The Pre-Tour de France thread v2.0
Comments
-
It's down to how the other teams outside of UAE neutralise each others long range attacks . Could get very annoying to watch ...or not"If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm0
-
Jumbo are *very* protective of Vingegaard, they won't let any pressure be put on him. They've also got to deal with what to do with van Aert, without a real leader he'll need to have help to achieve other goals (not gc). They're effectively freed from the Sky v2 model, but do they have the ability to switch to chaos racing?phreak said:
It will depend on how Jumbo responds to Roglic seeming to be out of the picture. They're a big team, along with Ineos, who could throw numbers at Pogacar, but if they've given up on a realistic GC challenge now then it does play into Pogacar's hands.No_Ta_Doctor said:
He's shown he can be isolated. I think it's going to be interestingbobmcstuff said:It's been a fantastic first week.
I'll admit it does look a bit less interesting for the rest of it, unless something happens with Pogacar.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Works well for me... watch the stage live or the long highlights on GCN, watch the ITV highlights for the interviews etc....mrb123 said:Is it just me or are we getting less of the actual cycling action on the ITV highlights show than ever before?
They always used to pad it out with filler on some of the duller sprint stages, but it seems this year on every stage we're getting endless interviews before and after the race plus the other features and analysis. The total racing shown must amount to only about 20mins.0 -
I had the same thought last night. The spoiler thread was more informativemrb123 said:Is it just me or are we getting less of the actual cycling action on the ITV highlights show than ever before?
They always used to pad it out with filler on some of the duller sprint stages, but it seems this year on every stage we're getting endless interviews before and after the race plus the other features and analysis. The total racing shown must amount to only about 20mins.1 -
Yeah, I could imagine it's better for those who've watched live and then want to hear all the reaction from the day.bobmcstuff said:
Works well for me... watch the stage live or the long highlights on GCN, watch the ITV highlights for the interviews etc....mrb123 said:Is it just me or are we getting less of the actual cycling action on the ITV highlights show than ever before?
They always used to pad it out with filler on some of the duller sprint stages, but it seems this year on every stage we're getting endless interviews before and after the race plus the other features and analysis. The total racing shown must amount to only about 20mins.
If you're relying on it to catch up with the action from the day, seeing every man and his dog get interviewed before and after the stage instead of any actual racing it a bit annoying.0 -
tbf the spoiler threads set a fairly high bar in terms of info. You've got a load more eyes on what's happening, from people with partisan interests in different riders (or looking for oddities to joke about), and the ability to assimilate information from a lot more sources than ITV can during the race itself (Ned and Dave have things to do other than follow two thousand twitter accounts).rick_chasey said:
I had the same thought last night. The spoiler thread was more informativemrb123 said:Is it just me or are we getting less of the actual cycling action on the ITV highlights show than ever before?
They always used to pad it out with filler on some of the duller sprint stages, but it seems this year on every stage we're getting endless interviews before and after the race plus the other features and analysis. The total racing shown must amount to only about 20mins.
And idiots like me can put up a stupid idea for others to shoot down, so false assertions also get challenged (usually in a way that adds more info).0 -
As someone who talks a lot but has to listen professionally, talking less would do them wonders. No one would mind and the quality would improve.Lanterne_Rogue said:
tbf the spoiler threads set a fairly high bar in terms of info. You've got a load more eyes on what's happening, from people with partisan interests in different riders (or looking for oddities to joke about), and the ability to assimilate information from a lot more sources than ITV can during the race itself (Ned and Dave have things to do other than follow two thousand twitter accounts).rick_chasey said:
I had the same thought last night. The spoiler thread was more informativemrb123 said:Is it just me or are we getting less of the actual cycling action on the ITV highlights show than ever before?
They always used to pad it out with filler on some of the duller sprint stages, but it seems this year on every stage we're getting endless interviews before and after the race plus the other features and analysis. The total racing shown must amount to only about 20mins.
And idiots like me can put up a stupid idea for others to shoot down, so false assertions also get challenged (usually in a way that adds more info).
It is also too hard to do it from another country1 -
Yeah, it's noticeable how much quieter the other language options are.0
-
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roads“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
If Ineos are keen on "Chaos racing" they need to go hard the first time up the Ventoux on Wednesday, with maybe Tao/Kwia up the road as well for them to catch0
-
What's the plan for Ineos that stops Pog just loading a pocket full of gels and following their only rider within half an hour on GC?tailwindhome said:
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roads0 -
Wait till he tries putting on a rain jacket on a descent. 😉kingstongraham said:
What's the plan for Ineos that stops Pog just loading a pocket full of gels and following their only rider within half an hour on GC?tailwindhome said:
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roadsThe above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I agree, and this was an opinion I put forward on the unpopular opinion thread.tailwindhome said:
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roads
I think the only exception is the rider with a strong team who has the best TT, because then the weak team rider has to attack in the mountains, and this is harder if the mountain train hasn't drilled it earlier on.
In the case of Pogacar, there is nothing any team can do short of echelons.0 -
The team approach this year would surely have been to have a couple of GC options to attack in turn. Unfortunately one of those options fell heavily and picked up an injury whilst the other two just seem a long way off their best form. I've never really understood the benefit of a team on a final climb. It's OK as a defensive measure to set a pace no-one can attack off (so good if you have a GC contender that can TT better than all the others like Wiggins) but if your main rival can TT and can climb better than you the only benefit of team support is to provide assistance with any mishaps.tailwindhome said:
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roads0 -
But, but, but, Sky/Ineos train, Jumbo Visma train..... For the avoidance of doubt I agree and said as much before last year's Tour. Pogacar proved it to be the case.Pross said:
The team approach this year would surely have been to have a couple of GC options to attack in turn. Unfortunately one of those options fell heavily and picked up an injury whilst the other two just seem a long way off their best form. I've never really understood the benefit of a team on a final climb. It's OK as a defensive measure to set a pace no-one can attack off (so good if you have a GC contender that can TT better than all the others like Wiggins) but if your main rival can TT and can climb better than you the only benefit of team support is to provide assistance with any mishaps.tailwindhome said:
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roadsThe above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
That team approach kinda requires Rider A to attack, Pogacar to slowly bring them back so that Rider B can then attack, Pogacar brings them back, and so on. In effect what we've had instead is Rider A attacks, Pogacar follows them and then attacks some more, leaving everyone in his dust. Not sure how a team could really help when someone is so much better than the rest.Pross said:
The team approach this year would surely have been to have a couple of GC options to attack in turn. Unfortunately one of those options fell heavily and picked up an injury whilst the other two just seem a long way off their best form. I've never really understood the benefit of a team on a final climb. It's OK as a defensive measure to set a pace no-one can attack off (so good if you have a GC contender that can TT better than all the others like Wiggins) but if your main rival can TT and can climb better than you the only benefit of team support is to provide assistance with any mishaps.tailwindhome said:
No. They can'ttailwindhome said:Can the best team beat the best rider?
It's an interesting proposition
My conclusion is this, when it comes to the climbs a team is of limited use.
'Team' all you want, the best rider is just going to follow your wheels until you've exhausted yourselves
If INEOS are going to use their superior team they need to engineer something in the valley roads0 -
An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.0
-
You only have to go back to last year's Tour.TheBigBean said:An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.
Pogacar proved beyond doubt that the stronger rider beats the stronger team.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
2008 Tour. Evans was the strongest rider, was marked out by two stronger riders than the winner Sastre, the Schlecks, who disrupted the chase so badly Sastre went and won the race on the Alp.TheBigBean said:An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.
Earlier in that Tour I think Saxo ripped it up in the crosswinds and hurt Evans there too.
Arguably in 2003 Ulrich made some tactical mistakes re Vino which handed Lance the Tour. I'd say he was probably stronger than Lance, though I think they were probably neck&neck and the variance was their different responses to weather.0 -
-
You have misunderstood. Pogacar was the strongest rider and won. Rick has understood what I meant.pblakeney said:
You only have to go back to last year's Tour.TheBigBean said:An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.
Pogacar proved beyond doubt that the stronger rider beats the stronger team.0 -
You mean the year Sastre took 2 mins out of everyone on one climb in less than 14km? Was it considered superhuman?rick_chasey said:
2008 Tour. Evans was the strongest rider, was marked out by two stronger riders than the winner Sastre, the Schlecks, who disrupted the chase so badly Sastre went and won the race on the Alp.TheBigBean said:An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.
Earlier in that Tour I think Saxo ripped it up in the crosswinds and hurt Evans there too.
Arguably in 2003 Ulrich made some tactical mistakes re Vino which handed Lance the Tour. I'd say he was probably stronger than Lance, though I think they were probably neck&neck and the variance was their different responses to weather.
Anyway, I think Evans made a big mistake. He thought he would get the time back in the TT, so didn't chase as hard as he should.0 -
Yeah. Evans didn't want to tow the Schlecks to the line and let them get a job on him. He was more worried about them than Sastre.
Anyway, the 2008 Tour is my go-to race for why having multiple leaders works if they are not selfish and for tactics trumping form.
You are right it is a rarity and that is ultimately why I prefer one-dayers to GTs - there is almost too much time so the impact of chance and tactics is significantly reduced. Strongest rider usually wins (though this is possibly a bit tautological).0 -
It's also a good example (of many) why it is a bad idea to assume a rider can claw back time in a TT or on a mountain.0
-
Obvious is obvious - it's never worth losing time if you can avoid it.TheBigBean said:It's also a good example (of many) why it is a bad idea to assume a rider can claw back time in a TT or on a mountain.
0 -
Fair, I misunderstood.TheBigBean said:
You have misunderstood. Pogacar was the strongest rider and won. Rick has understood what I meant.pblakeney said:
You only have to go back to last year's Tour.TheBigBean said:An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.
Pogacar proved beyond doubt that the stronger rider beats the stronger team.
You'd have to define weaker though. There have been a multitude of underdogs who have won for a wide range of reasons.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Famously Walkowiak, although it's probably never going to repeat.
Rick's right though - there's always a circular argument about who was strongest, because the winner is always someone that managed to take time at some point or another by definition, and we take that to assume they were strongest (unless someone's caught behind a crash or whatever).0 -
Possibly Froome's Giro but that was arguably the rider who had been strongest for 2 weeks suddenly falling apart.TheBigBean said:An interesting question would be in which grand tours did a weaker rider win, and why? Contador's Vuelta win in 2012 springs to mind which was due to good tactics. Other cases involve team orders. Quitana's wins involved Contador tactics and not seeing a flag.
0 -
Wiggins in 2012?0
-
That was covered by "Other cases involve team orders" as a lot of people don't accept it.kingstongraham said:Wiggins in 2012?
0
