Giro 2020 - Stage 21: Cernusco sul Naviglio – Milano 15.7 km ITT *spoilers*

mididoctors

Pogacar certainly surfed the tour

Lanterne_Rogue

I don't think Brailsford's trying to take credit, to be fair - he's just caught up in the moment.

Mention of the Tour does make me think one thing though. Is there a valid argument that TGH;s win actually owes a huge amount to Kwiatkowski's stage win at the Tour? Having somewhat slowly rejigged themselves to hunt stages at the Tour, it's conceivable that the experience made it much easier to mentally pivot when the Giro also went totally to pot.

bobmcstuff

RichN95. said:

No_Ta_Doctor said:

Strategically though, there is a huge difference between trying to control the race and surfing the race. The former is far more planned, the latter far more improvised. If Brailsford feels that this Giro was different - which he seems to - then I'd suggest that it's not just PR guff. The comments from various team members seem to back this up. Tactics in bike races are fairly standard - there aren't that many different ways to win. Strategy - how and when to deploy those tactics - is a different matter. From what I've heard, tactics were improvised - decisions made with no real pre-planning - as and when they were needed. That's certainly a very different emphasis than in earlier GTs. I can certainly understand why Brailsford and the riders feel like they were doing "bike racing" and that was different from what they'd done before.

I don't think there would have been much change of strategy going into the race. Thomas a race favourite. TGH stay up with him as long as possible on the GC stages. Dennis save yourself for that backloaded third week. Ganna do the TTs. Swift & Narvaez sprint on selective stages. I think you would have seen a Dennis and TGH leading Thomas through those later stages. The reason they didn't ride defensively isn't because of Brailsford new philosophy, it's because they had nothing to defend.

Their approach was largely due to Thomas exiting earlier than any GC rider before, Ganna almost guaranteeing three stage wins, and the uncertainty of the race ever getting to Milan.

If the next time Ineos have the pre-race favourite in the leader's jersey and they still send riders in the break everyday then I'll believe that they've riding differently. Until then it sounds like Brailsford trying to take all the credit after their Tour failure when people suggested that the team's past successes had been down more to Froome and Portal than him.

Except TGH had already started shipping time before Thomas quit. If they'd wanted him to stay up on GC he probably would've gone a bit harder in the first TT etc.

mididoctors

Brailsford did come across as a glory grabbing knob in those interviews ... When Tao mugged hindley and wilco stage what ever (16 or 17 )? he didn't think he was really on track for the podium ... Tao just rode as he always did taking wheels and coming 8 th in the TOC only this time it won him the giro.

m.r.m.

Brailsford just likes to embellish everything into a grand plan. "All" they did was go for stages when their GC ambitions crashed out. No different to the Tour really. The reason they win stages is hardly revolutionary racing. They simply have the budget to employ incredibly strong riders. Those riders are bound to be successful when freed up to ride for themselves.
Taking it a step further, does anyone honestly believe a team consisting of MvdP, WVA, Alaphilippe, Kwiatkowski, Remco, Gilbert, all working for a GC captain would not be winning even more stages if that captain crashed out in stage 1 of a GT? That is what Ineos is compared to most other teams.

TGH was simply able to keep up with the domestiques of the other teams, while the remaining contenders like Nibali and Fuglsang underperformed (their fault not his). So suddenly, GC was back in the picture towards the very final stages.

This is more luck than racecraft. It's down to TGH not losing time (his ability/skill; not luck) and being within striking distance. Having domestiques that can then blow up the peloton comes down to the budget again. TGH was a domestique himself. It's not like the backup rider of every team is talented enough to not blow up when Dennis or Ganna or Kwiatkowski or Castroviejo or Kuss for that matter go full gas. All that is down to budget.

There was certainly racecraft involved; but they hardly re-invented the wheel here. Not like they were able to do the same at the Tour with Pogacar and Roglic in the race. Had Yates and maybe even Kruijswijk remained in the race, they would have most likely just won stages. Something a team consisting entirely of super domestiques ought to do when riding against other domestiques for stages.

RichN95.

bobmcstuff said:

Except TGH had already started shipping time before Thomas quit. If they'd wanted him to stay up on GC he probably would've gone a bit harder in the first TT etc.

Sure he said that about the first TT himself. But his role would have been to be alongside Thomas as much as possible.

mididoctors

m.r.m. said:

Brailsford just likes to embellish everything into a grand plan. "All" they did was go for stages when their GC ambitions crashed out. No different to the Tour really. The reason they win stages is hardly revolutionary racing. They simply have the budget to employ incredibly strong riders. Those riders are bound to be successful when freed up to ride for themselves.
Taking it a step further, does anyone honestly believe a team consisting of MvdP, WVA, Alaphilippe, Kwiatkowski, Remco, Gilbert, all working for a GC captain would not be winning even more stages if that captain crashed out in stage 1 of a GT? That is what Ineos is compared to most other teams.

TGH was simply able to keep up with the domestiques of the other teams, while the remaining contenders like Nibali and Fuglsang underperformed (their fault not his). So suddenly, GC was back in the picture towards the very final stages.

This is more luck than racecraft. It's down to TGH not losing time (his ability/skill; not luck) and being within striking distance. Having domestiques that can then blow up the peloton comes down to the budget again. TGH was a domestique himself. It's not like the backup rider of every team is talented enough to not blow up when Dennis or Ganna or Kwiatkowski or Castroviejo or Kuss for that matter go full gas. All that is down to budget.

There was certainly racecraft involved; but they hardly re-invented the wheel here. Not like they were able to do the same at the Tour with Pogacar and Roglic in the race. Had Yates and maybe even Kruijswijk remained in the race, they would have most likely just won stages. Something a team consisting entirely of super domestiques ought to do when riding against other domestiques for stages.

The Rohan Dennis double act was a brilliant execution of a plan ...ok.they had the deep pockets but they used
their assets so well .

m.r.m.

Oh I agree with that; but that was at the very end when GC was back in the picture. Not part of some grand scheme from the very beginning.

mididoctors

m.r.m. said:

Oh I agree with that; but that was at the very end when GC was back in the picture. Not part of some grand scheme from the very beginning.

That's what kinda made it better. Saw the chance seized it .

gsk82

This win must have been far more enjoyable because it was unexpected. I bet the overriding relief at winning the tour with froome for the 4th time was relief, not joy.

mididoctors

Needs the rate the giro thread I guess

RichN95.

mididoctors said:

Needs the rate the giro thread I guess

Here's the verdict of a wannabe Italian (there's so much to disagree with there)

https://twitter.com/friebos/status/1320857956783632385

phreak

RichN95. said:

mididoctors said:

Needs the rate the giro thread I guess

Here's the verdict of a wannabe Italian (there's so much to disagree with there)

https://twitter.com/friebos/status/1320857956783632385

Sorry, what? 2010 3 stars? I'd rate that the best Grand Tour in the past 20 years.

inseine

larkim said:

Pross said:

larkim said:

So a rider not quite at the top wins a GT because the other contenders fall off / fall out / don't start this race. If he's called Nibali he's dissed. If he's called TGH he's lauded.

Is that fair?

One gets touted as a contender in every race and came 7th in this event, the other started as a domestique and won.

And TGH won't be touted as a contender from now on?

You can't really critisise pundits for what they might say in the future.

tailwindhome

What is the tactical brilliance I'm missing that amounts to more than having the strongest rider (left) in the race and having a world class TTer tow him up a mountain while dropping the field.

It's pretty much the Sky/Ineos GC playbook, no?

dabber

Whatever tactics.... I bet there was terrific morale and team spirit amongst them all during that latter part of the race.

blazing_saddles

RichN95. said:

mididoctors said:

Needs the rate the giro thread I guess

Here's the verdict of a wannabe Italian (there's so much to disagree with there)

https://twitter.com/friebos/status/1320857956783632385

phreak said:

Sorry, what? 2010 3 stars? I'd rate that the best Grand Tour in the past 20 years.

Yup.
I specifically selected it to watch it again during full lockdown.
nuff said.


Plus I don't get why expert pundits found Tom Dumoulin taking a dump to be so riveting.
That was a very ordinary edition to me.

andyp

2010 was a turd of a race, there were a couple of decent stages, but mainly it was dull, with the only intrigue being how long Arroyo would hang on to pink before handing it over to Basso. The passage of time really does strange things to people's memories.

blazing_saddles

andyp said:

2010 was a censored of a race, there were a couple of decent stages, but mainly it was dull, with the only intrigue being how long Arroyo would hang on to pink before handing it over to Basso. The passage of time really does strange things to people's memories.

Stages 2,3 and 5 should all have been standard sprint stages but all three were about as far removed from that, as possible.
Stage 4 was a pretty decent watch for a TT with the added bonus of watching Vino throw a hissy fit.
Stage 6 was a cracking medium mountain breakaway.
Stage 7 saw the re-introduction of Strade Bianche in appalling conditions, with the eventually race winner, Basso losing 2 minutes.

Stage 11 was the Escape to I'Aquila and some young bloke called Richie Porte in pink.

Arroyo still lead the race going into stage 19, but yeah, it was a shit race.

True that the back end did taper a fair bit, but if the order of things determine the overall quality of a GT, then despite this Vuelta starting with quite a bang, it will be end up viewed as a steaming pile.

mrfpb

Ineos switched from GC chasers to stage chasers then back to GC chasers, which they have not done before (as far as I know) in a GT. If Bernal had dropped out earlier in the TdF they may have done something similar (and I'm amazed if they didn't see it coming and plan around it). They showed they are not just about sticking to plan A come what may with the favourite and back up. And seven stage wins from three different riders is, while not suprising given the strength of the team, is unprecedented for this team at a GT.

takethehighroad

I think the new Ineos panache has come from teams replicating the old Sky mountain train.

TJV in the Tour and Sunweb in this Giro set the pace in the mountain stages so that Ineos didn't have the responsibility that they have before.

It leaves their riders fresher, with more freedom, and the result is "The Grenadiers"

mididoctors

RichN95. said:

mididoctors said:

Needs the rate the giro thread I guess

Here's the verdict of a wannabe Italian (there's so much to disagree with there)

https://twitter.com/friebos/status/1320857956783632385

That's perverse ...just inviting triggered click bait to his social.media

Pross

mrfpb said:

Ineos switched from GC chasers to stage chasers then back to GC chasers, which they have not done before (as far as I know) in a GT. If Bernal had dropped out earlier in the TdF they may have done something similar (and I'm amazed if they didn't see it coming and plan around it). They showed they are not just about sticking to plan A come what may with the favourite and back up. And seven stage wins from three different riders is, while not suprising given the strength of the team, is unprecedented for this team at a GT.

I don't think Carapaz had enough preparation time to take the role of alternative contender at the Tour though. He started to look good in the second half which is understandable when he had originally been aiming for the Giro.

mididoctors

I am bit of a froome hater on the quiet( not serious about it) but 2018 is a 5 sorry ... Best GT I have ever seen

2010 sticks in the mind more than the falcon on the finestre which was good

mididoctors

2014 quintana stealing it on a neutralised descent? Better than 2010

blazing_saddles

mididoctors said:

2014 quintana stealing it on a neutralised descent? Better than 2010

I can't remember a single thing about 2014 besides the Stelvio steal.
Is it the one where Sky were left with Cataldo trying to nick a stage?

mididoctors

blazing_saddles said:

mididoctors said:

2014 quintana stealing it on a neutralised descent? Better than 2010

I can't remember a single thing about 2014 besides the Stelvio steal.
Is it the one where Sky were left with Cataldo trying to nick a stage?

ireland in the rain

phreak

tailwindhome said:

What is the tactical brilliance I'm missing that amounts to more than having the strongest rider (left) in the race and having a world class TTer tow him up a mountain while dropping the field.

It's pretty much the Sky/Ineos GC playbook, no?

Think that's being a bit unfair to be honest. Wasn't the pink jersey dispatched with about 40km of the stage and the majority of the Stelvio still to do? That isn't a Jumbo style tow the leader to the final km approach. Even with Dennis' incredible shift, it was still man against man for all of the final climb.

phreak

andyp said:

2010 was a censored of a race, there were a couple of decent stages, but mainly it was dull, with the only intrigue being how long Arroyo would hang on to pink before handing it over to Basso. The passage of time really does strange things to people's memories.

Come again? We had the incredibly epic strada bianchi stage, which pretty much launched what has become a modern classic. We had the GC tipped upside down by the enormous split in the peloton to Aquila (on a 250km stage lest we forget). We had climbs of the Zoncolan, Grappa, Mortirolo, and Gavia, with a mountain TT up the Plan de Corones.

It wasn't just Arroyo that was being chased either, as the likes of Sastre and Wiggins gained huge time in that split, with Evans and Vino also showing good form, and even Nibali looking strong. Even discounting guys like Garzelli, Froome and Simoni, you had 7 existing or future GT winners in the mix for GC, which is a pretty strong field, and it added up to a great race.

m.r.m.

takethehighroad said:

I think the new Ineos panache has come from teams replicating the old Sky mountain train.

TJV in the Tour and Sunweb in this Giro set the pace in the mountain stages so that Ineos didn't have the responsibility that they have before.

It leaves their riders fresher, with more freedom, and the result is "The Grenadiers"

I don't think the new Ineos panache exists. I think they go for the stages when their GC ambition has failed. The success at stage hunting comes down to the quality of their riders compared to others allowed by the peloton to escape for stages.