|
News in October
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 09-10-2012 23:07
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Yes, and how many points would a guy like Houanard get in the races that are left in the calendar, where he would most certainly not lead in any, by starting to dope in late september? Enough to be among the 12 top point scorers in any of the teams which need points? Really?
|
| |
|
|
| Deadpool |
Posted on 09-10-2012 23:26
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 06-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
Yes, and how many points would a guy like Houanard get in the races that are left in the calendar, where he would most certainly not lead in any, by starting to dope in late september? Enough to be among the 12 top point scorers in any of the teams which need points? Really?
Agreed. I can totally see the "I need to get points to have a career" reasoning, but it certainly isn't something he started now.
My guess is that he dialed things up a little bit to try and get in fantastic form for Beijing, and got nipped. But it certainly isn't a late season only program. |
| |
|
|
| valverde321 |
Posted on 10-10-2012 00:24
|
World Champion
Posts: 12986
Joined: 20-05-2009
PCM$: 530.00
|
I certainly agree that a points system in this case has many negative effects, and hardly any positive ones.
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 10-10-2012 06:47
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
Say hello to Mrs. Kreuziger, the wedding was held at Garda.
Now Roman can start winning again. 
|
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:30
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
valverde321 wrote:
I certainly agree that a points system in this case has many negative effects, and hardly any positive ones.
Indeed.
They should just look at the results of the team with a jury and decide if that's PT worthy or not, instead of the points.
For example: Lotto: 4th with VDB, Greipel pretty good, Vanendert great results in classics, okay, they can stay.
Something like that |
| |
|
|
| Abelbaba |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:45
|
Domestique
Posts: 537
Joined: 13-12-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
valverde321 wrote:
I certainly agree that a points system in this case has many negative effects, and hardly any positive ones.
Indeed.
They should just look at the results of the team with a jury and decide if that's PT worthy or not, instead of the points.
For example: Lotto: 4th with VDB, Greipel pretty good, Vanendert great results in classics, okay, they can stay.
Something like that
but then you have to clerefy what is "good" or "not worthy", and the pro tour has weaker and stronger teams, but when a strong team fails in a year will they be juged the same as a weaker team that fail or do the judge them to their abbilaties... (i don't know how to say this proper, stronger, better judged... somting like that?)
Edited by Abelbaba on 10-10-2012 08:45
|
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:52
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
I understand, but still. Maybe they could take the results (not points) of the last three seasons, so that you can afford 1 bad year?
I know it's not the greatest system, either, but it would stop the cyclist-transfers-for-points system  |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 13:42
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Abelbaba |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:53
|
Domestique
Posts: 537
Joined: 13-12-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
but some teams do not even exsist 3 years...
like greenege, how would you judge them?
but mayby just dont give the points to the rider? so you have sepperate rankings for individual and teams.
in that case you don't do transfers for point?
Edited by Abelbaba on 10-10-2012 08:56
|
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:56
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
Just by the one year, obviously  |
| |
|
|
| Abelbaba |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:57
|
Domestique
Posts: 537
Joined: 13-12-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
but what if it is a bad year?
then they would go to the pro conti level... |
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 10-10-2012 08:59
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
Yeah, true. Unless there wasn't a Pro Conti team that they thought even better, then they could get benefit of the doubt. |
| |
|
|
| tyriion |
Posted on 10-10-2012 10:21
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1510
Joined: 29-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
You need objective rules though, otherwise companies will never invest. Most teams get loads of money so they can race the TdF. If you are not PT you are not guaranteed a spot, so if the decision who is PT and who isn't can be made by arbitrary guidelines companies will think twice before sponsoring.
The situation now is clearly wrong, but at least it's objective and teams and sponsor know from the start what is needed for PT.
Check out my ManGame team here
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 10-10-2012 10:23
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
tyriion wrote:
You need objective rules though, otherwise companies will never invest. Most teams get loads of money so they can race the TdF. If you are not PT you are not guaranteed a spot, so if the decision who is PT and who isn't can be made by arbitrary guidelines companies will think twice before sponsoring.
The situation now is clearly wrong, but at least it's objective and teams and sponsor know from the start what is needed for PT.
and that is why a points system is needed
but the current one is terrible
simple way to improve it. Riders cant take their points with them to a new team. If you earn a point for a team, that team keeps it if you leave.
|
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 10-10-2012 11:34
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
Deadpool wrote:
issoisso wrote:
Deadpool wrote:
Wait, Roger de Vlaeminck finished fourth that year? Must've been a weak field or a flat course.
Bertolgio won, Galdos 2nd, and Gimondi well back in third. I'm going with weak field. The guys in 5th and 8th don't even have wikipedia pages.
De Vlaeminck could climb extremely well. Of the seven stages he won in that Giro, 2 were major mountain stages. But he was inconsistent. He lost 4 minutes on the first mountain finish and a bunch more on the Stelvio.
Still finished 4th due to time bonuses (7 stage wins, better than Merckx) and several of the contenders losing 10 minutes or more in single days due to De Vlaeminck's aggression in the hills leaving them behind splits.
That's true, and is irrelevant to what I said (well, the inconsistent part is relevant). He certainly didn't do as well in Tours with significant amounts of riding in the high mountains, because of that inconsistency (and how it's much easier to lose ten minutes then it is to gain, say 5).
Ian Butler wrote:
De Vlaeminck was possibly even a better climber than Merckx himself. That's open for discussion, of course, but imo he was. Though Merckx was better all around, and had endless stamina and fighting spirit.
Worth remembering too that Merckx becomes an entirely different climber when he gets punched in the kidney, which I think is around this time.
Sorry for coming back to this, but I made a mistake in identity, I realize now: I mixed De Vlaeminck with Van Impe
Van Impe was possibly a better climber than Merckx, not De Vlaeminck |
| |
|
|
| Deadpool |
Posted on 10-10-2012 13:20
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 06-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ian Butler wrote:
Deadpool wrote:
issoisso wrote:
Deadpool wrote:
Wait, Roger de Vlaeminck finished fourth that year? Must've been a weak field or a flat course.
Bertolgio won, Galdos 2nd, and Gimondi well back in third. I'm going with weak field. The guys in 5th and 8th don't even have wikipedia pages.
De Vlaeminck could climb extremely well. Of the seven stages he won in that Giro, 2 were major mountain stages. But he was inconsistent. He lost 4 minutes on the first mountain finish and a bunch more on the Stelvio.
Still finished 4th due to time bonuses (7 stage wins, better than Merckx) and several of the contenders losing 10 minutes or more in single days due to De Vlaeminck's aggression in the hills leaving them behind splits.
That's true, and is irrelevant to what I said (well, the inconsistent part is relevant). He certainly didn't do as well in Tours with significant amounts of riding in the high mountains, because of that inconsistency (and how it's much easier to lose ten minutes then it is to gain, say 5).
Ian Butler wrote:
De Vlaeminck was possibly even a better climber than Merckx himself. That's open for discussion, of course, but imo he was. Though Merckx was better all around, and had endless stamina and fighting spirit.
Worth remembering too that Merckx becomes an entirely different climber when he gets punched in the kidney, which I think is around this time.
Sorry for coming back to this, but I made a mistake in identity, I realize now: I mixed De Vlaeminck with Van Impe
Van Impe was possibly a better climber than Merckx, not De Vlaeminck
Van Impe was a little bit of an opportunist at times, but I'd definitely still place him above Merckx in terms of climbing ability. The thing that sets Merckx apart isn't his pure talent. Both he and Hinault were very talented riders who became GOATs because they added Voigt-level determination and guts to that talent. To give an example with one of Hinault's great rivals, it's one of the reasons Fignon seems like somewhat of a disappointment in retrospect. One of the most talented riders ever, but it took him far too long to learn how to fight, and so he only took three grand tours, when on talent alone he should have had 5-7.
Oh, and I think isso will agree. I believe he once said (an I apologize if I'm mis-remembering) that in his opinion Van Impe and Fuente are the greatest climbers ever.
Edited by Deadpool on 10-10-2012 13:21
|
| |
|
|
| Farmer Sam |
Posted on 10-10-2012 15:14
|
Domestique
Posts: 542
Joined: 14-05-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
Former 'domestique' of Eddy Merckx and winner of the 1969 Fleche Wallonne Jos Huysman has died at the age of 70. RIP. |
| |
|
|
| Deadpool |
Posted on 10-10-2012 15:23
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 06-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Farmer Sam wrote:
Former 'domestique' of Eddy Merckx and winner of the 1969 Fleche Wallonne Jos Huysman has died at the age of 70. RIP.
That's very sad. Huysman is incredible to watch when you look up old Merckx tapes. They'll be talking about Merckx putting Molteni on the front to chase, and you'll see Huysman on the front motoring over a climb. Then, 60km later, they'll go back to the chase, and sure enough, they'll be Huysman still motoring, looking like he hasn't slowed down a modicum.
Great rider. |
| |
|
|
| aidanvn13 |
Posted on 10-10-2012 17:38
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2797
Joined: 06-11-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
The Jens Voigt of that era (tougher actually). Amazing rider and an awesome spirit.
RIP.
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-10-2012 17:42
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Abelbaba wrote:
but some teams do not even exsist 3 years...
like greenege, how would you judge them?
but mayby just dont give the points to the rider? so you have sepperate rankings for individual and teams.
in that case you don't do transfers for point?
Simple.
Points count for teams only, but there are only 15 spots in the WT. That way, new teams get wild cards easily.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 10-10-2012 17:44
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Deadpool wrote:
Van Impe was a little bit of an opportunist at times, but I'd definitely still place him above Merckx in terms of climbing ability. The thing that sets Merckx apart isn't his pure talent. Both he and Hinault were very talented riders who became GOATs because they added Voigt-level determination and guts to that talent. To give an example with one of Hinault's great rivals, it's one of the reasons Fignon seems like somewhat of a disappointment in retrospect. One of the most talented riders ever, but it took him far too long to learn how to fight, and so he only took three grand tours, when on talent alone he should have had 5-7.
Fignon was extremely dominant before the injury. It was the injury that ruined him (plus the depression, the tapeworm and EPO robbed him of results in different years)
Deadpool wrote:
Oh, and I think isso will agree. I believe he once said (an I apologize if I'm mis-remembering) that in his opinion Van Impe and Fuente are the greatest climbers ever.
I actually don't rate Van Impe as highly as most. Gaul, Pantani, Fuentes. Although naming Gaul is cheating because he could win TTs in the biggest races.
Edited by issoisso on 10-10-2012 17:44
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
