|
Who's the best ?
|
| Xavier |
Posted on 02-05-2009 22:26
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 933
Joined: 21-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ruben wrote:
Well that's normal really. For example, take the Netherlands:
After years of absense in mountain stages, a certain Remmert Wielinga finished with the best riders in mountain stages in the Dauphiné Libéré in 2003. Result? He was called the next big thing in Holland, compared to guys like Steven Rooks and Erik Breukink. Result? Nothing, he never amounted to anything after that.
Then Pieter Weening, in his first pro year, he attacked in nearly every uphill stage he could find. In his second year, he won a stage in the Tour and finished 2nd in the Tour of Poland. Result? The people expected him to be the next Dutch Tour winner, ofcourse he never amounted to anything as the expectations were against way too high.
Then came Thomas Dekker, now here is a guy who'd actually dominate in the youth categories and who kept making progression. A criterium international stage in his first year against Basso, Julich and Jaksche. Also a Pro Tour win with the ITT in the Tour of Pologne (against Kirchen, Brajkovic). Then the Tirreno win in 2006, the Romandie win in 2007, the good classics in 2008.
Result? Forgotten after the fight with Rabo, now the public had already found a new start:
Robert Gesink, although still not haven won anything big, he was attacking in mountain stages, and unlike Dekker, he doesn't shout out his ambitions. That is something which Dutch people like, stay down to earth and stay calm. They don't like 'Italian' Dekker. And ofcourse, now Gesink was heralded as new Tour winner after finishing 2nd on the Ventoux (Pn 2008) and 4th in Dauphine and 7th in Vuelta.
In the meantime, there was another one, Bauke Mollema, who won the Tour of l'Avenir, and at that time, immediately people claimed he would be better than Gesink.
See the insanity? As soon as young rider puts in a good result, he is immediately deemed 'better' as other young riders. Or as the best.
So now the Kreuziger mania can begin, until Taaramae wins the Tour of Catalunya, and everyone is going to think Taaramae is the new Contador.
I like Gesink as well and I agree that hes down to earth and what not 
but I have a question for you Ruben:
Boom does the same as Dekker right? Both have a 'big mouth'(nothing wrong with that, this is not an attack on either!); I mean he also says clearly what his goals/ambitions are, what he wants to achieve etc..
And you say Dutch ppl prefer the Gesink approach over the Dekker/Boom approach right? So my question is: why is Boom perceived as ambitious in a good way, and Dekker more as "Italian"/arrrogant/whatever-you-want-to-call-it guy
Why is Boom 'liked' and Dekker 'disliked' when they in essence both do the same thing?
Edited by Xavier on 02-05-2009 22:28
|
| |
|
|
| rovven7 |
Posted on 02-05-2009 23:52
|
Under 23
Posts: 78
Joined: 25-12-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
It's extremely easy to get confused about who to vote with. While Gesink is and probably will be the best climber among those mentioned, he lacks a lot of things. He's not going to be the best climber, so he won't dominate any grand tour. He's kinda weak on the flat, is an average/good TT-er, and lacks sprinting, so he won't get any great result in the classics either.
While, Dekker, for instance.. Well, he's amazing. To respect the PCM order: he's good on the flats, good on the long climbs, very good on hills, a great TT-er, and, last, a quality which may became extremely important these days, with all these close pelotons in the big races, he's a good enough sprinter. Regarding Cunego, which is my favourite rider, the difference between winning (two of the three Giro di Lombardia wins, 1 or 2 wins in the Giro d'Italia, and basically all his wins throughout his career) and placing second or third in those races, is his sprint. So i'd say Dekker indeed has what it takes to become the best out of those guys. |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 02-05-2009 23:55
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
the fact that Gesink can't sprint doesn't mean that he can't win classics. The Schleck's did that and they are even worse.
Also he is the youngest on that list. Still a lot to improve.
|
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 03-05-2009 00:05
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Appearently Rovven7 hasn't been keeping up Gesink's time trials the past 2 years.
Calling him average/weak in in flat/tt's is not very smart. If you consider his results in those time trials. Usually top 10 the past 2 years. At the very least always top 20. Only short prologues are maybe a problem. |
| |
|
|
| rovven7 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 00:12
|
Under 23
Posts: 78
Joined: 25-12-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
You should read again my statement. Average/weak is definetely not the same as average/good. If Cancellara is excellent, and guys like Menchov, Contador, Dekker and co. are very good, Gesink is no more than good.
And Alex, as i said, the Schlecks are good enough to make the difference on a climb. Gesink isn't. For now, at least. |
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 03-05-2009 07:45
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
what now..Gesink cant climb?
This is what he do! I like he's style.."slow burner"..always there. He will be great GT rider.. |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 08:59
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
rovven7 wrote:
You should read again my statement. Average/weak is definetely not the same as average/good. If Cancellara is excellent, and guys like Menchov, Contador, Dekker and co. are very good, Gesink is no more than good.
And Alex, as i said, the Schlecks are good enough to make the difference on a climb. Gesink isn't. For now, at least.
remember who made the attack in Amstel. Then Kroon and Ivanov came after him.
Paris Nice 08: Only Evans can stay with him on Mount Ventoux.
Dauphine Libere 08: Several stages where he started the set up the pace and let a lot of guys behind.
also in ToC 08: Winning the hardest stage.
As Guido said that's his specialty... climbing.
And on TT he isn't so poor. (u19 Dutch Champion in 2004)
Maybe he can do so well like the guys you mentioned but I remember a guy winning Le Tour last year, that Gesink can clearly beat him in a TT. 
Edited by alexkr00 on 03-05-2009 09:01
|
| |
|
|
| Michal4444 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 09:23
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 250
Joined: 27-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
For me close call. Gesink or Kreuziger - Gesink is better climber but Kreuziger is better TT I think. I couldn´t choose from skilles so patriotism won. However - only think that saved his talent was moving out from my country and it hurts... |
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 03-05-2009 10:05
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gesink and Vuelta for me..he was there with Contador, Leipheimer and Sastre..this was enough for me. He is tall guy ..but seems like when % going over 10..he looks even better. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 08:24
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 10:22
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
Guido Mukk wrote:
Gesink and Vuelta for me..he was there with Contador, Leipheimer and Sastre..this was enough for me. He is tall guy ..but seems like when % going over 10..he looks even better.
Dekker is tall too, but he isn't so skinny. Maybe that could be a reason why he is a little bit better than Gesink in the TTs. But that's why Gesink could have an advantage over the mountains...
|
| |
|
|
| rovven7 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 12:06
|
Under 23
Posts: 78
Joined: 25-12-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gesink is an amazing climber, but that's all. He can't do the difference on a climb. He can't distance everybody, for now. He's no Contador, Basso or Schleck. He finished 7 in the weakest grand tour. He wasn't there with Contador. He was there with Zaugg and Mosquera. Stop putting pressure on young guns making them the best when it's not the case. Let them grow. Gesink is just among the best climbers of the world. That's not gonna win him a grand tour, for now. I know it's cool to believe that suddenly a very young guy can beat the old guys, but that's just an altered form of hypocrisy. He's a very good climber and a good TT-er at his best. Not a single result he had so far points to other thing. |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 12:51
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
Contador is doped. Basso was in Puerto.
The Schlecks are doped or at least Frank [/Waghlon]
I don't want Gesink compete with those as he has no chance agains the dopers.
|
| |
|
|
| ponka00 |
Posted on 03-05-2009 13:00
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 820
Joined: 27-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Guido Mukk wrote:
Gesink and Vuelta for me..he was there with Contador, Leipheimer and Sastre..this was enough for me. He is tall guy ..but seems like when % going over 10..he looks even better.
He weighs just 2 kg more than both Andy and Fränk and 7 more than Contador...
EDIT: He also weighs just 1 kg more than Cadel Evans too 
Edited by ponka00 on 03-05-2009 13:01
|
| |
|
|
| aavf |
Posted on 03-05-2009 18:24
|
Stagiare
Posts: 151
Joined: 17-09-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
At the moment it's between Gesink and Kreuziger, some of the others can join them in the future. They're similar in potential, even born in the same month and year. Gesink maybe a bit better climber but we haven't seen them against each other in a GT, we'll see in the Tour. Kreuziger better in TT. Many thing can make one of them better, the course of GTs (look to be turning less TT oriented), strength of the team, intelligence, injuries, luck. The young guns are definitively rising, my favorite is Kreuziger because he's classy on the bike. |
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 03-05-2009 18:51
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
Guido Mukk wrote:
Gesink and Vuelta for me..he was there with Contador, Leipheimer and Sastre..this was enough for me. He is tall guy ..but seems like when % going over 10..he looks even better.
Dekker is tall too, but he isn't so skinny. Maybe that could be a reason why he is a little bit better than Gesink in the TTs. But that's why Gesink could have an advantage over the mountains... Dekker is skinny as fuck. Gesink just looks even more skinny because he is 1m92, Dekker is 'only' 1m86. |
| |
|
|
| ursul |
Posted on 04-05-2009 23:48
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1320
Joined: 15-05-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gesink his actually the best climber of them. |
| |
|
