2018 Tour of Flanders

Page 28 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Who will win

  • Peter Sagan

    Votes: 40 28.0%
  • Greg Van Avermaet

    Votes: 12 8.4%
  • Philippe Gilbert

    Votes: 13 9.1%
  • Tiesj Benoot

    Votes: 13 9.1%
  • Michal Kwiatkowski

    Votes: 5 3.5%
  • Sep Vanmarcke

    Votes: 12 8.4%
  • Niki Terpstra

    Votes: 14 9.8%
  • Zdenek Stybar

    Votes: 11 7.7%
  • Wout Van Aert

    Votes: 2 1.4%
  • Other

    Votes: 21 14.7%

  • Total voters
    143
  • Poll closed .
Re: Re:

trucido said:
DFA123 said:
alspacka said:
Less cohesion in national than trade teams to mark him out imo.
Good point. This is definitely a factor and makes it easier for a strong rider to win. Also I think courses might be designed with him in mind. Every host city wants a rider like Sagan winning, so their name goes down in history. No city wants their WC being forgotten as the one that Vainsteins or Astarloa won.
Yes, I'm pretty sure the Norwegian's wanted Sagan to win last year instead of Kristoff.
Well that supports the point. An ideal race for Kristoff is also an ideal race for Sagan. And designing the course with specific riders in mind certainly undermines the value of a race.
 
Re: Re:

Jungle Cycle said:
The Barb said:
So many people saying how obvious it was when Terpstra went that Sagan should've followed, but literally no one saying it pages ago on this forum when it happened. You post race geniuses aren't fooling anyone.

If Sagan promptly chased down Terpstra then it would've come back together and Stybar would've gone. Then when Sagan chased him, Gilbert would've gone, and the same people would be saying how naive Sagan was, trying to cover every attack.

Sagan's best hope was to form an alliance with a small group like with GVA and Vanmarcke, but they didn't have it today.

The reality is QS just have too many strong cards to play for one rider to beat them alone.
exactly!! 100% this...
Correct, but everyone was calling it before the race. So it is boring when everyone called what was going to happen because of the QS team strength and nobody did anything about it. Nothing different. Just like scripted. And Paris Roubaix is coming under similar circumstances. So I hope something changes.
 
Re:

The Barb said:
So many people saying how obvious it was when Terpstra went that Sagan should've followed, but literally no one saying it pages ago on this forum when it happened. You post race geniuses aren't fooling anyone.

If Sagan promptly chased down Terpstra then it would've come back together and Stybar would've gone. Then when Sagan chased him, Gilbert would've gone, and the same people would be saying how naive Sagan was, trying to cover every attack.

Sagan's best hope was to form an alliance with a small group like with GVA and Vanmarcke, but they didn't have it today.


The reality is QS just have too many strong cards to play for one rider to beat them alone.
Who he dropped on the Paterberg for absolutely no reason.

Of course Sagan should have followed Terpstra or Gilbert whenever they made a move. It doesn't take hindsight to say that. Sure, it might have lost him the race by wasting energy, but instead he played out the same race that has resulted in him losing time after time. He can't count on the other riders working with him - especially so when he keeps trying to drop them.
 
Aug 20, 2017
1,397
0
0
Re: Re:

Serpentin said:
Bot. Sky_Bot said:
Finally I hope Valverde will be crushed in Fleche and LBL by anybody.
The only one who is going to get crushed is KwiaTOWski aka "the wheel sucker".
Yes, if we will have finally the The Big Dissapointment of Valverde, why not.
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
The Barb said:
So many people saying how obvious it was when Terpstra went that Sagan should've followed, but literally no one saying it pages ago on this forum when it happened. You post race geniuses aren't fooling anyone.

If Sagan promptly chased down Terpstra then it would've come back together and Stybar would've gone. Then when Sagan chased him, Gilbert would've gone, and the same people would be saying how naive Sagan was, trying to cover every attack.

Sagan's best hope was to form an alliance with a small group like with GVA and Vanmarcke, but they didn't have it today.


The reality is QS just have too many strong cards to play for one rider to beat them alone.
Who he dropped on the Paterberg for absolutely no reason.
Lol what :eek: Gilbert and Stybar were in that group so obviously he did the right thing in going all out on Pater, try to shed them off and hope a non-QS rider could follow him.
 
Re:

LaFlorecita said:
Very strong Terpstra yet again, in my eyes he was the favorite but he still had to pull it off, he had to make an early move.

But I'm most impressed by Pedersen, that was a true nailbiter in the final 10km. So impressive how he held on to 2nd.
I agree. Pedersen showed he will be capable of a lot more in the future. Great ride.

Terpstra rode for it, but I also liked the other QS guys throwing themselfs in between the guys riding in the second group. Proper team tactics!
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Not sure why Sagan is dominating the pages here.

He was just not there when it counted.

Personally thought it was a entertaining race, with everything on the table before the decisive move from Terpstra.

A few youngsters made a great impression; Cortina, Pedersen.

QS was looking in trouble but in the end they showed the quality, as many times before.

Also think Cort was stronger than Valgren today, they betted on the wrong horse.
 
Great win by Terpstra, surely was the strongest today, although Pedersen was very impressive as well.

The rest was good but not great. Van Avermaet was only 6th or 7th on the Patersberg, one would expect more of him. But he can never win when he is the favorite. For all his biggest victories he needed crashes of better riders.
 
Re:

mrhender said:
Not sure why Sagan is dominating the pages here.

He was just not there when it counted.

Personally thought it was a entertaining race, with everything on the table before the decisive move from Terpstra.

A few youngsters made a great impression; Cortina, Pedersen.

QS was looking in trouble but in the end they showed the quality, as many times before.

Also think Cort was stronger than Valgren today, they betted on the wrong horse.
People are always obsessed about Sagan, even when he does next to nothing the entire race, launches 1 attack and then falls flat like today.

And to people calling it a bad race I wonder if they even watched the same race. And I say this as a person who dislikes Terpstra.. I'm impressed by the way he won though.
 
Re:

Bardamu said:
Great win by Terpstra, surely was the strongest today, although Pedersen was very impressive as well.

The rest was good but not great. Van Avermaet was only 6th or 7th on the Patersberg, one would expect more of him. But he can never win when he is the favorite. For all his biggest victories he needed crashes of better riders.
Since when is Roubaix not a big victory?
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
The Barb said:
So many people saying how obvious it was when Terpstra went that Sagan should've followed, but literally no one saying it pages ago on this forum when it happened. You post race geniuses aren't fooling anyone.

If Sagan promptly chased down Terpstra then it would've come back together and Stybar would've gone. Then when Sagan chased him, Gilbert would've gone, and the same people would be saying how naive Sagan was, trying to cover every attack.

Sagan's best hope was to form an alliance with a small group like with GVA and Vanmarcke, but they didn't have it today.


The reality is QS just have too many strong cards to play for one rider to beat them alone.
Who he dropped on the Paterberg for absolutely no reason.

Of course Sagan should have followed Terpstra or Gilbert whenever they made a move. It doesn't take hindsight to say that. Sure, it might have lost him the race by wasting energy, but instead he played out the same race that has resulted in him losing time after time. He can't count on the other riders working with him - especially so when he keeps trying to drop them.
The same strategy won him 3 WCRR, the one you advise none. It his hard to blame him he is trying this strategy in monuments.
He was not strong enough today and he knew it. He knew himself much better then we do. He knew his only match today to win is to risk to lose it by relaying on others.
When he is strong enough he is willing to chase two three attacs.
 
Re: Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:
Brullnux said:
Serpentin said:
Did Terpstra spit on Nibali ? I hate Terpstra, racist *******.
I don't think he did it on purpose, although I didn't really see it. Don't see why he'd have done it
"Crimes of Niki Terpstra", I couldn't find anything besides the following on his rap sheet of unpopularity

Spitting on Nibali at Ronde (???)
Kicking Pouilly at 4 Jours de Dunkerque (deliberate)
Ramming Wynants at Eneco Tour (deliberate to try to cut off team position)
Taunting when Santambrogio made a suicidal statement on the internet (later apologized)
Allegedly crashing Cancellara at Roubaix (he was involved but it wasn't intentional)
Crushing Sagan's sunglasses at Ronde (fluke incident which looked almost completely accidental)

Maybe other people know some things that we don't, but that was extent
People like Moscon who are openly racist and getting sued for allegedly causing serious injury, that is worse on paper than Terpstra

https://twitter.com/mrasmussen1974/status/904572501220614144

Terpstra is a racist and races nothing like a gentleman.
 
Re: Re:

Dekker_Tifosi said:
mrhender said:
Not sure why Sagan is dominating the pages here.

He was just not there when it counted.

Personally thought it was a entertaining race, with everything on the table before the decisive move from Terpstra.

A few youngsters made a great impression; Cortina, Pedersen.

QS was looking in trouble but in the end they showed the quality, as many times before.

Also think Cort was stronger than Valgren today, they betted on the wrong horse.
People are always obsessed about Sagan, even when he does next to nothing the entire race, launches 1 attack and then falls flat like today.

And to people calling it a bad race I wonder if they even watched the same race. And I say this as a person who dislikes Terpstra.. I'm impressed by the way he won though.
He attacked twice, actually. :lol:
 
Re: Re:

Flamin said:
Bardamu said:
Great win by Terpstra, surely was the strongest today, although Pedersen was very impressive as well.

The rest was good but not great. Van Avermaet was only 6th or 7th on the Patersberg, one would expect more of him. But he can never win when he is the favorite. For all his biggest victories he needed crashes of better riders.
Since when is Roubaix not a big victory?
Did you read about the crash.? :D
 
Re: Re:

SKSemtex said:
DFA123 said:
The Barb said:
So many people saying how obvious it was when Terpstra went that Sagan should've followed, but literally no one saying it pages ago on this forum when it happened. You post race geniuses aren't fooling anyone.

If Sagan promptly chased down Terpstra then it would've come back together and Stybar would've gone. Then when Sagan chased him, Gilbert would've gone, and the same people would be saying how naive Sagan was, trying to cover every attack.

Sagan's best hope was to form an alliance with a small group like with GVA and Vanmarcke, but they didn't have it today.


The reality is QS just have too many strong cards to play for one rider to beat them alone.
Who he dropped on the Paterberg for absolutely no reason.

Of course Sagan should have followed Terpstra or Gilbert whenever they made a move. It doesn't take hindsight to say that. Sure, it might have lost him the race by wasting energy, but instead he played out the same race that has resulted in him losing time after time. He can't count on the other riders working with him - especially so when he keeps trying to drop them.
The same strategy won him 3 WCRR the one you advise none. It his hard to blame him he is trying this strategy in monuments.
He was not strong enough today and he knew it. He knew himself much better then we do. He knew his only match today to win is to risk to lose it by relaying on others.
When he is strong enough he is willing to chase two three attacs.
Yep, just shows that to win the WC is much easier than to win a monument for a sprinter.

No need to make excuses for him; he was strong today, just missed the winning move. Perhaps he couldn't have beaten Quickstep anyway, but ultimately it was a similar failing. Sagan missing a decisive move and then bemoaning the other riders for their lack of cooperation.
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Re:

hrotha said:
This was a bad race.
You want us to ask why I guess?

Also not sure what a bad race is. Or why you would state it without explanation.

It would have been bad IMO if the steppers just toyed with everyone and had to make a draw who would win. But thats just my opinion of a bad race.
 
Re: Re:

Dekker_Tifosi said:
mrhender said:
Not sure why Sagan is dominating the pages here.

He was just not there when it counted.

Personally thought it was a entertaining race, with everything on the table before the decisive move from Terpstra.

A few youngsters made a great impression; Cortina, Pedersen.

QS was looking in trouble but in the end they showed the quality, as many times before.

Also think Cort was stronger than Valgren today, they betted on the wrong horse.
People are always obsessed about Sagan, even when he does next to nothing the entire race, launches 1 attack and then falls flat like today.
To be fair, he attacked twice.
 
Re: Re:

jaylew said:
Dekker_Tifosi said:
mrhender said:
Not sure why Sagan is dominating the pages here.

He was just not there when it counted.

Personally thought it was a entertaining race, with everything on the table before the decisive move from Terpstra.

A few youngsters made a great impression; Cortina, Pedersen.

QS was looking in trouble but in the end they showed the quality, as many times before.

Also think Cort was stronger than Valgren today, they betted on the wrong horse.
People are always obsessed about Sagan, even when he does next to nothing the entire race, launches 1 attack and then falls flat like today.
To be fair, he attacked twice.
And he was the pre-race favourite, both with the bookies and in the poll in this thread. And he was strong enough to drop all the other favourites on the final climb of the race. Yet once again, came away without even really coming close to challenging for the win.

Of course he is a main discussion point.
 
Apr 1, 2013
426
0
0
+ Sagan missing a decisive move +

let's face it, if Sagan would have gone with Terpstra it for sure would not have been a decisive move (Terpstra would not have contributed an inch) ....
QS was too strong today, unlike in former years they now seem to know how to play their cards (attacking one by one) - in order to put something against QS the other teams (or a other team) would need one or two more potential winners, which they can send out whenever someone from QS makes the attack ...
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Re: Re:

jaylew said:
Dekker_Tifosi said:
mrhender said:
Not sure why Sagan is dominating the pages here.

He was just not there when it counted.

Personally thought it was a entertaining race, with everything on the table before the decisive move from Terpstra.

A few youngsters made a great impression; Cortina, Pedersen.

QS was looking in trouble but in the end they showed the quality, as many times before.

Also think Cort was stronger than Valgren today, they betted on the wrong horse.
People are always obsessed about Sagan, even when he does next to nothing the entire race, launches 1 attack and then falls flat like today.
To be fair, he attacked twice.
Sure. Nothing should be taken away from him. He honestly did his best, and did make several attempts.

He is just not strong enough to make a real difference atm.

Many other riders made more attacks/strides alone and still finished ahead. Let's salute them instead!
 
Re:

loge1884 said:
+ Sagan missing a decisive move +

let's face it, if Sagan would have gone with Terpstra it for sure would not have been a decisive move (Terpstra would not have contributed an inch) ....
QS was too strong today, unlike in former years they now seem to know how to play their cards (attacking one by one) - in order to put something against QS the other teams (or a other team) would need one or two more potential winners, which they can send out whenever someone from QS makes the attack ...
Are you sure about this? This is the same Terpstra who co-operated with Kristoff for the last 40km of the same race a few years ago, and is in even better form now than he was then.

I think there is a very good chance Terpstra would have co-operated and tried to drop Sagan on the Paterberg (like his plan was with Kristoff). It would have been his only hope at winning after all.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY