2011 Copenhagen World Championships: Elite Men Road Race

[Dr. Maserati]

The Tour has followed a certain formula for quite some time now. Prologue, long time trial, sometimes a TTT, 3 Alpe stages, 3 Pyrenees stages, a few hilly stages and the rest plain flat stages.

2011 - No prologue, 23k TTT, 1 short TT (42k), 4 Alp stages, 3 Pyrenees stages.
2010 - Prologue, no TTT, 1 longish TT (52k), 3 Alp stages, 4 Pyrenees stages.
2009 - No prologue. 39k TTT, 2 TTs less than 41k, 4 Alp stages, 3 Pyrenees stages.

About the only formula the Tour has is that it spends some time in France.

T
One of the Belgian girls that got 8th at the WC was saying that the only problem she had on this course was to stay awake: it was that boring.

For me it just seems they made this race 260km long for the hell of it. Cut it down to 160km and the result would have been more or less the same. If the Champs Elysées is a glorified kermis koerske than this is a glorified Champs Elysées!

Thats a pretty big if.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But why can't sprinters win the yellow jersey? Why shouldn't they get a chance?

Ps: replace Hushovd with Samuel Sanchez, thank you very much.

Is there a rule that they can't? They get the same chance as anyone who starts.

 

[El Pistolero]

2011 - No prologue, TTT, 1 short TT (42k), 4 Alp stages, 3 Pyrenees stages.
2010 - Prologue, no TTT, 1 longish TT (52k), 3 Alp stages, 4 Pyrenees stages.
2009 - No prologue. TTT, 2 TTs less than 41k, 4 Alp stages, 3 Pyrenees stages.

About the only formula the Tour has is that it spends some time in France.


Thats a pretty big if.

Change prologue with short time trial then. I consider an 8k time trial to be a prologue as well even though the UCI has rules for how long a prologue can be.

Ps: 2009 TT was shorter than 41km?

 

[El Pistolero]

Is there a rule that they can't? They get the same chance as anyone who starts.

They also would get the very same chance if they started in a very hilly WC every single year

 

[Mambo95]

But why can't sprinters win the yellow jersey? Why shouldn't they get a chance?

Because that's the nature of the Tour de France. Just as the nature of the Worlds is, as the name suggests, more inclusive and is a circuit race which encompasses a variety of different parcours over the years (not the same sort every bleeding time).

 

[The Sheep]

Is there a rule that they can't? They get the same chance as anyone who starts.

Agreed, the tour should have no cols every few years so a sprinter like cav can get a chance @ yellow.

 

[pmcg76]

They do. They have the Green Jersey and stages to go for. A good Grand Tour presents opportunities for a variety of riders to claim glory. This year's Tour did that and the three big stars were Evans, Hushovd and Cavendish - diverse riders, winning in different ways.

Now if only we could find a way which offered three such great, but different riders an opportunity to become World Champion, we'd have everything solved.

You are right, the sprinters should have a sideshow event like the Green jersey and let the real top guys get on with the main event.

 

[greenedge]

Bettini and Boonen were favourites in 07 and 05. The Italians screwed up and if i was a Belgian manager i would be quietly annoyed at Gilbert who ddi not even try but still sent teammates up the road. Hushovd next year will not be captain ( as the course would not suit him, EBH it does and he does not have the rainbow jersey ) he also complained at the end about the dual captaincy.

 

[El Pistolero]

Because that's the nature of the Tour de France. Just as the nature of the Worlds is, as the name suggests, more inclusive and is a circuit race which encompasses a variety of different parcours over the years (not the same sort every bleeding time).

World champion suggests the best cyclist in the world to me. Think we can all agree that wasn't Cav on sunday, but more like Froome or Wiggins.

If you want a title for the best sprinter in the world, well that already exists. It's called the green jersey in the Tour de France. The best sprinter won it and he had to fight harder for it than this WC title.

 

[Mambo95]

Ps: replace Hushovd with Samuel Sanchez, thank you very much.

How about we add him in. Now how do you propose a World Championship and/or Olympics that Evans, Hushovd, Cavendish and Sanchez all have a chance of winning at some time in their career? It's a real puzzler.

 

[El Pistolero]

How about we add him in. Now how do you propose a World Championship and/or Olympics that Evans, Hushovd, Cavendish and Sanchez all have a chance of winning at some time in their career? It's a real puzzler.

Milan-San Remo? Perhaps a race like San Remo but just a tiny bit harder.

Michele Scarponi, similar rider to Sanchez, had a great showing at San Remo this year.

Nibali also had a great showing at San Remo last year and this year.

Cadel Evans could do well at San Remo if he tried.

Hushovd and Cavendish would be big favorites for San Remo.

90% of the time it will end in a bunch sprint. That's better than this Worlds with 99% of the time. And at least who ever won it would have worked harder for it.

 

[pmcg76]

But by saying that a course must be 'selective' or suit 'versatile' riders is making it restrictive.

As I said earlier - that would be an issue if every Worlds was pan flat or held on the same course - but they aren't.


I actually think saying any rider does nothing all day is quite ridiculous.
The Worlds is always 250k+, so that immediately makes it a tough race and by in large makes a worthy winner.

So does the Tour because it is 3 weeks long.
But some years the organizers put in lots of TTs (or even TTTs), or some years they put in lots of mountains.
There is no set formula to what makes either race prestigious, except the race itself.


To be fair - allowing U14s only contest the last 200m of a 260km race was probably a sensible idea

Your right, the Worlds should not be 'selective' and have every useless tosser in with a chance of winning.

As proven this year, staying in the bunch is not particularly difficult, we had Div 3 guys finishing in the main bunch FFS. The only guys who were really dropped were those who crashed. When was the last time there has been so many finishers at a Worlds RR.

So if the Tour organisers organised a race with all flat stages next year, you would regard the winner as worthy as previous winners. Yeah right.

On the last point, well played.

 

[greenedge]

There are many types of riders, and most courses give a chance to 2, 3 or maybe even 4 of these types of riders. Last year's race really didn't suit Evans, but Pozzato and Gilbert thought they could give it a go - but in the end it suited the sprinters. If he'd been in his 2009 form Cavendish could have won that one. 2009's race suited the hilly specialists and climbers (2 different but overlapping groups), but still cobbled riders like Breschel and Cancellara were up there.

This year's course suited sprinters, only sprinters and nobody else but sprinters. No other type of rider thought they had a chance, and this was reflected in the small attack groups and the lack of interest in breaking up the likelihood of the sprint in the last 30km. Nobody thought they could get it to anything but a sprint. Last year, people thought if they worked together and got it right, they could prevent the sprint - but they were wrong. But them trying made it exciting. This year nobody tried, because they all realised it wasn't worth it. This made it boring.

So true with the last part . But how did Pozzato try last year??? He made the break but did not even help the group of Evans, Kolobnev, Marteans Moorenhout and Shleck chase Gilbert down

 

[Mambo95]

If you want a title for the best sprinter in the world, well that already exists. It's called the green jersey in the Tour de France.

In 2009 and 2010 everyone was falling over themselves to say that it wasn't a 'sprinters' jersey, but for the most consistent finisher. If it was for the best sprinter, Cavendish would have four Green Jerseys already.

The Worlds changes every year and allows every top rider a chance to win at least a couple of times in their career. If you have the same sort of course every year, it becomes just another race.

 

[El Pistolero]

In 2009 and 2010 everyone was falling over themselves to say that it wasn't a 'sprinters' jersey, but for the most consistent finisher. If it was for the best sprinter, Cavendish would have four Green Jerseys already.

The Worlds changes every year and allows every top rider a chance to win at least a couple of times in their career. If you have the same sort of course every year, it becomes just another race.

Just like all the other 5 Monuments are just another race? It would still be different as it's in another country. I don't think the course should be the same every year, but I do think you need at least one real obstacle in a race. That's all.

They changed the rules this year: it's definitely a sprinters jersey now. You can't use other years as examples anymore. Besides if Cav wasn't so stupid he could have won it last year if he didn't stop sprinting when he saw he couldn't win anymore. If someone ever asks me what Cav's greatest achievement was I'll answer the green jersey. If someone asks his second greatest achievement I'll answer Milan-San Remo.

 

[Mambo95]

Milan-San Remo? Perhaps a race like San Remo but just a tiny bit harder.

Michele Scarponi, similar rider to Sanchez, had a great showing at San Remo this year.

Nibali also had a great showing at San Remo last year and this year.

Cadel Evans could do well at San Remo if he tried.

Hushovd and Cavendish would be big favorites for San Remo.

90% of the time it will end in a bunch sprint. That's better than this Worlds with 99% of the time. And at least who ever won it would have worked harder for it.

So is that your solution? You can't see any other way that all of Evans, Hushovd, Cavendish and Sanchez could possibly become World or Olympic Champion?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Change prologue with short time trial then. I consider an 8k time trial to be a prologue as well even though the UCI has rules for how long a prologue can be.

It wasn't 8k - it was 15k.

Ps: 2009 TT was shorter than 41km?

Annecy TT 40.5km.

 

[Mambo95]

They changed the rules this year: it's definitely a sprinters jersey now.

That will explain why Cavendish's biggest challengers were a second rate sprinter who can climb a bit and a punchy one-day specialist who doesn't do bunch sprints, while in the previous 15 years only bunch sprinters made the top three.

 

[El Pistolero]

It wasn't 8k - it was 15k.


Annecy TT 40.5km.

Still a long time trial by modern pathetic standards. 15km time trial is still short and it was on the first stage, so for me it's a prologue.

 

[El Pistolero]

That will explain why Cavendish's biggest challengers were a second rate sprinter who can climb a bit and a punchy one-day specialist who doesn't do bunch sprints, while in the previous 15 years only bunch sprinters made the top three.

That will explain that despite having a lot of uphill finishes and hilly stages the green jersey contest never really was a competition and it was always clear by the start of the third week that Cav would win it.

Recount all their points with last year's rules

Besides, Goss is a second rate sprinter who can climb a bit and is punchy.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Your right, the Worlds should not be 'selective' and have every useless tosser in with a chance of winning.

If every "useless tosser in with a chance of winning" then why is it you said earlier that Cav was the outstanding favorite?

I never said that the Worlds should "not be" selective - I asked why is it a "must" that it needs to be?

As proven this year, staying in the bunch is not particularly difficult, we had Div 3 guys finishing in the main bunch FFS. The only guys who were really dropped were those who crashed. When was the last time there has been so many finishers at a Worlds RR.

You don't get medals for staying in the bunch.

So if the Tour organisers organised a race with all flat stages next year, you would regard the winner as worthy as previous winners. Yeah right.

On the last point, well played.

Not worthy - but still the winner.

 

[El Pistolero]

If every "useless tosser in with a chance of winning" then why is it you said earlier that Cav was the outstanding favorite?

I never said that the Worlds should "not be" selective - I asked why is it a "must" that it needs to be?


You don't get medals for staying in the bunch.


Not worthy - but still the winner.

Well no one is arguing that Cav didn't win this race. Some people just don't find him a worthy winner.

 

[Mambo95]

That will explain that despite having a lot of uphill finishes and hilly stages the green jersey contest never really was a competition and it was always clear by the start of the third week that Cav would win it.

Recount all their points with last year's rules

But why should uphill and hilly finishes have any relevance. You said this is a pure sprinters competition. This, you said, is their World Championship. Yet now hills have relevance?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

World champion suggests the best cyclist in the world to me. Think we can all agree that wasn't Cav on sunday, but more like Froome or Wiggins.

If you want a title for the best sprinter in the world, well that already exists. It's called the green jersey in the Tour de France. The best sprinter won it and he had to fight harder for it than this WC title.

If only "the best cyclist in the World" could only become World Champion then they should do away with the WC Road race.

Hushovd better than Gilbert? (or Condator?)
Evens better than Cancellara in Mendriso?

Its a road race - not X Factor.

Well no one is arguing that Cav didn't win this race. Some people just don't find him a worthy winner.

About the only thing you haven't argued.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well no one is arguing that Cav didn't win this race. Some people just don't find him a worthy winner.

About the only thing you haven't argued.