Log in:  

Register

Tom Dumoulin discussion thread

A place to discuss all things related to current professional road races. Here, you can also touch on the latest news relating to professional road racing. A doping discussion free forum.

Moderators: Eshnar, Irondan, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

18 May 2018 20:15

I actually have a feeling hes gonna smash Zoncolan.
User avatar classicomano
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,548
Joined: 05 May 2011 15:13

18 May 2018 20:19

Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?
User avatar Koronin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,920
Joined: 14 Oct 2017 01:42
Location: North Carolina, USA

18 May 2018 20:21

Just looking at the physique and difference in era alone makes it invalid in my opinion.
Veni, Vidi, Kirby

I came, I saw, I was dead wrong as per usual
User avatar Red Rick
Administrator
 
Posts: 15,672
Joined: 20 Feb 2012 18:15

Re:

18 May 2018 20:52

Koronin wrote:Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?

Referring TD as "Dumourain" is a great comparison IMO. I would say that Indurain was a better climber, but other opponents, other times, I could be wrong. With as much ITT as there was in the '90s, Tom would win the TdF a bunch of times, use the same recipe. Back then it often was a week of flat, then an ITT before the first mountains, and Indurain would bludgeon the field. Then control (he had a great team), and if need be, there was still the final ITT to annihilate a possible rival. On occasions he would let a pure climber take off and tempo his way back. Not as much as Dumoulin, but he had a team that could set the pace. BigMig could also respond to attacks. I see a lot of similarities between the two.
SOLO LA VITTORIA È BELLA
User avatar Tonton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,155
Joined: 17 May 2013 18:59

Re:

18 May 2018 21:41

Koronin wrote:Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?


No. Indurain's supposed successor Olano is about as close to Dumoulin in abilities as I've ever seen two riders be.
But Indurain? No, definitely not.

Winning TTs by minutes - Rominger aside since he was a freak of nature himself - crushing everyone on the first climbing stage to establish supremacy, almost never losing any time at all in climbs, never seeming to be pushing hard, that's not Dumoulin.

Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.

Of course, Dumoulin is yet to amass anything even remotely like Olano's palmares, but he has time on his side.

While I respect Tonton's opinions, I have to disagree on the great team. Indurain had an average team for his first Tours and a downright terrible team later on. From about 94 onwards it was a source of constant fan criticism that they couldn't surround him with anyone even halfway decent.
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,295
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

Re: Re:

18 May 2018 22:32

GuyIncognito wrote:
Koronin wrote:Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?


No. Indurain's supposed successor Olano is about as close to Dumoulin in abilities as I've ever seen two riders be.
But Indurain? No, definitely not.

Winning TTs by minutes - Rominger aside since he was a freak of nature himself - crushing everyone on the first climbing stage to establish supremacy, almost never losing any time at all in climbs, never seeming to be pushing hard, that's not Dumoulin.

Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.

Of course, Dumoulin is yet to amass anything even remotely like Olano's palmares, but he has time on his side.

While I respect Tonton's opinions, I have to disagree on the great team. Indurain had an average team for his first Tours and a downright terrible team later on. From about 94 onwards it was a source of constant fan criticism that they couldn't surround him with anyone even halfway decent.

hehehe...I can't disagree much with your point. But I disagree some.

1. You kind of contradict yourself, dismissing the comparison with BigMig and mentioning Olano. They were clones, looked alike. Now, it's true that Olano was BigMig-Light. Fair enough.

2. Yes, before comparing the two, Dumoulin needs more GT credentials, a bigger body of work. I agree that the first MTF would often see BigMig do great, but those were ______/ and Dumoulin at the Blockhaus, under similar circumstances, was very competitive last year.

3. Reading the Zoncolan thread and how Dumoulin may be more vulnerable in medium gradient climbs reminds me of stage 4 of the '94 when Indurain struggled and lost a lot of time to Berzin.

4. Team-wise, Banesto was overtaken by GB and Telekom starting in'94, but before then, it was a machine. I would argue that Dumoulin doesn't have the second, third, or fourth best team.

So Dumoulin is Olano is Big-Mig-Light still makes the comparison valid. You make great points though. But give Dumoulin a few years and routes like BigMig (ain't gonna happen), he would race the same, pretty much. His first ITT at Il Giro last year was very Luxembourg...we're not too far apart.
SOLO LA VITTORIA È BELLA
User avatar Tonton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,155
Joined: 17 May 2013 18:59

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 02:10

GuyIncognito wrote:
Koronin wrote:Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?


No. Indurain's supposed successor Olano is about as close to Dumoulin in abilities as I've ever seen two riders be.
But Indurain? No, definitely not.

Winning TTs by minutes - Rominger aside since he was a freak of nature himself - crushing everyone on the first climbing stage to establish supremacy, almost never losing any time at all in climbs, never seeming to be pushing hard, that's not Dumoulin.

Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.

Of course, Dumoulin is yet to amass anything even remotely like Olano's palmares, but he has time on his side.

While I respect Tonton's opinions, I have to disagree on the great team. Indurain had an average team for his first Tours and a downright terrible team later on. From about 94 onwards it was a source of constant fan criticism that they couldn't surround him with anyone even halfway decent.



Interesting and fair points. I don't think they are saying as good. I think the comparisons are more being in many ways Dumoulin reminds them of Indurain. They do not expect him to ever be Big Mig.
User avatar Koronin
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,920
Joined: 14 Oct 2017 01:42
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 08:08

GuyIncognito wrote:
Koronin wrote:Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?


Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.

Too much mythology here

Dumoulin's margin at last year's ITT world championships was definitely in the same ballpark as Indurain's margins. Especially when you consider that Indurain's one (1) ITT world championship came with "only" a 49" margin over 43 km's.

Time trials aren't really conducted the same way anymore in grand tours, so this is an apples to oranges comparison. Grand Tours don't put that many chrono kms like they did in the 90s. And then combine that with Clinic stuff, and you can you see how having a 1-2 second per km advantage can result in huge time differentials.

On a seconds per km basis, Dumoulin has an Indurain-esque time trial. Take a look at the first ITT in the last Giro. His closest rivals were Thomas and Jungels, who are both good time trialists, and they dropped 49 seconds and 56 seconds respectively over less than 40km of parcours. He put >2 mins in all the other GC contenders.

Indurain won his first GT at the same age that Dumoulin is now. The year prior to his first win, he finished 10th. Over 12 minutes down on LeMond. The year he first won it, there were four time trial stages. A prologue (5.4km), a team trial (36.5km), and two ITTs (73km and 57km).

In fact, here are all the time trial miles of all the tours that Indurain won:

1991: 171.9 km
1992: 200.5 km
1993: 194.8 km
1994: 137.7 km
1995: 174.8 km

If there were that many TT km's in modern tours, would there be any doubt that Dumoulin would be a very strong contender every year?

I'm not going to suggest that Indurain isn't one of the greatest cyclists ever, or that Dumoulin will end up with a career like his (he won't, in large part because the Giro-Tour double isn't really possible anymore), but Indurain was the perfect cyclist for the parcours in the races he won.
Katabatic
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: 08 Apr 2017 23:05

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 08:29

Katabatic wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:
Koronin wrote:Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?


Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.

Too much mythology here

Dumoulin's margin at last year's ITT world championships was definitely in the same ballpark as Indurain's margins. Especially when you consider that Indurain's one (1) ITT world championship came with "only" a 49" margin over 43 km's.

Time trials aren't really conducted the same way anymore in grand tours, so this is an apples to oranges comparison. Grand Tours don't put that many chrono kms like they did in the 90s. And then combine that with Clinic stuff, and you can you see how having a 1-2 second per km advantage can result in huge time differentials.

On a seconds per km basis, Dumoulin has an Indurain-esque time trial. Take a look at the first ITT in the last Giro. His closest rivals were Thomas and Jungels, who are both good time trialists, and they dropped 49 seconds and 56 seconds respectively over less than 40km of parcours. He put >2 mins in all the other GC contenders.

Indurain won his first GT at the same age that Dumoulin is now. The year prior to his first win, he finished 10th. Over 12 minutes down on LeMond. The year he first won it, there were four time trial stages. A prologue (5.4km), a team trial (36.5km), and two ITTs (73km and 57km).

In fact, here are all the time trial miles of all the tours that Indurain won:

1991: 171.9 km
1992: 200.5 km
1993: 194.8 km
1994: 137.7 km
1995: 174.8 km

If there were that many TT km's in modern tours, would there be any doubt that Dumoulin would be a very strong contender every year?

I'm not going to suggest that Indurain isn't one of the greatest cyclists ever, or that Dumoulin will end up with a career like his (he won't, in large part because the Giro-Tour double isn't really possible anymore), but Indurain was the perfect cyclist for the parcours in the races he won.

The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context. Like the fact that Indurain was riding as a loyal domestique to Delgado until the year before his first win. He was still racking up wins in big stage races where he was the leader - so nothing like Dumoulin really.
User avatar DFA123
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,362
Joined: 07 Nov 2010 16:00
Location: Valencia

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 09:08

Koronin wrote:I don't think they are saying as good.


Apparently Karabatic is

Katabatic wrote:Too much mythology here

Dumoulin's margin at last year's ITT world championships was definitely in the same ballpark as Indurain's margins. Especially when you consider that Indurain's one (1) ITT world championship came with "only" a 49" margin over 43 km's.


You're knocking him for only winning one? You do realize the first ever edition was when his career was almost over, right?

He took part in one. He won it.

And Dumoulin's winning margin while excellent, really wasn't "in the same ballpark as Indurain" as you claim. It's in the same ballpark as Indurain's one world TT, but that's one TT out of many.

Katabatic wrote:Time trials aren't really conducted the same way anymore in grand tours, so this is an apples to oranges comparison.


What do you mean not conducted the same way? The distance?

Katabatic wrote:Grand Tours don't put that many chrono kms like they did in the 90s. And then combine that with Clinic stuff, and you can you see how having a 1-2 second per km advantage can result in huge time differentials.


If you want to discuss how clinic stuff increases gaps in TTs (I don't see how it would), feel free to open a topic in the clinic, I'll be there.

Katabatic wrote:On a seconds per km basis, Dumoulin has an Indurain-esque time trial. Take a look at the first ITT in the last Giro. His closest rivals were Thomas and Jungels, who are both good time trialists, and they dropped 49 seconds and 56 seconds respectively over less than 40km of parcours. He put >2 mins in all the other GC contenders.


1.23 sec/km in the first TT. Beaten by Jos van Emden in the second.
Let's compare that with Indurain

1 Miguel Indurain (Esp) en 1h19’31’’ @ 65km
2 Armand De Las Cuevas (Fra) à 3’

2.65 sec/km. More than double the advantage. In a better field.

Katabatic wrote:Indurain won his first GT at the same age that Dumoulin is now. The year prior to his first win, he finished 10th. Over 12 minutes down on LeMond.


Losing 12 minutes in one stage where he was sacrificed on the front to help Delgado. The talk at the end of that Tour was that he had been strongest and would've won it if he wasn't a domestique. He was let loose on the last mountain stage and won it.

Katabatic wrote:The year he first won it, there were four time trial stages. A prologue (5.4km), a team trial (36.5km), and two ITTs (73km and 57km).

In fact, here are all the time trial miles of all the tours that Indurain won:

1991: 171.9 km
1992: 200.5 km
1993: 194.8 km
1994: 137.7 km
1995: 174.8 km

If there were that many TT km's in modern tours, would there be any doubt that Dumoulin would be a very strong contender every year?


What's your point? Nobody said Dumoulin wouldn't be a strong contender. I said Dumoulin doesn't drop everyone by minutes on the first mountain stage of every GT to establish dominance, neither does he win nearly every TT. He's simply nowhere near the same level of dominance.

And aside from all this which is about time trials, Indurain was winning major races - both stage races and single day - regularly even before being team leader at the Tour. Dumoulin isn't doing that at all.
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,295
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

Re: Tom Dumoulin discussion thread

19 May 2018 09:17

Tonton wrote:For the sake of the race, Dumpoulin needs to lose about one minute over the week-end. I just don;t see it happening. He may actually lose more on Sunday than tomorrow, and I doubt it will be much.

No if he loses 1 minute the Giro is already over (for him). For it to stay interesting it needs to be between 20-40s (to Yates). Anything less and the TT will have a too big buffer. Anything more and he will have too few seconds of a lead after the TT.
User avatar Dekker_Tifosi
Veteran
 
Posts: 24,042
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:52
Location: Roermond, the Netherlands

19 May 2018 10:12

This debating style is obnoxious. Debate the entire point, not segmenting things down into easily manageable soundbites that you can take out of context to try to score points. It's so prevalent on the internet and every time I see it, it makes an otherwise interesting discussion into a chore.

GuyIncognito wrote:
Koronin wrote:I don't think they are saying as good.


Apparently Karabatic is


And you just proved my point entirely:

I'm not going to suggest that Indurain isn't one of the greatest cyclists ever, or that Dumoulin will end up with a career like his (he won't, in large part because the Giro-Tour double isn't really possible anymore), but Indurain was the perfect cyclist for the parcours in the races he won.


I made no attempt to say Dumoulin was as good as Indurain. Rather the opposite, actually. Just that your assertion that Dumoulin is nothing like Indurain is canonizing Indurain to a rather unreasonable degree.

GuyIncognito wrote:You're knocking him for only winning one? You do realize the first ever edition was when his career was almost over, right?

He took part in one. He won it.

And Dumoulin's winning margin while excellent, really wasn't "in the same ballpark as Indurain" as you claim. It's in the same ballpark as Indurain's one world TT, but that's one TT out of many.


His one ITT WC (against the best ITTs in the world, not just the best ITTs who happen to be racing in the same GT field) is actually worse, if you want to go by this very standard.

Indurain won his WC by a margin of 49" over a 43km course, gaining 1.14 sec/km.
Dumoulin won his WC by a margin of 57" over a 31km course, gaining 1.84 sec/km.

GuyIncognito wrote:If you want to discuss how clinic stuff increases gaps in TTs (I don't see how it would), feel free to open a topic in the clinic, I'll be there.


What, that clinic stuff allows you to hold on to marginal advantages for longer by giving people superhuman threshold endurance? I don't see how that's even a debate. That's literally what Clinic stuff does. That's literally why people do it.

GuyIncognito wrote:1.23 sec/km in the first TT. Beaten by Jos van Emden in the second.
Let's compare that with Indurain

1 Miguel Indurain (Esp) en 1h19’31’’ @ 65km
2 Armand De Las Cuevas (Fra) à 3’

2.65 sec/km. More than double the advantage. In a better field.


And I suppose it's easy to cherry pick certain ITTs where Indurain smashed the competition. How about the 73km '91 ITT into Alençon where Indurain won by 8 seconds? Or how about the 54km '95 ITT into Séraing where Indurain won by 12 seconds? Or the '93 ITT where Indurain lost more than 40 seconds to Rominger?

If you want to do a career average as them as GC leaders and calculating their sec/km over the nearest competition, that would be an interesting discussion. But what do you think you're actually proving by picking one or two examples against each other?

I don't even believe that Dumoulin is a better ITT than Indurain, just that Indurain is not some unassailable paragon that you seem to believe. It's not sacrilegious to compare riders to Indurain.

I would also caution talk about "better field" because it's very difficult to compare things across eras. Many riders (including very good time trialists like Greg Lemond), for instance, raced ITTs without a helmet. There's so much more technology and volume of research now that goes into time trialing and aerodynamics that it's very difficult to compare how good fields are.

GuyIncognito wrote:What's your point? Nobody said Dumoulin wouldn't be a strong contender. I said Dumoulin doesn't drop everyone by minutes on the first mountain stage of every GT to establish dominance, neither does he win nearly every TT. He's simply nowhere near the same level of dominance.


Except this didn't actually happen for Indurain either.

1991: Lost more than 6 minutes to Mottet and Leblanc on Stage 12.
1992: Lost 1:45 to Chiapucci on Stage 13.
1993: st as stage winner Rominger on Stage 10.
1994: Lost 2" to Leblanc. He did beat a young Pantani, so that's certainly to be commended.
1995: Lost 2 minutes to Zülle on Stage 9.

Indurain frequently lost minutes to the best climbers. He won by being very consistently near the top (limiting his losses), and smashing them in the time trials. The strategy is the same as Dumoulin's.

Some of these past tours are almost an alien landscape compared to modern tours. The 1992 TdF had two (count them, 2) stages listed as mountain stages. This year's Giro has 8. The 92 Tour had 200 km of TT. This year's Giro has 44km of TT. Dumoulin would be a huge favorite of any GT with those kinds of parcours.

As to what's the point, I've already stated it, except you willfully ignored it. Indurain was a perfect cyclist for the era of cycling he was in. He has the palmares to prove it. But you don't need to deify or mythologize his already incredible accomplishments. There are riders who ride like him, and if Indurain rode in an era like today where GT's have very few ITT miles and prioritize uphill sprints, he might not have the same palmares. It's really not that hard.

DFA123 wrote:The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context. Like the fact that Indurain was riding as a loyal domestique to Delgado until the year before his first win. He was still racking up wins in big stage races where he was the leader - so nothing like Dumoulin really.

Being on a lower tier WT team (which is what a team like Argos-Shimano was) as a young rider doesn't really promote great GC or stage win potential either. That's exactly why this comparison is apples to oranges. You're supporting my point if anything.
Katabatic
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: 08 Apr 2017 23:05

19 May 2018 10:29

You may call me obnoxious, but there is more to debating than picking results off the internet.

Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.
User avatar roundabout
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,189
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 11:43

Re:

19 May 2018 10:40

roundabout wrote:You may call me obnoxious, but there is more to debating than picking results off the internet.

Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.

Did you just out your sock?

And I like how people like to assume that just because I enjoy looking at old results and seeing if the data supports the assertion, that I never actually watched the races. I've probably watched as much racing as you have, and my eye test is just as valid as your eye test.

I know exactly what happened in Stage 9 of the '95 Tour, and Zülle's early attack was legendary, as was Indurain reeling him back. But it doesn't change the fact that he didn't smash everybody on the first mountain stage.
Katabatic
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: 08 Apr 2017 23:05

Re:

19 May 2018 11:00

Warning to others: don't bother reading this. It's just him claiming that my opinions are things I never claimed anywhere, and me replying "where did I say that?". Rinse, repeat

Katabatic wrote:This debating style is obnoxious. Debate the entire point, not segmenting things down into easily manageable soundbites that you can take out of context to try to score points.


If you make several different arguments, be sure I'm going to discuss them one by one.
It's popular precisely because it means people can't get away with one generic reply to one argument while ignoring others. In other words, it ensures what you just accused me of doing can't be done.

For example several of the points you raised before, you've conveniently dropped in this post without another word. I could raise them again as "soundbites" if I were doing what you claim, but I let it slide.

Katabatic wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:
Koronin wrote:I don't think they are saying as good.


Apparently Karabatic is


And you just proved my point entirely:

I'm not going to suggest that Indurain isn't one of the greatest cyclists ever, or that Dumoulin will end up with a career like his (he won't, in large part because the Giro-Tour double isn't really possible anymore), but Indurain was the perfect cyclist for the parcours in the races he won.


I made no attempt to say Dumoulin was as good as Indurain. Rather the opposite, actually. Just that your assertion that Dumoulin is nothing like Indurain is canonizing Indurain to a rather unreasonable degree.



I realize you said that at the end, and I quoted it.

But the rest of your post said the opposite. Each point you tried to make compared Dumoulin favorably to Indurain. Putting in a discardable line at the end saying "but I'm not saying it" doesn't change the fact that you said it

Katabatic wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:You're knocking him for only winning one? You do realize the first ever edition was when his career was almost over, right?

He took part in one. He won it.

And Dumoulin's winning margin while excellent, really wasn't "in the same ballpark as Indurain" as you claim. It's in the same ballpark as Indurain's one world TT, but that's one TT out of many.


His one ITT WC (against the best ITTs in the world, not just the best ITTs who happen to be racing in the same GT field) is actually worse, if you want to go by this very standard.

Indurain won his WC by a margin of 49" over a 43km course, gaining 1.14 sec/km.
Dumoulin won his WC by a margin of 57" over a 31km course, gaining 1.84 sec/km.


Now who's picking and choosing "soundbytes"? You took out my main point: that you picked one TT from each guy, the ones that you felt supported the conclusion you wanted, and you decided to compare them as if the rest of their respective careers didn't exist

Katabatic wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:If you want to discuss how clinic stuff increases gaps in TTs (I don't see how it would), feel free to open a topic in the clinic, I'll be there.


What, that clinic stuff allows you to hold on to marginal advantages for longer by giving people superhuman threshold endurance? I don't see how that's even a debate. That's literally what Clinic stuff does. That's literally why people do it.


I'll say it again: feel free to open a topic in the clinic, not here.

Katabatic wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:1.23 sec/km in the first TT. Beaten by Jos van Emden in the second.
Let's compare that with Indurain

1 Miguel Indurain (Esp) en 1h19’31’’ @ 65km
2 Armand De Las Cuevas (Fra) à 3’

2.65 sec/km. More than double the advantage. In a better field.


And I suppose it's easy to cherry pick certain ITTs where Indurain smashed the competition. How about the 73km '91 ITT into Alençon where Indurain won by 8 seconds? Or how about the 54km '95 ITT into Séraing where Indurain won by 12 seconds? Or the '93 ITT where Indurain lost more than 40 seconds to Rominger?

If you want to do a career average as them as GC leaders and calculating their sec/km over the nearest competition, that would be an interesting discussion. But what do you think you're actually proving by picking one or two examples against each other?


You still don't get it. I'm precisely pointing out that you picked the one TT from each guy that you wanted. I picked this one to show you how ridiculous it can get when cherry picking.

Katabatic wrote:I don't even believe that Dumoulin is a better ITT than Indurain, just that Indurain is not some unassailable paragon that you seem to believe. It's not sacrilegious to compare riders to Indurain.


When did I make any of those claims? Any at all? I hardly have Indurain on a pedestal, if anything I think he's overrated. You're the one hyping Dumoulin, although I guess that's to be expected in this topic.

Katabatic wrote:I would also caution talk about "better field" because it's very difficult to compare things across eras. Many riders (including very good time trialists like Greg Lemond), for instance, raced ITTs without a helmet. There's so much more technology and volume of research now that goes into time trialing and aerodynamics that it's very difficult to compare how good fields are.


Several riders rode without a helmet that day and it had nothing to do with lack of progress. There was significant climbing that day - Indurain called it harder than the 1993 Giro Sestriere TT - and as is usual in such TTs there were discrepancies in what each rider though was faster. LeMond went without a helmet because he believed it was faster. Several others did.

LeMond was precisely the rider who pushed the edge of TT technology, he's the poster child for it.

Katabatic wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:What's your point? Nobody said Dumoulin wouldn't be a strong contender. I said Dumoulin doesn't drop everyone by minutes on the first mountain stage of every GT to establish dominance, neither does he win nearly every TT. He's simply nowhere near the same level of dominance.


Except this didn't actually happen for Indurain either.

1991: Lost more than 6 minutes to Mottet and Leblanc on Stage 12.
1992: Lost 1:45 to Chiapucci on Stage 13.
1993: st as stage winner Rominger on Stage 10.
1994: Lost 2" to Leblanc. He did beat a young Pantani, so that's certainly to be commended.
1995: Lost 2 minutes to Zülle on Stage 9.


DFA123's line is on the money here: "The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context." Nearly every one of those is wrong.

1991: That wasn't the first day in the mountains, that was a medium mountain stage where the break of the day was allowed to stay away by minutes. Leblanc was a young rider not considered a danger, Mottet was already minutes down. The next day was the first day in the high mountains and both were shelled quickly. Indurain had a 3 minute lead by the end of it.

1992: Yes, Chiappucci gambled on an attack from a very long way out that cracked Indurain. Aside from the fact that everyone else lost minutes to Indurain, you're mostly right about this one

1993: Everyone was dropped except for Rominger who was 6 minutes down due to the events of the early flat stages. Indurain summarily dispatched anyone who was a GC threat to him

1994: Indurain set the pace on the climb - again - and dropped everyone who was a contender. Leblanc was over 8 minutes down even before the stage so Indurain didn't care that Leblanc hung on.

1995: Zulle was in the break of the day because he'd lost minutes already and everyone was expecting him to abandon due to injuries. On the final climb Indurain took the front - as usual - and rode everyone off his wheel. He sliced Zulle's advantage from 6 to 2 minutes and none of the GC guys finished within 2 minutes of him despite starting the final climb with him

1992 aside, it was domination every time.

Katabatic wrote:Indurain frequently lost minutes to the best climbers.


As shown above, not really, no. He didn't care about the ones who weren't GC threats, but he was never dropped by any where were threats other than Sestriere 1992 and of course his 11th place finish in 1996

GuyIncognito wrote: He won by being very consistently near the top (limiting his losses), and smashing them in the time trials. The strategy is the same as Dumoulin's.


In this we agree. But it's like saying Andrea Guardini and Marcel Kittel have the same strategy. The level to which they can execute it differs

Katabatic wrote:Some of these past tours are almost an alien landscape compared to modern tours. The 1992 TdF had two (count them, 2) stages listed as mountain stages. This year's Giro has 8. The 92 Tour had 200 km of TT. This year's Giro has 44km of TT. Dumoulin would be a huge favorite of any GT with those kinds of parcours.


Again: Yes, and? No argument from me, but that's like saying I have a green car: it's irrelevant because we're not discussing their palmares. We're discussing their abilities. Nowhere did I talk about Indurain winning X or Y except in the one case where you made a big point that Indurain was only TT world champion a single time. Once it was pointed out why that was, you - as usual - immediately dropped the subject and harped on something else.

As with most of the discussion in here, you're creating a strawman and pretending I've said something I never did.

Katabatic wrote:As to what's the point, I've already stated it, except you willfully ignored it. Indurain was a perfect cyclist for the era of cycling he was in. He has the palmares to prove it. But you don't need to deify or mythologize his already incredible accomplishments. There are riders who ride like him, and if Indurain rode in an era like today where GT's have very few ITT miles and prioritize uphill sprints, he might not have the same palmares. It's really not that hard.


I didn't ignore it. You ignored my points:
- Dumoulin isn't in the same quality as Indurain
- I never compared their palmares, I compared Dumoulin and Olano's palmares.


Katabatic wrote:
DFA123 wrote:The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context. Like the fact that Indurain was riding as a loyal domestique to Delgado until the year before his first win. He was still racking up wins in big stage races where he was the leader - so nothing like Dumoulin really.

Being on a lower tier WT team (which is what a team like Argos-Shimano was) as a young rider doesn't really promote great GC or stage win potential either. That's exactly why this comparison is apples to oranges. You're supporting my point if anything.


That....doesn't even begin to make sense. And once again you're dodging giving him an answer.


I eagerly await another round of you putting words in my mouth
Last edited by GuyIncognito on 19 May 2018 11:07, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,295
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

19 May 2018 11:07

Katabatic wrote:
roundabout wrote:You may call me obnoxious, but there is more to debating than picking results off the internet.

Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.

Did you just out your sock?


Not sure if you're talking to me or DFA123, but in any case read this:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=29991
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,295
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 11:08

Katabatic wrote:
roundabout wrote:You may call me obnoxious, but there is more to debating than picking results off the internet.

Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.

Did you just out your sock?

And I like how people like to assume that just because I enjoy looking at old results and seeing if the data supports the assertion, that I never actually watched the races. I've probably watched as much racing as you have, and my eye test is just as valid as your eye test.

I know exactly what happened in Stage 9 of the '95 Tour, and Zülle's early attack was legendary, as was Indurain reeling him back. But it doesn't change the fact that he didn't smash everybody on the first mountain stage.


If you knew exactly what happened, you would have mentioned that Indurain put 2+ minutes into everyone that started the last climb in the same group as him.

You did not.
User avatar roundabout
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,189
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 11:43

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 11:10

roundabout wrote:
Katabatic wrote:
roundabout wrote:You may call me obnoxious, but there is more to debating than picking results off the internet.

Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.

Did you just out your sock?

And I like how people like to assume that just because I enjoy looking at old results and seeing if the data supports the assertion, that I never actually watched the races. I've probably watched as much racing as you have, and my eye test is just as valid as your eye test.

I know exactly what happened in Stage 9 of the '95 Tour, and Zülle's early attack was legendary, as was Indurain reeling him back. But it doesn't change the fact that he didn't smash everybody on the first mountain stage.


If you knew exactly what happened, you would have mentioned that Indurain put 2+ minutes into everyone that started the last climb in the same group as him.

You did not.


It doesn't fit the conclusion that he's trying to crowbar in, so he ignores it.
Just like the rest of the stuff he's quietly dropped and never mentioned again in this topic.

Also, why am I talking to my own "sockpuppet"? :lol:
(Unless he's calling you a sockpuppet of DFA123. not sure)
User avatar GuyIncognito
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,295
Joined: 27 Jun 2013 21:19

19 May 2018 11:33

Ofcourse Dumoulin can't hold a candle to Indurain. But he would probably have an awesome GT palmares if the GT's nowadays were anything like in the 90's. If every Tour now has 150KM ITT ... He's gonna win each and everyone of them
User avatar Dekker_Tifosi
Veteran
 
Posts: 24,042
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:52
Location: Roermond, the Netherlands

Re: Re:

19 May 2018 11:50

GuyIncognito wrote:If you make several different arguments, be sure I'm going to discuss them one by one.
It's popular precisely because it means people can't get away with one generic reply to one argument while ignoring others. In other words, it ensures what you just accused me of doing can't be done.

Quoting two sentences isn't making a point. This is some twitter-level attention span.

If you want people to not "get away with ignoring other [arguments]" you reply to the argument presented. Fragmenting posts into a bunch of tiny splinters is how you pretty much guarantee that you miss arguments. You've missed plenty as well, as I'm sure was your intent by splintering a few basic points into dozens of them.

GuyIncognito wrote:I realize you said that at the end, and I quoted it.

But the rest of your post said the opposite. Each point you tried to make compared Dumoulin favorably to Indurain. Putting in a discardable line at the end saying "but I'm not saying it" doesn't change the fact that you said it

GuyIncognito wrote:Now who's picking and choosing "soundbytes"? You took out my main point: that you picked one TT from each guy, the ones that you felt supported the conclusion you wanted, and you decided to compare them as if the rest of their respective careers didn't exist


Let's pay attention here, and stop trying to misrepresent yourself. This is what you said:

GuyIncognito wrote:Winning TTs by minutes - Rominger aside since he was a freak of nature himself - crushing everyone on the first climbing stage to establish supremacy, almost never losing any time at all in climbs, never seeming to be pushing hard, that's not Dumoulin.

He won SOME TTs by minutes. But this is a point where you try to say it's not something Dumoulin does. While it's true in very specific examples, it also completely negates several key points:

1.) TT's were much longer in Indurain's day
2.) TT results nowadays are more clustered to begin with (you can see this by comparing the 25th percentile vs 75th percentile in the field), this is due in large part because of technology, power meters, and more advanced tools to ensure that riders are properly aerodynamic and power output is optimal throughout the course.
3.) Clinic Stuff

There are certain kinds of lies. Lies of commission (where you reject facts altogether), lies of influence (where you try to talk about things that look better in order to avoid suspicion), and lies of omission (where you leave off important facts or neglect to mention other factors).

Thus, trying to make a point as how Indurain is a better TT because he "won by minutes" is misleading and incomplete.

Katabatic wrote:I'll say it again: feel free to open a topic in the clinic, not here.

It seems like you rather just disagree with the very basis of what clinic things do, in which case it's hardly worthwhile to start this discussion. If you would like to open the topic, feel free.

GuyIncognito wrote:You still don't get it. I'm precisely pointing out that you picked the one TT from each guy that you wanted. I picked this one to show you how ridiculous it can get when cherry picking.

And I correctly identified how this is a roundabout and pointless means of argument. You would need to make a compiled list and talk about career averages.

Look, I enjoy talks about advanced statistics in sport. I'm well aware of how things can be misleading and you can't compare tiny samples. This is such an inane point that you can't seem to realize we're making the same one.

GuyIncognito wrote:When did I make any of those claims? Any at all? I hardly have Indurain on a pedestal, if anything I think he's overrated. You're the one hyping Dumoulin, although I guess that's to be expected in this topic.

To suggest that Indurain and Dumoulin aren't even able to compared is putting Indurain on a pedestal. Their racing styles are very similar. Dumoulin isn't as good, of course, but it's not like Dumoulin is a terrible rider who has no business being compared either.

GuyIncognito wrote:Several riders rode without a helmet that day and it had nothing to do with lack of progress. There was significant climbing that day - Indurain called it harder than the 1993 Giro Sestriere TT - and as is usual in such TTs there were discrepancies in what each rider though was faster. LeMond went without a helmet because he believed it was faster. Several others did.

I like how you just assume I was talking about a specific time trial. LeMond has gone helmet-less for a number of them. 91, 92, 86, just off the top of my head.

And yeah, it's still not an advantage even if there's significant climbing. I'm not really sure what your point is. It seems you were sidetracked by the point of one particular rider going without a helmet and completely ignored that the peloton, in general, have much better aerodynamics now in TT than in the 90s. Which is the larger point being made there.

I'm well aware of LeMond's advocacy of technological improvements.

GuyIncognito wrote:1991: That wasn't the first day in the mountains, that was a medium mountain stage where the break of the day was allowed to stay away by minutes. Leblanc was a young rider not considered a danger, Mottet was already minutes down. The next day was the first day in the high mountains and both were shelled quickly. Indurain had a 3 minute lead by the end of it.

LeBlanc rolled into the yellow jersey on the back of this stage, so I would hardly consider him a rider that should have posed no danger. Mottet also surged ahead of Indurain too.

Also, almost every rider would be "minutes down" if the tour opened with 100 TT km's before the first mountain stage. That's entirely the point. Indurain had the freedom to follow only specific riders because he almost always went into the first mountain stage on the back of significant TT km's.

GuyIncognito wrote:1993: Everyone was dropped except for Rominger who was 6 minutes down due to the events of the early flat stages. Indurain summarily dispatched anyone who was a GC threat to him

Mejia was in second at the time, and he stuck with Indurain across both the Alps stages.

You are, for the most part, correct here. After the ITTs and Alps stages, there was really no one left that could challenge Indurain.

GuyIncognito wrote:1994: Indurain set the pace on the climb - again - and dropped everyone who was a contender. Leblanc was over 8 minutes down even before the stage so Indurain didn't care that Leblanc hung on.

By everybody, I assume you mean Rominger, because that was the only person that remotely had a chance in GC, with everyone else more than 5 minutes down after 130 (!) combined miles of TT. He didn't really drop Pantani by much in the end. Pantani really wasn't going for GC either.

GuyIncognito wrote:1995: Zulle was in the break of the day because he'd lost minutes already and everyone was expecting him to abandon due to injuries. On the final climb Indurain took the front - as usual - and rode everyone off his wheel. He sliced Zulle's advantage from 6 to 2 minutes and none of the GC guys finished within 2 minutes of him despite starting the final climb with him

Zulle attacked on the first climb. It was hardly a case of the peloton letting him go. He was 4 minutes and change down, which is substantial but not completely out of contention.

Indurain did a great job of reeling him back in, for sure, but surrendering 2 minutes to the guy who would end up being the nearest step on the podium is not "smashing" them in my book. By this same logic, and using the same language, Dumoulin "smashed" everyone up the Blockhaus, dropping Zakarin, Pozzovivo, and Nibali while giving Mollema a tow up the mountain.

Pantani was largely stage hunting, and would dominate the next day up the Alpe d'Huez.

GuyIncognito wrote:As shown above, not really, no. He didn't care about the ones who weren't GC threats, but he was never dropped by any where were threats other than Sestriere 1992 and of course his 11th place finish in 1996

To be quite fair, how many climbers would be GC threats after 100 km of TT?

Spot Dumoulin 5 minutes to Yates, Pozzovivo, Pinot, and then allow him to lose time to any one of them (because he didn't care about non-GC threats) on any given stage, and I'm sure you could go back and spin the same narrative about every time gap so far this Giro.

GuyIncognito wrote:In this we agree. But it's like saying Andrea Guardini and Marcel Kittel have the same strategy. The level to which they can execute it differs

If Guardini road well in any grand tour and actually won a few stages in one of them (about the equivalent for a sprinter), sure, we could make the comparison based on similar styles. It wouldn't be silly.

It's silly because Guardini has never won against elite competition on the big stage.

GuyIncognito wrote:I didn't ignore it. You ignored my points:
- Dumoulin isn't in the same quality as Indurain

Correct, but close enough that a comparison should not be egregious.

They're both GT winners who have the same gameplan in order to win. That in and of itself is a point of comparison. No one said Dumoulin is as good as Indurain, just that certain stats compare reasonably well.

In general, GT racing has changed so much that Dumoulin will never be as accomplished as Indurain. That said, if the Tour goes back to 2 stages in the high moutains with 200 ITT kms, are you going to bet against him?

GuyIncognito wrote:
GuyIncognito wrote:- I never compared their palmares, I compared Dumoulin and Olano's palmares.

Fair enough. I don't like this comparison because 1.) Olano and Indurain are comparable riders. Olano is Indurain light. and 2.) Olano and Dumoulin have already won the same amount of stages in the Tour, and that includes Dumoulin not having done it since 2016.

GuyIncognito wrote:I eagerly await another round of you putting words in my mouth

Passive aggressive to end the post, I almost admire your style.
Katabatic
New Member
 
Posts: 47
Joined: 08 Apr 2017 23:05

PreviousNext

Return to Professional road racing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Akuryo and 27 guests

Back to top