53rd Amstel Gold Race - 260km

Page 25 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
cyclopsnoobie said:
Can you, as Administrato,r explain me please, why you (somebody) delay my posts - there si written that my posts must be approved - and as a result my posts wait sometime HOURS!!!! - so that is no chance to be part of ongoing disscussion for me - when my post get green to go the topics of discussion is over - at least put my post at the last page so there is chance that somebody sees it and can react
This is not how it works. Please understand that all new members get under scrutiny, which prevents spam and trolls.well...for the most part :) . We don't want to be YouTube :eek: . Thank you for your patience. And welcome to the forum.
 
Now with regards to the race and Piti riding conservative in the end, that's textbook Valverde, it doesn't always pay off, but that's who he is. He and Alaf had to spare energy to beat Sagan in a 3-way sprint. That's what gave a chance for others and we have a deserving winner. But yeah, the all against Sagan is still alive and well. He's so good that no one will drag him to the 400m mark.
 
Silly mode alert!

Not only did Valgren and Fuglsang have the advantage of having a teammate - each other - in the front group, they could also openly discuss their plans without worrying about anyone overhearing it.
Unless Holm was DSing for Quickstep.
 
Re:

tobydawq said:
I just don't understand why Valverde thinks it's better to lose by not sprinting for first place than lose a sprint for first place.
At least two reasons. Firstly, in the long game, he has a reputation to uphold ... that he isn't going to be Sagan's (or anyone else's) lead out man. Secondly, he has races to win later in the week. I also suspect, having attacked a short while before, with the others fighting to stay on his wheel, his legs will not have been at their freshest ...
I was disappointed, but given that Astana had worked things really well, I suspect he knew he wasn't going to win once Valgren went off the second time. Frankly, I had hoped for Alaphilippe to do more anyway.

It really isn't his sort of race anyway.
 
Re:

tobydawq said:
I just don't understand why Valverde thinks it's better to lose by not sprinting for first place than lose a sprint for first place.
I'm sure he doesn't think that, but they weren't the only two options. You simply have to be prepared to buff and hope another rider cracks first; it is the best chance of winning a race from that scenario - even if it looks incredibly passive when it doesn't come off. There was a chance - a pretty good chance with aggressive riders like Wellens and Alaphilippe around - that someone else ould do most of the work to bridge the gap and leave Valverde still able to contest the sprint for the win.
 
Re: Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
Blanco said:
Eyeballs Out said:
I thought it was pretty impressive for Sagan to even be there in the finale when the likes of Gilbert, Kwiatkowski weren't. I think it was more a case of being exhausted rather than intentionally watching Kreuziger and then Gasparotto ride away
He was exhausted alright, but he could've follow Kreuziger, he was on his wheel, not a big effort was needed. It was just a bluff from him, he was at the limit, and wanted Valverde, Alaphilippe and others to do that one more effort before the sprint while he would be resting at the back of the group. But things went wrong because Valverde didn't won't to close it either, and others just looked at those two.
That's my 5 cents.
That might make some sort of sense if it was Kreuziger who launched first. But with the dangerous Valgren having already attacked and Kreuziger being the only one to take the bait there is nothing to gained by not following him (if you can). Still if there was any doubt whether they were all cooked then there was still an outside chance for anyone with the legs to win if they can go with, and work with, Gasparotto. But legs said no
And yet he was somehow strongest in the sprint... I don't know. If he was dead, as you say, I think he would lose that sprint to Valverde.
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Eyeballs Out said:
Blanco said:
Eyeballs Out said:
I thought it was pretty impressive for Sagan to even be there in the finale when the likes of Gilbert, Kwiatkowski weren't. I think it was more a case of being exhausted rather than intentionally watching Kreuziger and then Gasparotto ride away
He was exhausted alright, but he could've follow Kreuziger, he was on his wheel, not a big effort was needed. It was just a bluff from him, he was at the limit, and wanted Valverde, Alaphilippe and others to do that one more effort before the sprint while he would be resting at the back of the group. But things went wrong because Valverde didn't won't to close it either, and others just looked at those two.
That's my 5 cents.
That might make some sort of sense if it was Kreuziger who launched first. But with the dangerous Valgren having already attacked and Kreuziger being the only one to take the bait there is nothing to gained by not following him (if you can). Still if there was any doubt whether they were all cooked then there was still an outside chance for anyone with the legs to win if they can go with, and work with, Gasparotto. But legs said no
And yet he was somehow strongest in the sprint... I don't know. If he was dead, as you say, I think he would lose that sprint to Valverde.
He did have a good minute's recovery, which might have restored a bit of his anaerobic energy stores.
 
Re: Re:

Blanco said:
Eyeballs Out said:
Blanco said:
Eyeballs Out said:
I thought it was pretty impressive for Sagan to even be there in the finale when the likes of Gilbert, Kwiatkowski weren't. I think it was more a case of being exhausted rather than intentionally watching Kreuziger and then Gasparotto ride away
He was exhausted alright, but he could've follow Kreuziger, he was on his wheel, not a big effort was needed. It was just a bluff from him, he was at the limit, and wanted Valverde, Alaphilippe and others to do that one more effort before the sprint while he would be resting at the back of the group. But things went wrong because Valverde didn't won't to close it either, and others just looked at those two.
That's my 5 cents.
That might make some sort of sense if it was Kreuziger who launched first. But with the dangerous Valgren having already attacked and Kreuziger being the only one to take the bait there is nothing to gained by not following him (if you can). Still if there was any doubt whether they were all cooked then there was still an outside chance for anyone with the legs to win if they can go with, and work with, Gasparotto. But legs said no
And yet he was somehow strongest in the sprint... I don't know. If he was dead, as you say, I think he would lose that sprint to Valverde.
If they are all dead then someone is still going to go less slow at the end than the others
 
Re:

Carstenbf said:
Hooray for Valgren. :)
And well done Jakob. Beware of him next Sunday!

Can't help but smile at all the Monday morning quarterbacking in here. Should've, could've, would've ... as if it's a matter of choice after 240k's of hard racing. Imo, it looked like Valgren was simply the strongest, while also enjoying the benefit of a teammate in the group. Wasn't like Sagan or Piti didn't try to close down his last move, but they simply couldn't. Only thing worth criticizing in that finale, from my perspective (and as others have pointed out as well), was Kreuziger willing to take another turn at the very end. Surprised me somewhat. Not sure if it'd made a difference though.
Are you sure you watched that finale?
 
Re:

Netserk said:
Yep, must have taken a lot of strength to sit back in the group and not take any pulls at all. Yuge strength.
For 10 km out of 260, sure - it's called riding smart :D

The dude didn't even gasp for air, he was there all the time, stone faced and ready.

But sure buddy, it is really "unfair" he won..... especially being one of your countrymen :lol:

People like you make me LOL - you love to hate any national success.
 
Re:

Netserk said:
Yep, must have taken a lot of strength to sit back in the group and not take any pulls at all. Yuge strength.
He was one of the few riders able to follow Valverde on the Geulhemmerberg, togeter with Sagan and Alaphilippe (Wellens and Fuglsang were just behind). Valgren being the rider who knows how to finish, Astana obviously made Fuglsang do more work than Valgren. He might not have been the strongest, but he was atleast one of them. He deserved his win.
 
Re: Re:

Broccolidwarf said:
Netserk said:
Yep, must have taken a lot of strength to sit back in the group and not take any pulls at all. Yuge strength.
For 10 km out of 260, sure - it's called riding smart :D

The dude didn't even gasp for air, he was there all the time, stone faced and ready.

But sure buddy, it is really "unfair" he won..... especially being one of your countrymen :lol:

People like you make me LOL - you love to hate any national success.
He didn't say it was unfair, just that he was not the strongest man in the race. Something most people would be inclined to agree with.
 
Re: Re:

Broccolidwarf said:
Netserk said:
Yep, must have taken a lot of strength to sit back in the group and not take any pulls at all. Yuge strength.
For 10 km out of 260, sure - it's called riding smart :D

The dude didn't even gasp for air, he was there all the time, stone faced and ready.

But sure buddy, it is really "unfair" he won..... especially being one of your countrymen :lol:

People like you make me LOL - you love to hate any national success.
That is a childish way of viewing the sport. Are you new to cycling? Because you sound more like a casual viewer than an actual fan of cycling. Valgren was clearly not the strongest, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't the smartest or didn't deserve the win. Valverde and Sagan did the most work because they were the favorites but both underestimated Valgren's abilities in the end.

A real fan put aesthetics, style, strength above nationality.

I am Dutch, but I don't cheer for the Dutch. I prefer Nibali above Dumoulin or Mollema for example.
 
Re: Re:

Netserk said:
Broccolidwarf said:
Netserk said:
Yep, must have taken a lot of strength to sit back in the group and not take any pulls at all. Yuge strength.
blablabla
My point was simply that he wasn't the strongest in the race. Nothing more than that. That's totally fair and doesn't make his win any less deserved.
That you believe someone else was stronger, does not make it fact, no matter how much you want it to :)

Either way, you are always the first to hate on danish riders in here, despite being danish..... the “law of Jante” is strong with you.
 
Re: Re:

WheelofGear said:
Broccolidwarf said:
Netserk said:
Yep, must have taken a lot of strength to sit back in the group and not take any pulls at all. Yuge strength.
For 10 km out of 260, sure - it's called riding smart :D

The dude didn't even gasp for air, he was there all the time, stone faced and ready.

But sure buddy, it is really "unfair" he won..... especially being one of your countrymen :lol:

People like you make me LOL - you love to hate any national success.
That is a childish way of viewing the sport. Are you new to cycling? Because you sound more like a casual viewer than an actual fan of cycling. Valgren was clearly not the strongest, but that doesn't mean that he wasn't the smartest or didn't deserve the win. Valverde and Sagan did the most work because they were the favorites but both underestimated Valgren's abilities in the end.

A real fan put aesthetics, style, strength above nationality.

I am Dutch, but I don't cheer for the Dutch. I prefer Nibali above Dumoulin or Mollema for example.
You seem new to cycling to me :)

And of course you don’t like Mollema, he sucks ;)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Pantani_lives Professional Road Racing 496

ASK THE COMMUNITY