Tour de France Stage 5 Ypres-Arenberg *Spoiler*
Comments
-
Frankie had a puncture at a bad time and had to wait quite a while for the car.Contador is the Greatest0
-
Turfle wrote:but I did love seeing little Richie Porte giving it some welly while caked in mud.
That is my one highlight!Correlation is not causation.0 -
yourpaceormine wrote:Any more Spring Classics masquerading as grand tour stages this year?
We've had a LBL type stage, and a PR stage, what's next?
And we've not even got into it yet!!!!!
Jesus. I have to say, whilst I enjoy a TTT, I don;t think it's fair and I'm pleased that there isn't one this year. It does still feel like there is something missing though.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:Sagan handles his bike better than half the peloton and has ridden cobbles and classics tens of times. Comparing him to Contador in this regard is pointless.
Maybe it's about time Contador did some classics then, or practised on the cobbles, you're always going on about how he trains harder than everyone else.0 -
TMR wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Boom said he was crying and had goosebumps before the end. He is also going on like he has won PR. Someone needs to let him know its the Tour and he still only has one top ten placing in a classic.
He did well today though, you can't deny that. It was a tough stage.
I'd be interested to know why they had such problems with grip, particularly at roundabouts? Are tubulars not as good in the wet as clinchers? I've never ridden tubs so have no idea. I've never slipped in the wet and I ride aggressively.
An amateur's idea of aggressively probably differs some from a pros.You live and learn. At any rate, you live0 -
Joelsim wrote:yourpaceormine wrote:Any more Spring Classics masquerading as grand tour stages this year?
We've had a LBL type stage, and a PR stage, what's next?
And we've not even got into it yet!!!!!
Jesus. I have to say, whilst I enjoy a TTT, I don;t think it's fair and I'm pleased that there isn't one this year. It does still feel like there is something missing though.
Froome0 -
Above The Cows wrote:I can't help feeling that there are people at ASO that know this and want this.
I think this is where the argument goes a little too far - I honestly doubt that anyone at ASO wanted to see dozens of riders crashing and one of the favourites leaving with an injury that may be quite serious. At worst they wanted a parcours that would generate some splits and promote a different type of rider than the usual candidates, but every grand tour tends to have a stage at about this point that serves to split out the field and impose some order on the narrative (if only to reduce the number of riders trying to spend the whole day in the front ten). Usually it's a time trial, or a sop to the climbers, but given that they're going to have to move back across the north of France to get back from England, why not visit the one thing that makes that part of the world so unique in cycling and let that do the work for them?
Where I think you have a better point is people's reaction to seeing the top riders in the world being given a good working over by the elements and the course - I think it produced compelling racing and exposed some interesting fault lines that we didn't expect, but some of the glee over crashes is a bit much.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
Personally I have mixed feelings about them. On one hand they undoubtedly create memorable stages without fail. And the way things panned out today sets the rest of the Tour up quite nicely.Pross wrote:I took issue with Rich's post comparing it with Wimbledon and indirectly to Iain's in the post you quoted above. You and DD were more vocal in your opinion that the cobbles shouldn't be included though.
However, I believe the organisers were very lucky. They lost Froome, largely because of yesterday, but on another day they could have lost more. I think Froome's DNF made all the GC guys more cautious (except the cycling version of Gonzo from the Muppets).
The thing is that first week of Tours have always been a bit frantic and there's always collateral damage, but I don't see why it is sensible to deliberately make it worse. Sport as entertainment is about the top competitors facing each other. The calendar means the top names in cycling rarely race each other on top form, this is the one time they always do. So why play dice with their participation? That's kind of where the Wimbledon analogy came from - unnecessarily jeopardising the progress of the big names.
Financially the Tour is 80% of the sport, and it is sponsor funded. If a sponsor is paying $10m a year they're not going to be impressed this sort of lottery in the year's main event. The two big clashes of the Tour never even started - and that can't be good for TV ratings either.
Possibly a reasonable point on the timing although I think with it in the first week it at least gives anyone who does lose time a chance to pull it back. You're the forum stato, how many GC contenders have been forced out of the race on (let's say) the last 5 pave stages of the Tour or even lost so much time it cost them any chance of winning? Part of my point is that the actual risk / danger is less than perceived. Also, you say the GC contenders took it easy but they only lost a minute or two to one of the greatest cobble riders there has been.
Maybe at the heart of this I just long for the days when a rider could be on the podium of the Tour and P-R in the same year and dislike this whole era of the GT specialist :?0 -
frenchfighter wrote:
Boom said he was crying and had goosebumps before the end. He is also going on like he has won PR. Someone needs to let him know its the Tour and he still only has one top ten placing in a classic.
That's a tad ungracious. He beat all the usual cobble suspects and the GT guys (who were racing like their GT depended on it), all of whom raced a bloc from the first km's.Life is unfair, kill yourself or get over it.0 -
Valverde rode the last 60km on Rojas' bike which is 2.5cm smaller than his. He crashed on the roundabout when someone took him out.Contador is the Greatest0
-
mfin wrote:Joelsim wrote:yourpaceormine wrote:Any more Spring Classics masquerading as grand tour stages this year?
We've had a LBL type stage, and a PR stage, what's next?
And we've not even got into it yet!!!!!
Jesus. I have to say, whilst I enjoy a TTT, I don;t think it's fair and I'm pleased that there isn't one this year. It does still feel like there is something missing though.
Froome
Yep. I get no pleasure out of seeing him today, whatever you think of him, the race is a loser with him not here. Nibali may be 2 1/2 mins ahead but it's not the same and Contador will win it far more easily and it won't be as good a spectacle.0 -
underlayunderlay wrote:Above The Cows wrote:I can't help feeling that there are people at ASO that know this and want this.
I think this is where the argument goes a little too far - I honestly doubt that anyone at ASO wanted to see dozens of riders crashing and one of the favourites leaving with an injury that may be quite serious. At worst they wanted a parcours that would generate some splits and promote a different type of rider than the usual candidates, but every grand tour tends to have a stage at about this point that serves to split out the field and impose some order on the narrative (if only to reduce the number of riders trying to spend the whole day in the front ten). Usually it's a time trial, or a sop to the climbers, but given that they're going to have to move back across the north of France to get back from England, why not visit the one thing that makes that part of the world so unique in cycling and let that do the work for them?
Where I think you have a better point is people's reaction to seeing the top riders in the world being given a good working over by the elements and the course - I think it produced compelling racing and exposed some interesting fault lines that we didn't expect, but some of the glee over crashes is a bit much.
I'm the child of tabloid journalists, I see 'it' everywhere.
And yes the glee of seeing people get taken out by crashes was too much for me.Correlation is not causation.0 -
Above The Cows wrote:Turfle wrote:but I did love seeing little Richie Porte giving it some welly while caked in mud.
That is my one highlight!
It was a great shot when he hosed down his face with his bidon.0 -
mfin wrote:frenchfighter wrote:Another reason Contador couldn't keep up in the end was because his small sprockets were blocked with mud so he was spinning out. He also said there was a break at the point he and Nibali separated.
Once a gap opens on wet cobbles coming round the side generally isnt easy at all.
Boom said he was crying and had goosebumps before the end. He is also going on like he has won PR. Someone needs to let him know its the Tour and he still only has one top ten placing in a classic.
Sagan did it well a few times, but he's got A-Level bike handling, Contador only got a basic GCSE pass.
Funny how Contador always makes excuses when he gets his a**e kicked. Man up and admit you were not strong enough on the day. :roll:0 -
Joelsim wrote:No tA Doctor wrote:Above The Cows wrote:Joelsim wrote:Mooro wrote:Above The Cows wrote:silly little boys waving their willies around like they're back in the playground
I went to school in the grim north, but even up there that would have been frowned at!
I think the discussion was fine today other than people being pleased about froomes departure which was a bit 'meh'
I'd happily wave my willy around if it was big enough.
Joel you're winning post of the thread and are a contender for post of the Tour with your 'Ytting' post, you can use that if you want a willy to wave around.
I've not had any nominations yet, but I'm hung like Delgado.
That's because you're a horse.
TBH I much preferred my post on FroomeCat! The Schlecks in paricular.
That's not a bone fide Tour thread though, so it doesn't count.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
I see it another way, to me, it's Contador losing time which is the interesting bit now (seeing as I would not want to see Contador or Froome win).0
-
r0bh wrote:Above The Cows wrote:Turfle wrote:but I did love seeing little Richie Porte giving it some welly while caked in mud.
That is my one highlight!
It was a great shot when he hosed down his face with his bidon.
I hope someone got a photo of that.Correlation is not causation.0 -
Pross wrote:RichN95 wrote:
Personally I have mixed feelings about them. On one hand they undoubtedly create memorable stages without fail. And the way things panned out today sets the rest of the Tour up quite nicely.Pross wrote:I took issue with Rich's post comparing it with Wimbledon and indirectly to Iain's in the post you quoted above. You and DD were more vocal in your opinion that the cobbles shouldn't be included though.
However, I believe the organisers were very lucky. They lost Froome, largely because of yesterday, but on another day they could have lost more. I think Froome's DNF made all the GC guys more cautious (except the cycling version of Gonzo from the Muppets).
The thing is that first week of Tours have always been a bit frantic and there's always collateral damage, but I don't see why it is sensible to deliberately make it worse. Sport as entertainment is about the top competitors facing each other. The calendar means the top names in cycling rarely race each other on top form, this is the one time they always do. So why play dice with their participation? That's kind of where the Wimbledon analogy came from - unnecessarily jeopardising the progress of the big names.
Financially the Tour is 80% of the sport, and it is sponsor funded. If a sponsor is paying $10m a year they're not going to be impressed this sort of lottery in the year's main event. The two big clashes of the Tour never even started - and that can't be good for TV ratings either.
Possibly a reasonable point on the timing although I think with it in the first week it at least gives anyone who does lose time a chance to pull it back. You're the forum stato, how many GC contenders have been forced out of the race on (let's say) the last 5 pave stages of the Tour or even lost so much time it cost them any chance of winning? Part of my point is that the actual risk / danger is less than perceived. Also, you say the GC contenders took it easy but they only lost a minute or two to one of the greatest cobble riders there has been.
Maybe at the heart of this I just long for the days when a rider could be on the podium of the Tour and P-R in the same year and dislike this whole era of the GT specialist :?
In which case cobbles should be on the GT every year.
There are so many ways to look at it. If it is part of road cycling then it should be on tour. If there was a cobbled stage every year and that became the norm, then the riders would have to adapt.0 -
One of the responses to someone's post was "F**k you" until it got edited to something else, I thought that was a bit strong to be fair...adr82 wrote:
No, it isn't. Maybe by normal BR standards it was a bit more heated than usual, but it was and is extremely restrained by internet standards.Joelsim wrote:Paul 8v wrote:Jesus, I missed the thread from about page 18 to page 70 as I was at work and didn't want to spoil the result, what the heck happened on here? Aside form a few doping trolls who thankfully disappeared earlier in the year this forum is normally quite a nice place to "hang out" this is just nasty today.
It was an emotional stage which was always going to divide opinions but that's no reason to rip in to each other on here...
Is it that bad?0 -
I think everyone should put x's on the end of their posts, that would make it all nicer x0
-
Two classic specialists saying how it is next to impossible to move up on wet cobbles.
Kwiatek crashed with Vasil before the first sector and chased for 20km.
GVA crashed before the first sector also.
Sep punctured which ended his race.
Pretty sure Kwiatek and Sep would have been fighting for the in as they looked the strongest.
The only thing I'll give Boom is after sucking the wheels dry he rode as hard as he could and was packed to the brim with emotions.Contador is the Greatest0 -
Paul 8v wrote:Jesus, I missed the thread from about page 18 to page 70 as I was at work and didn't want to spoil the result, what the heck happened on here? Aside form a few doping trolls who thankfully disappeared earlier in the year this forum is normally quite a nice place to "hang out" this is just nasty today.
It was an emotional stage which was always going to divide opinions but that's no reason to rip in to each other on here...
Good 50 pages were basically a live ticker0 -
RichN95 wrote:However, I believe the organisers were very lucky. They lost Froome, largely because of yesterday, but on another day they could have lost more. I think Froome's DNF made all the GC guys more cautious (except the cycling version of Gonzo from the Muppets).
The thing is that first week of Tours have always been a bit frantic and there's always collateral damage, but I don't see why it is sensible to deliberately make it worse. Sport as entertainment is about the top competitors facing each other. The calendar means the top names in cycling rarely race each other on top form, this is the one time they always do. So why play dice with their participation? That's kind of where the Wimbledon analogy came from - unnecessarily jeopardising the progress of the big names.
Financially the Tour is 80% of the sport, and it is sponsor funded. If a sponsor is paying $10m a year they're not going to be impressed this sort of lottery in the year's main event. The two big clashes of the Tour never even started - and that can't be good for TV ratings either.
Strong point. Strange that what can be good for the race can be bad for the sport. No showdown at all between Froome, Contador, and Quintana this season is a travesty. (Consolation Vuelta maybe).
But should it really be such a lottery? The GC has become too extreme. Nobody has come close to defending in recent years. Stages like this are one way to try to slow down the specialisation....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Paul 8v wrote:
One of the responses to someone's post was "F**k you" until it got edited to something else, I thought that was a bit strong to be fair...adr82 wrote:
No, it isn't. Maybe by normal BR standards it was a bit more heated than usual, but it was and is extremely restrained by internet standards.Joelsim wrote:Paul 8v wrote:Jesus, I missed the thread from about page 18 to page 70 as I was at work and didn't want to spoil the result, what the heck happened on here? Aside form a few doping trolls who thankfully disappeared earlier in the year this forum is normally quite a nice place to "hang out" this is just nasty today.
It was an emotional stage which was always going to divide opinions but that's no reason to rip in to each other on here...
Is it that bad?
Not necessary on here. On the road.cc forum we had an ar*e last week who ruined the forum completely. Thankfully he is banned now.0 -
Above The Cows wrote:underlayunderlay wrote:Above The Cows wrote:I can't help feeling that there are people at ASO that know this and want this.
I think this is where the argument goes a little too far - I honestly doubt that anyone at ASO wanted to see dozens of riders crashing and one of the favourites leaving with an injury that may be quite serious. At worst they wanted a parcours that would generate some splits and promote a different type of rider than the usual candidates, but every grand tour tends to have a stage at about this point that serves to split out the field and impose some order on the narrative (if only to reduce the number of riders trying to spend the whole day in the front ten). Usually it's a time trial, or a sop to the climbers, but given that they're going to have to move back across the north of France to get back from England, why not visit the one thing that makes that part of the world so unique in cycling and let that do the work for them?
Where I think you have a better point is people's reaction to seeing the top riders in the world being given a good working over by the elements and the course - I think it produced compelling racing and exposed some interesting fault lines that we didn't expect, but some of the glee over crashes is a bit much.
I'm the child of tabloid journalists, I see 'it' everywhere.
And yes the glee of seeing people get taken out by crashes was too much for me.
To be fair, that was a minority (of one?). And they've shown themselves to be lacking as a decent human being in other ways since so probably not to be paid attention to.Team My Man 2018: David gaudu, Pierre Latour, Romain Bardet, Thibaut pinot, Alexandre Geniez, Florian Senechal, Warren Barguil, Benoit Cosnefroy0 -
mfin wrote:I think everyone should put x's on the end of their posts, that would make it all nicer x
I know where you are going with this!0 -
Paul 8v wrote:
One of the responses to someone's post was "F**k you" until it got edited to something else, I thought that was a bit strong to be fair...adr82 wrote:
No, it isn't. Maybe by normal BR standards it was a bit more heated than usual, but it was and is extremely restrained by internet standards.Joelsim wrote:Paul 8v wrote:Jesus, I missed the thread from about page 18 to page 70 as I was at work and didn't want to spoil the result, what the heck happened on here? Aside form a few doping trolls who thankfully disappeared earlier in the year this forum is normally quite a nice place to "hang out" this is just nasty today.
It was an emotional stage which was always going to divide opinions but that's no reason to rip in to each other on here...
Is it that bad?
Really Paul, after you got Arthur Vichot to visit the forum?* For shame.
*For those that don't know, Paul tweeted Arthur Vichot about the 'What's Arthur Seen' thread. And Arthur favourited his tweet and everything.Correlation is not causation.0 -
Yellow Peril wrote:mfin wrote:I think everyone should put x's on the end of their posts, that would make it all nicer x
I know where you are going with this! x 0 -
TMR - sailing very close to the wind.
A) stop making sexist remarks. One of those again and you'll be gone. If you can't work out which of your posts was,you'll be gone anyway
stop trolling. Froome crashing out comment wasn't necessary.
C) chill out. When you get over excited you post sh!t
Last warning.0 -
Macaloon wrote:RichN95 wrote:However, I believe the organisers were very lucky. They lost Froome, largely because of yesterday, but on another day they could have lost more. I think Froome's DNF made all the GC guys more cautious (except the cycling version of Gonzo from the Muppets).
The thing is that first week of Tours have always been a bit frantic and there's always collateral damage, but I don't see why it is sensible to deliberately make it worse. Sport as entertainment is about the top competitors facing each other. The calendar means the top names in cycling rarely race each other on top form, this is the one time they always do. So why play dice with their participation? That's kind of where the Wimbledon analogy came from - unnecessarily jeopardising the progress of the big names.
Financially the Tour is 80% of the sport, and it is sponsor funded. If a sponsor is paying $10m a year they're not going to be impressed this sort of lottery in the year's main event. The two big clashes of the Tour never even started - and that can't be good for TV ratings either.
Strong point. Strange that what can be good for the race can be bad for the sport. No showdown at all between Froome, Contador, and Quintana this season is a travesty. (Consolation Vuelta maybe).
But should it really be such a lottery? The GC has become too extreme. Nobody has come close to defending in recent years. Stages like this are one way to try to slow down the specialisation.
Agreed. As it stands if you can climb well and TT well then you have a chance. If you are weak at one of those, then you will come close. Purito should have won a GT but it doesn't quite work for him. That is a shame.0
