Vuelta a España 2022 Vuelta a España stage 6(Bilbao > Ascensión al Pico Jano. San Miguel de Aguayo),181,2 km - Mountain

[Kwibus]

Maybe Jumbo should have brought Koen Bouwman after all? Although I don't know how his shape had been after his mountainbike crash.

Bouwman was going to ride the Vuelta, but out due to a knee inflammation.

 

[Kwibus]

In Mas' defense, he said he was fighting to hang on. So taking a turn was not in the cards.

That was quite obvious if you ask me. The fact he got dropped in the final meters only confirmed that. Vine and Evenepoel most likely did 6.5kg/w for 30 minutes. Lantern Rouge estimated that because of draft Mas would be at 6.25kg/w for 30 minutes which would be one of his best performances.
Evenepoel and Vine confirmed their performance in Norway which was quite similar.

Very nice to see this racing this early in the Vuelta, but it's still all up for grabs. Let's see if Evenepoel can do this for 3 weeks. Maybe he will keep on dropping everyone everytime, maybe he will fade a little later on, but still manages to fight for the Vuelta win, maybe he will vanish during week 3. Best part is we don't know yet so let's enjoy!

 

[Kwibus]

Also I don't expect Mas to be better in week 3. Riders that do 2 GT's in a row usually are fading a little in week 3 of the 2nd GT.

 

[Fantastico]

Then you also missed the point. Which was not to prove that he definitely will win this or any GT, but to ridicule people who have been claiming he will/could never because he would get dropped as soon as the road went up or can not compete against elite climbers.

If that's what you have been addressing, I'm fine with it. That didn't become clear from your initial post to me.

My reasoning on his GT winning capability has always been that he's still unproven over 3 weeks and, when it comes to elite climbing, rather unproven on high-altitude multi-climb stages (which is rather a thing in the Giro or Tour than in the Vuelta). There's no doubt he can crush everyone on these medium mountain climbs when he's on his best. He has proven that plenty of times.

 

[Netserk]

Fake climb. Breakaway for the stage win, main GC riders will sprint in the last km.

Great to be spectacularly wrong!

The weather and the crash definitely had an impact, but I also underestimated the willingness to make this count, helped by two hilly stages in the legs and an easy day tomorrow.

 

[SafeBet]

Also I don't expect Mas to be better in week 3. Riders that do 2 GT's in a row usually are fading a little in week 3 of the 2nd GT.

Mas was very solid in last year's Vuelta third week, after riding the Tour.
I don't think he was necessarily better than in week 1/2 but he certainly didn't fade.

 

[Ricco']

It may not have hurt the team but it hurt the rider's development - Also if you take Vine to the Giro it then gives you more days when you can go for the win.

Vine had lots of bad luck in the beginning of the year. Crashes and illnesses that made him pull out of several races. Two GTs in a year, so soon, would be too much. Better to just focus on the Vuelta, where due to fatigue of a full season, many riders come less fresher.

 

[Extinction]

Well, Merckx didn't enter the 1967 Vuelta - I'm assuming a mistype as what you state refers to the 1967 Giro, but by that time we already knew he could handle recovery within one day's racing (he'd already won San Remo twice) and the stages he won were stages 12 (finishing at Blockhaus) and 14, so we knew he could handle recovery within a Grand Tour, so bearing in mind he was not yet 22 at that point, I don't think anybody in their right mind would have said there was anything missing from the toolbox for him to win a Grand Tour. If anybody was claiming him the favourite for the 1967 Giro, people would have rightly been saying to pump the brakes until he'd proved he could do it over three weeks.

Remco has not yet demonstrated the recovery that Merckx showed in that 1967 Giro that put the final piece of the puzzle together in terms of the weapons at his disposal to win a GT - in his one attempt at a Grand Tour he faded badly after week 1, but it's also not really a representative performance in my opinion because of the circumstances of that Giro regards his injury, crashes, illnesses and so on. He may well be able to do that now that he's been able to target a Grand Tour without the injuries or disrupted preparation he had before - but we haven't seen it yet. Merckx's stage wins i

Of course we haven't seen it yet, because, till now and since his dramatic fall, he simply hasn't been in the position to demonstrate it. However, last year's Giro is a non-factor, since he was in no condition to demonstrate his potential, so why is it repeatedly being brought up as a point of reference? We will only get an inkling of his third week durability this go around, since only now has he been properly prepared. Everything else is pure speculation ante litteram. But again, his Giro has no bearing on the matter in this regard. All that can be said of that race is that it was a botched attempt to pull a rabit out of the hat.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Rarely you hear Eurosport commentators openly cheering for Rogla to crash.

They did that? Which language feed? They should be sacked if they did.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

No climbers on form, and even if they were, thin. Very thin.

Is that not the defining characteristic of climbers?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Of course we haven't seen it yet, because, till now and since his dramatic fall, he simply hasn't been in the position to demonstrate it. However, last year's Giro is a non-factor, since he was in no condition to demonstrate his potential, so why is it repeatedly being brought up as a point of reference? We will only get an inkling of his third week durability this go around, since only now has he been properly prepared. Everything else is pure speculation ante litteram. But again, his Giro has no bearing on the matter in this regard. All that can be said of that race is that it was a botched attempt to pull a rabit out of the hat.

And in the post you were replying to, I stated that in my opinion that Giro cannot be seen as a representative example of what Remco is capable of. It is, however, the only data point we have for his performance in weeks 2 and 3 of a Grand Tour, everything else is just conjecture and educated guesswork, which is why it is brought up.

 

[Carrick-On-Seine]

They did that? Which language feed? They should be sacked if they did.

I think that was just Robbie McEwen speculating that Quickstep were riding hard in those conditions to see how Roglic handled it as he is prone to crashing. I'd hardly calling it cheering, just saying something some people might not want to hear.

 

[Bonimenier]

They did that? Which language feed? They should be sacked if they did.

Of course they didn't. It's just CyclistAbi living in a parallel universe again.

 

[Extinction]

And in the post you were replying to, I stated that in my opinion that Giro cannot be seen as a representative example of what Remco is capable of. It is, however, the only data point we have for his performance in weeks 2 and 3 of a Grand Tour, everything else is just conjecture and educated guesswork, which is why it is brought up.

Yes, but you miss the point, because it's simply bogus data and thus cannot (despite the exlusivity) have any bearing on the matter. It's thus best to forget about it entirely, reboot, tabula rasa as they say, and start anew. It's like when you're writing a dissertation and, at a certain juncture, realize the data doesn't amount to anything, at least anything that isn't completely spurious. At which point you discard years of research and start cultivating new data that, with fortune on your side, actually is worth consideration. This is precisely the relationship between his Giro and the present Vuelta, for which only current outcomes can lead to valid prognostications of future performances.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yes, but you miss the point, because it's simply bogus data and thus cannot (despite the exlusivity) have any bearing on the matter. It's thus best to forget about it entirely, reboot, tabula rasa as they say, and start anew. It's like when you're writing a dissertation and, at a certain juncture, realize the data doesn't amount to anything, at least anything that isn't completely spurious. At which point you discard years of research and start cultivating new data that, with fortune on your side, actually is worth consideration. This is precisely the relationship between his Giro and the present Vuelta, for which only current outcomes can lead to valid prognostications of future performances.

All I'm saying is let's not anoint Remco the winner of the race just yet because he's completely unproven over a three week race. I've never said that he can't or won't, just that yesterday's performance doesn't bring us any closer to a conclusion on whether he can or will, because we already know he can perform at this level in a one-week race and the only data we have on him in a three week race is unreliable.

Unless the point is to whitewash all data that points to a conclusion you don't want, that's not missing the point, because I explicitly said, it's the only data point we have and I don't think it's representative enough to draw any meaningful conclusions from.

I don't understand why multiple posters have taken issue with this stance.

 

[Extinction]

All I'm saying is let's not anoint Remco the winner of the race just yet because he's completely unproven over a three week race. I've never said that he can't or won't, just that yesterday's performance doesn't bring us any closer to a conclusion on whether he can or will, because we already know he can perform at this level in a one-week race and the only data we have on him in a three week race is unreliable.

Unless the point is to whitewash all data that points to a conclusion you don't want, that's not missing the point, because I explicitly said, it's the only data point we have and I don't think it's representative enough to draw any meaningful conclusions from.

I don't understand why multiple posters have taken issue with this stance.

Look, I'm only trying to be objective, so it's got nothing to do with eliminating data that leads to conclusions I don't want, let alone whitewash the analysis. In fact, I've repeatedly stressed that we don't know if he will win, or can for that matter, and precisely for the uncharted territory you indicated. What I dispute, however, is any allusion to his Giro performance, because it doesn't matter, es spielt keine Rolle, non c'entra niente, no entra, which you are guilty of bringing up, however passively. How else can I spell it out?

 

[yaco]

Regarding Vine and Alpecin:
It’s quite funny that when a rider have developed well and suddenly win on top level, instead of applauding his team for right decisions to bring him to this level the team get called out for mismanaging him with a bad calendar and said to have hurt his development.

It makes zero sense.

Some of us have been complaining about Vine's calendar for all of 2022 - There are few if any 'Johnny Come Lately's who have suddenly entered the discussion.

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

Some of us have been complaining about Vine's calendar for all of 2022 - There are few if any 'Johnny Come Lately's who have suddenly entered the discussion.

Well, it still makes more sense to acknowledge that they have done most things correct regarding calendar and developement.
They have made him into a rider that can win WT mountain stages at around 6,5w/kg. Its hard to imagine this is a result of something that “hurts his developement”.

 

[StryderHells]

Some of us have been complaining about Vine's calendar for all of 2022 - There are few if any 'Johnny Come Lately's who have suddenly entered the discussion.

The guy has just won a GT stage at his second attempt, his development has had a good solid upward trajectory without putting to much pressure on him to early. Well done Alpecin and Vine.

 

[CyclistAbi]

They did that? Which language feed? They should be sacked if they did.

Before the penultimate climb they went on on how if team Remco puts some real pressure on Rogla basically Rogla would to crash. Portraying Rogla as a bad descender. On how that would i guess make this race more interesting. Going as far as suggesting it would be legitimate tactics. Valid discussion but in my opinion being a bit too eager about it. Likely they just cheer for Remco to win and got carried away a bit. Personally i don't feel they should be sacked for that. Rogla regaining the leaders jersey should be punishing enough.

 

[Extinction]

Before the penultimate climb they went on on how if team Remco puts some real pressure on Rogla basically Rogla would to crash. Portraying Rogla as a bad descender. On how that would i guess make this race more interesting. Going as far as suggesting it would be legitimate tactics. Valid discussion but in my opinion being a bit too eager about it. Likely they just cheer for Remco to win and got carried away a bit. Personally i don't feel they should be sacked for that. Rogla regaining the leaders jersey should be punishing enough.

I highly doubt that was the intention of their commentary. Come on.

 

[CyclistAbi]

I highly doubt that was the intention of their commentary. Come on.

Why wouldn't it be? It's rather standard thinking in pro road cycling. The whole reason on why i made a remark about it in the first place is. To correct a claim that Rogla is to be considered a bad descender. There is just no ground for claiming that. Reality is he is rather good descender.

 

[Extinction]

Why wouldn't it be? It's rather standard thinking in pro road cycling. The whole reason on why i made a remark about it in the first place is. To correct a claim that Rogla is to be considered a bad descender. There is just no ground for claiming that. Reality is he is rather good descender.

Apart from Roglic being a good descender, why on earth would Eurosport commentators wish the man to crash? It simply makes no sense.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Apart from Roglic being a good descender, why on earth would Eurosport commentators wish the man to crash? It simply makes no sense.

Likely it was about the fear. Fear that Rogla will just dominate this race through and through. As from this perspective you have to entertain the discussion a bit. When going down a rabbit hole. On how team Remco could beat Rogla. One way hence to be to make it difficult for him on descend on such a rainy day. So far so good. But after saying things like as Rogla is a bad descender ...

Well, no.

Anyway. These days a replay is seconds away. Hence i don't see a real problem here. Make of it whatever you want. Like the rest of us.

 

[hayneplane]

I just saw Chris Horner's video on stage 6. He thought it was curious that the entire Jumbo team seemed not to perform well--he speculated that it might have had something to do with calorie deficits, maybe not getting the meals right the night before, or some other team-wide phenomenon. He didn't think injuries were currently an issue for Primoz. He still thought Rog did a very good job of damage control.

Nah I think it’s more a case that they threw the kitchen sink at the Tour and came away with almost every prize. Vingo is effectively on a victory lap for the rest of the season, Wout now has other goals and Laporte too is off doing his own things.

Kuss always has the tendency to be super dominant one day and awol the next. Rohan Dennis in peak climbing form would be huge for Roglic but it didn’t seem likely to happen this Vuelta.

The stage Roglic won was the type of finish that he is arguably at least top 3 all time at final kms like that so winning there could happen even in suboptimal condition.