La Vuelta 2023: Stage 15:- Pamplona - Lekunberri, 158.5km ***Spoilers***
Comments
-
In his mind, he'd have still got the best result he possibly could have in those circumstances.blazing_saddles said:If Kamna hadn’t gone gardening, Costa would have been wheel sucking for second.
But it's 8 years since his last significant win, I think it's quite likely he'd have won more if people wanted to be in a breakaway with him.1 -
Just remembering back to Pidcock's Strade Bianche win this year, where Costa was an anchor weighing down the chase group that very nearly caught him, but didn't. A bit of work there and he might have had "The 6th Monument" on his palmares....Warning No formatter is installed for the format1
-
I beg to differ.wallace_and_gromit said:
Nice attempted deflection about rugby! Not relevant to this discussion...blazing_saddles said:
Obviously you first have to win in order to qualify it to be deserved win.wallace_and_gromit said:
OK. I'll explain for you. It shouldn't be necessary, but I'm in a helpful mood.blazing_saddles said:
Eh?wallace_and_gromit said:
Something tells me that Nietzsche didn't come up with that pearl of wisdom.
Costa won.
You described it a "thoroughly undeserved win".
I asked you how one deserves a win if winning itself doesn't do the job.
So please just answer the question. It's really not very hard. e.g. would he have deserved it if he'd ridden the stage naked? Or pulling wheelies through the last 10k?
EDIT - I should add that I'm just curious to see how you'll respond. My view is that in pro sport, a win is a win and only the losers worry about the sub-text.
Doesn’t make every win deserved.
Or is the term: ‘He/they didn’t deserve to lose,’ redundant?
There’s currently a far bigger debate on this regarding last nights World Cup rugby.
"Didn't deserve to lose" is the flip side of "underserved win", I guess, though more relevant to sports where there are refereeing decisions involved and where a draw is a common outcome. Bike racing is different as there is always a winner, and the impact of refereeing decisions is much less significant (other than re relegations in sprints etc.) All the same, I can see a few scenarios in which the outcome of a race is not that deserved by the key protagonists. e.g. rider taken out 50m from the finish when clearly poised for victory by mechanical, puncture, stray dog or thrown bottle by rival etc.
My challenge to you is to identify the factors applicable to Costa's win that make it undeserving, as you described it as such. I didn't see the finish - mowing the lawn between showers yesterday - but from what I've read, Costa appears to have simply crossed the line first, without benefitting from any obvious bad fortune being visited on his rivals.
There are several thousand posts on the BBC sports pages from people saying Wales didn't deserve to win.
According to your definition, or at least the way it reads to me is: They did.............because the did.
Anyhow, speaking purely in cycling terms and to try and give you some context to what I thought at the time.
They way Costa won, was ultimately inefficient and reliant upon luck, that wasn't of his own making.
I admire his ability to remain cool and out "chicken" his opponents, as much as anybody. It's a skill in itself. However, in this case I believe the victory could have been won more easily by contributing in the two man break.
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Most probably true.kingstongraham said:
In his mind, he'd have still got the best result he possibly could have in those circumstances.blazing_saddles said:If Kamna hadn’t gone gardening, Costa would have been wheel sucking for second.
But it's 8 years since his last significant win, I think it's quite likely he'd have won more if people wanted to be in a breakaway with him.
He's had an exceptionally good season, with 3 wins.
In this sport these days, it's like you either have to be very old, or very young to win (or nearly win) races."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Rui does animate the drama of a race ...... lol..
The notion everyone forgot he was such a wheel sucking tosser cos he is old and in wanty kit may have some merit ...someone up thread mentioned it.
I like there is characters such as him in the bunch . Need the odd villain . It's not cheating"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 -
He definitely didn't wheelsuck Arensman all the way to the line in Valencia this year. When he needed time to win on GC, he managed to be in the lead of the pair of them all the way from when they attacked until the line.0
-
He was pretty savy there ...just waited hoping to be ignored and it workedkingstongraham said:He definitely didn't wheelsuck Arensman all the way to the line in Valencia this year. When he needed time to win on GC, he managed to be in the lead of the pair of them all the way from when they attacked until the line.
"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 -
Pretty sure Arensman wasn't working though, he had Tao 's GC to protectkingstongraham said:He definitely didn't wheelsuck Arensman all the way to the line in Valencia this year. When he needed time to win on GC, he managed to be in the lead of the pair of them all the way from when they attacked until the line.
Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
That's a racing incident (misjudged corner?) rather than obvious bad fortune. I'm maybe harsh in my judgement of what is bad race riding vs what is bad luck.pblakeney said:
Kamna crashed in the last few kms when it looked like he would win.wallace_and_gromit said:
...but from what I've read, Costa appears to have simply crossed the line first, without benefitting from any obvious bad fortune being visited on his rivals.
0 -
Rui put them in a bind as Tao had been delayed off camera and arensman was going for the stage ... no one noticed how much a threat he was till he clipped offNo_Ta_Doctor said:
Pretty sure Arensman wasn't working though, he had Tao 's GC to protectkingstongraham said:He definitely didn't wheelsuck Arensman all the way to the line in Valencia this year. When he needed time to win on GC, he managed to be in the lead of the pair of them all the way from when they attacked until the line.
"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 pm1 -
? I specifically highlighted the difference between sports like bike racing and those with a referee's subjective judgement being an integral part of the result. In rugby, the "Tier 1" nations seem to get most of the marginal calls in their favour. In cycling, wind shifts, road surfaces, positions of road furniture etc. are wholly indifferent to the status of the rider.blazing_saddles said:
I beg to differ.wallace_and_gromit said:
Nice attempted deflection about rugby! Not relevant to this discussion...blazing_saddles said:
Obviously you first have to win in order to qualify it to be deserved win.wallace_and_gromit said:
OK. I'll explain for you. It shouldn't be necessary, but I'm in a helpful mood.blazing_saddles said:
Eh?wallace_and_gromit said:
Something tells me that Nietzsche didn't come up with that pearl of wisdom.
Costa won.
You described it a "thoroughly undeserved win".
I asked you how one deserves a win if winning itself doesn't do the job.
So please just answer the question. It's really not very hard. e.g. would he have deserved it if he'd ridden the stage naked? Or pulling wheelies through the last 10k?
EDIT - I should add that I'm just curious to see how you'll respond. My view is that in pro sport, a win is a win and only the losers worry about the sub-text.
Doesn’t make every win deserved.
Or is the term: ‘He/they didn’t deserve to lose,’ redundant?
There’s currently a far bigger debate on this regarding last nights World Cup rugby.
"Didn't deserve to lose" is the flip side of "underserved win", I guess, though more relevant to sports where there are refereeing decisions involved and where a draw is a common outcome. Bike racing is different as there is always a winner, and the impact of refereeing decisions is much less significant (other than re relegations in sprints etc.) All the same, I can see a few scenarios in which the outcome of a race is not that deserved by the key protagonists. e.g. rider taken out 50m from the finish when clearly poised for victory by mechanical, puncture, stray dog or thrown bottle by rival etc.
My challenge to you is to identify the factors applicable to Costa's win that make it undeserving, as you described it as such. I didn't see the finish - mowing the lawn between showers yesterday - but from what I've read, Costa appears to have simply crossed the line first, without benefitting from any obvious bad fortune being visited on his rivals.
There are several thousand posts on the BBC sports pages from people saying Wales didn't deserve to win.
According to your definition, or at least the way it reads to me is: They did.............because the did.
Anyhow, speaking purely in cycling terms and to try and give you some context to what I thought at the time.
They way Costa won, was ultimately inefficient and reliant upon luck, that wasn't of his own making.
I admire his ability to remain cool and out "chicken" his opponents, as much as anybody. It's a skill in itself. However, in this case I believe the victory could have been won more easily by contributing in the two man break.
Anyway, thanks for the clarification. I get your position now. You seem to be arguing against yourself somewhat though with:
"I admire his ability to remain cool and out-chicken his opponents..." which suggests he is at least partially deserving of his win for remaining cool etc.
"I believe the victory could have been won more easily by contributing in the two man break" which is a completely different point to the one you first made, which maybe should have been "Much harder work than it needed to be."
Having tracked your posts for some years, my conclusion is that from a racing perspective, you're not happy unless someone wins with "style and panache" by attacking repeatedly, and preferably from a long way out, but when they do that, you're not happy either, because such performances are clearly PED-enhanced.0 -
Talking of arguing completely different points and back tracking:wallace_and_gromit said:
? I specifically highlighted the difference between sports like bike racing and those with a referee's subjective judgement being an integral part of the result. In rugby, the "Tier 1" nations seem to get most of the marginal calls in their favour. In cycling, wind shifts, road surfaces, positions of road furniture etc. are wholly indifferent to the status of the rider.blazing_saddles said:
I beg to differ.wallace_and_gromit said:
Nice attempted deflection about rugby! Not relevant to this discussion...blazing_saddles said:
Obviously you first have to win in order to qualify it to be deserved win.wallace_and_gromit said:
OK. I'll explain for you. It shouldn't be necessary, but I'm in a helpful mood.blazing_saddles said:
Eh?wallace_and_gromit said:
Something tells me that Nietzsche didn't come up with that pearl of wisdom.
Costa won.
You described it a "thoroughly undeserved win".
I asked you how one deserves a win if winning itself doesn't do the job.
So please just answer the question. It's really not very hard. e.g. would he have deserved it if he'd ridden the stage naked? Or pulling wheelies through the last 10k?
EDIT - I should add that I'm just curious to see how you'll respond. My view is that in pro sport, a win is a win and only the losers worry about the sub-text.
Doesn’t make every win deserved.
Or is the term: ‘He/they didn’t deserve to lose,’ redundant?
There’s currently a far bigger debate on this regarding last nights World Cup rugby.
"Didn't deserve to lose" is the flip side of "underserved win", I guess, though more relevant to sports where there are refereeing decisions involved and where a draw is a common outcome. Bike racing is different as there is always a winner, and the impact of refereeing decisions is much less significant (other than re relegations in sprints etc.) All the same, I can see a few scenarios in which the outcome of a race is not that deserved by the key protagonists. e.g. rider taken out 50m from the finish when clearly poised for victory by mechanical, puncture, stray dog or thrown bottle by rival etc.
My challenge to you is to identify the factors applicable to Costa's win that make it undeserving, as you described it as such. I didn't see the finish - mowing the lawn between showers yesterday - but from what I've read, Costa appears to have simply crossed the line first, without benefitting from any obvious bad fortune being visited on his rivals.
There are several thousand posts on the BBC sports pages from people saying Wales didn't deserve to win.
According to your definition, or at least the way it reads to me is: They did.............because the did.
Anyhow, speaking purely in cycling terms and to try and give you some context to what I thought at the time.
They way Costa won, was ultimately inefficient and reliant upon luck, that wasn't of his own making.
I admire his ability to remain cool and out "chicken" his opponents, as much as anybody. It's a skill in itself. However, in this case I believe the victory could have been won more easily by contributing in the two man break.
Anyway, thanks for the clarification. I get your position now. You seem to be arguing against yourself somewhat though with:
"I admire his ability to remain cool and out-chicken his opponents..." which suggests he is at least partially deserving of his win for remaining cool etc.
"I believe the victory could have been won more easily by contributing in the two man break" which is a completely different point to the one you first made, which maybe should have been "Much harder work than it needed to be."
Having tracked your posts for some years, my conclusion is that from a racing perspective, you're not happy unless someone wins with "style and panache" by attacking repeatedly, and preferably from a long way out, but when they do that, you're not happy either, because such performances are clearly PED-enhanced.
"All the same, I can see a few scenarios in which the outcome of a race is not that deserved by the key protagonists. e.g. rider taken out 50m from the finish when clearly poised for victory by mechanical, puncture, stray dog or thrown bottle by rival etc."
If only you had said this in the first place, instead of being so cryptic.
It boils down to a question of Kamna's role in this and how we view it."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
True.wallace_and_gromit said:
That's a racing incident (misjudged corner?) rather than obvious bad fortune. I'm maybe harsh in my judgement of what is bad race riding vs what is bad luck.pblakeney said:
Kamna crashed in the last few kms when it looked like he would win.wallace_and_gromit said:
...but from what I've read, Costa appears to have simply crossed the line first, without benefitting from any obvious bad fortune being visited on his rivals.
I was pointing it out as Costa's only piece of good fortune. It was good for him.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.1 -
If only you all knew you were rehashing ancient Greek philosophical debates on the nature of luck and virtueWarning No formatter is installed for the format2
-
TBH, most stuff is either rehashing Greek stuff, with a few exceptions for Shakespeare, but even then....No_Ta_Doctor said:If only you all knew you were rehashing ancient Greek philosophical debates on the nature of luck and virtue
0 -
The Simpsons already did it.PTP Champion 2019, 2022 & 20230
-
Rui Costa is "a poor man's" Alejandro Valverde. With all the positives and negatives that that entails.PTP Champion 2019, 2022 & 20231
-
Actually Every real cycling fan knows valverde is a knock off Rui Costa with better watts"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
-
Re 1, fair point, I guess. I'm not one for the "romantic" side of cycling. I tend to focus on the results. I did like the reference to Nietzsche though. Never seen that on a cycling forum before!blazing_saddles said:1. If only you had said this in the first place, instead of being so cryptic.
2. It boils down to a question of Kamna's role in this and how we view it.
Re 2, I'm not sure there's much to say about Kamna's role other than "rider error" given that he lost his chance to "solo" to victory by riding off a dry, good quality road surface in perfect lighting conditions.
0 -
I love this stuff
0
