last man standing wins.

intothe12

Just got the Pro-Cycling through the post this morning...

I must admit that over the last 8 months I have been a bit turned off by Cav's attitude, but his analysis of the way things should be and who should win is spot on...

"The doped guys used to be the ones who woiuld ride away at the end of the stages. Now everyone is f*cked after 80km, and teh one who's least f*cked wins".

last man standing takes the prize.

The Prodigy

Wasn't this what the Tour was meant to be when it was a mere twinkle in Desgrange's eye.

intothe12

you are dead right....

the reason people love classic like roubaix, the ronde, is because they look hard, the riders look like they have travelled through hell and back for the wind...

alot of the grand tours seem a bit sterile, predictable, attack in the last 5 km....

fans want epic rides, and not epic rides that look like a piece of piss but ones where the rider will be in a body bag the next day from his exertions the day before.

dennisn

Somewhat like the saying about the loser is the person who makes the last mistake.

teagar

Yeah. Just like the '09 Vuleta.

Everyone was completely smashed, and it was who could make the least mistakes.


Everybody loved it.... :shock:

Not.

afx237vi

teagar wrote:

Yeah. Just like the '09 Vuleta.

Everyone was completely smashed, and it was who could make the least mistakes.


Everybody loved it.... :shock:

Not.

Rein Taaramae wasn't loving it, that's for sure:



Too easy! Too easy!

teagar

afx237vi wrote:

teagar wrote:

Yeah. Just like the '09 Vuleta.

Everyone was completely smashed, and it was who could make the least mistakes.


Everybody loved it.... :shock:

Not.

Rein Taaramae wasn't loving it, that's for sure:



Too easy! Too easy!

Hah! I think the phrase there is "no change!".

But, in all seriousness, the Vuelta was too tough for good GC racing.
It's not about the hardest races. Paris-Roubaix or De Ronde could easily be made harder. It's the way in which the courses make the selection which is exciting, not just how tough it is.

intothe12

teagar wrote:

Yeah. Just like the '09 Vuleta.

Everyone was completely smashed, and it was who could make the least mistakes.

Everybody loved it.... :shock:

Not.

ah, I see, watching Riis going up Hautcam in 96 in the big ring, mouth closed and breathing through his nose was more enjoyable?

what I am suggesting is that when you strip out the juice, and the team radio's for that matter you can get more unpredictable and more exciting racing. I would much rather see guys suffering than the robotic motions of the 2006 Giro.

teagar

intothe12 wrote:

teagar wrote:

Yeah. Just like the '09 Vuleta.

Everyone was completely smashed, and it was who could make the least mistakes.

Everybody loved it.... :shock:

Not.

ah, I see, watching Riis going up Hautcam in 96 in the big ring, mouth closed and breathing through his nose was more enjoyable?

what I am suggesting is that when you strip out the juice, and the team radio's for that matter you can get more unpredictable and more exciting racing. I would much rather see guys suffering than the robotic motions of the 2006 Giro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2FQqHF8x5I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YiV69YCtDc

People suffer, with juice or without. They just go faster on the juice, and can attack harder.

Without juice leads to more conservative racing. There's much less energy available to expend, so the margins for erorr is less, especially when the route is so tough. See the '09 Vuelta. That's why much more care should be taken to make races enjoyably selective. No-one likes seeing riders go slow for fear of crsahing, and no-one likes watching GC leaders stare at each other because they're too intimidated by the course. It's a fine line.