Paris Roubaix 2018

rick_chasey

With that numerical advantage, where QS have failed in the past is they've had Boonen as the ace so they let things happen in front an inevitably ended up behind events and so, with the numerical advantage, had the responsibility to chase.

Now they're much more aggressive in a classic pro-cycling manager move and send guys to counter moves from about 40km out and play hold up in the chase group behind.

rick_chasey

Last bit.

What makes things helpful is they have guys like Gilbert & Terpstra who can finish off a long attack who can and will go at the point where it's only favourites left.

That attack is unlikely to work UNLESS you have a favourite as a team mate in the same group, at which point it instantly stops working because no favourite will chase with other favourites hanging on.

Remember how important Oss was in PR last year? He chased everything down for GvA. Otherwise, those moves would have stayed away. Then when GvA did hit the burners, the race was already so thinned out it became a question of legs, not head. That's why you NEED bodies in the end.

No_Ta_Doctor

Yep.

In Flanders it took 70km for the break to go and they were way over the fastest schedule. QS didn't let anything go, they'd put a rider in almost every move.

They're also superb at drilling it in the key sections and staying in the wheels when it's just meaningless KMs. They controlled the first part of Flanders, then drilled an early section, then disappeared for an hour or so, then popped back up when it was critical to take control. They've got incredible depth of knowledge of both Flanders and P-R, they know every bend of every KM and know exactly when they can make a difference and when it's not worth the effort.

shirley_basso

Those four posts would make for depressing reading for a rival team. QS really have been sublime this season so far, MSR notwithstanding (can't remember any placings other than the win)

m.r.m.

Absolutely love my man WVA, but 13/1 seems pretty bad. Isn't he more the darkest of dark horses? He shouldn't be that close to GVA or Stybar. Should be 20/1 or 24/1 imho.

ocdupalais

Considering he’s had 4 top 10 places - including a win - Matt Hayman is between 80-1 and 150-1... Andre Greipel is getting better odds...

rick_chasey

https://twitter.com/marcelsieberg/statu ... 8002573312

Never underestimate how Euro (trash) cycling is.

RichN95.

I thought Rob Hatch was commentating tomorrow. But I just heard him reporting on the Commonwealth Games cycling for Radio 5. Hopefully he's doing it from his house.

blazing_saddles

Het Nieuwsblad
5 stars: Terpstra
4 stars: Stybar, Sagan
3stars: Gilbert, Démare, van Avermaet
2 stars: Vanmarcke, Stuyven, van Aert, Naesen
1 star: Lampaert, Degenkolb, Pedersen, Moscon, Trentin

milton50

Most sections now bone dry and dusty apparently.

If it does rain then I think Vanmarcke's chances go up significantly.

Vino'sGhost

Yes quick step are dominant but it’s not a foregone conclusion the parcour and distance will make the race.

There is a level of uncertainty beyond that provided by competitors . We just have to watch and see what happens as the race reveals itself.

DeVlaeminck

Far from a foregone conclusion - the fastest finishers amongst the wider group of contenders are on other teams and more often than not the race comes down to a small group sprint.

No_Ta_Doctor

It's never a foregone conclusion. It's just that QS are almost guaranteed to have 3-4 riders capable of winning in the last group who can mark any attack or go themselves. You don't get a jump without taking a QS rider with you, and you don't get to chase without pulling a QS rider on your wheels (except when he goes to the front to slow things down). Nobody else has options that broad.

The best bet for an exciting race is if a small lead group forms with a single QS rider (e.g. someone jumps, Terpstra goes with him, a few more bridge across) such that there's a group that's big enough to stay away even when the QS rider starts to coast. Imagine that being Terpstra, GVA, Benoot, Sep, Stannard plus a couple more. Almost nobody left to chase. Obviously if Sagan got in it then it would probably be caught just because nobody will tow him to the line...

No_Ta_Doctor

Just watched Stannard's 2015 OHN win again, and the QS failure is very different to the failures Rick describes above. That looked far more lack of cohesion in the team, a classic case of too many chiefs. Why Boonen attacked instead of Terpstra is a bit of a mystery, and why Vandenbergh closed the gap when Terpstra attacked later can only be rationally explained by the fact he wasn't riding for QS the next season.

While I'm sure Boonen's retirement has changed the dynamic a lot this season it really feels like QS have finally managed to add some tactics to the firepower they've always had.

DeVlaeminck

The thing if QS have strength in numbers other riders may look at them to neutralise attacks - they may have to make a decision on who is team leader and put one or two of their big guns to work. If they take the initiative and launch a rider chances are someone will go with them - if we do see a solo winner it's hard to see it not being a QS rider - chances are though it'll be a small group and in that situation a younger Boonen had a finish none of their current riders possess.

ocdupalais

Further to these most excellent and pertinent reasons as to why QS are not going to win - there’s also the fact that hopefully there’s an evolutionary arms race going on where the other teams will have learned how to counter and dismantle QS’s successful streak for the last of this batch of classics. I don’t think QS have the riders to dominate in the Ardennes.

andyp

OCDuPalais wrote:

I don’t think QS have the riders to dominate in the Ardennes.

I don't think they'll dominate, but most teams would gladly field a leadership duo of Gilbert and Alaphilippe.

rick_chasey

No tA Doctor wrote:

Just watched Stannard's 2015 OHN win again, and the QS failure is very different to the failures Rick describes above. That looked far more lack of cohesion in the team, a classic case of too many chiefs. Why Boonen attacked instead of Terpstra is a bit of a mystery, and why Vandenbergh closed the gap when Terpstra attacked later can only be rationally explained by the fact he wasn't riding for QS the next season.

While I'm sure Boonen's retirement has changed the dynamic a lot this season it really feels like QS have finally managed to add some tactics to the firepower they've always had.

Numerical advantage = responsibility to ride.

I also think that ultimately stannard was ultimately stronger and that combined with sitting on for 40km while the other 3 rode had also helped.

gsk82

I don't see the fuss with qs in this race. Have lampaert or Gilbert done anything to warrant been favourites for this race? Has stybar looked like winning it before? I suspect there's half a dozen riders ststronger han those the and they won't be involved at the end.

gsk82

I don't see the fuss with qs in this race. Have lampaert or Gilbert done anything to warrant been favourites for this race? Has stybar looked like winning it before? I suspect there's half a dozen riders stronger han those three and they won't be involved at the end.

rick_chasey

gsk82 wrote:

I don't see the fuss with qs in this race. Have lampaert or Gilbert done anything to warrant been favourites for this race? Has stybar looked like winning it before? I suspect there's half a dozen riders stronger han those three and they won't be involved at the end.

Lampaert is young and won a tough DDV against decent opposition and is well known in the peloton to have a big engine for this kind of thing.

Gilbert won ToF last year with a 50km solo effort. He's also proven beyond doubt at the monument distance; he's won all the Ardenne races and Tour of Lombardi. He's got enormous pedigree.

Stybar has been second twice including last season and always seems to do well in PR (when he doesn't have bad luck).

Terpstra has also won Paris Roubaix, is in the form of his life, won E3 and Flanders, and PR suits him better than Flanders.

No-one would be surprised if any of those 4 are in the final selection with 20km to go.

No other team can boast the. At best, any other team has 2 people who we wouldn't be surprised to be in the final selection.

RichN95.

gsk82 wrote:

I don't see the fuss with qs in this race. Have lampaert or Gilbert done anything to warrant been favourites for this race? Has stybar looked like winning it before? I suspect there's half a dozen riders stronger han those three and they won't be involved at the end.

This race is full of winners who had never previously looked like winning it, but had top tens to their name. Terpstra, Hayman, O'Grady, Vansummeren etc. It's not all Cancellara and Boonen. Aside from Hayman, they were all riding for strong teams with several contenders.

knedlicky

gsk82 wrote:

I don't see the fuss with qs in this race. Have lampaert or Gilbert done anything to warrant been favourites for this race? Has stybar looked like winning it before? I suspect there's half a dozen riders stronger han those three and they won't be involved at the end.

I agree with this wrt to Gilbert – ambitious as he is to win all 'monuments', P/R isn't his stamping ground.

As it's unlikely Terpstra will be allowed the freedom to ride away again, QS's best bet must be Stybar (or in a surprise/calculated move, Lampaert).

Otherwise Sagan (or van Avermaet) - although, this is true

RichN95 wrote:

This race is full of winners who had never previously looked like winning it, but had top tens to their name….. they were all riding for strong teams with several contenders.

So back to Stybar and Lampaert.
Or Stuyven?

*
If one wanted to choose dark horses, why isn't anyone mentioning Boasson Hagen, or even Thomas or van Baarle (as ploy instead of Moscon)?

RichN95.

I just watched that 2001 Knaven win again. Domo had four riders in the final selection of six. And it's always a bit surprising to see Wilfred Pieters as an actual rider (he's as fat as me now).

RichN95.

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Het Nieuwsblad
5 stars: Terpstra
4 stars: Stybar, Sagan
3stars: Gilbert, Démare, van Avermaet
2 stars: Vanmarcke, Stuyven, van Aert, Naesen
1 star: Lampaert, Degenkolb, Pedersen, Moscon, Trentin

Let's match them up with the bookies odds (Paddy Power)

4/1 Sagan
6/1 Van Avermaet
15/2 Gilbert
9/1 Terpstra, Stybar
14/1 Vanmarcke
18/1 Demare
20/1 Degenkolb
22/1 Hagen, Naesen, Kristoff, Van Aert
25/1 Stannard, Stuyven
33/1 Moscon, Lampaert, Thomas, Martin, Oss, Pedersen

I'm going to have a punt on Demare at those odds.

blazing_saddles

Always a slight element of bias with these star ratings, a bit like Rick.
Here's another one.

de Telegraaf
5 stars: Terpstra
4 stars: Sagan, van Avermaet, Gilbert
3 stars: Stybar, Pedersen, Vanmarcke, van Aert
2 stars: van Baarle, Langeveld, Démare, Stuyven, Naesen, Trentin
1 star: Teunissen, Lampaert, Degenkolb, Kristoff, Roelandts, Moscon, EBH

DeadCalm

Pedersen at 33/1 would be tempting.

The_Boy

RichN95 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Het Nieuwsblad

I'm going to have a punt on Demare at those odds.

Backed him antepost at 25s. He's always looked good at this race, imo and seems to have taken a step forward this year.

bobmcstuff

I've gone for probably the most boring bet possible, e/w on GVA, Gilbert and Demare... and stupidly small stakes too. #baller.

rick_chasey

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Always a slight element of bias with these star ratings, a bit like Rick.
Here's another one.

de Telegraaf
5 stars: Terpstra
4 stars: Sagan, van Avermaet, Gilbert
3 stars: Stybar, Pedersen, Vanmarcke, van Aert
2 stars: van Baarle, Langeveld, Démare, Stuyven, Naesen, Trentin
1 star: Teunissen, Lampaert, Degenkolb, Kristoff, Roelandts, Moscon, EBH

Offended.

Sagan is 2 star at best.

I’d like to see Degrnkolb play a role in the finale.