Poor coverage by the BBC.....even the commentators were "frustrated with the info".....still fairplay to the Kazakstani....good to see an 'old' un win.
Poor coverage by the BBC.....even the commentators were "frustrated with the info".....still fairplay to the Kazakstani....good to see an 'old' un win.
This and this.
Vinokourov was also banned for doping in 2007 and has remained somewhat uncontrite about his use of drugs.
I don't feel like congratulating a rider who doped and then refused to acknowledge his guilt.
No help from others or not, a team of 4-5 including Wiggins and Froome all working for one guy should have made a more concerted effort to reel in the lead group with an hour to go.
Bit harder when you've been doing all the work for over 4 1/2 hours already, with half the amount of cyclists usually in a team cycling over a longer distance. If the work had been shared they would have had more strength to chase down on their own if need be. And with more teams working it's highly unlikely the cyclists who made the break would have been anywhere near as high in number and subsequently would have been much easier to catch.
Could be argued that if Cav isn't good enough to do what Vinokourov (sp) did then he doesn't deserve to win. But at least he and the team tried to win unlike certain others who did have a good chance of Gold or at least a medal, and didn't bother. That's what I find strange.
so who helped the guy who won it then ? didnt see him with a "team" or waiting for another team to put in the effort?
Bottom line they got the tactics wrong------we move on and hopefully this isnt any sort of a sign GB is in for a shit olympics. Did better than anyone thought last time and now there is even more pressure on.
GB couldn't respond on Box Hill cause Cav would have been left, and having had to do all the work on the front of the Peloton to try and keep the breakaways under control is brutal work, especially if the reason your there can't respond himself. Your riding with 3 less then the World champs, and 4 less then what Sky had on the road in the Tour, so the work on the front is even harder. Stannard, Froome, Millar and Wiggins, put massive shifts in to try and reel it in, but they needed the likes of Germany to help up the pace in the chase.
Cav could do with learning to win some One Day Classics
so who helped the guy who won it then ? didnt see him with a "team" or waiting for another team to put in the effort?
Bottom line they got the tactics wrong------we move on and hopefully this isnt any sort of a sign GB is in for a shit olympics. Did better than anyone thought last time and now there is even more pressure on.
You are comparing oranges with apples.
Mark Cavendish could never have won in the way that Vinokorov did because that's not the way he rides. His job is to be there at the finish where he can use his one great advantage - his sprint finish. The team's job was to set him up and police the race, bring attacks back etc and make sure that 50-100 metres out that he could bring that advantage into play.
still can't get my head round this - this is an individual event where only 1 person wins gold.............why then is there a GB "team" with Wiggins, Broome etc trying to help Cav win ??? doesn't make sens to me..........
so who helped the guy who won it then ? didnt see him with a "team" or waiting for another team to put in the effort?
We did, because he and the rest of the peloton that hadn't wasted their energy making the earlier breaks had a comfortable ride behind the 4 frontmen for GB until the 30-odd broke away at the end of the Box Hill section. Even at that breakaway, evidently the Germans and others thought that they'd be reeled in but they didn't put in a shift until it was too late.
This is how the Aussies (Sydney Morning Herald) saw it:
"...Great Britain deserves full credit for how they rode collectively all day long. Their confidence and calm as the early break extended their lead to more than six minutes and as a flurry of counter attacks went off without any of their riders in them was astounding.
And they were rewarded for it by the way the race saw a regroupment after the last of nine climbs up Box Hill.
But then after catching the solo attacker Philippe Gilbert of Belgium, came the moment that turned the race on its head.
The peloton suddenly split and caught out the Great Britain team that was suddenly put back on detail to chase down the leaders. So dangerous was the move that the teammates of German Andre Greipel were finally forced to help chase, at the tail end of a day in which they had contributed so little to helping the British except for the cameo roles of Tony Martin...."
Exactly my point GH the guy who won it deserved it because he performed the best on the day
As Afka says we had some apparently talented boys with him and we did not do enough to win
I love the whole 2012 thing and have since the first day I started working on it 7 years ago I know from the ones we have sponsored as a business how much it means to them
I have a friend who is fencing for GB and I know how hard she has worked to get here
I have spoken to Jess and to vicky p about the lengths and efforts they go to just for this day
But ultimately if you don't perform then you don't win and I think it's disrespectful to insinuate that people stopped cav winning
No none knocked him off his bike or pulled him back we should've led from the start or not them get such a lead and be in position
But ultimately if you don't perform then you don't win and I think it's disrespectful to insinuate that people stopped cav winning
While it's true that if you don't perform you deserve to lose you have to understand the tactics and strategy involved. He's a sprinter not an all-rounder and the only way he could win was through team work.
I wonder how much cycling some of you have watched if you think a five man team could dominate and lock down a 250KM race on their own?
But ultimately if you don't perform then you don't win and I think it's disrespectful to insinuate that people stopped cav winning
While it's true that if you don't perform you deserve to lose you have to understand the tactics and strategy involved. He's a sprinter not an all-rounder and the only way he could win was through team work.
I wonder how much cycling some of you have watched if you think a five man team could dominate and lock down a 250KM race on their own?
I was wondering the same, seems Dave Brailsford has got some rivals for the job
It was a GB team of five v rest of the world - basically the rest ganged up to stop our known tactics and it worked. You cannot criticise the GB group an ounce for that.
everyone was desperate to create a race where there wasn't a bunch sprint, cause they knew Cav would win, so the best bet was to break away, commit one person to the break, and hope that no one would help Team GB who wasn't in the break. It happened, especially the utterly gutless riding of the Germans. When you Wiggins and Froome utterly spent having ridden hard for 250km, then you know the rest of the peloton got their way.
Cav is bang on, they were more interested in GB not winning, then winning themselves.
still can't get my head round this - this is an individual event where only 1 person wins gold.............why then is there a GB "team" with Wiggins, Broome etc trying to help Cav win ??? doesn't make sens to me..........
Because if you don't think you have 1 guy who can go it alone and win then the next best thing is to work as a team and tacticly try to get a win for your mate. Would you rather another GB rider won and we got another medal or another country. Most of the teams would have been doing the same.
Rightly or wrongly the team it appears felt that racing the way they did with Cav was the best chance they had of getting GB a medal. If the stage had been mountainous they would have done something different.
The right tactics that just didn't work, or the wrong tactics. Can easily argue either way.
I haven't watched much at all but the guy who won could only have a maximum of 5 in his team and he won
He didn't win solely because everyone else was trying to stop cavendish
He won because he and his team Petformed better
Again...
Vinokourov's best chance of winning was to get in a breakaway group and then go early in the knowledge that if it came down to a bunch sprint that he stood little to no chance of success.
So he used his strengths to his advantage - that is he could get away and stay away for long enough to make a small gain succeed, today it worked. If Cavendish had been in that breakaway and he tried to go at about 2KM out when Vino and Uran went he would have been left for dead. However in a bunch finish he would stand a better chance than any in that race and any in just about any other year you care to mention. Cav's strength is in finishing - in footballing terms he's a goal hanger who doesn't do much outside the penalty box - but if you ship the ball to him ten yards from goal and do it often enough he'll give you 20+ goals a season. However if you ask that player to drop back deep into midfield and work and set up goals for himself and others then you are wasting your time and energy.
So the entire world ganged up on us to make sure we didn't win, and they didn't care if the net result was they also didn't win?
Yeah, OK....... Try telling that to Greipel, Sagan, Cancellara et al, that they and their teams were there simply to ensure Cav didn't win.
We got the tactics wrong, they should have rode out the attack better (the Spanish had managed to get at least 3 team members into that breaking pack, so to say we couldn't because Cav wouldn't be able to keep up is beyond me) and ultimately we couldn't even reel them in in the final 10k anyway
All the Germans fault. This current bunch are worse than the nazis. Not cycling to help the British bloke win is a disgrace.
They had their own sprinter in Andre Greipel who like Cavendish is there for the last few yards. It was in their interest to make an alliance with the British team to get their guy at the front so he could race for a medal. The chances are against Cavendish it would have been silver - but instead he got a good look at the Surrey countryside for his trouble.
If I were Cav I'd be happy that my team did everything they could. If I were Greipel I'd be furious that in a team event no one on my team barring Tony Martin seemed to want to do anything to help. He wasted his afternoon.
So the entire world ganged up on us to make sure we didn't win, and they didn't care if the net result was they also didn't win?
Yeah, OK....... Try telling that to Greipel, Sagan, Cancellara et al, that they and their teams were there simply to ensure Cav didn't win.
We got the tactics wrong, they should have rode out the attack better (the Spanish had managed to get at least 3 team members into that breaking pack, so to say we couldn't because Cav wouldn't be able to keep up is beyond me) and ultimately we couldn't even reel them in in the final 10k anyway
You're blowing it out of proportion but simply... yes. The Germans didn't want to help out, not because they didn't want Cav to win but they wanted to give their man, Greipel, the best shot at beating him. The only way they can do that is by not using up energy chasing down the breakaway.
You can't blame GB because they did everything they had to do to win!
So the entire world ganged up on us to make sure we didn't win, and they didn't care if the net result was they also didn't win?
No they didn't gang up on us - but where interests coincide you have to help your opponent in order to give your guy a shot at the medal. As I say upthread this happened at the World Championships last year where the Germans and other teamd were working to the same tactics. On that occasion it didn't work for them and Cavendish won and very easily. Perhaps bitten by that they refused to assist this time - which is their choice, but it cost Greipel any chance of a medal.
Cancellara was a bit different - he's a good short distance Time Trial rider (he's won several prologue type events over short distances). I presume his tactics were to go four/five km out and then see what was up.
Sagan had no team - literally he was a one man team meaning he'd have to freelance.
All the Germans fault. This current bunch are worse than the nazis. Not cycling to help the British bloke win is a disgrace.
But they didn't cycle to help themselves either. By helping us we would also have be helping them to their best chance of winning. They might as well have not bothered turning up. They had a great chance of getting a medal themselves, even the Gold, but chose to do nothing rather than trying. That I don't get.
Serious question as I don't know too much about cycling, have watched bits and pieces... how come a lot of it seems to be team based but to set up one man to win? Would the others not rather try to win for themself?
And does that spoil anyone's viewing a little? I think I'd rather see a less calculated every-man-for-himself race, I think.
Serious question as I don't know too much about cycling, have watched bits and pieces... how come a lot of it seems to be team based but to set up one man to win? Would the others not rather try to win for themself?
And does that spoil anyone's viewing a little? I think I'd rather see a less calculated every-man-for-himself race, I think.
I think I agree it should be every man for himself, maybe only having 1 cyclist per country would make it that way. But as it is, if you don't think you have a chance of winning by yourself would you rather a fellow coutrymen could be helped to win or not care? Plus the race was 250km's, It's a long way to work on your.
Serious question as I don't know too much about cycling, have watched bits and pieces... how come a lot of it seems to be team based but to set up one man to win? Would the others not rather try to win for themself?
And does that spoil anyone's viewing a little? I think I'd rather see a less calculated every-man-for-himself race, I think.
I'm sure that everyone in the race would want a medal, but that may not be feasible. It's not unique. You sometimes see team work in other in other long distance racing like marathon running where a pace maker will sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others. And think about football. I'm sure everyone would love to score the winning goal, but sometimes it makes sense to pass to a team mate; you might not get the glory of scoring, but you increase the chances of a win for the team.
I don't think it spoils it. I think it adds a level of interest; different teams (or individuals)/different tactics.
Comments
I don't feel like congratulating a rider who doped and then refused to acknowledge his guilt.
If the work had been shared they would have had more strength to chase down on their own if need be. And with more teams working it's highly unlikely the cyclists who made the break would have been anywhere near as high in number and subsequently would have been much easier to catch.
Could be argued that if Cav isn't good enough to do what Vinokourov (sp) did then he doesn't deserve to win. But at least he and the team tried to win unlike certain others who did have a good chance of Gold or at least a medal, and didn't bother. That's what I find strange.
Bottom line they got the tactics wrong------we move on and hopefully this isnt any sort of a sign GB is in for a shit olympics. Did better than anyone thought last time and now there is even more pressure on.
Cav could do with learning to win some One Day Classics
You are comparing oranges with apples.
Mark Cavendish could never have won in the way that Vinokorov did because that's not the way he rides. His job is to be there at the finish where he can use his one great advantage - his sprint finish. The team's job was to set him up and police the race, bring attacks back etc and make sure that 50-100 metres out that he could bring that advantage into play.
This is how the Aussies (Sydney Morning Herald) saw it:
"...Great Britain deserves full credit for how they rode collectively all day long. Their confidence and calm as the early break extended their lead to more than six minutes and as a flurry of counter attacks went off without any of their riders in them was astounding.
And they were rewarded for it by the way the race saw a regroupment after the last of nine climbs up Box Hill.
But then after catching the solo attacker Philippe Gilbert of Belgium, came the moment that turned the race on its head.
The peloton suddenly split and caught out the Great Britain team that was suddenly put back on detail to chase down the leaders. So dangerous was the move that the teammates of German Andre Greipel were finally forced to help chase, at the tail end of a day in which they had contributed so little to helping the British except for the cameo roles of Tony Martin...."
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/olympics/cycling-london-2012/veteran-ogrady-produces-classic-ride-in-mens-road-race-20120729-2349c.html#ixzz21vnc0GrH
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00wn13x
As Afka says we had some apparently talented boys with him and we did not do enough to win
I love the whole 2012 thing and have since the first day I started working on it 7 years ago I know from the ones we have sponsored as a business how much it means to them
I have a friend who is fencing for GB and I know how hard she has worked to get here
I have spoken to Jess and to vicky p about the lengths and efforts they go to just for this day
But ultimately if you don't perform then you don't win and I think it's disrespectful to insinuate that people stopped cav winning
No none knocked him off his bike or pulled him back we should've led from the start or not them get such a lead and be in position
Over a min behind at box hill not good enough
While it's true that if you don't perform you deserve to lose you have to understand the tactics and strategy involved. He's a sprinter not an all-rounder and the only way he could win was through team work.
I wonder how much cycling some of you have watched if you think a five man team could dominate and lock down a 250KM race on their own?
He didn't win solely because everyone else was trying to stop cavendish
He won because he and his team Petformed better
Cav is bang on, they were more interested in GB not winning, then winning themselves.
But I'm no expert.
Would you rather another GB rider won and we got another medal or another country. Most of the teams would have been doing the same.
Rightly or wrongly the team it appears felt that racing the way they did with Cav was the best chance they had of getting GB a medal. If the stage had been mountainous they would have done something different.
The right tactics that just didn't work, or the wrong tactics. Can easily argue either way.
Vinokourov's best chance of winning was to get in a breakaway group and then go early in the knowledge that if it came down to a bunch sprint that he stood little to no chance of success.
So he used his strengths to his advantage - that is he could get away and stay away for long enough to make a small gain succeed, today it worked. If Cavendish had been in that breakaway and he tried to go at about 2KM out when Vino and Uran went he would have been left for dead. However in a bunch finish he would stand a better chance than any in that race and any in just about any other year you care to mention. Cav's strength is in finishing - in footballing terms he's a goal hanger who doesn't do much outside the penalty box - but if you ship the ball to him ten yards from goal and do it often enough he'll give you 20+ goals a season. However if you ask that player to drop back deep into midfield and work and set up goals for himself and others then you are wasting your time and energy.
Yeah, OK....... Try telling that to Greipel, Sagan, Cancellara et al, that they and their teams were there simply to ensure Cav didn't win.
We got the tactics wrong, they should have rode out the attack better (the Spanish had managed to get at least 3 team members into that breaking pack, so to say we couldn't because Cav wouldn't be able to keep up is beyond me) and ultimately we couldn't even reel them in in the final 10k anyway
If I were Cav I'd be happy that my team did everything they could. If I were Greipel I'd be furious that in a team event no one on my team barring Tony Martin seemed to want to do anything to help. He wasted his afternoon.
The Germans didn't want to help out, not because they didn't want Cav to win but they wanted to give their man, Greipel, the best shot at beating him. The only way they can do that is by not using up energy chasing down the breakaway.
You can't blame GB because they did everything they had to do to win!
No they didn't gang up on us - but where interests coincide you have to help your opponent in order to give your guy a shot at the medal. As I say upthread this happened at the World Championships last year where the Germans and other teamd were working to the same tactics. On that occasion it didn't work for them and Cavendish won and very easily. Perhaps bitten by that they refused to assist this time - which is their choice, but it cost Greipel any chance of a medal.
Cancellara was a bit different - he's a good short distance Time Trial rider (he's won several prologue type events over short distances). I presume his tactics were to go four/five km out and then see what was up.
Sagan had no team - literally he was a one man team meaning he'd have to freelance.
They might as well have not bothered turning up. They had a great chance of getting a medal themselves, even the Gold, but chose to do nothing rather than trying. That I don't get.
And does that spoil anyone's viewing a little? I think I'd rather see a less calculated every-man-for-himself race, I think.
Plus the race was 250km's, It's a long way to work on your.
I don't think it spoils it. I think it adds a level of interest; different teams (or individuals)/different tactics.