Such a purist.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteS
You'll be telling me Wiggins really must have had asthma next.:(
(Actually I agree - and what's all that about changing your helmet Thomas!)
Printable View
Such a purist.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteS
You'll be telling me Wiggins really must have had asthma next.:(
(Actually I agree - and what's all that about changing your helmet Thomas!)
Shout out for Cav winning the last stage. It should give him a lot of confidence for the rest of his season.
I have to disagree with both Graham and Marco :D
I don't think an Evanpoel win would have been on the cards. The overall route suited him, but I still think he might have found some of the steeper inclines challenging and had an off day or two along the way.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Tec.
On the Friday, it was notable to me that Roglic picked up his TT prepped bike for the final climb and Thomas seemed to have plenty in hand with a few hundred metres to go and gapped Roglic, only to be pipped on the line.
200m out that didn't seem likely.
Thomas didn't seem to tie up, but the gearing seemed to help Roglic put in a final push.
It also seemed to help in the final few km on the TT. Thomas was still 2nd quickest. He didn't capitulate.
Ineos have been technically in front over the years and clearly Roglic is a very good cyclist and climber, but the time gap on Saturday was extensive to all the main rivals, compared to what we had seen during the previous days, so I think the technical setup won the day from him and Jumbo-Visma.
What is the race about? It's the rider, hopefully the best winning, but it's also about team, about tactics, mental strength and technical decisions.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteS
I agree it looks odd watching, but they can all do the same within the rules set out.
What won the Giro in my opinion, was the gearing decision by Team Roglic for that final TT which I think may have also helped him by a similar amount on the Friday.
He swapped his bike before the last climb and he wouldn't have done that unless he felt it would hep him.
Maybe it gave him as much as 2 minutes in tow days over his rivals.
Mmmh. Well life is short but it would be interesting to see a graph with two curves for each showing exactly what gearing Roglic and Thomas were pushing up the final section of the TT with their speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
Roglic was running a 40 chain ring with a 44 dinner plate on the rear. Nuts but you can't argue with the result. No idea on G but I'm sure it's only a Google away
Allegedly Thomas is blaming (as in I'm not blaming but I am mentioning it...) bicarbonate of soda.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteS
Well I hope that didn't arrive in a Jiffy bag. Could have easily just popped into Aldi. (Graham, it's like Booths but affordable!;))Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
I've heard of various legally allowed supposedly performance enhancing substances but this is a new one on me. I just use it for baking and removal of shoe odour!
I've been trying to come up with an analogy with other sports events where an individual stage could be decided on choice of equipment but not allowed during the race. The only similarly I can think of is rallying where tyre choice before a stage is paramount especially in mixed terrain. Driver ability, car technology etc all tactics worked out in advance to deliver the fastest time. I like the simplicity and the fact it doesn't necessarily favour the team with the largest budget. Indeed, the driver needs to deliver and that's surely what bike racing is about too?
At the risk of showing my age - I still think Laurent Fignon won 3 Tours and Lemond won one less than he thinks he did.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteS
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/h...as-queen-stage
This piece explained the potential gains.
A better way of understanding this choice though, is in terms of speed and cadence.
At a cadence of 100rpm, Roglič could ride at a minimum speed of 12.8kph on this setup. Compare this to a more common lowest gear setup of 39/32, which at the same 100rpm gives a minimum speed of 15.6kph. Faster, yes, but more taxing.
On a 18% gradient, a 70kg rider —even on a UCI weight limit matching 6.8kg bike— would need to put out a sustained 600 watts to keep up that cadence and average speed.
When on standard bikes, Roglic was pretty much the same as GT and Almeida on climbs, with GT having the edge if anything.
So I'd suggest there's good evidence to say the tactical change of tec won it for him.
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Witton Park
I think the two most interesting aspects of that article are:
1. the prescience that it was a rehearsal for the TT (which I think the Eurosport commentariat mentioned on the day as well)
2. that the mighty, arrogant, overweening, smug, cheating Ineos didn't then do the same. Not invented here perhaps? Or Shimano don't have the same SRAM set up.
Although on the theme of "stuck in their ways" I always thought if Ullrich has pushed a smaller gear he would have beaten twiddling, cheating Armstrong. So does Daniel Friebe in his 448 page biography The Best There Never Was.
So it must be true.
But alas Ullrich was mentally damaged from his East Germany years and only knew one way to think.
Incidentally IMHO Cycling Weekly the magazine is gushing, fawning, comedy whereas the website is far more analytical and considered.