Omloop Het Nieuwsblad *spoiler* thread

mike6

Rick Chasey wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Elite athletes do the best excuses

Don't think GvA was giving an excuse. More saying what happened.

He should have won that and it's a missed opportunity for him.

Then he only has himself to blame. I think Stan just wanted it more than he did.

Richmond Racer

Bloody good race. The strongest man won. Team tactics spot on.

Love the Yogi!

Yellow Peril

Sky have obviously spent years of not listening to instructions on the radio in one day races so when there are races with no radios they have an obvious advantage

I felt sorry for Offredo, he looked to be riding well until he binned it.

iainf72

Richmond Racer wrote:

Bloody good race. The strongest man won. Team tactics spot on.

Love the Yogi!

I find it's funny how people tend to forget Sky are generally very good at the Omloop. If you look at basically every edition since the team started they've either won it or been right up there.

powerbookboy

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Elite athletes do the best excuses

When tiny nths of percentages mean the difference between first and nowhere, being freezing bloody cold seems like a perfectly plausible and valid excuse. Boonen's in good condition this early in the season, which means he's also very lean compared to some.

Doesn't change the fact that OPQS, with the riders they have, should have got someone up at the sharp end. To few Chiefs, too many Indians? Edit: I'm a dick and ignored Terpstra...

powerbookboy

ThomThom wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Waiting for EBH would have been pointless. By taking a turn he made sure the guys towing EBH had to work to bring them back (whether he knew it or not)

Also, EBH hasn't really had the best record at doing anything in the classics lately, so him winning the sprint, while likely, wouldn't have been a done deal by any means.

Well, a whole lot more likely than Stannard winning the sprint. Especially since Hagen did nothing for the last 5km.. and is a sprinter..

It turned out the right way for Sky, barely, but there's no way - if we didn't know the result - that one can argue that Stannard didn't do too much work in front. Had GVA just been a tiny bit more calm (he had the best position in the sprint before moving in front of Stannard) and paid attention to Stannard's acceleration, he'd won it as well. That gap cost him the victory as he was faster in the actual sprint.

Mmm. Admittedly EBH isn't one of my favoured riders, but how many times has he been in the final selection and failed to finish it, even when amongst riders you'd expect him to destroy on raw pace? My impression is he's got raw speed, but he loses that when he's got a lot of hard miles in his legs. Hence he wins Tour stages, doesn't win one day races against recognised finishers?

Stannard was by a country mile Sky's best one-day rider last year. An absolute beast. If he'd have deferred to EBH and played tailgunner, 3 things would have happened. 1). His chance of a big contract in the future would have disappeared in smoke due to a perceived lack of ambition. 2). Sky's chances would have dropped from 50% to 40% for a win. I don't gamble, but even I know you play the percentages. 3). The daft talk about Wiggins becoming a protected rider in Roubiaux etc. would have gained more credence; instead he's gonna get worker bees, leaving him in better shape to contest the sharp end.

I'm ecstatic for the guy.

tailwindhome

rick_chasey

mike6 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Elite athletes do the best excuses

Don't think GvA was giving an excuse. More saying what happened.

He should have won that and it's a missed opportunity for him.

Then he only has himself to blame. I think Stan just wanted it more than he did.

Not sure he was blaming anyone else? It wasn't a question of who wanted it more. If anything it's a bigger deal for Greg than Ian.

rick_chasey

ThomThom wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Waiting for EBH would have been pointless. By taking a turn he made sure the guys towing EBH had to work to bring them back (whether he knew it or not)

Also, EBH hasn't really had the best record at doing anything in the classics lately, so him winning the sprint, while likely, wouldn't have been a done deal by any means.

Well, a whole lot more likely than Stannard winning the sprint. Especially since Hagen did nothing for the last 5km.. and is a sprinter..

It turned out the right way for Sky, barely, but there's no way - if we didn't know the result - that one can argue that Stannard didn't do too much work in front. Had GVA just been a tiny bit more calm (he had the best position in the sprint before moving in front of Stannard) and paid attention to Stannard's acceleration, he'd won it as well. That gap cost him the victory as he was faster in the actual sprint.

Yup.

rick_chasey

Anyone want to argue earpieces don't change tactics btw? Think that finale is the best example I've seen. It wouldn't have happened like that with earpieces.

thegibdog

Would have been interesting to see the reaction on here if Stannard had waited and EBH had blown it...

I was thinking whilst I was out on the bike yesterday that it'd be great to see Stannard getting some victories this spring. Got home to find out he'd won, dead chuffed for him. I really admire the way he rides, mainly because I can't comprehend being able to ride that way myself!

powerbookboy

Rick Chasey wrote:

Anyone want to argue earpieces don't change tactics btw? Think that finale is the best example I've seen. It wouldn't have happened like that with earpieces.

And was better for it? Dunno.

I'm personally in favour - I'm just not sure long term if it will encourage dynamic racing or nullify it. Depends on how many people are prepared to win a race, rather than be seen to lose a race?

Review it in 6months after a Classics spring and couple of Tours, ditch it if it fails. Particularly kill it if we see more accidents when riders forget to break/hit oil on road/parked cars?

gpreeves

iainf72 wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Bloody good race. The strongest man won. Team tactics spot on.

Love the Yogi!

I find it's funny how people tend to forget Sky are generally very good at the Omloop. If you look at basically every edition since the team started they've either won it or been right up there.

Yep. They (Flecha) won it in 2010, and had one 2nd place, two third places and a fourth place in 2011/2012/2013. They're actually one of the more successful teams at the Omloop in recent years.

Macaloon

powerbookboy wrote:

Stannard was by a country mile Sky's best one-day rider last year. An absolute beast. If he'd have deferred to EBH and played tailgunner, 3 things would have happened. 1). His chance of a big contract in the future would have disappeared in smoke due to a perceived lack of ambition. 2). Sky's chances would have dropped from 50% to 40% for a win. I don't gamble, but even I know you play the percentages. 3). The daft talk about Wiggins becoming a protected rider in Roubiaux etc. would have gained more credence; instead he's gonna get worker bees, leaving him in better shape to contest the sharp end.

I'm ecstatic for the guy.

+1. Somehow, 'The Docker' convinced GVA that he was happy to wait for Eddie. Otherwise what was GVA, the undisputed superior sprinter, doing leading out from 500m? Whatever the reasons that was exceptional battle chess on wheels.

rick_chasey

Macaloon wrote:

]

+1. Somehow, 'The Docker' convinced GVA that he was happy to wait for Eddie. Otherwise what was GVA, the undisputed superior sprinter, doing leading out from 500m? Whatever the reasons that was exceptional battle chess on wheels.

Nah. GvA just made a few tactical mistakes. It wasn't anything to do with Eddie.

It was his to lose and he lost it.

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

Anyone want to argue earpieces don't change tactics btw? Think that finale is the best example I've seen. It wouldn't have happened like that with earpieces.

The argument isn't whether they change tactics, it's how much they change them and whether they change them for the worse. It always gets mentioned after a good race but never after KBK ends in a bunch sprint.

FJS

Rick Chasey wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

]

+1. Somehow, 'The Docker' convinced GVA that he was happy to wait for Eddie. Otherwise what was GVA, the undisputed superior sprinter, doing leading out from 500m? Whatever the reasons that was exceptional battle chess on wheels.

Nah. GvA just made a few tactical mistakes. It wasn't anything to do with Eddie.

It was his to lose and he lost it.

GVA said in interview post-race that he simply was overconfident and complacent that he would win the sprint. He is so much faster than Stannard, he said he'd 'already won in his head before the sprint'. Not a convincing excuse for someone with a bit of experience, but there you are.
9 out of 10 times it would have gone the other way though. A Sky win high on panache, but tactically questionable in the finale.

frenchfighter

Racer.

frenchfighter

Mad_Malx

^great collection FF

frenchfighter

frenchfighter

mroli

Rouleur have posted their Stannard interview (Boulting) from a couple of copies ago: http://rouleur.cc/journal/riders/ian-stannard

frenchfighter

Nice interview thanks. I feel for him at that World's because he really was flying around something special. Despite being in the wind a ton and making big efforts he still managed to finish with the front runners!

frenchfighter

Really enjoyed that a lot. Will have four eyes on him come Roubaix. What a racer.

frenchfighter

SKY management:
They’re on the bus watching it on TV, and phoning the director: ‘Tell him to take his cape off’. They wanted me to be more aero – to get out there and bloody win it. But there was no way I was taking my bloody cape off. I was hanging on by the skin of my teeth.”
Results over people as per usual.

frenchfighter

I had always assumed him to be more modest. Here is one example of that not being the case:

Nationals that he won:
“Who was your main threat that day?” He sighs. “No one. Am I allowed to say that?

“At the Nationals you go from the gun. It’s basically ‘last man standing’ and you’ve got to be pretty strong to beat me. Last man standing. One on one. I rode away from the last two on the first climb of the final circuit with about 15k to go. To be honest I didn’t expect to go on my first attack. I expected it to be a bit harder. I was still very controlled and measured at that point. It wasn’t really in doubt.”

thomthom

Marcel Sieberg ‏@MarcelSieberg 6h
For what we have new rules??? Front group all on the asphalt *bike path* Peloton all on the cobbles. pic.twitter.com/ldoDhtmr4I

Anonymous

frenchfighter wrote:

I had always assumed him to be more modest. Here is one example of that not being the case:

Nationals that he won:
“Who was your main threat that day?” He sighs. “No one. Am I allowed to say that?

“At the Nationals you go from the gun. It’s basically ‘last man standing’ and you’ve got to be pretty strong to beat me. Last man standing. One on one. I rode away from the last two on the first climb of the final circuit with about 15k to go. To be honest I didn’t expect to go on my first attack. I expected it to be a bit harder. I was still very controlled and measured at that point. It wasn’t really in doubt.”

I asked him at the 2014 nationals, if he was going to win today, he replied: "We need to drop Cav, we can't beat him in a sprint, but he's a better climber than us as well, so probably not."

Anonymous

ThomThom wrote:

Marcel Sieberg ‏@MarcelSieberg 6h
For what we have new rules??? Front group all on the asphalt *bike path* Peloton all on the cobbles. pic.twitter.com/ldoDhtmr4I

Wrong race I thnk.