Vuelta / Froome / Cobo

cal_stewart

for me it was just that the last 6 stages were never going to change much gt wise. for me the race was over after stage15

Ron Stuart

Cal_Stewart wrote:

for me it was just that the last 6 stages were never going to change much gt wise. for me the race was over after stage15

The TDF was over in 2005 when Armstrong overtook Ullrich in the prologue. :shock:

Cheer up could be worse mate :

Turfle

Not sure I buy the idea that it promotes aggressive racing. If anything it stunts attacking, as would be attackers are able to leave their dig until the very end safe in the knowledge there are 20 seconds to be had on the line.

Without bonuses would Froome have decided not to attack Cobo on Pena Cabarga, or would it have forced the attacking to start earlier?

There are maybe 2 riders in the peloton who wouldn't want to "just" win the stage.

20 seconds is just too big a bonus to me.

blazing_saddles

Turfle wrote:

Not sure I buy the idea that it promotes aggressive racing. If anything it stunts attacking, as would be attackers are able to leave their dig until the very end safe in the knowledge there are 20 seconds to be had on the line.

Without bonuses would Froome have decided not to attack Cobo on Pena Cabarga, or would it have forced the attacking to start earlier?

There are maybe 2 riders in the peloton who wouldn't want to "just" win the stage.

20 seconds is just too big a bonus to me.

That whole stage was raced at 44kph. The attacking started on the penultimate climb and kicked off again, as soon as the riders hit the foot of Pena Carbarga.
It was Cobo who initiated the attacking, not Froome. Froome countered.
On the Angliru, Sastre went on the attack at the base, Anton soon followed.
Cobo attacked just as soon as the bunch hit the serious gradients.

I'm not sure what more we should expect, with or without bonus seconds.

Le Tour did away with bonus seconds a few years back. Until the Alps this year, they hadn't exactly set our screens on fire with searing, early attacks in the mountains.

Who can forget the 2009 tedious plod up Arcalis, or the track stands at Trois Domaines in 2010?

emadden

Ron Stuart wrote:

....and Cobo's unbelievable turn of form. :shock:

A bit like Froome's?

Ron Stuart

emadden wrote:

Ron Stuart wrote:

....and Cobo's unbelievable turn of form. :shock:

A bit like Froome's?

It's been covered already and I agreed, read again. :!:

Pross

Turfle wrote:

Cobo of course was the deserving winner. Everyone knew the rules beforehand.

That said, I'm against time bonuses for the most part. 20 seconds is a hell of a big bonus on a mountain stage. Stages like the Sierra Nevada stage where Froome and then Wiggins TTd up, left it all on the road, but were jumped by Mollema, Martin, and one other, is why I'm against time bonuses. They make "sitting on" the good tactical choice.

If you have to have them make it 6, 4, 2.

I agree with nearly all of this apart from the last bit. I would say if you have them they should be say 5 seconds for the winner only. I only realised at the start of the race that they had time bonuses and commented early on that it shouldn't be the case.

Tom Butcher

afx237vi wrote:

I find it quite strange that a 3 week race needed to be settled with time bonuses in the first place. Maybe that means there was something wrong with the route, because in 21 days the only really selective stages were the Angliru, the TTT and the ITT. Everything else ended with small groups and very small gaps. The entire top ten is separated by 5 and half minutes... you get bigger gaps than that in Paris-Nice!

Why does a close GC mean there was something wrong with the route - isn't a close GC a good thing ?

rick_chasey

Tom Butcher wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

I find it quite strange that a 3 week race needed to be settled with time bonuses in the first place. Maybe that means there was something wrong with the route, because in 21 days the only really selective stages were the Angliru, the TTT and the ITT. Everything else ended with small groups and very small gaps. The entire top ten is separated by 5 and half minutes... you get bigger gaps than that in Paris-Nice!

Why does a close GC mean there was something wrong with the route - isn't a close GC a good thing ?

Therein lies the dilema.

Ultimately, you want any bike race to be selective, whether that's over one day or three weeks.

A very selective GT however, isn't a tense affair.

Pross

To be fair, Geox and Cobo timed things to perfection. Cobo was always up there but unnoticed by Sky who were concerned with Nibs, Mollema etc. and he only showed his hand the day before the Angliru knowing he had a good chance to put more time into them the next day and that there weren't many chances after that for anyone to overhaul him. Sky's biggest mistake was letting him go on that stage (assuming of course they could have stopped him).