers Gustav

_____________________________________

Thanks for that Doca. So there was 2-3kmph difference in the top speed for most of 07. Obviously there was some races especially in the early rounds where there was a huge difference but the the majority were no more than 2-3kmph difference.

It's not that straight forward is it though. The Ducati got out of the corners and accelerated/got the power to the ground better than the others - it's evident to see this if you just watch the races.

For arguments sake... say both the Ducati and the Yamaha maxxed out at 315kph.

The Ducati takes 8.9 seconds to hit this ceiling
The Yamaha takes 10 seconds to hit this ceiling

Which will reach the end of the straight first?

Of course, in reality the Ducati had that extra few kph (and more at some tracks) on top of their competition too so this scenario amplifies the difference greatly... you can't just look at the top speed and say "oh they were equal"... the Ducati in that aspect was awesome (compared to the Yamaha and Honda) that year and the grunt it had getting out of the corners was phenomenal to watch.

It may have been a twat of a bike to get around the corners, but if you were capable of doing it (like Stoner obviously was), they you could make the most of this advantage.

It is that straight forward Tourn, I was just summarising the graph, I never drew any conclusions


On a separate note; I believe the 07 duke with any other rider on board (including Rossi) would not have won the 2007 championship. The other aliens may have been able to win races on it, especially in the rounds where it had a massive speed advantage but I dont think they would have picked up the championship.

Do you think Rossi would have beaten Casey and Danny that year if he was on the Duke and Casey was on a Yamaha or Honda factory machine? Remember Danny came second to Casey in 2007....

I'm not expecting we will agree on this but just thought its worth a shot