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

pblakeney

andyp said:

What is it with some people on this forum and the lack of respect shown to Nibali? He's won four GTs, with only Froome ahead of him amongst currently active riders, and three monuments, with only Gilbert and Valverde ahead of him, and yet there are still some who seem to think he's second rate.

You don't build a palmares like his without being talented, committed and professional. He might be in the twilight of his career, but it's been an outstanding career by any objective measure.

My problem isn't with Nibali himself, it is commentators continually banging on about "the shark". Fine if he is doing well, really annoying when he is obviously dropping further and further back.

DeVlaeminck

pblakeney said:

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

mididoctors said:

Insane can't believe it still.

Only 3 secs slower than wilco ..which I think settles the "did sunweb make the right decision debate" inane now

Yeah I think so... They were never going to peg TGH to within 3 seconds of Kelderman, even if Hindley had done a Dennis-like effort.

Had Hindley won yes, as it is it kind of proved he was never going to win and saving 90 seconds for Kelderman over 2 stages was at least possible - Smith reckoned he'd have saved almost that on the Stelvio stage.

Still on about this? Your horse lost, get over it.
Oh, and Smith changed his tune this afternoon.

I only reply when other people comment - why not it's a discussion forum - I think my horse is ahead and you don't - Jai Hindley (your horse) didn't win the bike race because entirely predictably he lost a load of time in the TT.

If it triggers you don't read it. I can't really see why you take it personally.

bobmcstuff

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

mididoctors said:

Insane can't believe it still.

Only 3 secs slower than wilco ..which I think settles the "did sunweb make the right decision debate" inane now

Yeah I think so... They were never going to peg TGH to within 3 seconds of Kelderman, even if Hindley had done a Dennis-like effort.

Had Hindley won yes, as it is it kind of proved he was never going to win and saving 90 seconds for Kelderman over 2 stages was at least possible - Smith reckoned he'd have saved almost that on the Stelvio stage.

If Kelderman had beat TGH by a decent margin in the TT I'd have agreed it was at least possible. As it is I just don't see your argument at all, they'd have had to keep Kelderman within 3s of TGH which doesn't seem remotely credible.

Percy_TomTom

Censored pandemic! I want a pink-ballooned Giro winner's parade through the streets of Hackney to finish outside the Town Hall. I want to raise locally-brewed ale to the sky and cheer Tao's name and then get more drunk and further shake my head in disbelief that he's won the censored Giro!

blazing_saddles

bobmcstuff said:

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

mididoctors said:

Insane can't believe it still.

Only 3 secs slower than wilco ..which I think settles the "did sunweb make the right decision debate" inane now

Yeah I think so... They were never going to peg TGH to within 3 seconds of Kelderman, even if Hindley had done a Dennis-like effort.

Had Hindley won yes, as it is it kind of proved he was never going to win and saving 90 seconds for Kelderman over 2 stages was at least possible - Smith reckoned he'd have saved almost that on the Stelvio stage.

If Kelderman had beat TGH by a decent margin in the TT I'd have agreed it was at least possible. As it is I just don't see your argument at all, they'd have had to keep Kelderman within 3s of TGH which doesn't seem remotely credible.

Why stop at Stage 18?

I think Ineos made a mistake in sending the entire team back to tow Thomas on stage 3 and leaving Tao alone. Fat lot of good that did.
Had Dennis stayed with him, he wouldn't have lost 2 minutes to Kelderman that day.
I reckon that with physics 'n all he possibly could have saved 90 seconds.

mrfpb

The difference is Nibali gets compared to his GT winning rivals.

Who are almost all TGHs team mates.

mrfpb

But there has also been a lack of respect for Quintana on these boards over the time I've been here. I didnt get into pro cycling early enough to see his big sucesses, but he also is due some kudos. Movistar didn't treat him well IMO.

pblakeney

mrfpb said:

But there has also been a lack of respect for Quintana on these boards over the time I've been here. I didnt get into pro cycling early enough to see his big sucesses, but he also is due some kudos. Movistar didn't treat him well IMO.

Not so much disrespect as disappointment of an unfulfilled early promise.

kingstongraham

mrfpb said:

But there has also been a lack of respect for Quintana on these boards over the time I've been here. I didnt get into pro cycling early enough to see his big sucesses, but he also is due some kudos. Movistar didn't treat him well IMO.

Quintana looked like he was going to be an amazingly exciting cyclist. Then turned out to be good.

DeVlaeminck

bobmcstuff said:

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

mididoctors said:

Insane can't believe it still.

Only 3 secs slower than wilco ..which I think settles the "did sunweb make the right decision debate" inane now

Yeah I think so... They were never going to peg TGH to within 3 seconds of Kelderman, even if Hindley had done a Dennis-like effort.

Had Hindley won yes, as it is it kind of proved he was never going to win and saving 90 seconds for Kelderman over 2 stages was at least possible - Smith reckoned he'd have saved almost that on the Stelvio stage.

If Kelderman had beat TGH by a decent margin in the TT I'd have agreed it was at least possible. As it is I just don't see your argument at all, they'd have had to keep Kelderman within 3s of TGH which doesn't seem remotely credible.

Fair enough Bob, I think given the way it ended in the end whichever course of action they took on balance they probably lost the bike race.

I still think there is a realistic chance (not a likelihood) they *might* have limited Kelderman's losses enough and we don't know how TTing to win the race may have brought out the best - I'd put money on him being closer than Jai got in the end - but we can't know and agreeing to disagree is all we can do.

If my replying to comment upsets people...c'est la vie or whatever that is in Italian.

ddraver

Nibbles came 7th my dudes, get over it...

bobmcstuff

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

mididoctors said:

Insane can't believe it still.

Only 3 secs slower than wilco ..which I think settles the "did sunweb make the right decision debate" inane now

Yeah I think so... They were never going to peg TGH to within 3 seconds of Kelderman, even if Hindley had done a Dennis-like effort.

Had Hindley won yes, as it is it kind of proved he was never going to win and saving 90 seconds for Kelderman over 2 stages was at least possible - Smith reckoned he'd have saved almost that on the Stelvio stage.

If Kelderman had beat TGH by a decent margin in the TT I'd have agreed it was at least possible. As it is I just don't see your argument at all, they'd have had to keep Kelderman within 3s of TGH which doesn't seem remotely credible.

Fair enough Bob, I think given the way it ended in the end whichever course of action they took on balance they probably lost the bike race.

I still think there is a realistic chance (not a likelihood) they *might* have limited Kelderman's losses enough and we don't know how TTing to win the race may have brought out the best - I'd put money on him being closer than Jai got in the end - but we can't know and agreeing to disagree is all we can do.

If my replying to comment upsets people...c'est la vie or whatever that is in Italian.

Definitely not upsetting!

My opinion is that Sunweb were making a decision:

- with no perfect answer (someone would have been negatively affected whatever option they chose - I don't disagree that it had *some* affect on Kelderman's time losses) (a "wicked problem", more or less, if familiar with the term...)
- in the heat of the moment (if they were really committing to Kelderman they would have needed to make that decision pretty sharpish)
- with imperfect information (e.g., whether Kelderman was completely cracked and about to ship 15 minutes, or would be able to pace himself - or )

They had to play the numbers, basically, and to me the option they chose seems to me to have obviously been the best one - certainly the safest. More so in hindsight.

I think the fact Kelderman was then unable to hold the wheel of other riders who came past supports that view, I think.

And that's not considering Blazing's hypothetical above that Ineos shouldn't have sacrificed TGH's position on stage 3 etc.. Taking that into account Tao's comeback is even more remarkable.

mrfpb

Going back to the TdF, Ineos won a stage witha double act (Carapaz, Kwiatowski) pulling away from the break and sharing the work to get to the line for the stage and the Polka Dot jersey. If Hindley had dropped back on stage 18, RH and TGH would have (more than likely) pulled off a similar double act to the line on the Stelvio, for Pink and the Stage.

As a pair in this event RH+TGH > WC + JH whatever way you cut it.

davidof

When the sunweb car sped past kelderman on the stelvio stage barely bothering to toss him a bottle it showed their commitment to him. K flipping them the bird as they sped away showed his frustration.

brundonbianchi

It was great to see Googlesearch getting a result, he’s a top bloke. I’m sure even he would admit he wouldn’t have been allowed to challenge the Welshman if it had come to it though. However, you can only play with the cards you’re dealt, and fair play to him for making a potential disaster brilliant watching.

mididoctors

bobmcstuff said:

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

DeVlaeminck said:

bobmcstuff said:

mididoctors said:

Insane can't believe it still.

Only 3 secs slower than wilco ..which I think settles the "did sunweb make the right decision debate" inane now

Yeah I think so... They were never going to peg TGH to within 3 seconds of Kelderman, even if Hindley had done a Dennis-like effort.

Had Hindley won yes, as it is it kind of proved he was never going to win and saving 90 seconds for Kelderman over 2 stages was at least possible - Smith reckoned he'd have saved almost that on the Stelvio stage.

If Kelderman had beat TGH by a decent margin in the TT I'd have agreed it was at least possible. As it is I just don't see your argument at all, they'd have had to keep Kelderman within 3s of TGH which doesn't seem remotely credible.

Fair enough Bob, I think given the way it ended in the end whichever course of action they took on balance they probably lost the bike race.

I still think there is a realistic chance (not a likelihood) they *might* have limited Kelderman's losses enough and we don't know how TTing to win the race may have brought out the best - I'd put money on him being closer than Jai got in the end - but we can't know and agreeing to disagree is all we can do.

If my replying to comment upsets people...c'est la vie or whatever that is in Italian.

Definitely not upsetting!

My opinion is that Sunweb were making a decision:

- with no perfect answer (someone would have been negatively affected whatever option they chose - I don't disagree that it had *some* affect on Kelderman's time losses) (a "wicked problem", more or less, if familiar with the term...)
- in the heat of the moment (if they were really committing to Kelderman they would have needed to make that decision pretty sharpish)
- with imperfect information (e.g., whether Kelderman was completely cracked and about to ship 15 minutes, or would be able to pace himself - or )

They had to play the numbers, basically, and to me the option they chose seems to me to have obviously been the best one - certainly the safest. More so in hindsight.

I think the fact Kelderman was then unable to hold the wheel of other riders who came past supports that view, I think.

And that's not considering Blazing's hypothetical above that Ineos shouldn't have sacrificed TGH's position on stage 3 etc.. Taking that into account Tao's comeback is even more remarkable.

its a talking point for the ages,

frankly wilco did well to stay on the podium. rode as fast and even as pace as he could. there was nothing left to give.

blazing_saddles

bobmcstuff said:

And that's not considering Blazing's hypothetical above that Ineos shouldn't have sacrificed TGH's position on stage 3 etc.. Taking that into account Tao's comeback is even more remarkable.

Just my little joke example of how far this whatifery can be taken.

So, far all the whatifery has focused upon how much time Hindley could have saved Kelderman, but no allowance is being made for how much quicker the Ineos pair would have been on stages 18 and 20.

mrfpb

Leaving aside TGH for a moment, isn't this the most exciting performance from Ineos as a team in their history?

Back before the second TT they were looking like (very) sucessful stage chasers with TGH at 12th. Then the last week they turned from stage chasers and breakaway specialists back into an exciting GC team.

It's the sort of mid-race turn around they used for Froome's comeback in the 2018 Giro, they don't have to do it very often, but when they need to the whole team (on and off road) just seem to turn things around.

davidof

mrfpb said:

Leaving aside TGH for a moment, isn't this the most exciting performance from Ineos as a team in their history?

The French journalist Claire Bricogne said much the same to Dave Brailsford the other day "so Ineos have learned how to race bikes?"

Brailsford agreed.

RichN95.

davidof said:

mrfpb said:

Leaving aside TGH for a moment, isn't this the most exciting performance from Ineos as a team in their history?

The French journalist Claire Bricogne said much the same to Dave Brailsford the other day "so Ineos have learned how to race bikes?"

Brailsford agreed.

They haven't really done anything that different though. They won time trials Froome, Wiggins, Thomas, Kiryienka all did that, they won MTFs with their GC guy, Froome and Thomas did that, and they got in breakaways when the designated leader failed - Landa and Nieve won Giro KOMs doing that.

It's complete revisionist history. Sky never really used the mountain trains in the Giro or Vuelta. Dennis provided more of a train than they ever had in those races before. At no point did TGH actually attack from the bunch. He just sat in wheels while rivals went out the back, and took time in the time trials, which is exactly the 'train' tactic. Ironically the rider that brought TGH into GC contention was Hindley on stage 15.

norrinradd

I think on rest day 2 there must have been some weird manga-LOTR mashup transfer of the soul of the Kiryienka-bot to the rider of Rohan Dennis.
On the Stelvio the DS pressed the engage Kiryienka button in the car.
True fantasy doping.

Lanterne_Rogue

One thing that made me smile was that I'd cracked some witticism about Ineos accidentally winning it by hunting for consolation stages, then Orla C popped up on Eurosport and was all "I asked Ben Swift this afternoon when did they start racing for the GC and he was, like, lol, Stage 20..."

commuterlegs

I've not seen anything yet but has any journalist calculated what percentage of the total prize pot Ineos have walked away with? Given the 7 stages, Pink, White, team classification, Cima Coppi and other high placings I'm assuming it may be getting on for close to half the purse!?

RichN95.

commuterlegs said:

I've not seen anything yet but has any journalist calculated what percentage of the total prize pot Ineos have walked away with? Given the 7 stages, Pink, White, team classification, Cima Coppi and other high placings I'm assuming it may be getting on for close to half the purse!?

Also there was no prize money given out for stage 19 where they did nothing.

kingstongraham

commuterlegs said:

I've not seen anything yet but has any journalist calculated what percentage of the total prize pot Ineos have walked away with? Given the 7 stages, Pink, White, team classification, Cima Coppi and other high placings I'm assuming it may be getting on for close to half the purse!?

https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/giro-d-italia/2020/gc/stages/money-rider-ranking

Ineos 432,643 out of total 1,422,010 = 30%

ddraver

davidof said:

mrfpb said:

Leaving aside TGH for a moment, isn't this the most exciting performance from Ineos as a team in their history?

The French journalist Claire Bricogne said much the same to Dave Brailsford the other day "so Ineos have learned how to race bikes?"

Brailsford agreed.

it's a mark of quite how giddy this seems to have made DB. In any the other year or not he'd have been well within his rights to tell her to get stuffed!

No_Ta_Doctor

While the question "so Ineos have learned how to race bikes?" is obviously loaded and imo uncharitable, I think the claim that the Giro was won the same way as all their other wins have been achieved is wrong. The difference here is between tactics and strategy. Tactically, as Rich95 points out, there was nothing we'd not seen before at some point.

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.

mididoctors

RichN95. said:

davidof said:

mrfpb said:

Leaving aside TGH for a moment, isn't this the most exciting performance from Ineos as a team in their history?

The French journalist Claire Bricogne said much the same to Dave Brailsford the other day "so Ineos have learned how to race bikes?"

Brailsford agreed.

They haven't really done anything that different though. They won time trials Froome, Wiggins, Thomas, Kiryienka all did that, they won MTFs with their GC guy, Froome and Thomas did that, and they got in breakaways when the designated leader failed - Landa and Nieve won Giro KOMs doing that.

It's complete revisionist history. Sky never really used the mountain trains in the Giro or Vuelta. Dennis provided more of a train than they ever had in those races before. At no point did TGH actually attack from the bunch. He just sat in wheels while rivals went out the back, and took time in the time trials, which is exactly the 'train' tactic. Ironically the rider that brought TGH into GC contention was Hindley on stage 15.

Pretty much. tgh did some classy wheel sucking . Took all the right wheels at the right time . When they let Hamilton go it was a signal for him to go too. Really savy ride . I wonder who called the shots when ..

Pross

kingstongraham said:

commuterlegs said:

I've not seen anything yet but has any journalist calculated what percentage of the total prize pot Ineos have walked away with? Given the 7 stages, Pink, White, team classification, Cima Coppi and other high placings I'm assuming it may be getting on for close to half the purse!?

https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/giro-d-italia/2020/gc/stages/money-rider-ranking

Ineos 432,643 out of total 1,422,010 = 30%

That's the helicopters paid for and still a big chunk left over.

RichN95.

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.