Congrats to Gerrans on MSR.... BUT

[Froome19]

I'm not sure if they had radios or not during MSR. My guess is that either way, Gerrans had to have known that Goss was no longer in the front group going down the Poggio. That means that Goss and Nibali sat on Fabian's wheel for essentially all of over 8 km-then Gerrans jumped for the win.

Yes he reacted to Nibali's attack, but at least Nibali had Sagan sitting in who could take the sprint, which he did for 3rd.

What would Gerran's excuse for not taking more than a 1 or 2 pulls be?

Sitting in almost the entire time not doubt left more in the tank for his sprint. It would have probably been different if he worked with Fabian.

Yes he won, and I am a fan of his. But in my eyes, one might be thinking while sitting on for over 8 km that maybe there has to be SOME honor and he might just act like he couldn't take Fabian in the sprint and concede the win to someone who has been pulling him along for so long and arguably deserved it more?

+10000

If only cycling worked that way, I feel really bad for Canc because there was only one person who could have taken the victory away from the sprinters and that was canc that he managed such a feat was absolutely incredible.

people are saying that Nibali was disappointing because he could not put up a fight at the end. I dont think they understand how strong Canc was, Nibali was the strongest in tirreno but he had no chance against canc, whilst gerrans was evidently in superb form. Yet in terms of pure cycling what Canc did was amazing and surely deserved a medal or something, unfortunately life is not fair but it would be said to wish it so. so I say that its great to at least proclaim misery over such a robbery.

 

[Ripper]

For what it's worth, I actually think the Liqui tactics of Nibali attacking worked against them. Sagan could not attack or pull, but he was obviously the best of the rest (hindsight is nice). Nibali is not going to stay away at MSR on his own, and there are too many big engines that can still make it over the P. I like Nibali, but I think there is a bit of ego going on.

Wrong thread I know, but want to keep perspective on the situation. nibs must have been thinking "I screwed this up" for the last few hundred meters.

 

[rhubroma]

The question should be "why doesn't FC try anything different at the end of races?".

Cancellara made no mistakes and played his exclusive card.

His rhythm was the only possibility of the trio, and that also benefitted him.

Had the others pulled that would have meant a drop in velocity, which would have meant getting caught, which would have meant getting passed in the sprint.

In fact, his second was admirable under the circumstances and demonstrated that the strongest man doesn't always win, though in this case not for bad tactics.

 

[rhubroma]

+10000

If only cycling worked that way, I feel really bad for Canc because there was only one person who could have taken the victory away from the sprinters and that was canc that he managed such a feat was absolutely incredible.

people are saying that Nibali was disappointing because he could not put up a fight at the end. I dont think they understand how strong Canc was, Nibali was the strongest in tirreno but he had no chance against canc, whilst gerrans was evidently in superb form. Yet in terms of pure cycling what Canc did was amazing and surely deserved a medal or something, unfortunately life is not fair but it would be said to wish it so. so I say that its great to at least proclaim misery over such a robbery.

Nibali won Tirreno A in the mountains. His attack on the Poggio was respectable, although having Cancellara on his wheel in the end meant that his effort only gave the Swiss a shot at victory. Fabian took that shot, but the circumstances made it impossible (even if his forcing was, to say the least, impressive).

And the victor benefited from both initiatives, for he could neither have opened the gap on the Poggio, nor pulled his colleagues to the finish line without getting caught.

 

[Froome19]

Nibali won Tirreno A in the mountains. His attack on the Poggio was respectable, although having Cancellara on his wheel in the end meant that his effort only gave the Swiss a shot at victory. Fabian took that shot, but the circumstances made it impossible (even if his forcing was, to say the least, impressive).
.

It doesnt mean he was in bad form

 

[rhubroma]

It doesnt mean he was in bad form

Indeed not! But the Poggio isn't Alpe d'Huez. Thus each played the card that, under the circumstances, was at his disposal.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I'm not sure if they had radios or not during MSR. My guess is that either way, Gerrans had to have known that Goss was no longer in the front group going down the Poggio. That means that Goss and Nibali sat on Fabian's wheel for essentially all of over 8 km-then Gerrans jumped for the win.

Yes he reacted to Nibali's attack, but at least Nibali had Sagan sitting in who could take the sprint, which he did for 3rd.

What would Gerran's excuse for not taking more than a 1 or 2 pulls be?

Sitting in almost the entire time not doubt left more in the tank for his sprint. It would have probably been different if he worked with Fabian.

Yes he won, and I am a fan of his. But in my eyes, one might be thinking while sitting on for over 8 km that maybe there has to be SOME honor and he might just act like he couldn't take Fabian in the sprint and concede the win to someone who has been pulling him along for so long and arguably deserved it more?

Gerrans took advantage of Nibali not attacking on the flat and Cancellara riding pretty much the whole way to the finish on the front. He chose to ride like that.

 

[hfer07]

@ the OP: Lets cut the sh!t To win MSR you must be the strongest-there is no hiding or second breather waiting for you- If a rider happens to be at the front climbing the Poggio & somehow have the engine to "attack" or "counterattack" or "bridge a Gap" after 290k & is in a position to fight for the win along with the two other escapades- than only meas one thing:

"all three-Nibss, Cance & Gerro were the Strongest today- Simon simply won because he is the better Sprinter of them-that's all"

 

[rhubroma]

Gerrans took advantage of Nibali not attacking on the flat and Cancellara riding pretty much the whole way to the finish on the front. He chose to ride like that.

Nibali not attacking on the flat!? How ever was he supposed to do that!?

He spent everything on the Poggio and didn't have the legs, especially with a Cancellara like that who you just hope to hold onto for the ride. Besides his only chance to win in such a sprint, provided the trio made it to the line, was to stay on the wheels of his adversaries.

In the end he couldn't even pull anyway, because Sagan was at 5 seconds!

 

[Froome19]

"all three-Nibss, Cance & Gerro were the Strongest today- Simon simply won because he is the better Sprinter of them-that's all"

That would be nice..
If it were true

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Yeup, happens all the time in cycling. Canc knew he couldn't take Gerrans in a sprint, so chose to bury himself hoping it would put Gerrans in enough difficulty to even the odds in the final push to the line. It almost worked.

 

[rhubroma]

Yeup, happens all the time in cycling. Canc knew he couldn't take Gerrans in a sprint, so chose to bury himself hoping it would put Gerrans in enough difficulty to even the odds in the final push to the line. It almost worked.

Bravo! Finally someone talking sense.

 

[pmcg76]

I think if people want a sport in which the strongest almost always wins, I suggest watching track athletics like the 5000m or 10,000m. Usually boring and predictable as anything. I wonder what forums are like during those races!!!

Cycling can be like poker on wheels which is what makes it so intriguing, in particular one day races, you play the cards you are dealt with, the best hand doesnt always win.

I notice a few people who are complaining about Gerran's would have been happy to see SKY drag Cavendish to the final 200m and then see him sprint for victory, much more noble of course

I definitely dont think Gerrans is an unworthy or poor winner, he got himself in the position he was in to take advantage of the situation and that is smart tactical work, a requisite skill for any pro cyclist.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Nibali not attacking on the flat!? How ever was he supposed to do that!?

He spent everything on the Poggio and didn't have the legs, especially with a Cancellara like that who you just hope to hold onto for the ride. Besides his only chance to win in such a sprint, provided the trio made it to the line, was to stay on the wheels of his adversaries.

In the end he couldn't even pull anyway, because Sagan was at 5 seconds!

He had 0% chance in a sprint. I doubt he had nothing left after the climb as otherwise he wouldn't have attacked on the climb. You don't go from being able to putting in a massive attack and then stay with Cancellara going crazy to not being able to do anything.

He at least had a chance to win if he attacked. Saying Sagan was in the back group is not an excuse either.

also, have you guys watched Cancellara sprint in last years MSR or WC? He can certainly sprint very well.

 

[rhubroma]

That would be nice..
If it were true

Gerrons won because in the tactical scheme of team duties he was told to follow, and had the legs to (which is commendable), whoever attacked on the Poggio; then Cancellara fortuitously joined, the only one who could have towed them to the line. Nibali made the initiative and Cancellara did the rest. In between was a Gerrons who did exceptionally well what he was ordered to do and, capitalizing, took the victor's laurels. Deservedly so, even if it was the others who made the race.

Had nobody gotten away on the Poggio, or had the chasers gotten back to them, in all likelihood Sagan would have won.

 

[hfer07]

That would be nice..
If it were true

but It was!! the problem is for some folks to accept it

 

[rhubroma]

He had 0% chance in a sprint. I doubt he had nothing left after the climb as otherwise he wouldn't have attacked on the climb. You don't go from being able to putting in a massive attack and then stay with Cancellara going crazy to not being able to do anything.

He at least had a chance to win if he attacked. Saying Sagan was in the back group is not an excuse either.

also, have you guys watched Cancellara sprint in last years MSR or WC? He can certainly sprint very well.

At 300 ks things are different.

Trust me, Nibali spent everything on the Poggio. It was his only chance at victory. He's too slow in the sprint anyway, to have had any chance no matter what.

 

[Froome19]

Gerrons won because in the tactical scheme of team duties he was told to follow, and had the legs to (which is commendable), whoever attacked on the Poggio; then Cancellara fortuitously joined, the only one who could have towed them to the line. Nibali made the initiative and Cancellara did the rest. In between was a Gerrons who did exceptionally well what he was ordered to do and, capitalizing, took the victor's laurels. Deservedly so, even if it was the others who made the race.

Had nobody gotten away on the Poggio, or had the chasers gotten back to them, in all likelihood Sagan would have won.

Indeed...
But it doesnt change that Cancellara was still the strongest by far and then probably Sagan/Gerrans was second.

 

[pmcg76]

Indeed...
But it doesnt change that Cancellara was still the strongest by far and then probably Sagan/Gerrans was second.

Strongest but not the smartest and that is what counts.

 

[rhubroma]

Indeed...
But it doesnt change that Cancellara was still the strongest by far and then probably Sagan/Gerrans was second.

Well, did I ever say Cancellara wasn't the strongest?

He just found one other customer on the Poggio he fatally didn't need.

Nibali did what nobody else could do on the climb, Fabian what nobody else could do on the flat. Unfortunately there was a third, who, not being able to do himself what Nibali could do on the climb, nor alone what Fabian could do on the flat, was in the end strong enough to take advantage of both.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

but It was!! the problem is for some folks to accept it

Was Nuyens as strong as Chavanel and Cancellara in the Ronde last year? No.

Cancellara was the strongest man today, not Gerrans. Gerrans was, however, strong enough to stay with Cancellara, but if he and Nibali were doing the turns then Paolini would have had a much better chance of pulling them back. Gerrans won today because he did the right thing tactically - when faced with a superior opponent, make them do the work so they aren't as superior when it comes to the end. Cancellara's only chance of winning was to hold off the whole bunch on his own and hope against hope that he had more left in him for the sprint than Gerrans and Nibali. Gerrans' chance of winning was hoping that Cancellara could hold off the whole bunch of his own and know that he had more left in him for the sprint than Cancellara.

Being the strongest in cycling isn't always enough; you must also be the smartest. Being the strongest can sometimes mean you don't need to be smart, and being the smartest can sometimes mean you don't have to be as strong. Evans was the strongest on the Mur de Huy in 2008, but Kirchen won the race. Why? Evans mistimed it. Cancellara was the strongest in Roubaix last year, but van Summeren won the race. Why? Because Garmin's tactic was to make Cancellara do all the work and put somebody strong in the break.

Sometimes the decisive factor is the strength. Sometimes the decisive factor is the smarts. Sometimes the decisive factor is just a big slice of luck. To win a race like this, you need to have a bit of all three.

 

[Dutchsmurf]

Indeed...
But it doesnt change that Cancellara was still the strongest by far and then probably Sagan/Gerrans was second.

Maybe Cancellara was the strongest, but to win you also need to be smart. Cancellara, probably in a Leopard tradition, decided to ride for second place and Gerrans took full advantage of that.

It doesn't really matter if you end 2nd or 10th. In both cases you lost. Cancellara was using a losing tactic and should have done something to change that. Which would have been sitting up. If he really was that strong he could have done a leadout for Bennati. With a proper leadout Bennati would probably have finished second too, but at least the odds are better there.

 

[Froome19]

Well, did I ever say Cancellara wasn't the strongest?

He just found one other customer on the Poggio he fatally didn't need.

Nibali did what nobody else could do on the climb, Fabian what nobody else could do on the flat. Unfortunately there was a third, who, not being able to do himself what Nibali could do on the climb, nor alone what Fabian could do on the flat, was in the end strong enough to take advantage of both.

Strongest but not the smartest and that is what counts.

I wasnt arguing with you guys but rather what hfer said about all 3 of Gerrans, nibali and Cancellara being the strongest
I agree Gerrans is a deserved winner but in an ideal world i would have like the strongest man-Cancellara to win.

 

[rhubroma]

Strongest but not the smartest and that is what counts.

Nonsense. Fabian was tactically fine. What else was he supposed to do attack first on the Poggio, drop everyone, and then solo to the finish? Or not follow Nibali and have a go at the sprint against Boonen? Sagan? and the rest? Given that Nibali and the Austrailian alone would have surely been caught.

He played the only card he had on such a course and unfortunately lost, but was the moral victor.

 

[cineteq]

It doesn't really matter if you end 2nd or 10th. In both cases you lost. Cancellara was using a losing tactic and should have done something to change that. Which would have been sitting up. If he really was that strong he could have done a leadout for Bennati. With a proper leadout Bennati would probably have finished second too, but at least the odds are better there.

Cancellara did what needed to do, he had better odds by doing what he did, otherwise Sagan would've just toyed with all of them.

Nonsense. Fabian was tactically fine. What else was he supposed to do attack first on the Poggio, drop everyone, and then solo to the finish? Or not follow Nibali and have a go at the sprint against Boonen? Sagan? and the rest? Given that Nibali and the Austrailian alone would have surely been caught.

He played the only card he had on such a course and unfortunately lost, but was the moral victor.

Voila! Another way to say the same thing!