Posts
641
Joined
10/16/2008
Location
Scottsville, NY
US
Edited Date/Time
1/26/2012 10:11pm
I personally was always an Emig fan. MC won alot of races. I just don't think he had any real competition when he won. Does anyone else feel that the talent level was low at that point? If Ricky would have came sooner he would of stopped him a couple titles early. Obviously if my aunt had a #^{£ she would be uncle.
I didn't like the comments MC made about Pourcel and Reed. I personally think Reed is just as good if not better than MC. Reed has always had stacked competition and rose to the occasion. When it comes to pourcel I think he is more talented as well.. I'm going to get some $#^+ for this. Reed the best rider-owner ever?
I didn't like the comments MC made about Pourcel and Reed. I personally think Reed is just as good if not better than MC. Reed has always had stacked competition and rose to the occasion. When it comes to pourcel I think he is more talented as well.. I'm going to get some $#^+ for this. Reed the best rider-owner ever?
With that said, no he didn't have as much competition as what is on the line today.
And yes I agree that Reed is one of the best this sport has ever seen.
The Shop
Media standpoint I and main stream MC is the reason for it. He was a great "face" for our sport. Alot like Travis!
That's not to take anything away from what he accomplished, he is still the man but I'm just saying that some of the factors that lead to his dominance went beyond his talent and everything just seemed to fall into place for him at that time.
I don't call it lucky, but he certainly benefitted from the competition level. That doesn't take anything away from his accomplishments though. You beat who is there, and out of all the millions of people on the planet, only a few even took a SX race from him for about 8 years.
Carmichael, Emig, Lusk, Huffman, Stanton, Windham, LaRocco, Vuillemin, Hughes (Ryno), Button, Henry, Albertyn, Ferry, Tortelli, Pichon, Ward, Dowd.
Now to say he got lucky with the guys above is just silly, some of those guys above at their best were bloody fast and hard to beat. MC was just better and smarter in most races then those guys to win so many races and championships.
I don't think the talent pool was shallow, he raced against some fast guys. Think about all the fast guys from the 90s, henry, Lusk, Larocco Kiedroski and Emig to mane a few. No it wasn't a weak field at all.
Emig: I would agree. Emig was one of the best.
RC: He beat RC one season while RC was crashing his brains out.
Lusk: I like Erza but he couldn't win when MC was gone.
LaRocco: Hard nose, hard working guy that wasn't the smoothest SX guy.
Stanton: Put him up there with the question mark with Bradshaw.
Huffman: Good solid rider, but not at the same level at someone like MC.
Lamson: Fantastic 125 pilot, but didn't set the woods on fire in the 250s.
Windham: Raced a few years with MC as a rookie.
MC was a Supercross specialist. He raced 10 full Sx seasons (250 class). I think back then, they were 16 race seasons. 160 races, he won 72 races. That's a winning percentage of 45%.
RC was a Motocross specialist. He raced 10 full Mx seasons (125/250/450). 12 races a season (other than 2003, 11 races). That's 119 races, and he won 102. That's a winning percentage of 85.7%.
Ricky won waaaaaaaay more in his speciality.
Then if you look at racing and winning in the other aspect:
MC won 17 races out of his comfort zone.
RC won 48 races out of his comfort zone.
How do people still think MC is the GOAT? I don't get it. The numbers don't lie. And Ricky did it with stiffer competition.
People of the 90's, it's okay to admit that MC wasn't the greatest.
Pit Row
MC's competition cannot be viewed objectively. A viewer's impression of Yogi or DV was influenced by MC; how they fared against MC.
Consider rider x, a mythical rider who is 5-10 times better than whoever you consider the greatest of all time. By definition, in whatever era rider x raced, he dominated. His competition, be it Karsmakers, DeCoster, Everts, RJ, Yogi, RC, Reed or Stewart, would appear vastly inferior relative to rider x. This does not necessarily mean his competition was inferior from a pan-era perspective.
The only thing approaching a common denominator is KW. KW is still kicking ass. He will give one of the big 5 a run on a given night. He nearly won a race this year. It stands to reason that his better years were in MC's era.
MC did not get lucky, but I was responding to the guy calling MC the GOAT. Sorry, but MC "was" the GOAT, until RC came along and shattered any hope of anyone performing like he did.
No one will touch Ricky's 150 wins. With the talent pools as deep as they are these days, no way... at least not for a long, long time.
But back on topic...
MC was not lucky.
Post a reply to: Did MC get lucky?