If GB had done everything they had to do to win, they would have won, but they didn't so surely that means that they didn't do everything they could have done!
I really don't get this 'blame the others for not helping us'. Surely if you're the best, you will win.
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.
But even if you limit the number of people in a team, you can't stop people from forming temporary alliances. In fact that's what happened between Vinokourov and Uran; neither of them would have won without helping the other.
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.
The individual time trial (Wednesday) is about individuals and there's always the track racing in the velodrome.
In a group race there will always be team tactics.
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.
But even if you limit the number of people in a team, you can't stop people from forming temporary alliances. In fact that's what happened between Vinokourov and Uran; neither of them would have won without helping the other.
Of course that's true, and is where cycling is so different to other sports. But it would stop countrys picking teams to fit pre planned tactics and would allow 1 cyclist seen to be the best who has to make decisions and react to things on the day. Team tactics do kind of go against what is supposed to be an individual event. Not gonna ever happen though.
Would it be fair to say that "team GB" had no plan B and that plan A didn't work?
Once they rode to Plan A that meant 4 of them being prepared to sacrifice themselves by fronting the peloton (and that's exactly what happened). That plan appeared to be going great when they reeled in the initial breakaway group towards the end of the Box Hill section but, of course, the GB front 4 had done all the donkey work and none of them was a likely winner at that stage. I guess when the final group brokeaway they would still have hoped that they'd get some help from other teams and Cav might have been taken along by others to eventually reel in the breakaway group (never materialised). Therefore only Plan B at the end of Box Hill would have been for Cav to abandon team tactics and go alone. I'm no expert but from what BFR (who obviously knows his onions) has said, maybe he wouldn't have been left with enough in the tank at the finish if he'd have go on alone that far out. Happy for BFR to put me right if that's total baloney.
Would it be fair to say that "team GB" had no plan B and that plan A didn't work?
Once they rode to Plan A that meant 4 of them being prepared to sacrifice themselves by fronting the peloton (and that's exactly what happened). That plan appeared to be going great when they reeled in the initial breakaway group towards the end of the Box Hill section but, of course, the GB front 4 had done all the donkey work and none of them was a likely winner at that stage. I guess when the final group brokeaway they would still have hoped that they'd get some help from other teams and Cav might have been taken along by others to eventually reel in the breakaway group (never materialised). Therefore only Plan B at the end of Box Hill would have been for Cav to abandon team tactics and go alone. I'm no expert but from what BFR (who obviously knows his onions) has said, maybe he wouldn't have been left with enough in the tank at the finish if he'd have go on alone that far out. Happy for BFR to put me right if that's total baloney.
That's basically it.
With Cavendish there was always only ever going to be a Plan A as no Plan B would ever stand a realistic chance of working. While he's world class at closing races he's at best average in the middle of races - that's not his fault he doesn't have the body shape to ride the hard yards at a decent pace so he needs the team around him to drag him along (the slipstream effect saves a fair amount of energy). So it was all about delivering him to the front and letting him doing his thing, unfortunately to get to the finish they first had to negotiate 249.5KM of road and combat the tactics and strategies of other riders.
Oh my days Cancellara, a good short distance time trialler? The most powerful rider of his generation, who's won 3-4 ITT's in the Tour? One of the best monument riders of his generation. A guy who virtually cycled for himself in the 2010 Paris Roubais and motored on his own for almost 50 km. A guy who powered his time away from the field in an TDF uphill TT - after drivng himself into the ground for the Schlecks - only to be stolen the victory by a very questionable Contador: if memory serves me right no one got near them that day.
It's as a one day classic should be in the best of worlds. The strongest mixed skill individual wins. It should not be a sprinter's classic like Milan San Remo. Just a shame Cancellara didn't win. I still don't believe in Vinikourov results, not that I believed anyone from Astana, Discovery or CSC. There was no defenite that the peloton would catch the breakaway, too many strong riders in it. Germany were not particularly a strong team, Grabsch seems past it, I'm not sure any of them could have done the work apart from Martin. However they got to the finish they'd have to arrive fresher, to makes sure Greipel was delivered.
I had a great day at the race, stood not long after the descents of Box Hill and saw 7 circuits there before moving on to see them pass through Leatherhead and then watched the finale at the big screen there. Crowds were amazing and gave great support to Team GB who were always at the front of the peleton when they passed. Disappointing result was only letdown, you simply can't let a break of 30 or so with that quality get away.
Today's race is a different kettle of fish for me. Firstly we are not the favourites which means that our girls are not marked like the men or going to be expected to do all the work from start to the (sprint) finish.
In Cooke we have a bit of a wildcard who can get in among any breakaways and in Armitstead we have another Cav situation if the pack is together coming into The Mall. Lot more for the others to cover than sitting on our wheel and waiting for us to lead them around.
'not our fault we didn't win' - just reinforces my view of cyclists I'm afraid.
Care to expand on your view of cyclists? I'd love to hear what you think of us.
Ok - I watched the clip of Cavendish's interview where he was asked the perfectly valid question 'do you think the tour de france had any effect?'. This was greeted with the very immature, arrogant and aggresive response of 'stop asking stupid questions, do you know about cycling?!' Yes, he was upset that he lost but had, say, Murray have done this can you imagine the vitriol.
The whole idea that non-cyclists 'don't get it' is more than a little patronising. It ain't a difficult concept.
Added to the fact that, when I drive in busy London rush hours (as I regularly do), most (not all) cyclists seem to think it is their right to have their own training session, weaving in and out of cars, swaying from side to side as they get a sprint on and running red lights.
I'm sure you're all nice people individually but a bit of a pious crowd collectively.
Comments
I really don't get this 'blame the others for not helping us'. Surely if you're the best, you will win.
In a group race there will always be team tactics.
But it would stop countrys picking teams to fit pre planned tactics and would allow 1 cyclist seen to be the best who has to make decisions and react to things on the day. Team tactics do kind of go against what is supposed to be an individual event. Not gonna ever happen though.
Happy for BFR to put me right if that's total baloney.
That's basically it.
With Cavendish there was always only ever going to be a Plan A as no Plan B would ever stand a realistic chance of working. While he's world class at closing races he's at best average in the middle of races - that's not his fault he doesn't have the body shape to ride the hard yards at a decent pace so he needs the team around him to drag him along (the slipstream effect saves a fair amount of energy). So it was all about delivering him to the front and letting him doing his thing, unfortunately to get to the finish they first had to negotiate 249.5KM of road and combat the tactics and strategies of other riders.
It's as a one day classic should be in the best of worlds. The strongest mixed skill individual wins. It should not be a sprinter's classic like Milan San Remo. Just a shame Cancellara didn't win. I still don't believe in Vinikourov results, not that I believed anyone from Astana, Discovery or CSC. There was no defenite that the peloton would catch the breakaway, too many strong riders in it. Germany were not particularly a strong team, Grabsch seems past it, I'm not sure any of them could have done the work apart from Martin. However they got to the finish they'd have to arrive fresher, to makes sure Greipel was delivered.
In Cooke we have a bit of a wildcard who can get in among any breakaways and in Armitstead we have another Cav situation if the pack is together coming into The Mall. Lot more for the others to cover than sitting on our wheel and waiting for us to lead them around.
The whole idea that non-cyclists 'don't get it' is more than a little patronising. It ain't a difficult concept.
Added to the fact that, when I drive in busy London rush hours (as I regularly do), most (not all) cyclists seem to think it is their right to have their own training session, weaving in and out of cars, swaying from side to side as they get a sprint on and running red lights.
I'm sure you're all nice people individually but a bit of a pious crowd collectively.
gone for it and attacked not worrying about what the others do if cavendish had done this he could've achieved he never and so failed