115th Paris-Roubaix 2017 - April 9, 257k

[Frankschleck]

Re: Re:

I mean - did GvA contributed when Oss was in front? (with all the respect for his own effort to get back before) As far as I remember he did only when he faced attacks from other leaders. Yet that was the part, when Styby was for the long kms the only one to left for his own leader. And he worked hard.

Indeed he countered attacks while he didn't have to. Quick Step gave Styby weird team orders. Styby had as many chance to outsprint Greg than Boonen to outsprint Degenkolb if not more. Fortuantely, everything ended the way it should.

Yep.
GVA deserved it. And Quick Step need a good kick up the beejesus for the negative tactics they've been employing. Boonen was out of it, Stybar had no good reason not to tap through.

He kind of did tho, as even though he didn't tap in, he still cound't win, so he would have been in a even worse posistion if he had helped van avermant

Tapping through isn't driving the break. It wouldn't have made a great difference to his energy. It's just horribly negative to sit on like he did. And he then goes for a long range attack? It's too great a race for that nonsense.

The win has to be properly fought for to be truly deserved and if he'd won it would have left a bitter taste for me.

Did'nt like the attack either, and i get your view, but i still believe stybar had it right with not doing anything in the front group. He doesn't care and should not care about another second place in my opionen. But desvered winner in Greg Van A.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Re:

very finely written:

http://www.eurosport.com/cycling/pa...p-to-the-heart-of-hell_sto6117660/story.shtml

As Gouvenou explains, “I can’t recall anyone winning Paris-Roubaix after leaving the Arenberg in 60th place – and the favourites all know that.”

 

[IndianCyclist]

This PR came very close to becoming a sprint a la MSR. The fact that it was ridden at highest speed indicates that the cobbles are not selective enough on hot dry day. More cobbles are required otherwise it runs the danger of becoming a sprint classic. No disrespect to him but Greipel at the pointy end of PR???
This was a day also of the Gregario, Stuyven, Oss and Moscon impressive performances by all of them.
GVA has got his monument duck out of the way.
QS failed in their strategy by getting too sentimental. Stybar was working in the middle of the race and for him to cover most of the moves and then get second is impressive. Which means they should have been working for Stybar. This is where an additional leader in the form of Gilbert would be nice. His tactical nous and power and form were really good and to not use him did not make any sense especially they at least could have used him to chase for Boonen if nothing else.
Expected Boonen to do or die as this was his last race. He didnot do or die, wheelsucking from Degenkolb not withstanding. As is the case with everyone who comes here with last race in mind like Wiggins they sadly disappoint. Compare this with the performance of Moscon who initiated a number of breaks and in the end was in the finale. This is what was expected of Boonen. As it is a hugely disappointing race for him.
Trek got 3 men in top 10 with good strategy but they might want to rethink the finale a bit. How due you expect Stuyven to compete against the like of GVA after being in the break for a long time. The likes of GVA/Sagan should have been chased by Degenkolb and if Boonen is making a move then work with him to bring the break back. Unless they get these correct, they will always have top5/10 but the win will elude them. Degenkolb himself seems to have forgotten the lessons of his win where he chased down none other than GVA/Stybar in the finale to take the win.
Griepel in the final was the surprise which begs the question. What would he have done if he had trained properly for the cobbles when he was young.
Sagan needs to rethink how much power he puts out on the cobbles or his line or his tyre choice otherwise punctures will ruin his day like in the Rio mountain bike race
GVA was the most impressive. I thought that his race was lost before Arenberg but to come back for the mechanical and then go on the attack and work extensively in the finale and win after Stybar had 2 bike lengths. He looks to be the complete package now. He has been consistently overshadowed by Boonen/Cance & Gilbert at BMC and now Sagan. So this win is hugely deserving

 

[Dan2016]

Re: Re:

Yep.
GVA deserved it. And Quick Step need a good kick up the beejesus for the negative tactics they've been employing. Boonen was out of it, Stybar had no good reason not to tap through.

He kind of did tho, as even though he didn't tap in, he still cound't win, so he would have been in a even worse posistion if he had helped van avermant

Tapping through isn't driving the break. It wouldn't have made a great difference to his energy. It's just horribly negative to sit on like he did. And he then goes for a long range attack? It's too great a race for that nonsense.

The win has to be properly fought for to be truly deserved and if he'd won it would have left a bitter taste for me.

Did'nt like the attack either, and i get your view, but i still believe stybar had it right with not doing anything in the front group. He doesn't care and should not care about another second place in my opionen. But desvered winner in Greg Van A.

But but but...Sean Kelly agreed with me so that makes me right. (just kidding)

I probably stated my point a bit strong. I see yours and others point too, that it was okay for him to sit on, I just hate seeing it happen in such a massive classic. Must admit though, I had that many problems with live streaming I missed almost the whole race, only caught the last 20km or so. So I don't really have the full picture of what happened. Glad GVA won in any case. Gutsy rider.

Cheers.

 

[Tonton]

Re: Re:

Durbrige crashed

quickly picked up and now he's back in the pack

He did a "Bardet" to come back.

You spelled Demare wrong, my friend

By Demare you mean Nibali?

Demare was the best of the rest. Close but no cigar...he was strong today.

GVA "a trick from the track" like Kwiat? Let a gap open? In purpose?

Not so. But GVA was cool and collected. And he nailed it. Props.

Funny how GVA takes advantage of the Sagan Watch. And cleans the board...smart,

 

[Jancouver]

Re:

How was, from the rules above, Greg's bike change not allowed? Nothing says you cannot get a bike from anyone at the side of the road (be it a BMC guy or a random bystander or even another team's guy), as long as your old bike gets on the roof of a vehicle following the race (be it the BMC car, another car,...).

The difference with Porte in the Giro was, that Porte got help from another RIDER from another team.

Are you saying every pave section is an authorized place to receive a technical assistance? I doubt that.

OK, Stybar is the first Czech monument winner. :lol:

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re: Re:

Ridiculous luck for GvA today. After his re-entering of the peloton after Arenberg, of course.

He was in a horrible position when Sagan, Bodnar, Oss and Stuyven were in front and in my opinion, that could have been the winning move. Instead, Sagan punctured giving GvA a dream scenario with a teammate in front (who was stronger than his companion) and carte blanche to do nothing.

Instead, every time the favorite group split, Sagan had to close all the gaps and burn a lot of matches. Nevertheless, GvA managed to let Sagan get away another time and put himself into a winning position just to puncture again!

At the same time, Trek-Segafredo demonstrated complete and utter horrible tactical imbecility and chose to put Stuyven in front, which gave Degenkolb an alibi not to work and try to catch the GvA front group. But how stupid can you be to do this? It was by no means an advantage to have Stuyven up there as he was clearly never going to win and prevented Degenkolb from being in contention.

And when are the others going to mark GvA a little bit? Why always Sagan? Cycling isn't fair, I guess.

Disclaimer: Yes, I'm bitter, and no, GvA was not lucky (but clearly the strongest) in the finishing kilometres - but I think he was inferior to Sagan who rode like a beast until his second puncture. It's hugely frustrating that they didn't get the chance to face off.

Very good post.

 

[SKSemtex]

I do no know till when Oss has his contract with BMC but Bora should definitely buy him.
Sagan does not need only great domestic, he needs somebody who can win the race instead of him.
Something like Moser in Strade 2013
Bora would be the perfect team for Oss and he would be a perfect match with Sagan.
He is such an amazing rider for me.

 

[RedheadDane]

Re:

It's true that Sagan wasn't the only one who was unlucky, but clearly it shouldn't be difficult to understand why his accidents were more unfortunate than that of the others? In both cases he had forged clear and was on the offensive and had thus put GvA on the back foot and in both instances his attack just evaporated into thin air and he gained nothing but a lot of wasted energy.

Of course it was hella unfortunate, but that's just how life is; sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.

Question: Why is there even a time limit? I just noticed a whole bunch of riders completed the course but OTL. What difference does it make?

I've been wondering that myself. Those guys work their butts out of their shorts in order to get to the finish, only to be met by a "Too bad, you're too late."

 

[tobydawq]

Re: Re:

It's true that Sagan wasn't the only one who was unlucky, but clearly it shouldn't be difficult to understand why his accidents were more unfortunate than that of the others? In both cases he had forged clear and was on the offensive and had thus put GvA on the back foot and in both instances his attack just evaporated into thin air and he gained nothing but a lot of wasted energy.

Of course it was hella unfortunate, but that's just how life is; sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.

But how often have you seen a rider who has just attacked puncture? A very recent example of course would be Alaphilippe last week. Otherwise, I remember Bennati in the closing kilometres of a Giro stage a few years back (at least I think it was the Giro). Of course, that risk is higher in Roubaix, but still, to have that happen twice in one race - that's incredibly bad luck.

 

[RedheadDane]

Re: Re:

It's true that Sagan wasn't the only one who was unlucky, but clearly it shouldn't be difficult to understand why his accidents were more unfortunate than that of the others? In both cases he had forged clear and was on the offensive and had thus put GvA on the back foot and in both instances his attack just evaporated into thin air and he gained nothing but a lot of wasted energy.

Of course it was hella unfortunate, but that's just how life is; sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.

But how often have you seen a rider who has just attacked puncture? A very recent example of course would be Alaphilippe last week. Otherwise, I remember Bennati in the closing kilometres of a Giro stage a few years back (at least I think it was the Giro). Of course, that risk is higher in Roubaix, but still, to have that happen twice in one race - that's incredibly bad luck.

Sure, but sometimes you're really unlucky.

 

[tobydawq]

Re: Re:

It's true that Sagan wasn't the only one who was unlucky, but clearly it shouldn't be difficult to understand why his accidents were more unfortunate than that of the others? In both cases he had forged clear and was on the offensive and had thus put GvA on the back foot and in both instances his attack just evaporated into thin air and he gained nothing but a lot of wasted energy.

Of course it was hella unfortunate, but that's just how life is; sometimes you're lucky, sometimes you're not.

But how often have you seen a rider who has just attacked puncture? A very recent example of course would be Alaphilippe last week. Otherwise, I remember Bennati in the closing kilometres of a Giro stage a few years back (at least I think it was the Giro). Of course, that risk is higher in Roubaix, but still, to have that happen twice in one race - that's incredibly bad luck.

Sure, but sometimes you're really unlucky.

Yeah, I guess. When I think about it, I don't really know where I'm going with this, as we all can agree that he was unlucky.

To have a discussion as to what degree he was unlucky might be beyond the scope of relevant discussable subjects....

 

[RedheadDane]

Maybe it's more a question of whether it was unfair that he was unlucky...
Do you think it was unfair?

 

[tobydawq]

Re:

Maybe it's more a question of whether it was unfair that he was unlucky...
Do you think it was unfair?

Maybe a childish part of me feels that way. But I don't think fairness is a property that cobbles have so it wasn't like they systematically went for Sagan's tires.

And I don't believe in karma or other stuff like that so rationally speaking, no, it wasn't unfair.

 

[Jagartrott]

You could ask the question whether it was a coincidence Sagan punctured twice while on the attack. Perhaps, but perhaps it had something to do with the style of riding on the cobbles in those situations or the chosen tire pressure?

 

[SKSemtex]

I was a little bit disappointed with Boonen. I also expected him to go win or die. He looked so strong on cobbles.
He was just to scare of Sagan. Sagan showed him several times that he is willing to make the race hard but all his attack were neglected. It looks like Sagan was the only rider who wanted the ride PR not conservatively. :sad:

It is funny how GVA is still underrated in the peloton. If Sagan had the same problem before Arenberg as GVA had, the Peloton would fly away and nobody, nobody would have a chance to join back (we saw it last year).

Boonen lost his race on Arenberg not when he did not join GVA. What did he want? To beat Degenkolb on Velodrome when he had a problem last year with Haymen?
He wasted his energy in so many pointless attacks instead of riding hard with committed Sagan.

PR used to be the race for strongest rider and each cobbled sector should have his victims. The regrouping we saw yesterday was ridiculous. The cream of the cream was Greipel repeatedly attacking in places where we should have 4-5 strongest guys riding for victory.

 

[spalco]

Re: Re:

Stybar will win a Roubaix in the future. 6th, 5th, 2nd and 2nd in 5 years as a road cyclist. Surely we'll have a rain edition soon.

How do you imagine him winning? He's fast, but really fast enough on the line. He's really great on the cobbles, but on the asphalt I don't see him holding a gap. He'd probably have to escape with someone like Vanmarcke.

That sort of consistency shows a special kind of class though imo. Stybar's sprint isn't useless, eventually he'll get to the end with the right group if he can keep that up.

A flat tire and crashes can never be prevented 100% of the time, but sometimes such issues are caused by carelessness due to exhaustion. I'm convinced stronger riders have fewer mechanicals in races like Roubaix on average. Cancellara finished Roubaix 11 times in 14 years, 8 times in the top 10, that can't just be luck.

 

[RedheadDane]

Re: Re:

Maybe it's more a question of whether it was unfair that he was unlucky...
Do you think it was unfair?

Maybe a childish part of me feels that way. But I don't think fairness is a property that cobbles have so it wasn't like they automatically went for Sagan's tires.

And I don't believe in karma or other stuff like that so rationally speaking, no, it wasn't unfair.

Now, that would be the ultimate conspiracy theory; the cobbles don't like Sagan, so they made him puncture.

 

[Cance > TheRest]

Re: Re:

I think it must have been frustrating to be Langeveld and Van Avermaet while Stybar was wheelsucking, but Stybar was one of the two riders who had given a lot at that point and i think he was cooked. I understand he didn't want to work. The fact that Boonen was behind was obviously only an excuse, since he was in the same group as Degenkolb and Greipel. Can't blame Stybar. The only negative rider i saw today was Degenkolb, who still refused to do jack sh** when Stuyven was dropped and was trailing 45 seconds behind Langeveld, Van Avermaet and Stybar. Hoping somebody else would bring him (Degenkolb) back in front. The only negative rider i saw today and the only one i would have felt bad about had he won it.

QS agrees but it's weird to hear Demol say what he did

“Some guys were always on my wheels…,” Boonen said with a shake of his head. “I think that John Degenkolb did the most cowardly race by only focusing on me.”

Quick-Step team boss, Patrick Lefevere added, “Some men rode like such little children that they could only lose.”

“We never knew what to do with our leaders John Degenkolb or Jasper Stuyven,” Trek-Segafredo sports director Dirk Demol said.

How was "Sagan obviously still weakened by last week's crash"??? He looked mightily strong until his race was lost by bad luck.

Well, he's already mentioned he doesn't like GVA.

Gotta hand it to Lefevre. His ridiculous comments are always a fun read - seems like he's taught Boonen a few things about being disrespectful.
Demol is obviously right. They had no idea what to do with Degenkolb and Stuyven.

 

[Volderke]

I was a little bit disappointed with Boonen. I also expected him to go win or die. He looked so strong on cobbles.
He was just to scare of Sagan. Sagan showed him several times that he is willing to make the race hard but all his attack were neglected. It looks like Sagan was the only rider who wanted the ride PR not conservatively. :sad:

It is funny how GVA is still underrated in the peloton. If Sagan had the same problem before Arenberg as GVA had, the Peloton would fly away and nobody, nobody would have a chance to join back (we saw it last year).

Boonen lost his race on Arenberg not when he did not join GVA. What did he want? To beat Degenkolb on Velodrome when he had a problem last year with Haymen?
He wasted his energy in so many pointless attacks instead of riding hard with committed Sagan.

PR used to be the race for strongest rider and each cobbled sector should have his victims. The regrouping we saw yesterday was ridiculous. The cream of the cream was Greipel repeatedly attacking in places where we should have 4-5 strongest guys riding for victory.

Boonen tried to get rid of Sagan and Degenkolb just after Mons-en-Pevele. He almost succeeded, but Degenkolb did a hell of an effort to bring Sagan back. After that, and all the action on his favourite cobbles (Bersee) with headwind, Boonen realized he could not get rid of Degenkolb and when Stybar attacked and GvA attacked and even Sagan attacked and Degenkolb just kept following his wheel... He knew he had a major wheelsucker and decided that Stybar was the best chance for podium/win.

To say that the regrouping was ridicilous clearly shows you don't have any idea how this race at 45/h AVERAGE in 20 degrees was ridden. Are you suggesting they had to ride even harder while it was clear that all the KOM's on strava on the headwind segments are smashed and also KOMs on asphalt in between? Only KOMs on cobbles with headwind still stand. So to say that they 'allowed' regrouping is ridiculous. They couldn't go harder.

 

[SKSemtex]

I was a little bit disappointed with Boonen. I also expected him to go win or die. He looked so strong on cobbles.
He was just to scare of Sagan. Sagan showed him several times that he is willing to make the race hard but all his attack were neglected. It looks like Sagan was the only rider who wanted the ride PR not conservatively. :sad:

It is funny how GVA is still underrated in the peloton. If Sagan had the same problem before Arenberg as GVA had, the Peloton would fly away and nobody, nobody would have a chance to join back (we saw it last year).

Boonen lost his race on Arenberg not when he did not join GVA. What did he want? To beat Degenkolb on Velodrome when he had a problem last year with Haymen?
He wasted his energy in so many pointless attacks instead of riding hard with committed Sagan.

PR used to be the race for strongest rider and each cobbled sector should have his victims. The regrouping we saw yesterday was ridiculous. The cream of the cream was Greipel repeatedly attacking in places where we should have 4-5 strongest guys riding for victory.

Boonen tried to get rid of Sagan and Degenkolb just after Mons-en-Pevele. He almost succeeded, but Degenkolb did a hell of an effort to bring Sagan back. After that, and all the action on his favourite cobbles (Bersee) with headwind, Boonen realized he could not get rid of Degenkolb and when Stybar attacked and GvA attacked and even Sagan attacked and Degenkolb just kept following his wheel... He knew he had a major wheelsucker and decided that Stybar was the best chance for podium/win.

To say that the regrouping was ridicilous clearly shows you don't have any idea how this race at 45/h AVERAGE in 20 degrees was ridden. Are you suggesting they had to ride even harder while it was clear that all the KOM's on strava on the headwind segments are smashed and also KOMs on asphalt in between? Only KOMs on cobbles with headwind still stand. So to say that they 'allowed' regrouping is ridiculous. They couldn't go harder.

What are you talking about? Mons-en-Pevele was too late. I am talking about Arenberg. Shell he ride hard with Sagan from that point, when Sagan was strong and committed it would be a totally different race.

 

[SKSemtex]

It was fast but mostly because of tailwind. From Boonen side, it was like GO and SIT, GO and SIT. There was nobody there strong enough and committed enough to make it constantly hard enough. Martin left QS one year too early for Boonen.

 

[loge1884]

I guess the usual discussion "what would have happend, if ...." is pretty pointless ... it didn't and that's it ...

my conclusions are:
- GVA did certainly not steal his victory ... he's a well-earned winner (as would have been Zdenek Stybar in my opinion)
- Peter Sagan looked pretty strong 3/4s of the race, was extremely unlucky - however his showing in the last quarter of the race does not suggest he would have won even without the punctures (we'll never know though)
- one thing I am very happy about is John Degenkolb's tactic of wheelsucking Tom Boonen the whole race didn't give any pay-out ... I hope he will not turn into a Gerrans ver. 2.0

 

[Volderke]

What are you talking about? Mons-en-Pevele was too late. I am talking about Arenberg. Shell he ride hard with Sagan from that point, when Sagan was strong and committed it would be a totally different race.

I am talking about how hard pro riders can ride a race. You seem to happily ignore the fact that after a hard-raced section of cobbles, everybody is having a moment of trying to catch their breath. Arenberg was raced really hard. If you fail to understand that they couldn't go much harder and that the asphalt after Arenberg was strong headwind... I rest my case.
You are complaining some riders should have raced harder while on average they went more than 1km/h faster than the previous record.
Sections with bad cobbles where difference could be made (like Bersee, Mons-en-Pevele, Carrefour) all had a headwind so you cannot simply get rid of guys following wheels.

 

[KGB]

Re:

I guess the usual discussion "what would have happend, if ...." is pretty pointless ... it didn't and that's it ...

my conclusions are:
- GVA did certainly not steal his victory ... he's a well-earned winner (as would have been Zdenek Stybar in my opinion)
- Peter Sagan looked pretty strong 3/4s of the race, was extremely unlucky - however his showing in the last quarter of the race does not suggest he would have won even without the punctures (we'll never know though)
- one thing I am very happy about is John Degenkolb's tactic of wheelsucking Tom Boonen the whole race didn't give any pay-out ... I hope he will not turn into a Gerrans ver. 2.0

Nothing wrong with Johny D.tactics.The same did Tepstra to Sagan.Only suprise is here QS and specially Boonen did not have solution for that.Karma is *** sometimes.