Rio Olympic TT (M/F) *SPOILERS*

FocusZing

salsiccia1

EnacheV wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

NitrousOxide wrote:

Great result for Spartacus!

Froome 0, Wiggins 1 (doing TDF/ Olympics double)

We just had this debate in the office, I suggested that being a 3x TdF winner was maybe a little bit better than winning the Olympic time trial... Given our office isn't far from Wiggins' house I got stoned for this suggestion.

when the next UK tdf winner after Froome will be in 100 years they will learn to appreciate Froome more.

Not to speak about the fact that Wiggins won his only personal designed for him TdF only because the best GC rider in the race was his domestique.

*shots fired*

Richmond Racer 2

Super Fabs

Gutsy ride by TomDum

type:epyt

EnacheV wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

NitrousOxide wrote:

Great result for Spartacus!

Froome 0, Wiggins 1 (doing TDF/ Olympics double)

We just had this debate in the office, I suggested that being a 3x TdF winner was maybe a little bit better than winning the Olympic time trial... Given our office isn't far from Wiggins' house I got stoned for this suggestion.

when the next UK tdf winner after Froome will be in 100 years they will learn to appreciate Froome more.

Not to speak about the fact that Wiggins won his only personal designed for him TdF only because the best GC rider in the race was his domestique.

It's 50/50 whether Froome would have won the 2012 tour ... He had the advantage on tne climbs and got into Wiggins' head far too easily but if Wiggins applied himself I think he would still have won via the final TT.

Froome, however would have won the 2011 Vuelta handily if he hadn't been hand holding Wiggins' round Spain.

cruff

FocusZing wrote:

What the actual fcuk is that aberration Froome is wearing? That looks like something a hipster might wear to an ironic 'salute to the 90s' party

m.r.m.

Then again you can distinguish it as Team GB kit (which is important). Cancellara's Jacket looks like a random Nike jumper, especially since the medal placement obscures the Swiss Logo. Dutch sports kit is always incredibly easy to distinguish due to the color. They have great branding in that aspect.

type:epyt wrote:

It's 50/50 whether Froome would have won the 2012 tour ... He had the advantage on tne climbs and got into Wiggins' head far too easily but if Wiggins applied himself I think he would still have won via the final TT.

I think it's rather likely Wiggins would have lost so much time in the mountains trying to close a Froome attack, that he most likely would not have been able to make it up via the time trial. I think his subsequent "demotion" if you are willing to see it as such, clearly show that Team Sky saw Froome as a far superior GC rider even before he had won anything in his career.
I think regardless of Wiggins' incredible TT ability, Froome would have won that tour if given free reign.

mfin

zebulebu wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

What the actual fcuk is that aberration Froome is wearing? That looks like something a hipster might wear to an ironic 'salute to the 90s' party

It's embarrassingly sh1t isn't it? Little stella mcartney ill fitting nightie weird things for everyone, why don't they even fit like normal jackets.

Why couldn't we just have a simple classy kit and without getting a fashion prat involved in the designing.

One of the athletes should at least say "yeah, very good, I'm not f*****g wearing that".

Richmond Racer 2

FocusZing wrote:

EnacheV wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

NitrousOxide wrote:

Great result for Spartacus!

Froome 0, Wiggins 1 (doing TDF/ Olympics double)

We just had this debate in the office, I suggested that being a 3x TdF winner was maybe a little bit better than winning the Olympic time trial... Given our office isn't far from Wiggins' house I got stoned for this suggestion.

when the next UK tdf winner after Froome will be in 100 years they will learn to appreciate Froome more.

Don't forget Froome is doing the Vuelta too!

Where he will get his arse kicked

He isn't looking tippety top

(But tbf winning the Tour is enough to make yer season, so...)

Richmond Racer 2

FocusZing wrote:

EnacheV wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

NitrousOxide wrote:

Great result for Spartacus!

Froome 0, Wiggins 1 (doing TDF/ Olympics double)

We just had this debate in the office, I suggested that being a 3x TdF winner was maybe a little bit better than winning the Olympic time trial... Given our office isn't far from Wiggins' house I got stoned for this suggestion.

when the next UK tdf winner after Froome will be in 100 years they will learn to appreciate Froome more.

Don't forget Froome is doing the Vuelta too!

Where he will get his arse kicked

He aint looking tippety top

(But tbf winning the Tour is enough to make yer season, so...)

Dorset_Boy

That hideous track top will sell well to the chavs.

morstar

Not seen the race, only the result as on holiday but, what a great podium. Past master taking final bow supported by likely future master and pre eminent GT rider.

DeVlaeminck

Never really warmed to Cancellara but was happy to get in and see this result - he's been the best TTer in the last 15 years or so which is my time watching pro cycling so it's a fitting highlight of his final season.

Not the best result for Froome but I think he'll genuinely see it as a bronze gained rather than a gold lost.

Haven't looked at the reactions to Pooley's performance but I expect it's opened up the debate about her selection again. I was dubious myself but I thought she put a decent shift in for Armitstead in the road race and while the course favoured her in the TT the weather didn't and she was always going to be very much an outsider for a medal anyway. Bottom line is we had no other contenders who didn't travel so for me she answered the critics of her selection with her performance the other day and today was neither here nor there as far as that is concerned.

philbar72

Thing is whilst Froome is obviously a very strong TTer, he's not a pure timetriallist if that makes sense. Martin/cancellara/Kirienka/ Wiggins/ Dennis are the "big diesels". Froom has a dieselish engine in a lightweight body. so I guess he can't be too disappointed?

spam02

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Haven't looked at the reactions to Pooley's performance but I expect it's opened up the debate about her selection again. I was dubious myself but I thought she put a decent shift in for Armitstead in the road race and while the course favoured her in the TT the weather didn't and she was always going to be very much an outsider for a medal anyway. Bottom line is we had no other contenders who didn't travel so for me she answered the critics of her selection with her performance the other day and today was neither here nor there as far as that is concerned.

Hindsight's a wonderful thing, but I think they would have been better taking Hayley Simmonds instead of Nikki Harris. She could have done the early donkey work for Lizzie in the RR and then climbed off to prepare for the TT.

Simmonds would have done much better in the TT than Pooley and is in great form at the moment smashing records for fun. I thought Pooley was a strange choice considering how little racing she has done and her form leading up to the games. Strange, considering that GB's mantra has always been about only selecting likely medallists.

dinyull

mfin wrote:

zebulebu wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

What the actual fcuk is that aberration Froome is wearing? That looks like something a hipster might wear to an ironic 'salute to the 90s' party

It's embarrassingly sh1t isn't it? Little stella mcartney ill fitting nightie weird things for everyone, why don't they even fit like normal jackets.

I'd imagine it's ill fitting because he's 6 foot 1 and 11 stone.

Richmond Racer 2

SPaM02 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Haven't looked at the reactions to Pooley's performance but I expect it's opened up the debate about her selection again. I was dubious myself but I thought she put a decent shift in for Armitstead in the road race and while the course favoured her in the TT the weather didn't and she was always going to be very much an outsider for a medal anyway. Bottom line is we had no other contenders who didn't travel so for me she answered the critics of her selection with her performance the other day and today was neither here nor there as far as that is concerned.

Hindsight's a wonderful thing, but I think they would have been better taking Hayley Simmonds instead of Nikki Harris. She could have done the early donkey work for Lizzie in the RR and then climbed off to prepare for the TT.

Simmonds would have done much better in the TT than Pooley and is in great form at the moment smashing records for fun. I thought Pooley was a strange choice considering how little racing she has done and her form leading up to the games. Strange, considering that GB's mantra has always been about only selecting likely medallists.

Simmonds is on great form in the rarified world of domestic TTing here.

She placed 26th on an easier course in Richmond last year. So I'm sure she would have smashed ydays course.

As for the road race, she has relatively little experience of riding in the women's pro peloton.

(as for Pooley's forming leading up to Rio, worth noting that on the Giro Rosa's queen stage she was second over the Motirolo with only Mara Abbott ahead of her...)


It was a gamble that didn't pay off yday but the argument that Simmonds would have done better is one I struggle with

spam02

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

SPaM02 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Haven't looked at the reactions to Pooley's performance but I expect it's opened up the debate about her selection again. I was dubious myself but I thought she put a decent shift in for Armitstead in the road race and while the course favoured her in the TT the weather didn't and she was always going to be very much an outsider for a medal anyway. Bottom line is we had no other contenders who didn't travel so for me she answered the critics of her selection with her performance the other day and today was neither here nor there as far as that is concerned.

Hindsight's a wonderful thing, but I think they would have been better taking Hayley Simmonds instead of Nikki Harris. She could have done the early donkey work for Lizzie in the RR and then climbed off to prepare for the TT.

Simmonds would have done much better in the TT than Pooley and is in great form at the moment smashing records for fun. I thought Pooley was a strange choice considering how little racing she has done and her form leading up to the games. Strange, considering that GB's mantra has always been about only selecting likely medallists.

Simmonds is on great form in the rarified world of domestic TTing here.

She placed 26th on an easier course in Richmond last year. So I'm sure she would have smashed ydays course.

As for the road race, she has relatively little experience of riding in the women's pro peloton.

True, it's a shame she left UHC so soon. Harris has been around for a long time, but this is the first season she has been competing at a decent level in the women's pro peloton.
- don't be too hard on the rarified world of domestic TTing. It's produced some great World, Olympic and GT winners etc. over the years

Richmond Racer 2

SPaM02 wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

SPaM02 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Haven't looked at the reactions to Pooley's performance but I expect it's opened up the debate about her selection again. I was dubious myself but I thought she put a decent shift in for Armitstead in the road race and while the course favoured her in the TT the weather didn't and she was always going to be very much an outsider for a medal anyway. Bottom line is we had no other contenders who didn't travel so for me she answered the critics of her selection with her performance the other day and today was neither here nor there as far as that is concerned.

Hindsight's a wonderful thing, but I think they would have been better taking Hayley Simmonds instead of Nikki Harris. She could have done the early donkey work for Lizzie in the RR and then climbed off to prepare for the TT.

Simmonds would have done much better in the TT than Pooley and is in great form at the moment smashing records for fun. I thought Pooley was a strange choice considering how little racing she has done and her form leading up to the games. Strange, considering that GB's mantra has always been about only selecting likely medallists.

Simmonds is on great form in the rarified world of domestic TTing here.

She placed 26th on an easier course in Richmond last year. So I'm sure she would have smashed ydays course.

As for the road race, she has relatively little experience of riding in the women's pro peloton.

True, it's a shame she left UHC so soon. Harris has been around for a long time, but this is the first season she has been competing at a decent level in the women's pro peloton.
- don't be too hard on the rarified world of domestic TTing. It's produced some great World, Olympic and GT winners etc. over the years

But straight out of the traps early season Harris showed her value in the work she did for Armitstead and Boels Dolman wins at the lines of Strade Bianchi. That's a key thing. Simmonds has nothing of that level to show by comparison.

My point stands: 26th at an easier World's last year does not point to a better result on a much tougher course in Rio.

spam02

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

SPaM02 wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

SPaM02 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Haven't looked at the reactions to Pooley's performance but I expect it's opened up the debate about her selection again. I was dubious myself but I thought she put a decent shift in for Armitstead in the road race and while the course favoured her in the TT the weather didn't and she was always going to be very much an outsider for a medal anyway. Bottom line is we had no other contenders who didn't travel so for me she answered the critics of her selection with her performance the other day and today was neither here nor there as far as that is concerned.

Hindsight's a wonderful thing, but I think they would have been better taking Hayley Simmonds instead of Nikki Harris. She could have done the early donkey work for Lizzie in the RR and then climbed off to prepare for the TT.

Simmonds would have done much better in the TT than Pooley and is in great form at the moment smashing records for fun. I thought Pooley was a strange choice considering how little racing she has done and her form leading up to the games. Strange, considering that GB's mantra has always been about only selecting likely medallists.

Simmonds is on great form in the rarified world of domestic TTing here.

She placed 26th on an easier course in Richmond last year. So I'm sure she would have smashed ydays course.

As for the road race, she has relatively little experience of riding in the women's pro peloton.

True, it's a shame she left UHC so soon. Harris has been around for a long time, but this is the first season she has been competing at a decent level in the women's pro peloton.
- don't be too hard on the rarified world of domestic TTing. It's produced some great World, Olympic and GT winners etc. over the years

But straight out of the traps early season Harris showed her value in the work she did for Armitstead and Boels Dolman wins at the lines of Strade Bianchi. That's a key thing. Simmonds has nothing of that level to show by comparison.

My point stands: 26th at an easier World's last year does not point to a better result on a much tougher course in Rio.

Yes, but Simmonds is undoubtedly in much better form than last year.

In terms of the main objective of Gold in the RR, Pooley/Harris instead of Simmonds was the right choice. However, taking the TT on its own merits, Simmonds, who put a minute into Pooley at the recent BTTC championships, just seemed (to me anyway) the more sensible decision.
Anyway RR trumps TT (and is likely to in 4 years time) so that's that. Just felt to me that BC judged the women's TT to be a bit of a throw away event.
Damn you UCI/IOC and your multiple event/cyclist selection criteria!

dinyull

It's a bit of a shoot rule, especially when you see eric the eel and the likes being able to "compete" in the swimming.

RichN95.

Dinyull wrote:

It's a bit of a shoot rule, especially when you see eric the eel and the likes being able to "compete" in the swimming.

That'a a bit different though. In swimming and athletics every country gets to enter one man and one woman regardless of qualifying standards (that's one in each sport, not each event). Hence Eric the Eel. It's so everyone has somebody at the games

The_Boy

Dinyull wrote:

It's a bit of a shoot rule, especially when you see eric the eel and the likes being able to "compete" in the swimming.

There's no reason to exclude competitors like Eddie the eagle or Eric the eel. The overwhelming majority of the entrants in any event have no hope of winning a medal - to exclude them is rather to miss the point.

Not awarding medals for different strokes on the other hand. We don't have backward cycling of one-legged running, or blindfolded archery events. Make all swimming events freestyle only and expand other sports. Bosh.

bobmcstuff

The_Boy wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

It's a bit of a shoot rule, especially when you see eric the eel and the likes being able to "compete" in the swimming.

There's no reason to exclude competitors like Eddie the eagle or Eric the eel. The overwhelming majority of the entrants in any event have no hope of winning a medal - to exclude them is rather to miss the point.

Not awarding medals for different strokes on the other hand. We don't have backward cycling of one-legged running, or blindfolded archery events. Make all swimming events freestyle only and expand other sports. Bosh.

Inrng makes a similar point http://inrng.com/2016/08/if-cycling-was-swimming/

wallace_and_gromit

Deleted.

wallace_and_gromit

Swimming is big box-office in the USA. If there is to be a change to the programme it will be to add further events! (50m for the non-freestyle events, perhaps.)

And tbh, you don't make cycling a more high profile sport by cutting back on swimming events, which is the only likely way to address the imbalance between swimming and track cycling.

Richmond Racer 2

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Swimming is big box-office in the USA. If there is to be a change to the programme it will be to add further events! (50m for the non-freestyle events, perhaps.)

And tbh, you don't make cycling a more high profile sport by cutting back on swimming events, which is the only likely way to address the imbalance between swimming and track cycling.

Re swimming and the US, TV coverage offered up by NBC to the US viewers is so narrow and parochial, it's unbelievable. A mate is on holiday there at the moment, and 99% of the coverage is going on the swimming and the gymnastics

NBC pays big bucks, FINA get huge $$$ from their cut of the tv revenues going to the IOC, and the US public gets to see endless shots of Michael Phelps and Simone Biles

spam02

bobmcstuff wrote:

The_Boy wrote:

Dinyull wrote:

It's a bit of a shoot rule, especially when you see eric the eel and the likes being able to "compete" in the swimming.

There's no reason to exclude competitors like Eddie the eagle or Eric the eel. The overwhelming majority of the entrants in any event have no hope of winning a medal - to exclude them is rather to miss the point.

Not awarding medals for different strokes on the other hand. We don't have backward cycling of one-legged running, or blindfolded archery events. Make all swimming events freestyle only and expand other sports. Bosh.

Inrng makes a similar point http://inrng.com/2016/08/if-cycling-was-swimming/

Yes, and it's not just that additional opportunities are available, it's the fact that unlike cycling, there is no necessity to use the same athletes for multiple events. So a swimmer in the 400m Freestyle doesn't have to be selected from someone entered for the 100 or 200m Freestyle.
It strikes me as unfair that cycling has a quota imposed upon it (including one rider per nation per event on the track) whereas certain sports seem to have no limits placed on the amount of athletes that can compete (subject to meeting qualification standards).
The 'quota' rule was imposed by the UCI (not the IOC) and seems a strange way to sell your sport to the rest of the world. Track cycling, whilst a niche product, is far more likely to capture the imagination of the casual viewer than 6 hours of the RR.
It's odd that the sports governing body has ensured that the best cyclists in the world will not be on display - especially, when unlike on the road, the Olympics is the pinnacle of a track cyclist's career.

milton50

mfin wrote:

Most people love Cancellara, that's got to be about the most popular win that could have happened.

I'm just really pleased that he got a big win in his final season. It would have been rubbish if his last season as a pro was remembered for crashes in the spring classics.

bobmcstuff

Milton50 wrote:

mfin wrote:

Most people love Cancellara, that's got to be about the most popular win that could have happened.

I'm just really pleased that he got a big win in his final season. It would have been rubbish if his last season as a pro was remembered for crashes in the spring classics.

r0bh

SPaM02 wrote:

Yes, and it's not just that additional opportunities are available, it's the fact that unlike cycling, there is no necessity to use the same athletes for multiple events. So a swimmer in the 400m Freestyle doesn't have to be selected from someone entered for the 100 or 200m Freestyle.
It strikes me as unfair that cycling has a quota imposed upon it (including one rider per nation per event on the track) whereas certain sports seem to have no limits placed on the amount of athletes that can compete (subject to meeting qualification standards).
The 'quota' rule was imposed by the UCI (not the IOC) and seems a strange way to sell your sport to the rest of the world. Track cycling, whilst a niche product, is far more likely to capture the imagination of the casual viewer than 6 hours of the RR.
It's odd that the sports governing body has ensured that the best cyclists in the world will not be on display - especially, when unlike on the road, the Olympics is the pinnacle of a track cyclist's career.

And take a look at Athletics; the GB team has 3 men in the team just for the 4*100 relay (on top of the 6 running in the 100 and 200) and 3 just for the 4*400. If this were cycling we'd be using 800 and 1500m runners in the 4*400!!