That would make his results during his peak time about even with Stoner. Personally, I think that Marquez is better than Stoner.
Of course. Their results over this period are simular. You could take any number of other riders - JLo, Hayden for example and condense down the results to a two/three year period and come to the same conclusion. Personally, I don’t think anyone can get an accurate assessment from comparing two riders results and then substituting one of them with a third rider. I don’t prescribe to this notion. Too many variables and not absolute. If Rossi=Stoner And MM>Stoner Then MM>Rossi How do you propose accounting for Rossi’s results from 2000-2006?
I did not "condense down" the results. I took Stoner's entire MotoGP career except for his rookie year on a satellite bike, and looked how that compared to Rossi over the same period. Rossi 2000-2006? He was the best. No doubt about it. Then stronger competition rolled in. Now, regarding your "prescription" : I already acknowledged that all this stuff is subjective (well, except for head-to-head competition, which there has been plenty of).