dienblad wrote:
1. Stop comparing this crash and the riding by BMC (and following them by Matthews and friends) with the Belkin-Valverde thing in the Tour 13, or the 2010 Tour thing in the Ardennes, as they are completely different situations (Valverde: 1 rider with a mechanical far before the finish, and Tour Ardennes still 40km (?) before the finish).
You're right, what Belkin did was much worse. BMC rode in the final, where they're supposed to ride, Belkin rode full throttle far from the finish line to get rid of a rival they had a vendetta on. This situation is a lot more like Bouhannis win the other day. A crash in the middle of a final, Bouhanni should have waited for the other sprinters to get back on to get a fair sprint.
Can't you read or interprete a text? I said stop comparing, as those were different situations. So what do you do? Comparing again.
And to compare it with the Bari stage: everybody got the same time there, instead of today. That's different, loosing a stage, or loosing the GC....
Don't even try to have a discussion with that guy.
dienblad wrote:
1. Stop comparing this crash and the riding by BMC (and following them by Matthews and friends) with the Belkin-Valverde thing in the Tour 13, or the 2010 Tour thing in the Ardennes, as they are completely different situations (Valverde: 1 rider with a mechanical far before the finish, and Tour Ardennes still 40km (?) before the finish).
You're right, what Belkin did was much worse. BMC rode in the final, where they're supposed to ride, Belkin rode full throttle far from the finish line to get rid of a rival they had a vendetta on. This situation is a lot more like Bouhannis win the other day. A crash in the middle of a final, Bouhanni should have waited for the other sprinters to get back on to get a fair sprint.
Can't you read or interprete a text? I said stop comparing, as those were different situations. So what do you do? Comparing again.
And to compare it with the Bari stage: everybody got the same time there, instead of today. That's different, loosing a stage, or loosing the GC....
Maybe you shouldn't take what I write so litteral. No rules mean you have to decided in the moment what is the right thing to do, and us viewers get to judge their decision. When there are no clear rules about it we have to compare to similiar situation if we want conclusions. Obviously a sprint stage is very different from a hill top finish, and the GC is a lot different from a stage win. One rider is also different from several GC riders, but this is all open to interpritation. According to many members of this forum Valverde is not worth as much as 22 riders, which is fair. But the 10 riders behind the 22 riders who lost time today wasn't worth as much as the 22 riders, which is why I try to find the limit. Or maybe people on this forum are just biased and don't care as long as their favourite doesn't lose time to anything but their bad form.
If you stopped a sprint everytime there was a crash then you wouldn't have any sprints. In my opinion they should not have waited, bad positioning doesn't even come into question from the GC contenders as it looks like the crash happened towards the front. It is the risks you take and crashes happen.
dienblad wrote:
1. Stop comparing this crash and the riding by BMC (and following them by Matthews and friends) with the Belkin-Valverde thing in the Tour 13, or the 2010 Tour thing in the Ardennes, as they are completely different situations (Valverde: 1 rider with a mechanical far before the finish, and Tour Ardennes still 40km (?) before the finish).
You're right, what Belkin did was much worse. BMC rode in the final, where they're supposed to ride, Belkin rode full throttle far from the finish line to get rid of a rival they had a vendetta on. This situation is a lot more like Bouhannis win the other day. A crash in the middle of a final, Bouhanni should have waited for the other sprinters to get back on to get a fair sprint.
Not true, since they arranged with OPQS to form echelons, way before Valverde had a mechanical.
This is very far from the point I was trying to make, but it's important to the facts straight, and I honestly don't remember that stage to well, I just sort of took what he wrote and made it look bad.
dienblad wrote:
1. Stop comparing this crash and the riding by BMC (and following them by Matthews and friends) with the Belkin-Valverde thing in the Tour 13, or the 2010 Tour thing in the Ardennes, as they are completely different situations (Valverde: 1 rider with a mechanical far before the finish, and Tour Ardennes still 40km (?) before the finish).
You're right, what Belkin did was much worse. BMC rode in the final, where they're supposed to ride, Belkin rode full throttle far from the finish line to get rid of a rival they had a vendetta on. This situation is a lot more like Bouhannis win the other day. A crash in the middle of a final, Bouhanni should have waited for the other sprinters to get back on to get a fair sprint.
Can't you read or interprete a text? I said stop comparing, as those were different situations. So what do you do? Comparing again.
And to compare it with the Bari stage: everybody got the same time there, instead of today. That's different, loosing a stage, or loosing the GC....
Maybe you shouldn't take what I write so litteral. No rules mean you have to decided in the moment what is the right thing to do, and us viewers get to judge their decision. When there are no clear rules about it we have to compare to similiar situation if we want conclusions. Obviously a sprint stage is very different from a hill top finish, and the GC is a lot different from a stage win. One rider is also different from several GC riders, but this is all open to interpritation. According to many members of this forum Valverde is not worth as much as 22 riders, which is fair. But the 10 riders behind the 22 riders who lost time today wasn't worth as much as the 22 riders, which is why I try to find the limit. Or maybe people on this forum are just biased and don't care as long as their favourite doesn't lose time to anything but their bad form.
If you stopped a sprint everytime there was a crash then you wouldn't have any sprints. In my opinion they should not have waited, bad positioning doesn't even come into question from the GC contenders as it looks like the crash happened towards the front. It is the risks you take and crashes happen.
Which is why you shouldn't stop when there are crashes. The point I was trying to make.
dienblad wrote:
1. Stop comparing this crash and the riding by BMC (and following them by Matthews and friends) with the Belkin-Valverde thing in the Tour 13, or the 2010 Tour thing in the Ardennes, as they are completely different situations (Valverde: 1 rider with a mechanical far before the finish, and Tour Ardennes still 40km (?) before the finish).
You're right, what Belkin did was much worse. BMC rode in the final, where they're supposed to ride, Belkin rode full throttle far from the finish line to get rid of a rival they had a vendetta on. This situation is a lot more like Bouhannis win the other day. A crash in the middle of a final, Bouhanni should have waited for the other sprinters to get back on to get a fair sprint.
Can't you read or interprete a text? I said stop comparing, as those were different situations. So what do you do? Comparing again.
And to compare it with the Bari stage: everybody got the same time there, instead of today. That's different, loosing a stage, or loosing the GC....
Maybe you shouldn't take what I write so litteral. No rules mean you have to decided in the moment what is the right thing to do, and us viewers get to judge their decision. When there are no clear rules about it we have to compare to similiar situation if we want conclusions. Obviously a sprint stage is very different from a hill top finish, and the GC is a lot different from a stage win. One rider is also different from several GC riders, but this is all open to interpritation. According to many members of this forum Valverde is not worth as much as 22 riders, which is fair. But the 10 riders behind the 22 riders who lost time today wasn't worth as much as the 22 riders, which is why I try to find the limit. Or maybe people on this forum are just biased and don't care as long as their favourite doesn't lose time to anything but their bad form.
If you stopped a sprint everytime there was a crash then you wouldn't have any sprints. In my opinion they should not have waited, bad positioning doesn't even come into question from the GC contenders as it looks like the crash happened towards the front. It is the risks you take and crashes happen.
Which is why you shouldn't stop when there are crashes. The point I was trying to make.
But on the other hand if the crash happened earlier into he stage then yes they should wait for any GC contenders caught behind.
dienblad wrote:
1. Stop comparing this crash and the riding by BMC (and following them by Matthews and friends) with the Belkin-Valverde thing in the Tour 13, or the 2010 Tour thing in the Ardennes, as they are completely different situations (Valverde: 1 rider with a mechanical far before the finish, and Tour Ardennes still 40km (?) before the finish).
You're right, what Belkin did was much worse. BMC rode in the final, where they're supposed to ride, Belkin rode full throttle far from the finish line to get rid of a rival they had a vendetta on. This situation is a lot more like Bouhannis win the other day. A crash in the middle of a final, Bouhanni should have waited for the other sprinters to get back on to get a fair sprint.
Can't you read or interprete a text? I said stop comparing, as those were different situations. So what do you do? Comparing again.
And to compare it with the Bari stage: everybody got the same time there, instead of today. That's different, loosing a stage, or loosing the GC....
Maybe you shouldn't take what I write so litteral. No rules mean you have to decided in the moment what is the right thing to do, and us viewers get to judge their decision. When there are no clear rules about it we have to compare to similiar situation if we want conclusions. Obviously a sprint stage is very different from a hill top finish, and the GC is a lot different from a stage win. One rider is also different from several GC riders, but this is all open to interpritation. According to many members of this forum Valverde is not worth as much as 22 riders, which is fair. But the 10 riders behind the 22 riders who lost time today wasn't worth as much as the 22 riders, which is why I try to find the limit. Or maybe people on this forum are just biased and don't care as long as their favourite doesn't lose time to anything but their bad form.
If you stopped a sprint everytime there was a crash then you wouldn't have any sprints. In my opinion they should not have waited, bad positioning doesn't even come into question from the GC contenders as it looks like the crash happened towards the front. It is the risks you take and crashes happen.
Which is why you shouldn't stop when there are crashes. The point I was trying to make.
But on the other hand if the crash happened earlier into he stage then yes they should wait for any GC contenders caught behind.
Most of the time the favourites will decide to wait for a fallen rider anyways, since it takes up a lot of strengh from the team to keep a gap. I honestly believe the favourites will always do what helps them win in the long run.
Since J-Rod abandoned, I hope he skips Tour (he got that podium there anyway and there's hardly more possible anyways) and instead he just prepares fully for Vuelta and snatches the rainbow jersey along the way. Oh, and Lombardia #3.
"It’s a little bit scary when Contador attacks." - Tommy V
I hope that Rodriguez skips the Tour to go all in on the Vuelta, which is likely his last chance on a GC-win.
On today's stage. BMC and Orica-GreenEdge did nothing wrong, coming from someone who dislikes Evans. They were lucky, some others were not, and yes it sucks if your favourite riders are in the loser group today.
I'm 99% sure that if instead of BMC Belkin was in front to give Kelderman an advantage, some guys here wouldn't complain at all. And if it was Quintana or Majka, their fans would stop complaining.
To all who are upset with the crash and the following results at the finish line:
1. The crash wasn't because BMC was riding at the front, that is just ridiculous. It was because of the awful maintenance on Italian roads, which are dangerous as fuck in the rain. Don't you guys remember what happened to the Pompeiana in MSR?
2. The results were because the people in group 2 didn't organize a chase properly. We are talking about a group of 8 guys, of which 3 guys were saving it for the last KM, on a 8 KM climb. Against a group of 40+ riders, that were visibly not cooperating and effectively chasing on camera (riders sitting up and attacking when it went too slow).
So for those of you who are upset that Evans gained time today or that your favourite lost time to him, stop blaming Evans. Neither the crash nor the results were his fault.
Putting emotions aside, one thing is blaming Evans for taking the opportunity and one thing is observing he did not take a chance to behave himself as you could expect from a rider of such class. There is a large room between anger and disappointment and some of us will go closer to the former on this scale. But I guess it would be unwise to deny anyone their right to feel disappointed by Cadel.
PS. Majka apparently said he got injured and the doctors will decide if he starts tomorrow. Judging by what happened to Roche and how much smaller the fauvorite group is right now, I say it's unlikely for him to abandon and not even try, but...
Edited by Smoku on 15-05-2014 21:03
Smoku wrote:
PS. Majka apparently said he got injured and the doctors will decide if he starts tomorrow. Judging by what happened to Roche and how much smaller the fauvorite group is right now, I say it's unlikely for him to abandon and not even try, but...
Hopefully he'll be able to continue and the injury won't affect his performances too much. But, since he's not sure if he'll continue I doubt the injury won't have an impact on his results
I know it is a three week race, but no wonder why Rodriguez has been looking a bit offpar when he was hiding that fact he broke 2 ribs during Amstel Gold Race. Now he can add another rib and a left thumb to that total as well apparently.
Has anyone got any video highlights or just the conclusion of the race? I'm not digging back through a ton of pages to see if I can find it and I really want to see Wellens performing well.
CountArach wrote:
Has anyone got any video highlights or just the conclusion of the race? I'm not digging back through a ton of pages to see if I can find it and I really want to see Wellens performing well.
CountArach wrote:
Has anyone got any video highlights or just the conclusion of the race? I'm not digging back through a ton of pages to see if I can find it and I really want to see Wellens performing well.
It's CyclinghubHD now, not Cyclinghub (taken down)
baseballlover312, 06-03-14 : "Nuke Moscow...Don't worry Russia, we've got plenty of love to go around your cities"
Sarah Palin, 08-03-14 (CPAC, on Russian aggression) : "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke"
Big thanks to jdog for making this AMAZING userbar!
