Log in:  

Register

Geraint Thomas, the next british hope

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 11:03

samhocking wrote:why pursuit riders at least in man 2,3 & 4 also make great ITT riders too

For this to be presented as a fact you must have numerous examples.

Endulge us with 10 top pursuiters cranking them TT wins Sam.
il Mito wrote:“I’m in pension, I don’t give a **** about training,” Ferrari said. “They are all strong without me. Did you see the Tour de France?”
User avatar Fearless Greg Lemond
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,238
Joined: 20 Apr 2012 15:07
Location: Netherlands

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 11:08

DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:
DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:how comes that being a talented track rider, joining high-scale doping programme, losing weight and as a result becoming a great climber is far less OKish than being a talented little climber by nature and winning big races with an assistance of doping? why super elite racing should allegedly be a direct reflection of what took place in tour de l'avenir. damn, it doesnt make any sense imo.

The issue is that it's so blatant. It's impossible to suspend disbelief - to imagine that the most talented riders in the world are actually winning the race. If some guy like Valverde or Sagan wins a race then - looking at their youth results and progression - you can believe its plausible that they would be there or there abouts in a clean peloton. If someone suddenly transforms mid (or late) career to win the Tour - you know its not that much to do with talent any more. It feels like the Armstrong era all again - where having a huge budget, the best lawyers and friends in the right places is deciding races. Thomas is a bit different to Froome/Dumoulin I think because he's clearly talented, even by pro standards, but he's so tainted by the Sky brand right now, that it's difficult to have any faith in him.

the issue is that a lot of fans are desperately willing to search for some kind of bike racing fairness which is actually senseless, because the whole world is unfair by its nature. the model "the earlier talent is evident - the more credible and well-deserved champion" is valid to a certain extent, but clearly has multiple flaws, coming down more to the idealist attitude. nobody has a clue what would have happened in a completely clean cycling, the sport, that has histrorically been one of the hardest and dirtiest. so would you have a faith in valverde / quintana, had they won the tour by crushing thermonuclear sky?

Not sure what you mean by 'have faith'? That they are clean? Obviously not. That they are extremely talented riders who would be at the pinnacle of cycling in any era? Probably yes.

Its not really about fairness either. Its about being able to appreciate that the guy winning is a world class sportsman, rather than has a world class pharmicist, or friends in high places. In the blood doping era this is obviously increasingly harder to know, but youth career is a good place to start. And a sudden big transformation is pretty much a giant red flag for a donkey turned racehorse.

what I'm trying to make emphasis on IS the difference you draw between quintana / valverde / sagan and froome / thomas / dimoulin is ridiculously big. it's virtually super atheletes with physique that enables them to be a world class cyclists since they were babies vs overly mediocre riders, who reached the top owning to enormous luck and top-notch doping regime. I just disagree. no doubt, each of three has physique, talent and determination to be big champions. certainly, looking back in the past, we accept that a doping free cycling would have looked completely differently. but speculation about hypothetical clean bike racing starts and ends in clinic subforum on cn and has very little to do with real life. reality is three so-called donkeys won 8 grand tours.
dacooley
Member
 
Posts: 1,670
Joined: 30 May 2015 15:37

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 12:26

samhocking wrote:
dacooley wrote:
DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:how comes that being a talented track rider, joining high-scale doping programme, losing weight and as a result becoming a great climber is far less OKish than being a talented little climber by nature and winning big races with an assistance of doping? why super elite racing should allegedly be a direct reflection of what took place in tour de l'avenir. damn, it doesnt make any sense imo.

The issue is that it's so blatant. It's impossible to suspend disbelief - to imagine that the most talented riders in the world are actually winning the race. If some guy like Valverde or Sagan wins a race then - looking at their youth results and progression - you can believe its plausible that they would be there or there abouts in a clean peloton. If someone suddenly transforms mid (or late) career to win the Tour - you know its not that much to do with talent any more. It feels like the Armstrong era all again - where having a huge budget, the best lawyers and friends in the right places is deciding races. Thomas is a bit different to Froome/Dumoulin I think because he's clearly talented, even by pro standards, but he's so tainted by the Sky brand right now, that it's difficult to have any faith in him.

the issue is that a lot of fans are desperately willing to search for some kind of bike racing fairness which is actually senseless, because the whole world is unfair by its nature. the model "the earlier talent is evident - the more credible and well-deserved champion" is valid to a certain extent, but clearly has multiple flaws, coming down more to the idealist attitude. nobody has a clue what would have happened in a completely clean cycling, the sport, that has histrorically been one of the hardest and dirtiest. so would you have a faith in valverde / quintana, had they won the tour by crushing thermonuclear sky?


The point i'm making is not that the 4km effort itself and of itself is indicative of Grand Tour success, it's that the training effort required in order to put such a high 4km effort onto, only comes from a very strong, basic aerobic threshold over much longer periods and why pursuit riders at least in man 2,3 & 4 also make great ITT riders too. Basically the 4km pursuit identifies riders with very good sustained power over an hour or so ,mbecause if you don't have that, you are not able to bolt on the numbers required to win a pursuit. The pursuit naturally selects those riders who, with weight adjustment and race tactics up climbs in Grand Tours can then tip the maths into their favour. All rider types have basic endurance to get around France, that's not the point.

The riders that are not very good at sustained power over an hour or so are guess who? Pure climbers. As discussed when the road goes uphill the 'maths and physics' tip in their favour as discussed above, so how do you negate that favour? You ride at sustained threshold from the bottom of the climb, so when you get to the more decisive last 3-4km the pure climbers can't then make the difference over a shorter effort and typical of where the Tour de France time is won and lost. The 'maths and physics' have been tipped into the favour of the heavier riders like Doumilin, Wiggins, Thomas, Indurain etc.


Well this is all massively obvious. What's also obvious is that there are numerous prohibited substances floating around cycling which can facilitate this 'weight adjustment' and 'tipping of the odds in their favour'. And that doing 'weight adjustment' without resultant power loss has been the holy grail of cyclists for over 100 years - with almost no success until things like Clen and Aicar came onto the scene.
User avatar DFA123
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,336
Joined: 07 Nov 2010 16:00
Location: Valencia

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 12:37

dacooley wrote:what I'm trying to make emphasis on IS the difference you draw between quintana / valverde / sagan and froome / thomas / dimoulin is ridiculously big. it's virtually super atheletes with physique that enables them to be a world class cyclists since they were babies vs overly mediocre riders, who reached the top owning to enormous luck and top-notch doping regime. I just disagree. no doubt, each of three has physique, talent and determination to be big champions. certainly, looking back in the past, we accept that a doping free cycling would have looked completely differently. but speculation about hypothetical clean bike racing starts and ends in clinic subforum on cn and has very little to do with real life. reality is three so-called donkeys won 8 grand tours.

I disagree with this. I think there is a big difference between the natural talent of riders in the peloton and that doping obscures a lot of that. But there are ways that you can suspect who is talented - youth results being the most prominent example. I mean, if Raul Alarcon got a WT contract and won the Tour or Giro ahead of Bernal, for example, would you think they were similarly naturally talented?

Btw, determination is a completely different factor. Froome for example has incredible mental strength which has undoubtedly contributed to his prolonged period of success - and he is a worthy champion in that respect.
User avatar DFA123
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,336
Joined: 07 Nov 2010 16:00
Location: Valencia

Re: Geraint Thomas, the next british hope

06 Aug 2018 12:43

Mamil wrote:I never realised that winning a GT was so simple. Big endurance engine + losing all possible weight = winning Le Tour.

Why are all these big engines British?

Why isn't Rohan Dennis, who is quite tall and clearly has a massive engine of his own and ability to maintain high watts for a long time, not destroying GTs left right and centre?

Oh, what's that, you need to dope too? Silly me. I thought maybe poor Roh was just fat :rolleyes:


Surely you mean dope correctly, unless you think Dennis did the fastest ever TDF TT clean?
wansteadimp
Junior Member
 
Posts: 278
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 12:16

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 15:50

DFA123 wrote:
samhocking wrote:
dacooley wrote:
DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:how comes that being a talented track rider, joining high-scale doping programme, losing weight and as a result becoming a great climber is far less OKish than being a talented little climber by nature and winning big races with an assistance of doping? why super elite racing should allegedly be a direct reflection of what took place in tour de l'avenir. damn, it doesnt make any sense imo.

The issue is that it's so blatant. It's impossible to suspend disbelief - to imagine that the most talented riders in the world are actually winning the race. If some guy like Valverde or Sagan wins a race then - looking at their youth results and progression - you can believe its plausible that they would be there or there abouts in a clean peloton. If someone suddenly transforms mid (or late) career to win the Tour - you know its not that much to do with talent any more. It feels like the Armstrong era all again - where having a huge budget, the best lawyers and friends in the right places is deciding races. Thomas is a bit different to Froome/Dumoulin I think because he's clearly talented, even by pro standards, but he's so tainted by the Sky brand right now, that it's difficult to have any faith in him.

the issue is that a lot of fans are desperately willing to search for some kind of bike racing fairness which is actually senseless, because the whole world is unfair by its nature. the model "the earlier talent is evident - the more credible and well-deserved champion" is valid to a certain extent, but clearly has multiple flaws, coming down more to the idealist attitude. nobody has a clue what would have happened in a completely clean cycling, the sport, that has histrorically been one of the hardest and dirtiest. so would you have a faith in valverde / quintana, had they won the tour by crushing thermonuclear sky?


The point i'm making is not that the 4km effort itself and of itself is indicative of Grand Tour success, it's that the training effort required in order to put such a high 4km effort onto, only comes from a very strong, basic aerobic threshold over much longer periods and why pursuit riders at least in man 2,3 & 4 also make great ITT riders too. Basically the 4km pursuit identifies riders with very good sustained power over an hour or so ,mbecause if you don't have that, you are not able to bolt on the numbers required to win a pursuit. The pursuit naturally selects those riders who, with weight adjustment and race tactics up climbs in Grand Tours can then tip the maths into their favour. All rider types have basic endurance to get around France, that's not the point.

The riders that are not very good at sustained power over an hour or so are guess who? Pure climbers. As discussed when the road goes uphill the 'maths and physics' tip in their favour as discussed above, so how do you negate that favour? You ride at sustained threshold from the bottom of the climb, so when you get to the more decisive last 3-4km the pure climbers can't then make the difference over a shorter effort and typical of where the Tour de France time is won and lost. The 'maths and physics' have been tipped into the favour of the heavier riders like Doumilin, Wiggins, Thomas, Indurain etc.


Well this is all massively obvious. What's also obvious is that there are numerous prohibited substances floating around cycling which can facilitate this 'weight adjustment' and 'tipping of the odds in their favour'. And that doing 'weight adjustment' without resultant power loss has been the holy grail of cyclists for over 100 years - with almost no success until things like Clen and Aicar came onto the scene.


Do you honestly believe the other teams and riders don't know this? Crikey the majority of the teams in World Tour & Professional Continental level are continuations at ownership, staffing and ex-rider level who lived and breathed doping, cheating and evasion! One would not only think they might know just as much as a bunch of track riders coming over to France for the first time, but should know a fair bit more how all this corruption, collusion, evasion, omerta and substance abuse actually gets donkeys to be racehorses, because they've been doing it for 100 years before Brailsford & Keen were even born and those teams have direct unbroken lineage with all of cycling doping history. The best UK has is Simpson, who rode for a French team doping himself to death!
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 1,888
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 15:58

samhocking wrote:The best UK has is Simpson, who rode for a French team doping himself to death!

Quoted just for the ignorance, again, spouted here.

Whats the niche Sam?
il Mito wrote:“I’m in pension, I don’t give a **** about training,” Ferrari said. “They are all strong without me. Did you see the Tour de France?”
User avatar Fearless Greg Lemond
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,238
Joined: 20 Apr 2012 15:07
Location: Netherlands

06 Aug 2018 16:03

I'm talking about proven experience at doping to 'win' road races abroad at the highest level. Simpson was the most successful rider we had before Wiggins that we know doped. Robert Millar we assume, but he's not involved in British Cycling even though he wanted to be iirc. Point is as British Team he died, didn't win!
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 1,888
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re:

06 Aug 2018 16:20

samhocking wrote:I'm talking about proven experience at doping to 'win' road races abroad at the highest level. Simpson was the most successful rider we had before Wiggins that we know doped. Robert Millar we assume, but he's not involved in British Cycling even though he wanted to be iirc. Point is as British Team he died, didn't win!
There is no proof Simpson ever doped.

Robert now Philippa got popped in Spain though.

Was and still is the best British rider ever known.

Still waiting for your list of pursuiters who kicked *** at TT's though?
il Mito wrote:“I’m in pension, I don’t give a **** about training,” Ferrari said. “They are all strong without me. Did you see the Tour de France?”
User avatar Fearless Greg Lemond
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,238
Joined: 20 Apr 2012 15:07
Location: Netherlands

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 16:55

Fearless Greg Lemond wrote:
samhocking wrote:why pursuit riders at least in man 2,3 & 4 also make great ITT riders too

For this to be presented as a fact you must have numerous examples.

Endulge us with 10 top pursuiters cranking them TT wins Sam.



Wiggins and Thomas? :lol:
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 17:37

DFA123 wrote:
dacooley wrote:what I'm trying to make emphasis on IS the difference you draw between quintana / valverde / sagan and froome / thomas / dimoulin is ridiculously big. it's virtually super atheletes with physique that enables them to be a world class cyclists since they were babies vs overly mediocre riders, who reached the top owning to enormous luck and top-notch doping regime. I just disagree. no doubt, each of three has physique, talent and determination to be big champions. certainly, looking back in the past, we accept that a doping free cycling would have looked completely differently. but speculation about hypothetical clean bike racing starts and ends in clinic subforum on cn and has very little to do with real life. reality is three so-called donkeys won 8 grand tours.

I disagree with this. I think there is a big difference between the natural talent of riders in the peloton and that doping obscures a lot of that. But there are ways that you can suspect who is talented - youth results being the most prominent example. I mean, if Raul Alarcon got a WT contract and won the Tour or Giro ahead of Bernal, for example, would you think they were similarly naturally talented?

Btw, determination is a completely different factor. Froome for example has incredible mental strength which has undoubtedly contributed to his prolonged period of success - and he is a worthy champion in that respect.

as far as i understand your logic, a rider should take his place in cycling hierarchy solely depending on what nature granted him with all other factors being entirely secondary. so we have thomas and froome, whose grand tour fame is massively founded on using doping as an overwhelming factor, on one side of the scales and god-gifted climbers quintana / bardet, hostages to their own doping-related inferiority, on other one. that's probably where we part our opinions. natural talent is a base but it can neither guarantee nor provide any result. result is a complex product, generated by dozens of variables starting from talent, doping, mental toughness and ending with discipline, will and determination. even one time grand tour allegedly lacking / not having talent is where i always chuckle while reading the forums.
dacooley
Member
 
Posts: 1,670
Joined: 30 May 2015 15:37

Re: Re:

06 Aug 2018 19:21

thehog wrote:Wiggins and Thomas? :lol:

I am still waiting for those statistics indeed ;)

dacooley wrote:as far as i understand your logic, a rider should take his place in cycling hierarchy solely depending on what nature granted him with all other factors being entirely secondary. so we have thomas and froome, whose grand tour fame is massively founded on using doping as an overwhelming factor, on one side of the scales and god-gifted climbers quintana / bardet, hostages to their own doping-related inferiority, on other one. that's probably where we part our opinions. natural talent is a base but it can neither guarantee nor provide any result. result is a complex product, generated by dozens of variables starting from talent, doping, mental toughness and ending with discipline, will and determination. even one time grand tour allegedly lacking / not having talent is where i always chuckle while reading the forums.
The chuckling part is where we agree.

Never seen so much patriotism as with British people, sorry to say. Totally blinded by the medal count.

Brailswashed.
il Mito wrote:“I’m in pension, I don’t give a **** about training,” Ferrari said. “They are all strong without me. Did you see the Tour de France?”
User avatar Fearless Greg Lemond
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,238
Joined: 20 Apr 2012 15:07
Location: Netherlands

Re: Geraint Thomas, the next british hope

06 Aug 2018 20:07

wansteadimp wrote:Surely you mean dope correctly, unless you think Dennis did the fastest ever TDF TT clean?


Yes, probably. But whatever he's on certainly doesn't work that well when the road starts going uphill. He's getting better at it, but it all looks relatively natural.

Point is he's pretty lean and proven to have a more than decent engine, whether assisted or not, but is still only so-so on the climbs. There's far more to being an exceptional climber than just sustained power and weight loss.
Mamil
Junior Member
 
Posts: 109
Joined: 11 Jan 2018 11:24

06 Aug 2018 20:33

Here's a complete list of riders in the last 50 years who had their first GT top 10 at the age of 30 or above.

Tour de France
Geraint Thomas (1st, 2018, age 32)
Daniel Navarro (8th, 2013, age 30 - his 30th birthday was three days before the end of the race)
Thomas Voeckler (4th, 2011, age 32)
Jean-Christophe Peraud (9th, 2011, age 34)
Chris Horner (9th, 2010, age 38)
Christian Vande Velde (4th, 2008, age 32)
Cyril Dessel (6th, 2006, age 31)
François Simon (6th, 2001, age 32)
Roland Meier (7th, 1998, age 30)
Alberto Elli (7th, 1994, age 30)
Giancarlo Perini (8th, 1992, age 32)
Raymond Martin (5th, 1980, age 31)

Giro d'Italia
Yuri Trofimov (10th, 2015, age 31)
Przemysław Niemiec (6th, 2013, age 33)
John Gadret (3rd*, 2011, age 32)
Michele Scarponi (4th, 2010, age 30)
Marco Pinotti (9th, 2010, age 34)
José Enrique Gutiérrez (2nd, 2006, age 31)
Victor Hugo Peña (9th, 2006, age 31)
Patxi Vila (10th, 2006, age 30)
Marzio Bruseghin (9th, 2005, age 30)
Tyler Hamilton (2nd, 2002, age 31)
Andrea Noè (4th, 2000, age 31)
Heinz Imboden (8th, 1995, age 33)
Massimo Podenzana (7th, 1994, age 32)
Claudio Corti (5th, 1986, age 31)
Üli Sutter (10th, 1978, age 31)
Ronald de Witte (9th, 1977, age 31)

Vuelta a España
Michael Woods (7th, 2017, age 30)
Laurens ten Dam (8th, 2012, age 31)
Daniel Moreno (9th, 2011, age 30 - like Navarro he turned 30 during the race, this time on the second rest day)
Xavier Tondó (6th, 2010, age 31)
Paolo Tiralongo (8th, 2009, age 32)
David Moncoutié (8th, 2008, age 33)
Egoí Martínez (9th, 2008, age 30)
Ezequiel Mosquera (5th, 2007, age 31)
Félix García Casas (8th, 2002, age 34)
David Plaza (6th, 2001, age 31)
Claus Michael Møller (8th, 2001, age 33)
Roberto Laiseka (6th, 2000, age 31)
Gianni Faresin (9th, 1997, age 32)
Tony Rominger (1st, 1992, age 31)
Jean-Claude Bagot (9th, 1989, age 31)
Eddy Schepers (9th, 1988, age 32)
Pierre-Raymonde Villemiane (6th, 1982, age 31)
Jørgen Marcussen (4th, 1981, age 30)
Ventura Díaz (9th, 1974, age 36)
Roger Swerts (9th, 1973, age 30)

As you can see, a lot of these placements are low end top 10s, mostly placements from 6th to 10th, suggesting these are riders who were either backup options for their team or were simply not strong GC leaders but were able to compensate with nous and experience to get into the top 10 without threatening the podium. Many of them are also one-and-done top 10s; of those who hit the top 10 for the first time after the age of 30 above, several never made it again, and only a small handful became regulars up there - Rominger, Mosquera, Moreno, Scarponi, Bruseghin and Peraud are perhaps the main ones to point to. It's also harder to achieve this feat at the Tour - the Tour accounts for 25% of the number up there; the Giro is a perfect 33,33%, so the Vuelta accounts for 41,67% Of the 48 names above, only 4 have actually won a GT - and Thomas is the only one for whom that GT is the Tour; Tony Rominger won three Vueltas and a Giro, Chris Horner won a Vuelta, and Michele Scarponi won a Giro through forfeit after Contador was removed from the results sheet. Horner is a massive outlier even among this list which exclusively deals with late bloomers.

There is also a significant increase in the number of these post-30 maiden top 10s in recent times - of the 48, over 75% are since 1990, almost 66% are since 2000 and a little under a third are since 2010. It is not surprising that in the pre-Wende days, the Vuelta is the most common place for experienced stagers to get their first GT top 10 (6 first timers as opposed to 3 at the Giro and 1 at the Tour) seeing as it was by far the least established of the 3, and it is really since the 1980s with the takeoff of the skiing industry and the reintegration of Spain into Europe that its GT status is affirmed; the numbers start to be more in line with the other two GTs from that point onward. I would say that the increase in importance of the World Tour and its predecessors plays a large role in that, in that placements are increasingly important and so experienced riders drifting backward slowly are now quite a useful commodity as the ability to "Zubeldia" a top 10 is quite an effective tool for a team's continued World Tour ambitions. Also, I would argue that the increased quality of domestiques means that riders are better protected for longer; we may decry the lack of long-range action and aggressive racing, but more energy saved in the bunch is probably helpful in increasing riders' longevity.

In the early 90s you had a bit of an exception when you have the riders from the former Eastern Bloc who weren't previously able to ride the Grand Tours (other than a small handful of Soviet riders who did the Vuelta in the late 80s) although even they were mostly late 20s at their first GT (Ugrumov 29, Jaskuła 28 for example); they follow the example of Gösta Pettersson, who is probably the best example to point to as a precedent for the kind of performances that Wiggins and Thomas have put in after converting to being climbers late on; he didn't turn pro until he was almost 29, and top 10ed both the Giro and Tour in his first pro season (thus excluding him from the above list), then won the Giro in his second; he did however mostly race road as an amateur, though he did join in the track along with his brothers at times, such as the 1968 Olympics; his road palmarès as an amateur included some major stage racing credentials, however, winning the Tour du Maroc and the Tour de Tunisie as well as the Milk Race when it was two weeks long, and coming 2nd in the mountainous Tour de Yugoslavie, so he's not a perfect comparison. He is perhaps more directly comparable in the modern day with somebody like Niemiec, who for personal reasons (a private family connection) signed a much longer than is normal contract with a third tier team and therefore didn't get to do a GT until he was 31, or Tondó, who took to the sport late, and was buried by bad timing beneath Puerto exiles who were limited to lower level teams, that blocked his route to the top until he was nearly 30; Mosquera belongs in the same category, not having the chance to race the Vuelta until 2007, but obviously he also pushed his luck too far trying to win the race in 2010 and fell foul of doping controls.

There's also a lot of other convicted or otherwise known dopers there too - Hamilton, Vande Velde, Meier, Gutiérrez, Hesjedal, Scarponi (who may be unique in having served his ban prior to his appearance on this list). Very few podiums among these first top 10s, though there is the occasional late convert to at least this side of the sport (Jice Peraud being the most recent example of this, he of course later did podium) as well as those who didn't turn pro until a late age back in the pro-am days; Michael Woods is of course another outlier, having been in a completely different sport. There are quite a few fluke performances and ones where large time gifts played a role (Voeckler, Martínez and Dessel, for example, and I can't remember if Pinotti was in 'that' break). Quite a few of the most notorious 'late bloomers' in world cycling, regardless of their reasons for that, actually had their maiden GT top 10s at 28-29 - Ugrumov, Wiggins, Hesjedal, Joaquím Rodríguez, Pettersson - so in some ways using 30 as the cut-off is slightly arbitrary as if it somehow makes, say, Moreno or Navarro, who both finished at the bottom end of the top 10 in a race they had their 30th birthdays in, more significantly late bloomers than Wiggins or Hesjedal (Moreno had finished 12th, 12th and 11th in his 3 Vuelta rides prior to being 9th in 2011, so he was actually very consistent and it's his 5th the following year that's more of an outlier, whereas Hesjedal's and Wiggins' best GT results prior to their successive maiden top 10s were 47th and 71st respectively, so you'd say Moreno's performance is much less inherently eye-opening once that context is added - though I believe Moreno was one of the riders connected to Jesús Losa back in around 2009-10), but I thought its position as a milestone birthday and a point at which historical provenance suggests riders ought to start to decline made it a useful starting point, though of course the point at which a rider actually does stop improving and start to decline is never going to be at a uniform point for all athletes.

The number of first timers making the podium, as Thomas did, is pretty small too - counting Gadret is debatable because of Contador's presence in 2011, but even with him, there's literally only Thomas, Rominger, "Búfalo" Gutiérrez, Hamilton and Gadret among those over 30 in the last half a century who have had their maiden GT top 10 be a podium - not exactly company Thomas will be clamouring to be conflated with I should imagine - and furthermore, interestingly, Thomas is the only rider to achieve that at the Tour de France. And not only that - but he's the only rider to never hit a GT top 10 until 30 years of age, and then have their maiden top 10 be a GC victory.
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,656
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

07 Aug 2018 06:01

Good post LS ans Horner and Navarro both had their top 10's helped from breakaways.
User avatar SHAD0W93
Member
 
Posts: 803
Joined: 13 Aug 2011 03:50

07 Aug 2018 06:20

Agreed, good post.

As far as being helped by breakaways, François Simon was in a break that got more than 35 minutes on the field. He would have finished mid-20s without the time he gained from that stage. Andrei Kivilev got 4th overall that year after being in the same break.
User avatar Saint Unix
Member
 
Posts: 771
Joined: 14 Feb 2014 11:00
Location: Norway

Re: Re:

07 Aug 2018 08:33

Fearless Greg Lemond wrote:
samhocking wrote:Still waiting for your list of pursuiters who kicked *** at TT's though?


I'm not sure why I am helping him but both Boardman and Obree went from pursuit to the Hour Record, which supports some of his physiological argument.

The flaw is that track cycling requires upper body strength to resist the G force and constant acceleration - this then becomes a big problem when you hit the mountains in a road race. When in a steady state in the velodrome, or a flat prologue mass can be overcome by aerodynamics so both Boardman's and Obree's 'technical doping' worked. You can't do this in the mountains, there is no way of hiding mass from gravity.

The debate really is can you turn 85kg of trackie into 67kg of GT winner without them losing power? Not credibly to many of us...
Winterfold
Member
 
Posts: 1,554
Joined: 30 Jul 2009 22:54

07 Aug 2018 11:22

How many of those 30+ first timers in the top 10 were super talented and amongst the elite in a different specialisation of pro cycling before turning their attention to climbing/GC?

Not to mention Thomas would almost certainly have had his first top 10 at the Giro last year were it not for his crash, and this is before even considering his role as a domestique the whole time.

Of course Thomas is suspicious, but the way this is being spun by some posters here is ridiculous. His performance on PSM was way more surprising at the time than this Tour victory is now
User avatar PremierAndrew
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,686
Joined: 09 May 2014 18:47

Re: Re:

07 Aug 2018 16:35

Fearless Greg Lemond wrote:
thehog wrote:Wiggins and Thomas? :lol:

I am still waiting for those statistics indeed ;)

dacooley wrote:as far as i understand your logic, a rider should take his place in cycling hierarchy solely depending on what nature granted him with all other factors being entirely secondary. so we have thomas and froome, whose grand tour fame is massively founded on using doping as an overwhelming factor, on one side of the scales and god-gifted climbers quintana / bardet, hostages to their own doping-related inferiority, on other one. that's probably where we part our opinions. natural talent is a base but it can neither guarantee nor provide any result. result is a complex product, generated by dozens of variables starting from talent, doping, mental toughness and ending with discipline, will and determination. even one time grand tour allegedly lacking / not having talent is where i always chuckle while reading the forums.
The chuckling part is where we agree.

Never seen so much patriotism as with British people, sorry to say. Totally blinded by the medal count.

Brailswashed.


Well off the world pursuit champions that come to mind that also did very well on road in ITT and TTT I can immediately think of the following names. I'm sure there are plenty of others who've crossed over as it's an obvious choice to do well in ITT if you're a pursuit champion.

AUS
Jack Bobridge - UCI Road World Under–23 Championships ITT, National ITT Champion, 5th UCI Worlds ITT
Melissa Hoskins - 2nd UCI World Team time trial
Stuart OGrady - 1st Tour de France ITT 2013, 2nd Commonwealth Games ITT
Luke Roberts - 1st Endenhoven TTT
Brett Lancaster - 2nd World Team Time Trial Championships, 1st Junior National Time Trial Championships, 3rd Eindhoven Team Time Trial
Bradley McGee - 1st ITT Tour de Suisse, 1st Giro ITT

GBR
Thomas - we already know
Wiggins - we already know
Owain Doull - 3rd UCI TTT Championships, 2nd National Under–23 ITT, 2nd National ITT
Joanna Rowsell - 1st National Time Trial Championships
Chris Boardman - we already know
Graeme Obree - we already know

RUS
Viatcheslav Ekimov - 1st Time trial, Olympic Games etc etc

FR
Jeannie Longo - 1st World Time Trial Championship etc etc

NZ
Sarah Ulmer - 1st National Time Trial Championships, 1st ITT Oceania Games

HOL
Leontien van Moorsel - 1st Olympic ITT x 2, 1st National ITT, 2nd Commonwealth Games etc etc

US
Chloé Dygert - 1st World Junior ITT
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 1,888
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re: Re:

07 Aug 2018 17:49

samhocking wrote:
Fearless Greg Lemond wrote:
thehog wrote:Wiggins and Thomas? :lol:

I am still waiting for those statistics indeed ;)

dacooley wrote:as far as i understand your logic, a rider should take his place in cycling hierarchy solely depending on what nature granted him with all other factors being entirely secondary. so we have thomas and froome, whose grand tour fame is massively founded on using doping as an overwhelming factor, on one side of the scales and god-gifted climbers quintana / bardet, hostages to their own doping-related inferiority, on other one. that's probably where we part our opinions. natural talent is a base but it can neither guarantee nor provide any result. result is a complex product, generated by dozens of variables starting from talent, doping, mental toughness and ending with discipline, will and determination. even one time grand tour allegedly lacking / not having talent is where i always chuckle while reading the forums.
The chuckling part is where we agree.

Never seen so much patriotism as with British people, sorry to say. Totally blinded by the medal count.

Brailswashed.


Well off the world pursuit champions that come to mind that also did very well on road in ITT and TTT I can immediately think of the following names. I'm sure there are plenty of others who've crossed over as it's an obvious choice to do well in ITT if you're a pursuit champion.

AUS
Jack Bobridge - UCI Road World Under–23 Championships ITT, National ITT Champion, 5th UCI Worlds ITT
Melissa Hoskins - 2nd UCI World Team time trial
Stuart OGrady - 1st Tour de France ITT 2013, 2nd Commonwealth Games ITT
Luke Roberts - 1st Endenhoven TTT
Brett Lancaster - 2nd World Team Time Trial Championships, 1st Junior National Time Trial Championships, 3rd Eindhoven Team Time Trial
Bradley McGee - 1st ITT Tour de Suisse, 1st Giro ITT

GBR
Thomas - we already know
Wiggins - we already know
Owain Doull - 3rd UCI TTT Championships, 2nd National Under–23 ITT, 2nd National ITT
Joanna Rowsell - 1st National Time Trial Championships
Chris Boardman - we already know
Graeme Obree - we already know

RUS
Viatcheslav Ekimov - 1st Time trial, Olympic Games etc etc

FR
Jeannie Longo - 1st World Time Trial Championship etc etc

NZ
Sarah Ulmer - 1st National Time Trial Championships, 1st ITT Oceania Games

HOL
Leontien van Moorsel - 1st Olympic ITT x 2, 1st National ITT, 2nd Commonwealth Games etc etc

US
Chloé Dygert - 1st World Junior ITT


You are asked to provide names and you list 6 female cyclists, U-23 riders and guys who only even won TTTs, i.e O'Grady, Roberts. That is too funny. Really scraping the bottom of the barrel there.

The irony being that you listed riders who did well at TTs at U-23 level which is something Thomas didn't do, so I guess that is like an o.g in the Thomas narrative. Didn't look like a GT rider, didn't look like a TT monster early road career either.

The most glaring omission is Lech Piasecki(World Pursuit Champion) and regular performer in TTs on the road. Who beat LeMond in the final TT stage of the 89 Giro? you know, the one where he showed the first signs of his turnaround. Piasecki was a class all round rider, won 3 stages in the 89 Giro including a road stage. Such a pity his pro career only lasted 5 seasons as he was already quite old by the time he was allowed to turn pro by the Polish federation. Could probably throw Francis Moreau in there as well. Had some decent results on the road and in prologues.

So take out the females, U-23s , TTT riders and we are left with Boardman, Obree??? Piasecki, Berzin, Moser, McGee, Ekimov and below that the likes of Moreau etc. Considering that covers a 40 years period, it is hardly a long list. In fact it highlights the opposite of what you want it to illustrate.

Funny, went back and pulled out an edition of ProCycling from 2007, remember there being a G feature in it as part of a British takeover themed issue, also featured Cavendish and Ben Swift. After waxing lyrical about Thomas and his talents, the article finished by saying "probably not a future Tour contender, but a big future in the sport". Ouch, even the biased British cycling media didn't envisage G as a Tour contender.
pmcg76
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,481
Joined: 06 Mar 2009 17:56

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests

Back to top