National 10

shinyhelmut

mroli wrote:

NorvernRob wrote:

Matt Bottrill is a postie, there was an article on him in the RM staff magazine recently. He said he struggles to get enough training time in, but manages 7-8hrs per week.

And considering he earns the same as me, he definitely hasn't got deep pockets

Matt Bottrill won't buy his own kit though will he? He's sponsored (drag2zero?) and I distinctly remember in Hutch's The Hour book that he was getting his sponsors to come up with kit for him... I know they won't be making "real" money, but it won't be costing them "deep pocket" amounts?

I don't suppose his sponsors just chose a random postie to buy some kit for though. He had to prove himself first.

Pross

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Surprised that someone like Hutchinson gets 5 minutes in a TT against Tony Martin... put things in perspective, I guess

It's just a single result. You can find other results which show the opposite. For example, this makes him look pretty good:

40km:
1. David Millar (Sco) 47 minutes 19 seconds,
2. Alex Dowsett (Eng) at 55secs,
3. Luke Durbridge (Aus) 1min 1sec,
4. Michael Hutchinson (Nir) 2mins 14secs,
5. Chris Froome (Eng) 2mins 20secs,
6. Rohan Dennis (Aus) 3mins 3secs,
7. Zachary Bell (Can) 3mins 17secs,
8. Jack Bauer (NZ) 3mins 30secs,
9. Jesse Sergent (NZ) 4mins 15secs

Possibly maybe... looks like Commonwealth Games? The CG are good quality for swimming, some athletic disciplines where the Caribbean are strong... cycling is pretty paltry to be honest, as the big Aussie guys don't bother to show up. Thomas won by a mile, with a puncture, while just a week earlier was greyer than grey at the Tour

Look at diving, Tom Daley won the 10 mt pretty much uncontested, while his chance of a medal in Rio are pretty weak

That list above suggests that the big Aussie's (and Kiwis) did turn up though. He's beaten a fair few World Tour riders in that set of results including a future TdF winner (and TdF TT stage winner). As for Thomas being 'greyer than grey' at the Tour - he spent two weeks driving the bunch along on behalf of first Froome and then (an undeserving) Porte. Who knows what he could have achieved had he been given a free reign on the stages that suited him - he was immensely strong at the CG as he was in the Tour but performing a different role. As it was he went on to finish in the Tour top 20, not bad for a domestique not noted for his climbing in the high mountains - Nico Roche has made a career as a 'GT contender' with results like that!!

ugo.santalucia

Pross wrote:

That list above suggests that the big Aussie's (and Kiwis) did turn up though. He's beaten a fair few World Tour riders in that set of results including a future TdF winner (and TdF TT stage winner). As for Thomas being 'greyer than grey' at the Tour - he spent two weeks driving the bunch along on behalf of first Froome and then (an undeserving) Porte. Who knows what he could have achieved had he been given a free reign on the stages that suited him - he was immensely strong at the CG as he was in the Tour but performing a different role. As it was he went on to finish in the Tour top 20, not bad for a domestique not noted for his climbing in the high mountains - Nico Roche has made a career as a 'GT contender' with results like that!!

In the CG there are 3 cycling nations... (5 if you want to break down the UK)... and Canada probably has a couple of riders (which did not show up). If the best Aussie don't show up (Gerrans, Evans?), Wiggins and Froome are not there, what is left? Let's be honest, Thomas was the better rider of a sub standard field. I can't think of any UCI race for PROs with a lesser level of participants. In fact it was a pretty embarrassing race (as was the London classic). It is questionable whether road cycling should be part of the games at all... surely there are sports which are more popular in the Commonwealth... thinking of some sort of cricket tournament... sailing is obviously big and so on

DeVlaeminck

NorvernRob wrote:

madasahattersley wrote:

I'm sure it was a rapid day but I agree training and technology have come on so far that 86 people today went under 20 mins, and 24 went under 19. All of them bar Mullen are just amateurs probably with very few training hours, just very deep pockets

Matt Bottrill is a postie, there was an article on him in the RM staff magazine recently. He said he struggles to get enough training time in, but manages 7-8hrs per week.

7-8 hours ? Well no cyclist will tell you they've been doing shedloads will they. If he can produce those results off 7-8 hours then I'm the next British Tour winner.

Mad_Malx

I don't really get the RR as an individual sport in the olympics or CG (or for that matter the worlds) really. I can't think of any other sport where an indivual gets all the recognition for what is usually a team effort.
TTs are different, obviously.

Pross

ugo.santalucia wrote:

In the CG there are 3 cycling nations... (5 if you want to break down the UK)... and Canada probably has a couple of riders (which did not show up). If the best Aussie don't show up (Gerrans, Evans?), Wiggins and Froome are not there, what is left? Let's be honest, Thomas was the better rider of a sub standard field. I can't think of any UCI race for PROs with a lesser level of participants. In fact it was a pretty embarrassing race (as was the London classic). It is questionable whether road cycling should be part of the games at all... surely there are sports which are more popular in the Commonwealth... thinking of some sort of cricket tournament... sailing is obviously big and so on

No-one is suggesting the CG road cycling field is a stellar one. However, the example Rich posted above was showing the Hutch had beaten quite a few riders in a TT that have gone on to be World Tour riders and many of them have reputations as decent TT riders at that level. I think Rich's point was that you can pick a set of results at random to suit your case e.g. the margin of defeat that Hutch suffered against Tony Martin but that it doesn't show anything in isolation.

As for the CG road race, my point wasn't that Thomas won against a strong field but more that describing Thomas' performance in the Tour as 'greyer than grey' is harsh in the extreme given that he made the top 20 despite having to lose time in the support of two different riders.

ugo.santalucia

Pross wrote:

As for the CG road race, my point wasn't that Thomas won against a strong field but more that describing Thomas' performance in the Tour as 'greyer than grey' is harsh in the extreme given that he made the top 20 despite having to lose time in the support of two different riders.

I might be wrong in this, but I feel that beyond the first 13, nobody really was there for the GC, so finish 20th or 100th is not much different and doesn't mean you are a contender. Different thing is to finish 20th and bag a stage or at least miss a win by an inch after a day in the wind... by greyer than grey I mean he didn't get close to achieving anything (very much like the rest of the team) and 22th best in the GC doesn't mean anything. Also, 22nd at 1 hour from Nibali... given Nibali has put time in his opponents in say 8 stages out of 21... it means that as an average, when there was time to lose, he lost over 7 minutes, which is not exactly saying "I was there with the best".
So, it's a matter of opinions... I think it was a grey Tour de France for the team and for him too

ugo.santalucia

Pross wrote:

As for the CG road race, my point wasn't that Thomas won against a strong field but more that describing Thomas' performance in the Tour as 'greyer than grey' is harsh in the extreme given that he made the top 20 despite having to lose time in the support of two different riders.

I might be wrong in this, but I feel that beyond the first 13, nobody really was there for the GC, so finish 20th or 100th is not much different and doesn't mean you are a contender. Different thing is to finish 20th and bag a stage or at least miss a win by an inch after a day in the wind... by greyer than grey I mean he didn't get close to achieving anything (very much like the rest of the team) and 22th best in the GC doesn't mean anything. Also, 22nd at 1 hour from Nibali... given Nibali has put time in his opponents in say 8 stages out of 21... it means that as an average, when there was time to lose, he lost over 7 minutes, which is not exactly saying "I was there with the best".
So, it's a matter of opinions... I think it was a grey Tour de France for the team and for him too

ugo.santalucia

Pross wrote:

As for the CG road race, my point wasn't that Thomas won against a strong field but more that describing Thomas' performance in the Tour as 'greyer than grey' is harsh in the extreme given that he made the top 20 despite having to lose time in the support of two different riders.

I might be wrong in this, but I feel that beyond the first 13, nobody really was there for the GC, so finish 20th or 100th is not much different and doesn't mean you are a contender. Different thing is to finish 20th and bag a stage or at least miss a win by an inch after a day in the wind... by greyer than grey I mean he didn't get close to achieving anything (very much like the rest of the team) and 22th best in the GC doesn't mean anything. Also, 22nd at 1 hour from Nibali... given Nibali has put time in his opponents in say 8 stages out of 21... it means that as an average, when there was time to lose, he lost over 7 minutes, which is not exactly saying "I was there with the best".
So, it's a matter of opinions... I think it was a grey Tour de France for the team and for him too

Pross

I get your point

ugo.santalucia

You can look it another way... Porte cracked in stage 13. After stage 13 Thomas was 18th at 14 minutes from Nibali. So in the remaining 8 stages where he should have done better according to your theory, he actually lost 4 places and about 45 minutes... :shock:

Pross

ugo.santalucia wrote:

You can look it another way... Porte cracked in stage 13. After stage 13 Thomas was 18th at 14 minutes from Nibali. So in the remaining 8 stages where he should have done better according to your theory, he actually lost 4 places and about 45 minutes... :shock:

They were predominantly mountain stages and as I said above he isn't a climber. His role was to tow Froome (Porte) around for as long as possible so arguable he was there to be 'grey' and he was nearly omnipresent near the front of the race whilst he still had someone to perform that role for. The CG road race is more comparable with a Classic and he was far from grey in those. Anyway, how did we get to this from a thread about the National 10 that G didn't even ride?

ugo.santalucia

Pross wrote:

Anyway, how did we get to this from a thread about the National 10 that G didn't even ride?

I don't know, but nobody seems to care/mind, so we can go ahead, I guess... it all started because I said that a Thomas in mediocre form made easy job of the CG road race... you argued he wasn't in crap form at the Tour, I think he was in form in spring and in July was far from his best. At the end of the day, if you are there to carry water and do a bit of work at the front, why would you bother to be at 100%... best to try and gather the best form when it matters for you... the team comes second. Had he been in top form, he had plenty of stages to prove it... Froome got out stage 5 and plan B was a plan nobody really believed in

frenchfighter

Mullen 7th today in the ToB stage.

pinno

frenchfighter wrote:

Mullen 7th today in the ToB stage.

Seen as we are allowed to go off topic and if Ugo says we are then we are definitely allowed to...

What's the next step for Mullen ?