2025 FIM MotoGP World Championship

[CMSMJ1]

I didn't feel Pecco as a champion like MM, Rossi or Fabio. But at the end he succeed it. Now his performance prooves my previous feeling and I know there is people feels like me. But if he left team as you said, I think he will be finished. He should learn how to ride better and defeat MM with same bike to show us what he is.

It's been painfully obvious for many years that Ducati had the best bike on the grid and was constantly being let down by its lackluster riders. It was only when they created an extremely dominant bike that they finally started winning championships.

Like, I am 100% comfortable claiming that if you switch Dovi and Marc in 2018, that Marc wins the title. And not just cuz Marc is any sort of GOAT, but because if you put like some equivalent top rider on the Honda and the same on the Ducati, the Ducati rider would win out.

I think it might even be arguable before 2018 because prime Marquez was absolutely like Stoner in that he could do magical things with difficult-to-ride bikes.

Bottom line, Ducati has had the best bike for at least 7 years in a row, and the only reason they dont have more to show for it is because their riders haven't actually been that amazing. In fact, their riders have consistently been flattered by the Ducati, not the other way around.

I really never understood why Stoner was rated highly. He drove two really good bikes in the years when he won the titles. He failed to succeed the following years when those bikes didn't evolve to be as good as they were in the previous year. But otherwise, he was just ordinary. I think riders like Dovi, Pedrosa, Jorge Lorenzo and Jorge Martin have done better, although Dovi and Pedrosa didn't enjoy title success. Comparing Stoner to Marquez is really too much of a stretch.

Can't agree with that - Casey was an aberration and managed to find pace in the Ducati that only he could use. He made the Ducati, through his talent, rideable and winnable. He then went to HRC and nailed that.

Dovi can't match that
Pedrosa was also excellent but too fragile and unlucky
Jorge Lorenzo was also excellent - but fluffed his lines at Ducati and bombed terribly at HRC
Jorge Martin has not done anything close to guys above to be up there IMO

Marquez i the joker in the pack - when he is fit - he is dominant and was even winning on bikes that no-one else could ride..a la Stoner.

A freak of nature - and we are priviliged to see it

[Seanspeed]

I really never understood why Stoner was rated highly. He drove two really good bikes in the years when he won the titles. He failed to succeed the following years when those bikes didn't evolve to be as good as they were in the previous year. But otherwise, he was just ordinary. I think riders like Dovi, Pedrosa, Jorge Lorenzo and Jorge Martin have done better, although Dovi and Pedrosa didn't enjoy title success. Comparing Stoner to Marquez is really too much of a stretch.

That's quite a take. lol

Stoner was regularly winning races on bikes that others, even good riders, were nowhere on. In his first title year(in only his 2nd year in MotoGP, and his first at Ducati) he had 367 points. The next closest Ducati was 7th with 166 points.

But that wasn't some aberration. Even if next year, he didn't win the title, he still finished 2nd place with 280 points and six wins, while the next Ducati finished in 12th place with 92 points and only two podiums(zero wins).

In 2009, he finished 4th with 220 points and 4 wins after having missed three races due to injury. Still, next closest Ducati was in 13th place with 104 points and one measly 3rd place podium.

And when he went back to Honda, he largely dominated Pedrosa and Dovi, proving quite convincingly that no, his Ducati performance was not just some fluke.

He was legitimately one of the fastest riders MotoGP has ever seen. And I didn't even particularly like the guy, so I'm not just some highly biased megafan or anything.

I dont mind talking about Lorenzo or Pedrosa in a similar breath as they were all top talents, but in no world do guys like Dovi and Martin belong in the conversation, much less be put ahead of Stoner.

Did you actually watch MotoGP during his time? You might as well be saying that Ayrton Senna wasn't actually that good.

[kurtj]

I really never understood why Stoner was rated highly. He drove two really good bikes in the years when he won the titles. He failed to succeed the following years when those bikes didn't evolve to be as good as they were in the previous year. But otherwise, he was just ordinary. I think riders like Dovi, Pedrosa, Jorge Lorenzo and Jorge Martin have done better, although Dovi and Pedrosa didn't enjoy title success. Comparing Stoner to Marquez is really too much of a stretch.

That's quite a take. lol

Stoner was regularly winning races on bikes that others, even good riders, were nowhere on. In his first title year(in only his 2nd year in MotoGP, and his first at Ducati) he had 367 points. The next closest Ducati was 7th with 166 points.

But that wasn't some aberration. Even if next year, he didn't win the title, he still finished 2nd place with 280 points and six wins, while the next Ducati finished in 12th place with 92 points and only two podiums(zero wins).

In 2009, he finished 4th with 220 points and 4 wins after having missed three races due to injury. Still, next closest Ducati was in 13th place with 104 points and one measly 3rd place podium.

And when he went back to Honda, he largely dominated Pedrosa and Dovi, proving quite convincingly that no, his Ducati performance was not just some fluke.

He was legitimately one of the fastest riders MotoGP has ever seen. And I didn't even particularly like the guy, so I'm not just some highly biased megafan or anything.

I dont mind talking about Lorenzo or Pedrosa in a similar breath as they were all top talents, but in no world do guys like Dovi and Martin belong in the conversation, much less be put ahead of Stoner.

Did you actually watch MotoGP during his time? You might as well be saying that Ayrton Senna wasn't actually that good.

Since when did team mate comparison became a benchmark of the greatness? Your opinion doesn't make the facts any stronger than mine.

While he won on a Ducati that was undeniably better bike than others in 2007, it’s worth noting that Stoner never fully developed bikes for the long term. His feedback style was often labeled as "vague" or "unconstructive" by engineers and teammates. In contrast, riders like Rossi, Lorenzo, and Pedrosa not only adapted but shaped the evolution of their bikes over years. When Stoner left, Ducati remained a mess—Rossi couldn’t fix it either, but the contrast shows Stoner didn't leave behind a legacy of progress. He enjoyed a good bike and left behind a bad one.

Ducati, at the time, was built around a very specific riding style—heavy reliance on electronics and rear traction—something that suited Stoner. This wasn’t just "raw talent" but more a compatibility quirk—like Biaggi on a 500cc Aprilia or Bayliss in WSBK. Great riders show universal adaptability, like Rossi moving from Honda to Yamaha and turning it into a winner, or Marquez adapting to multiple rule and bike changes.

In 2011, Stoner did dominate—but that was also the first year of the new 800cc Honda RC213V, which had clear mechanical superiority. Dani Pedrosa missed races with injury, and Lorenzo suffered a nasty hand injury that year. Even then, in 2012 (his final year), Stoner was beaten by both Lorenzo and Pedrosa in points and wins. Great riders don’t fade when their machinery advantage dips slightly—they adapt and find a way to fight.

Truly great riders are remembered for heroics in mixed or wet conditions (Rossi at Donington 2005, Marquez at Sachsenring 2021, Lorenzo at Motegi 2009). Stoner was fast in the dry but rarely put on masterclasses in adverse conditions. That further weakens the “complete package” claim.

Greatness involves not just speed but mental strength. Stoner frequently cited "lack of enjoyment" and "politics" as reasons for leaving MotoGP—fair points, but also signs that he lacked the long-term mental fortitude that others like Lorenzo, Rossi, and Marquez have shown while dealing with constant pressure, media scrutiny, and expectations.

Let's leave Senna alone for now. Hope you have watched MotoGP as much.

[Seanspeed]

Since when did team mate comparison became a benchmark of the greatness? Your opinion doesn't make the facts any stronger than mine.

While he won on a Ducati that was undeniably better bike than others in 2007, it’s worth noting that Stoner never fully developed bikes for the long term. His feedback style was often labeled as "vague" or "unconstructive" by engineers and teammates. In contrast, riders like Rossi, Lorenzo, and Pedrosa not only adapted but shaped the evolution of their bikes over years. When Stoner left, Ducati remained a mess—Rossi couldn’t fix it either, but the contrast shows Stoner didn't leave behind a legacy of progress. He enjoyed a good bike and left behind a bad one.

Ducati, at the time, was built around a very specific riding style—heavy reliance on electronics and rear traction—something that suited Stoner. This wasn’t just "raw talent" but more a compatibility quirk—like Biaggi on a 500cc Aprilia or Bayliss in WSBK. Great riders show universal adaptability, like Rossi moving from Honda to Yamaha and turning it into a winner, or Marquez adapting to multiple rule and bike changes.

In 2011, Stoner did dominate—but that was also the first year of the new 800cc Honda RC213V, which had clear mechanical superiority. Dani Pedrosa missed races with injury, and Lorenzo suffered a nasty hand injury that year. Even then, in 2012 (his final year), Stoner was beaten by both Lorenzo and Pedrosa in points and wins. Great riders don’t fade when their machinery advantage dips slightly—they adapt and find a way to fight.

Truly great riders are remembered for heroics in mixed or wet conditions (Rossi at Donington 2005, Marquez at Sachsenring 2021, Lorenzo at Motegi 2009). Stoner was fast in the dry but rarely put on masterclasses in adverse conditions. That further weakens the “complete package” claim.

Greatness involves not just speed but mental strength. Stoner frequently cited "lack of enjoyment" and "politics" as reasons for leaving MotoGP—fair points, but also signs that he lacked the long-term mental fortitude that others like Lorenzo, Rossi, and Marquez have shown while dealing with constant pressure, media scrutiny, and expectations.

Let's leave Senna alone for now. Hope you have watched MotoGP as much.

Stoner left cuz he started getting injuries, dealing with bouts of arm pump, and yes, because he got tired of dealing with the celebrity circus and traveling routine of a major international competition that lasts most of the year. But the big thing that allowed him to walk away without remorse is that he really had little more to prove to anybody at that point.

I also never said he was a 'complete package'. But neither were people like Pedrosa and Lorenzo. Stoner made up for it by simply being faster than them, though.

Your take is just beyond reason, honestly. I'm having a hard time even grasping the fact that you're actually arguing this seriously. How many more bike manufacturers would he need to win titles on before you'd give him kudos? How do you honestly put people like Dovizioso and Martin ahead of Stoner given all the criticisms you just tried to level at Stoner here? How come Lorenzo and Pedrosa didn't win when their bike advantage wasn't assured? Come on now, Stoner was not simply winning on the clear best bike. Those Ducatis would have been considered mediocre-to-bad in those earlier years had Stoner not been there.

And of course how somebody fares compared to their teammate is one of the absolute most critical ways to judge a racer's actual competitiveness.

You seem to be giving expectations to Stoner that you're absolutely not willing to give to anybody else that you somehow consider better than him. Where is your spiel about how Lorenzo wasn't actually any good because he only won on the Yamaha when it was the best bike? How come you say the best riders need to be adaptable, but then say it doesn't count when Stoner adapts to the Ducati in a way that people like Rossi or Lorenzo never could? Stoner was literally great on every single bike he rode. It makes no sense at all and makes me think you've got some very deep rooted biases against Stoner that makes you incapable of giving him any credit. Your takes are so wild that I'm still struggling to grasp that you're actually making them seriously and not just here trying to waste other people's time refuting obvious reality.

[CMSMJ1]

Since when did team mate comparison became a benchmark of the greatness? Your opinion doesn't make the facts any stronger than mine.

While he won on a Ducati that was undeniably better bike than others in 2007, it’s worth noting that Stoner never fully developed bikes for the long term. His feedback style was often labeled as "vague" or "unconstructive" by engineers and teammates. In contrast, riders like Rossi, Lorenzo, and Pedrosa not only adapted but shaped the evolution of their bikes over years. When Stoner left, Ducati remained a mess—Rossi couldn’t fix it either, but the contrast shows Stoner didn't leave behind a legacy of progress. He enjoyed a good bike and left behind a bad one.

Ducati, at the time, was built around a very specific riding style—heavy reliance on electronics and rear traction—something that suited Stoner. This wasn’t just "raw talent" but more a compatibility quirk—like Biaggi on a 500cc Aprilia or Bayliss in WSBK. Great riders show universal adaptability, like Rossi moving from Honda to Yamaha and turning it into a winner, or Marquez adapting to multiple rule and bike changes.

In 2011, Stoner did dominate—but that was also the first year of the new 800cc Honda RC213V, which had clear mechanical superiority. Dani Pedrosa missed races with injury, and Lorenzo suffered a nasty hand injury that year. Even then, in 2012 (his final year), Stoner was beaten by both Lorenzo and Pedrosa in points and wins. Great riders don’t fade when their machinery advantage dips slightly—they adapt and find a way to fight.

Truly great riders are remembered for heroics in mixed or wet conditions (Rossi at Donington 2005, Marquez at Sachsenring 2021, Lorenzo at Motegi 2009). Stoner was fast in the dry but rarely put on masterclasses in adverse conditions. That further weakens the “complete package” claim.

Greatness involves not just speed but mental strength. Stoner frequently cited "lack of enjoyment" and "politics" as reasons for leaving MotoGP—fair points, but also signs that he lacked the long-term mental fortitude that others like Lorenzo, Rossi, and Marquez have shown while dealing with constant pressure, media scrutiny, and expectations.

Let's leave Senna alone for now. Hope you have watched MotoGP as much.

Stoner left cuz he started getting injuries, dealing with bouts of arm pump, and yes, because he got tired of dealing with the celebrity circus and traveling routine of a major international competition that lasts most of the year. But the big thing that allowed him to walk away without remorse is that he really had little more to prove to anybody at that point.

I also never said he was a 'complete package'. But neither were people like Pedrosa and Lorenzo. Stoner made up for it by simply being faster than them, though.

Your take is just beyond reason, honestly. I'm having a hard time even grasping the fact that you're actually arguing this seriously. How many more bike manufacturers would he need to win titles on before you'd give him kudos? How do you honestly put people like Dovizioso and Martin ahead of Stoner given all the criticisms you just tried to level at Stoner here? How come Lorenzo and Pedrosa didn't win when their bike advantage wasn't assured? Come on now, Stoner was not simply winning on the clear best bike. Those Ducatis would have been considered mediocre-to-bad in those earlier years had Stoner not been there.

And of course how somebody fares compared to their teammate is one of the absolute most critical ways to judge a racer's actual competitiveness.

You seem to be giving expectations to Stoner that you're absolutely not willing to give to anybody else that you somehow consider better than him. Where is your spiel about how Lorenzo wasn't actually any good because he only won on the Yamaha when it was the best bike? How come you say the best riders need to be adaptable, but then say it doesn't count when Stoner adapts to the Ducati in a way that people like Rossi or Lorenzo never could? Stoner was literally great on every single bike he rode. It makes no sense at all and makes me think you've got some very deep rooted biases against Stoner that makes you incapable of giving him any credit. Your takes are so wild that I'm still struggling to grasp that you're actually making them seriously and not just here trying to waste other people's time refuting obvious reality.

Let's not get into personal digs please. Your post was fine to the last sentence.

It's interesting to see other opinions and it's always good to try to understand them ( even if they are wrong )

@kurtj - How do you not see comparison with team mate as a valid metric to decide whether someone is doing well or not?

The Ducati was a poor bike for many years and it's surely easy to see that it only had regular wins/podium in the hands of Stoner?

There's no doubt he was fast. Is he top ten all time? Maybe. He's not yet best, but he was superb before he got ill and realised that he can't do this MotoGP business anymore. He was a young man and could have ridden another ten years.

Either way, was great to watch.

[Chuckjr]

Marc is absolutely amazing. I feel privileged to see him race like when I used to watch Senna.

[Wouter]

https://www.motorsport.com/motogp/news/ ... /10735550/

[bluechris]

Ouch .... Imagine MotoGP in some years with soap Pirelli tyres also for the sake of entertainment......

[Wouter]

Ouch .... Imagine MotoGP in some years with soap Pirelli tyres also for the sake of entertainment......

.
And how about the TT in Assen removed from the calender to have a new circuit in the Middle East?

[bluechris]

Ouch .... Imagine MotoGP in some years with soap Pirelli tyres also for the sake of entertainment......

.
And how about the TT in Assen removed from the calender to have a new circuit in the Middle East?

Bonus to this, missiles flying all over. Great show indeed.

[CMSMJ1]

Ouch .... Imagine MotoGP in some years with soap Pirelli tyres also for the sake of entertainment......

MotoGP are moving to Pirelli ..
Moto3 and Moto2 already use them