2015, Ronde van Vlaanderen 264.9 Km

[the asian]

Re: Re:

But Terpstra is still riding for Etixx Quickstep last time I checked, he's not riding for himself, therefore he should do what their is best for the team and that was not gambling on that he could beat Kristoff

Where was Trentin when he needed him?

you do not expect Trentin to be in the selected group of 30

I wasn't trying to have a cheap shot at Trentin, but commenting that team tactics are much easier when one of the fastest men in the peloton is on your team and in the thick of the action, which wasn't the case for Terpstra.

Trentin crashed earlier.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Lol at people in this forum telling Terpstra to ride like a coward and not pull. I can't believe how reactionary and shortsighted some people are.

If he stopped riding with Kristoff he still wouldn't have won.

But the difference is he would lose his podium place no one will ever trust him in a breakaway again.

Any race he ever attacks in, every other rider working with him would identify him immediately as the guy who will sell them down the river with cowardly cheapo tactics if the breakaway gets a sniff at a win.

An extremely dumb thing for a rider who's best chance to win is from a mid race break, to do.

He has more chance to win in a 4 man group than alone with kristoff. You're dumb to deny that.

If he wants to win, then the only way was to no ride at all.

Or kristoff keeps pulling and maybe he can try something in the last few km (better than what it was right now)

or they're with 4 and kristoff prob can't react to everything.

That was the optimal strategy for him to win the race.

There's a risk he won't get podium but that's worth the risk for winning the race.

If he waited for Sagan and GVA he would have had even less of a chance and would have even lost his podium place.

There was no way he would have distanced the others in the flat, and sprinting vs 1 gives you a better chance of winning than sprinting vs 3. I

He did the right thing.

At least got him self and QS a podium place.

It is possible that he could have distanced the others. Terpstra himself won from a group of much faster finishers at Paris Roubaix last year. If he would have attacked with say 3km to go, there could easily have been some hesitation between the other three, none of whom wanted to waste their energy chasing down Terpstra. Terpstra wouldn't need a lot of a gap to stay away given his time trialling.

In a break of two though Terpstra had absolutely no chance. Kristoff would always get on his wheel straight away and beat him easily in a sprint.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

But Terpstra is still riding for Etixx Quickstep last time I checked, he's not riding for himself, therefore he should do what their is best for the team and that was not gambling on that he could beat Kristoff

This is the key point. Second may be a great result personally for Terpstra, but it is a poor result for Etixx, given their squad and their focus on the classics.

Etixx had a bigger chance of a chance if there was a bigger group coming into the finish, than they did in a head v head between Terpstra and Kristoff.

What bigger chance?! With Kristoff, Sagan, Degenkolb, GVA, Roelandts!!!

 

[the asian]

Re: Re:

But Terpstra is still riding for Etixx Quickstep last time I checked, he's not riding for himself, therefore he should do what their is best for the team and that was not gambling on that he could beat Kristoff

This is the key point. Second may be a great result personally for Terpstra, but it is a poor result for Etixx, given their squad and their focus on the classics.

Etixx had a bigger chance of a chance if there was a bigger group coming into the finish, than they did in a head v head between Terpstra and Kristoff.

Not really.

Dgenkolb and kristoff would have finished 1st and 2nd.

And there are plenty of riders like Sagan, GVA, Boom, Roelandts who have a better finish than Stybar and most likely would have finished 3rd.

Don't think a late attack would have succeeded either as Kristoff was on top of his game.

 

[Tank Engine]

As I thought, Sky's naive tactics and G not being the reincarnation of Cancellara meant that G was isolated. Kristoff was a deserving winner. It would have been interesting to see what sort of tactics would have been played if Stybar had managed to stay with GvA and Sagan on the Paterberg. He had already done a lot of work covering attacks, G in particular. From that point on Etixx had to gamble on Terpstra beating Kristoff. Maybe attacking would have been a better option, but TGAK would still almost certainly have won.

I wouldn't criticise GvA for missing the break. He had a great race. He had tried beforehand at a reasonable point in the race and it just wasn't the winning break. It happens sometimes. BMC might have been able to do more when the winning break went away, as they had several guys in the chase group, but who knows what state their legs were in (they seemed to disappear quickly).

 

[The Hitch]

Re:

Give me an example in the past where someone was treated that way for refusing to ride with one of the fastest guys in the last few km?

MSR 2013. Sagan has reputation as a bit of a wheelsucker in groups. Canc refuses to work with Sagan.
Neither Sagan nor Cancellara win.

Now you give me an example of when someone actually decided to go full *** and refuse to work in a winning breakaway with 10km to go, thereby letting the group get caught.

Its stupid, immoral, ridiculous from every angle.

Once again i'm not blaming terpstra, it was a very hard situation but if he wanted to truly win he should have gambled and not ride in the last 10km.
.

Why would I care if you blame Terpstra. I don't care about Terpstra or Kristoff. this is about the morality and feasability of any rider throwing their toys out of the pram and deciding not to work with a fellow breakaway rider becuase that rider is stronger. The fact that you felt you needed to make such a meaningless point suggests to me you don't even know what the discussion is about.

He's riding with one of the fastest guys in the peloton, who the hell would consider him a wheelsucker for not riding with him at the end? Terpstra is usually who always rides but being punished for wanting to win? LOL

If he is riding with one of the fastest riders in the peloton then he should drop him on the climbs. Outsmart him on the flat. Use teammate attacks to wear him down. Can't do that? You aren't going to win. Choosing to stop riding isn't going to help you and its an *** thing to do.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

He has more chance to win in a 4 man group than alone with kristoff. You're dumb to deny that.

If he wants to win, then the only way was to no ride at all.

Or kristoff keeps pulling and maybe he can try something in the last few km (better than what it was right now)

or they're with 4 and kristoff prob can't react to everything.

That was the optimal strategy for him to win the race.

There's a risk he won't get podium but that's worth the risk for winning the race.

This. Can't believe I see Hitch advocating riding for 2nd place. In a group of 4 he might have won

Terpstra is racing with one of the fastest guys in this peloton. Anyone considering him a coward for not riding with him is a genius.

Well then maybe I am a genius.
But

Neither of you has actually addressed the point that resorting to such disgraceful behaviour would do long term damage to Terpstra's ability to win in breakaways from ANY race in the future.

Imagine next week or next year in PR he finds himself in a group with 2 riders with 20k to go, who he has a good chance to drop on the remaining cobbles sectors, but both, having seen what he did in RVV refuse to work with him, because they realize that they have no chance to win being in a group with him, as he will abandon them if he isn't able to drop them. They don't work, and all 3 riders lose their chance to win the race (since neither are the strongest)
Who would feel like a genius then?

You may say - oh well its worth it if he won RVV, but then his chances of winning RVV were still extremely low. Best best case scenario, he still would have had to somehow drop, 3 riders that were stronger than him. I can't actually work out how he would have won unless what you have in mind is all 3 of them taking eachother in a crash out in which case he STILL has to keep up a 10 second gap to the peloton.

Its not like Sagan GVA and Kristoff will ignore him for the next 5km and voluntarily tow him to the last 3k, where he drops them all, solos to the line, gets a kiss from the queen, cures cancer and lives happily ever after. Please

Even if you are operating from a pure game theory P.O.V and choose to ignore all morality (which both of you quite clearly seem to be doing), then you have to ask yourself what % chance would he actually have gained by betraying Kristoff like that, and what % chance would he have lost to win any race in the future from everyone else identifying him as a snake.

Its not worth it. The Hail mary pray that Kristoff might tow him to the line and let him win is not worth sacrificing your chances at every race in the future.

Each situation is different, Terpstra had 0 chance to win in a 2 man group, so if he wanted to win he was better off in a 4man group for which he would've had to stop pulling at all. Nothing disgraceful about that in any way. It doesn't matter it's not the way the 'breakaway system' was built, you either try to win or you don't. Not cooperating should have no impact on how others ride with him in a group in PR.

How was he better off in a 4 man group. He was the weakest of the 4 and refuses to help them. When is he going to drop them and how?

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

But Terpstra is still riding for Etixx Quickstep last time I checked, he's not riding for himself, therefore he should do what their is best for the team and that was not gambling on that he could beat Kristoff

This is the key point. Second may be a great result personally for Terpstra, but it is a poor result for Etixx, given their squad and their focus on the classics.

Etixx had a bigger chance of a chance if there was a bigger group coming into the finish, than they did in a head v head between Terpstra and Kristoff.

Not really.

Dgenkolb and kristoff would have finished 1st and 2nd.

And there are plenty of riders like Sagan, GVA, Boom, Roelandts who have a better finish than Stybar and most likely would have finished 3rd.

Don't think a late attack would have succeeded either as Kristoff was on top of his game.

Well there's no way of knowing that. A larger group of riders would all be aware they would need to drop Kristoff and Degenkolb before the line and would take turns to attack them - no-one would help Kristoff chase them down, and so eventually he might crack and someone might get away.

It's certainly not guaranteed to work, but it would have given Etixx a chance at the victory at least. A chance that they didn't have in a head to head between Terpstra and Kristoff.

 

[BigMac]

Still digesting it. Tired of Kristoff, I asked anyone but him winning this. Of course, he wins. Terpstra did well. However, I cannot understand that a few of the very same people who are approving of his tactics today, are as well those who, on most other occasions similar to this, or on which identical tactics are reasonable, are the ones wishing heavens to fall upon certain rider. I mean, admit your bias or get your stuff together. Although I dont agree with Hitch here, at least he is consistent. Terpstra is not exactly clueless as tactis are concerned, on the contrary - he knew where he had to attack, if he didn't, that's because he just could not. Kristoff was simply better, did you see the tempo he put on the Paterberg? That was tactics combined with unmatched strentgh today, preventing any attacks from Terpstra. He put Terpstra under the pressure the latter was planing to apply on an attack, on the beggining of the climb!

That said, great, though not surprising, to see Oliveira doing well. I just wish he had more (doesn't have any) free roles.

 

[Mr.White]

Etixx couldn't win this in any scenario. Terpstra rode good race, Stybar was not so good. They miss Boonen

 

[The Hitch]

Still digesting it. Tired of Kristoff, I asked anyone but him winning this. Of course, he wins. Terpstra did well. However, I cannot understand that a few of the very same people who are approving of his tactics today, are as well those who, on most other occasions similar to this, or on which identical tactics are reasonable, are the ones wishing heavens to fall upon certain rider. I mean, admit your bias or get your stuff together. Although I dont agree with Hitch here, at least he is consistent. Terpstra is not exactly clueless as tactis are concerned, on the contrary - he knew where he had to attack, if he didn't, that's because he just could not. Kristoff was simply better, did you see the tempo he put on the Paterberg? That was tactics combined with unmatched strentgh today, preventing any attacks from Terpstra. He put Terpstra under the pressure the latter was planing to apply on an attack, on the beggining of the climb!

That said, great, though not surprising, to see Oliveira doing well. I just wish he had more (doesn't have any) free roles.

We do agree. At least on the main point which is - Terpstra was not strong enough to win today.

My point, and what you might not agree with me on, is that if you can't win 1 vs 1, then you aren't going to win 1 vs 1 vs 1 vs 1. Absolutely nothing about Niki's performance today suggests he would have been able to sustain an attack against those 3 riders.

 

[doperhopper]

Not only that Niki was going for the 2nd, but moreover, his main goal was to be the 1st from EQS. New racing Etixx.

 

[BigMac]

Still digesting it. Tired of Kristoff, I asked anyone but him winning this. Of course, he wins. Terpstra did well. However, I cannot understand that a few of the very same people who are approving of his tactics today, are as well those who, on most other occasions similar to this, or on which identical tactics are reasonable, are the ones wishing heavens to fall upon certain rider. I mean, admit your bias or get your stuff together. Although I dont agree with Hitch here, at least he is consistent. Terpstra is not exactly clueless as tactis are concerned, on the contrary - he knew where he had to attack, if he didn't, that's because he just could not. Kristoff was simply better, did you see the tempo he put on the Paterberg? That was tactics combined with unmatched strentgh today, preventing any attacks from Terpstra. He put Terpstra under the pressure the latter was planing to apply on an attack, on the beggining of the climb!

That said, great, though not surprising, to see Oliveira doing well. I just wish he had more (doesn't have any) free roles.

We do agree. At least on the main point which is - Terpstra was not strong enough to win today.

My point, and what you might not agree with me on, is that if you can't win 1 vs 1, then you aren't going to win 1 vs 1 vs 1 vs 1. Absolutely nothing about Niki's performance today suggests he would have been able to sustain an attack against those 3 riders.

Ah, ok. That's different. Sorry, I didn't read the full discussion, mainly the latest replies to your posts. I agree with that.

 

[May0maniac]

Re: Re:

But Terpstra is still riding for Etixx Quickstep last time I checked, he's not riding for himself, therefore he should do what their is best for the team and that was not gambling on that he could beat Kristoff

Where was Trentin when he needed him?

you do not expect Trentin to be in the selected group of 30

I wasn't trying to have a cheap shot at Trentin, but commenting that team tactics are much easier when one of the fastest men in the peloton is on your team and in the thick of the action, which wasn't the case for Terpstra.

Wasn't Trentin caught behind a crash?

 

[jmdirt]

NT must have been empty and knew that he couldn't create a gap before the sprint.

Good race! Next up...Paris-Roubaix!

 

[cellardoor]

Re: Re:

But Terpstra is still riding for Etixx Quickstep last time I checked, he's not riding for himself, therefore he should do what their is best for the team and that was not gambling on that he could beat Kristoff

Where was Trentin when he needed him?

you do not expect Trentin to be in the selected group of 30

I wasn't trying to have a cheap shot at Trentin, but commenting that team tactics are much easier when one of the fastest men in the peloton is on your team and in the thick of the action, which wasn't the case for Terpstra.

Wasn't Trentin caught behind a crash?

Apparently so, as also pointed out by the asian. I wasn't aware of it.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Shame the tv producer chose to focus on Vanmarcke's struggles than the race-winning move developing. We saw Terpstra go and Kristoff follow and Thomas try/fail to follow and look around for help. The next we saw there was a 20 second gap. Then there was a strange period where we had Rowe, Oliveira and Greipel working to chase but BMC who had four riders didn't appear to contribute. I think it's pretty obvious that two of the strongest riders vs three domestiques who have already done a lot of work was a mismatch and game over. If it was a breakaway and two riders took off with 30km to go the rest of breakaway would be all be chasing through-and-off without even questioning it but it rarely seems to happen the same way with team leaders

 

[crapna]

Anybody agree motards ride too close ahead of riders?

 

[red_flanders]

Still digesting it. Tired of Kristoff, I asked anyone but him winning this. Of course, he wins. Terpstra did well. However, I cannot understand that a few of the very same people who are approving of his tactics today, are as well those who, on most other occasions similar to this, or on which identical tactics are reasonable, are the ones wishing heavens to fall upon certain rider. I mean, admit your bias or get your stuff together. Although I dont agree with Hitch here, at least he is consistent. Terpstra is not exactly clueless as tactis are concerned, on the contrary - he knew where he had to attack, if he didn't, that's because he just could not. Kristoff was simply better, did you see the tempo he put on the Paterberg? That was tactics combined with unmatched strentgh today, preventing any attacks from Terpstra. He put Terpstra under the pressure the latter was planing to apply on an attack, on the beggining of the climb!

That said, great, though not surprising, to see Oliveira doing well. I just wish he had more (doesn't have any) free roles.

Good summation. I think Terpstra rode well and has nothing to answer for. Kristoff thought so as well.

 

[May0maniac]

Benoot is scary, but what a ride by Greipel, he could be a darkhorse for Roubaix.

 

[red_flanders]

Re:

Benoot is scary, but what a ride by Greipel, he could be a darkhorse for Roubaix.

He was definitely giving it all he had! You could be right about Roubaix.

 

[doperhopper]

Let's all thank Kristoff for not winning Vlaandenprijs bunch sprint but proper Ronde (not his fault others did not make the race selective enough before he went with Terp who was apparently riding different "best of the rest of Etixx" race)

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Benoot is scary, but what a ride by Greipel, he could be a darkhorse for Roubaix.

He was definitely giving it all he had! You could be right about Roubaix.

He was probably still seething at the injustice of being given second place at De Panne. He does seem to be coming into top form at the right time for Roubaix though - might slip under the radar a bit as well with everyone no doubt concerned about Kristoff and Thomas.

 

[crapna]

Re: Re:

Give me an example in the past where someone was treated that way for refusing to ride with one of the fastest guys in the last few km?

MSR 2013. Sagan has reputation as a bit of a wheelsucker in groups. Canc refuses to work with Sagan.
Neither Sagan nor Cancellara win.

Now you give me an example of when someone actually decided to go full ******* and refuse to work in a winning breakaway with 10km to go, thereby letting the group get caught.

Its stupid, immoral, ridiculous from every angle.

Once again i'm not blaming terpstra, it was a very hard situation but if he wanted to truly win he should have gambled and not ride in the last 10km.
.

Why would I care if you blame Terpstra. I don't care about Terpstra or Kristoff. this is about the morality and feasability of any rider throwing their toys out of the pram and deciding not to work with a fellow breakaway rider becuase that rider is stronger. The fact that you felt you needed to make such a meaningless point suggests to me you don't even know what the discussion is about.

He's riding with one of the fastest guys in the peloton, who the hell would consider him a wheelsucker for not riding with him at the end? Terpstra is usually who always rides but being punished for wanting to win? LOL

If he is riding with one of the fastest riders in the peloton then he should drop him on the climbs. Outsmart him on the flat. Use teammate attacks to wear him down. Can't do that? You aren't going to win. Choosing to stop riding isn't going to help you and its an ******* thing to do.

If I was a racer and somebody ruined the break deliberately by wheelsucking I would hit that genius in his face as hard I could after the race and throw his bike into the ocean. Those wheelsucking scumbags should stay away from cycling.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

If I was a racer and somebody ruined the break deliberately by wheelsucking I would hit that genius in his face as hard I could after the race and throw his bike into the ocean. Those wheelsucking scumbags should stay away from cycling.

It's a race - every rider in contention should do everything they can to win the race. The only reason that riders usually co-operate is because it's mutually beneficial to reach the closing stages in a smaller group. If it doesn't benefit one rider to reach a sprint together then it's not wheelsucking if they refuse to share the work.

If it's not mutually beneficial for both riders to work hard then it's not wheelsucking, it's just tactics.

If one of the fastest sprinters in the world is in a break of two, I doubt he expects the other rider to fully co-operate with him until the line.