|
Vuelta a España - Week 2
|
| ruben |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:08
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Gesink is 2 months younger than me, which means he is 26 for at least 3/4 years.
As for the rest of your post, garbage. |
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:11
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
ruben wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
kumazan wrote:
Gesink is better than De Gendt, I don't think anyone could seriously defend a different position. But, for a rider who is 1000 times worse, De Gendt has a GT podium, and Gesink hasn't any. There's more than strength in cycling (something that can't be appreciated in the current Vuelta route, which is one of the reasons I despise it).
Strength of impacts on the ground is still a matter of strength, however you look at it, IMO. 
Agreed with the rest (of course).
Yeah like luck. If Mosquera doesn't decide to go down in the Vuelta 2009, Gesink had a GT podium and we would not even have thid discussion.
Cycling has so much random factors...
Of course. But that's from 3 years ago, and Gesink hasn't come close to podium a GT in the meantime. I can't be all due to bad luck.
|
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:13
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
ruben wrote:
Aquarius wrote:
kumazan wrote:
Gesink is better than De Gendt, I don't think anyone could seriously defend a different position. But, for a rider who is 1000 times worse, De Gendt has a GT podium, and Gesink hasn't any. There's more than strength in cycling (something that can't be appreciated in the current Vuelta route, which is one of the reasons I despise it).
Strength of impacts on the ground is still a matter of strength, however you look at it, IMO.
Agreed with the rest (of course).
Yeah like luck. If Mosquera doesn't decide to go down in the Vuelta 2009, Gesink had a GT podium and we would not even have thid discussion.
Cycling has so much random factors...
Of course. But that's from 3 years ago, and Gesink hasn't come close to podium a GT in the meantime. I can't be all due to bad luck.
But in Gesinks case, we can actually prove that it is a case of bad luck. I can sum all it up and you'll go crying if that was you. |
| |
|
|
| MartijnVDD |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:15
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 801
Joined: 26-06-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
ruben wrote:
Seriously, baseballover etc. Why do you even start a discussion with retards? Or Belgians on this matter?
It's useless.
Attacking the arguer(s) rather than his (their) arguments is a proof of weakness, so please, don't make a fool of yourself.
Edited by MartijnVDD on 31-08-2012 22:16
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:15
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
|
| |
|
|
| aymen |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:19
|
Stagiare
Posts: 179
Joined: 20-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
Agreed  |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:28
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
same can be said for Farrar....
but while Gesink is a good climber and tt'er (good GC rider) you have to be able to get through the flat stages first...
this is the sign of a really great contender.
Armstrong won the TDF 7 times, and he almost never crashed or got caught behind a split in those 7 years (i cant think of one off the top of my head)
While Gesink can be a good climber etc. his crashes arn't bad luck (not all of them), they are a lack of awareness and bad positioning on the flat, things which he can control
|
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:30
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
All bar 1 where bad luck. Only the one where he broke his leg last year was his own fault (steering mistake). In all others it was an unavoidable massive pile up either AT the front of the peloton or somewhere else.
So remember, only 1. |
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:35
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Unavoidable for Gesink, because no other major GC contender crashes as much as him, except maybe Piti. No sorry, I don't buy the bad luck argument.
|
| |
|
|
| aymen |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:36
|
Stagiare
Posts: 179
Joined: 20-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
same can be said for Farrar....
but while Gesink is a good climber and tt'er (good GC rider) you have to be able to get through the flat stages first...
this is the sign of a really great contender.
Armstrong won the TDF 7 times, and he almost never crashed or got caught behind a split in those 7 years (i cant think of one off the top of my head)
While Gesink can be a good climber etc. his crashes arn't bad luck (not all of them), they are a lack of awareness and bad positioning on the flat, things which he can control
No he did in 2001 and Ulrich was dumb and much fair-play to wait him, and then he paid Armstrong won Team, Clearly dopping at that time |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 26-11-2024 01:55
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| aymen |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:36
|
Stagiare
Posts: 179
Joined: 20-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
same can be said for Farrar....
but while Gesink is a good climber and tt'er (good GC rider) you have to be able to get through the flat stages first...
this is the sign of a really great contender.
Armstrong won the TDF 7 times, and he almost never crashed or got caught behind a split in those 7 years (i cant think of one off the top of my head)
While Gesink can be a good climber etc. his crashes arn't bad luck (not all of them), they are a lack of awareness and bad positioning on the flat, things which he can control
No he did in 2001 and Ulrich was dumb and much fair-play to wait him, and then he paid Armstrong won Team, Clearly dopping at that time |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:39
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
aymen wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
same can be said for Farrar....
but while Gesink is a good climber and tt'er (good GC rider) you have to be able to get through the flat stages first...
this is the sign of a really great contender.
Armstrong won the TDF 7 times, and he almost never crashed or got caught behind a split in those 7 years (i cant think of one off the top of my head)
While Gesink can be a good climber etc. his crashes arn't bad luck (not all of them), they are a lack of awareness and bad positioning on the flat, things which he can control
No he did in 2001 and Ulrich was dumb and much fair-play to wait him, and then he paid Armstrong won Team, Clearly dopping at that time
how could i forget that stage....
doping has nothing to do with it, as everyone then was doped
just illustrating that not crashing is needed to be a GC contender and that luck is not the only thing involved
|
| |
|
|
| aymen |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:42
|
Stagiare
Posts: 179
Joined: 20-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
aymen wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
same can be said for Farrar....
but while Gesink is a good climber and tt'er (good GC rider) you have to be able to get through the flat stages first...
this is the sign of a really great contender.
Armstrong won the TDF 7 times, and he almost never crashed or got caught behind a split in those 7 years (i cant think of one off the top of my head)
While Gesink can be a good climber etc. his crashes arn't bad luck (not all of them), they are a lack of awareness and bad positioning on the flat, things which he can control
No he did in 2001 and Ulrich was dumb and much fair-play to wait him, and then he paid Armstrong won Team, Clearly dopping at that time
how could i forget that stage....
doping has nothing to do with it, as everyone then was doped
just illustrating that not crashing is needed to be a GC contender and that luck is not the only thing involved
 True that everyone was doped and Valverde in Valdezcaray also done a great work, |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:45
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
You guys are missing the whole point of this Vuelta. Froome looks to be in trouble, not because of his form, but because he is the only one that isn't doping!
|
| |
|
|
| aymen |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:52
|
Stagiare
Posts: 179
Joined: 20-08-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
You guys are missing the whole point of this Vuelta. Froome looks to be in trouble, not because of his form, but because he is the only one that isn't doping!
True |
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:56
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
MartijnVDD wrote:
ruben wrote:
Seriously, baseballover etc. Why do you even start a discussion with retards? Or Belgians on this matter?
It's useless.
Attacking the arguer(s) rather than his (their) arguments is a proof of weakness, so please, don't make a fool of yourself.
Not when arguers are proven to be an idiot (aymen) or clearly biased (you're a belgian).
Same reason I don't really take part in this discussion because I'm Dutch and therefore biased. |
| |
|
|
| ruben |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:57
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7721
Joined: 23-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
Unavoidable for Gesink, because no other major GC contender crashes as much as him, except maybe Piti. No sorry, I don't buy the bad luck argument. And I don't believe in god.
Everyone their own beliefs.  |
| |
|
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:57
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
You guys are missing the whole point of this Vuelta. Froome looks to be in trouble, not because of his form, but because he is the only one that isn't doping!
amen for that..only without a doping you can keep top form 3 months 
Edited by Guido Mukk on 31-08-2012 22:58
|
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 31-08-2012 22:58
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
aymen wrote:
alexkr00 wrote:
You guys are missing the whole point of this Vuelta. Froome looks to be in trouble, not because of his form, but because he is the only one that isn't doping!
True
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| issoisso |
Posted on 31-08-2012 23:02
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 22918
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
Unavoidable for Gesink, because no other major GC contender crashes as much as him, except maybe Piti. No sorry, I don't buy the bad luck argument.
I can name another GC guy who crashed as much as Gesink: Zülle. Who was also a horrible bike handler.
People who crash a lot are either deaf or have poor bike handling skills (see Soler). End of story.
aymen wrote:
TheManxMissile wrote:
kumazan wrote:
A crash is bad luck. Two might be bad luck. All the crashes Gesink has had can't be bad luck. Impossible.
same can be said for Farrar....
but while Gesink is a good climber and tt'er (good GC rider) you have to be able to get through the flat stages first...
this is the sign of a really great contender.
Armstrong won the TDF 7 times, and he almost never crashed or got caught behind a split in those 7 years (i cant think of one off the top of my head)
While Gesink can be a good climber etc. his crashes arn't bad luck (not all of them), they are a lack of awareness and bad positioning on the flat, things which he can control
No he did in 2001 and Ulrich was dumb and much fair-play to wait him, and then he paid Armstrong won Team, Clearly dopping at that time
That was 2003. It's amazing just how many little things that ARE in fact dumb luck went against Ullrich that year. If just a couple hadn't, he'd have won the Tour.
2001 was the less remembered event, when Ullrich crashed and Armstrong waited. And then Armstrong repeated Hinault's "look" of 20 years previously, and the american fans went ballistic "OMG THATS SO ORIGINAL"
Edited by issoisso on 31-08-2012 23:05
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)
