valverde321 wrote:
What? Perget is a decent climber
He has done a lot to justify only 73 MO imo. 24 at the Vuelta last year, thats finishing ahead of Zubeldia, Machado, Anton, Duarte, Txurukka, Kessiakoff.
5th in the Route de Sud.
17th at Giro del Trentino. He finished around Tiralongo, Niemiec, Pirazzi, Sella, Nibali, Losada.
And I believe he was quite attacking in the 2010 Tour leading the KoM for a few days.
How can you say he deserves a 65?
65 was maybe a bit low, but he isn't a 73. His Vuelta was more about stability, his top mountain stage finish was a 34th place. He is more a REC rider than a MO rider, he's at 72 REC ATM, a rise to 74-75 could be fine. I was a little too fast about his MO, remember that he was barely to be seen on TV in the Vuelta and was beaten by riders like Majka, Jufre, etc.
His Giro was also a total waste except a 29th at the Stelvio (again, late in the race). If he gets 70-71 MO and 75 REC he could still get decent results if he's in top form.
valverde321 wrote:
What? Perget is a decent climber
He has done a lot to justify only 73 MO imo. 24 at the Vuelta last year, thats finishing ahead of Zubeldia, Machado, Anton, Duarte, Txurukka, Kessiakoff.
5th in the Route de Sud.
17th at Giro del Trentino. He finished around Tiralongo, Niemiec, Pirazzi, Sella, Nibali, Losada.
And I believe he was quite attacking in the 2010 Tour leading the KoM for a few days.
How can you say he deserves a 65?
65 was maybe a bit low, but he isn't a 73. His Vuelta was more about stability, his top mountain stage finish was a 34th place. He is more a REC rider than a MO rider, he's at 72 REC ATM, a rise to 74-75 could be fine. I was a little too fast about his MO, remember that he was barely to be seen on TV in the Vuelta and was beaten by riders like Majka, Jufre, etc.
His Giro was also a total waste except a 29th at the Stelvio (again, late in the race). If he gets 70-71 MO and 75 REC he could still get decent results if he's in top form.
I still dont see how he isn't a 73 to you. I think its probably perfect for him. Can get decent Top 50 results with those stats, but wont ever win anything big. Even with high REC in PCM, 70 mountain is not going to do anything for him. And just because he wasn't on TV, it doesn't take away his results, which he clearly has.
75 REC is insane for him. He's not nearly that good, and riding the Giro as a team-mate his goal wasn't to get results, so I can't class it as a failure at all.
Edited by valverde321 on 13-08-2012 21:12
valverde321 wrote:
What? Perget is a decent climber
He has done a lot to justify only 73 MO imo. 24 at the Vuelta last year, thats finishing ahead of Zubeldia, Machado, Anton, Duarte, Txurukka, Kessiakoff.
5th in the Route de Sud.
17th at Giro del Trentino. He finished around Tiralongo, Niemiec, Pirazzi, Sella, Nibali, Losada.
And I believe he was quite attacking in the 2010 Tour leading the KoM for a few days.
How can you say he deserves a 65?
65 was maybe a bit low, but he isn't a 73. His Vuelta was more about stability, his top mountain stage finish was a 34th place. He is more a REC rider than a MO rider, he's at 72 REC ATM, a rise to 74-75 could be fine. I was a little too fast about his MO, remember that he was barely to be seen on TV in the Vuelta and was beaten by riders like Majka, Jufre, etc.
His Giro was also a total waste except a 29th at the Stelvio (again, late in the race). If he gets 70-71 MO and 75 REC he could still get decent results if he's in top form.
I still dont see how he isn't a 73. I think its probably perfect for him. Can get decent Top 50 results with those stats, but wont ever win anything big. Even with high REC in PCM, 70 mountain is not going to do anything for him. And just because he wasn't on TV, it doesn't take away his results, which he clearly has.
75 REC is insane for him. He's not nearly that good, and riding the Giro as a team-mate his goal wasn't to get results, so I can't class it as a failure at all.
He had placings around 60-70 on the other mountain stages, then he started to do better, topping with a 29th on the Stelvio. That proves that he has good stability and very good recovery.
valverde321 wrote:
What? Perget is a decent climber
He has done a lot to justify only 73 MO imo. 24 at the Vuelta last year, thats finishing ahead of Zubeldia, Machado, Anton, Duarte, Txurukka, Kessiakoff.
5th in the Route de Sud.
17th at Giro del Trentino. He finished around Tiralongo, Niemiec, Pirazzi, Sella, Nibali, Losada.
And I believe he was quite attacking in the 2010 Tour leading the KoM for a few days.
How can you say he deserves a 65?
65 was maybe a bit low, but he isn't a 73. His Vuelta was more about stability, his top mountain stage finish was a 34th place. He is more a REC rider than a MO rider, he's at 72 REC ATM, a rise to 74-75 could be fine. I was a little too fast about his MO, remember that he was barely to be seen on TV in the Vuelta and was beaten by riders like Majka, Jufre, etc.
His Giro was also a total waste except a 29th at the Stelvio (again, late in the race). If he gets 70-71 MO and 75 REC he could still get decent results if he's in top form.
I still dont see how he isn't a 73. I think its probably perfect for him. Can get decent Top 50 results with those stats, but wont ever win anything big. Even with high REC in PCM, 70 mountain is not going to do anything for him. And just because he wasn't on TV, it doesn't take away his results, which he clearly has.
75 REC is insane for him. He's not nearly that good, and riding the Giro as a team-mate his goal wasn't to get results, so I can't class it as a failure at all.
He had placings around 60-70 on the other mountain stages, then he started to do better, topping with a 29th on the Stelvio. That proves that he has good stability and very good recovery.
To me thats more a sign of him getting over the big early climbs, and then holding on during the final climb. An even better sign that he's a good climber, rather than him being amazing at recovering.
He placed poorly in the later weeks mountain stages too. Obviously his recovery is pretty good, but he is nothing special, imo. For a mountain attacker/ team-mate, 75 REC is an awful lot. Even on further inspection I believe his stats are pretty good the way they are.
I think people need to stop overating GC guuys recovery and underrating other guys recovery. Alll GC guys have a high stat, when they only get worse, and guys who get better have worse Recovery. I agree with Sweaty. I'd give him 72 mtn and 75 recovery.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
baseballlover312 wrote:
TJVG should have 75-76, Pinot struggled in the Alps at first but rebounded, 74.
Pinot was better than Van Garderen in the mountains, even though he struggled with stomach problems on the stage to Bagneres-de-Luchon. I can't see why Tejay should get a higher recovery stat than him.
baseballlover312 wrote:
TJVG should have 75-76, Pinot struggled in the Alps at first but rebounded, 74.
Pinot was better than Van Garderen in the mountains, even though he struggled with stomach problems on the stage to Bagneres-de-Luchon. I can't see why Tejay should get a higher recovery stat than him.
Agreed, I thought Pinot was one of the best climbers if not, the best climber in the final few mountain stages, where as in the first week he was basically just "there".
Concerning talents, you also have to keep in mind that they develop during a career.
For example, Tejay really shouldn't have TdF stats at the beginning of a career, but he should have a potential that allows him to become what he showed at the Tour.
My point is that if you give him TdF-stats, he will be way beyond his TdF-level once you reach the TdF in the game. That's not realistic, so his stats should be lower at the beginning of a career. That goes for all talents.
i thought some while at Kittel , maybe that 80 is a liitle bit to much , he didint win a stage in an inmportant race this year , (not Eneco )but he is talented and he abandonned in TDF . The same for Rojas he was injured , not his fault that he didint have wins .
i thought some while at Kittel , maybe that 80 is a liitle bit to much , he didint win a stage in an inmportant race this year , (not Eneco )but he is talented and he abandonned in TDF . The same for Rojas he was injured , not his fault that he didint have wins .
P-N had no pure flat stages, he was ill in TdF, and Eneco is the only other WT race for him this year, and he clearly dominated there. What do you expect? For me, there's no need at all to think about lowering him.
i thought some while at Kittel , maybe that 80 is a liitle bit to much , he didint win a stage in an inmportant race this year , (not Eneco )but he is talented and he abandonned in TDF . The same for Rojas he was injured , not his fault that he didint have wins .
Farrar should have 77. With 76, he will be mixed in with worser leadout men.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy
i thought some while at Kittel , maybe that 80 is a liitle bit to much , he didint win a stage in an inmportant race this year , (not Eneco )but he is talented and he abandonned in TDF . The same for Rojas he was injured , not his fault that he didint have wins .
Farrar should have 77. With 76, he will be mixed in with worser leadout men.
i thought some while at Kittel , maybe that 80 is a liitle bit to much , he didint win a stage in an inmportant race this year , (not Eneco )but he is talented and he abandonned in TDF . The same for Rojas he was injured , not his fault that he didint have wins .
Farrar should have 77. With 76, he will be mixed in with worser leadout men.
Guardini down to 76/77 SP.
He beated Cavendish in a straight sprint, the day after a tough mountain stage where he finished dead last. 79/79 for me with low secondary stats.
(surprised to see no one had mentioned that yet 
