Best tactical move:
Best rider signing for 2019:
Worst tactical move:
Worst rider signing for 2019:
Best rider signing for 2019:
Worst tactical move:
Worst rider signing for 2019:
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Gigs_98 said:Yeah Movistar was tactically as bad as it gets this season. But if there is one specific tactical move which was so bad it deserves special attention it was Lotto NL on the aubisque. They had Froome in the ropes but Roglic refused to keep his pace high and always allowed Froome to get back. And then when he finally had a big gap on Froome of all people it was Steven Kruijswijk to help Froome and bernal to close the gap again. Moreover you could add that not sending Kruijswijk up the road with landa, bardet,... on the tourmalet in that stage was so stupid it would deserve its own mention. That stage was just one gigantic rabofail
When it comes to good tactics you just can't get around qs this year. How they played it in almost all classics except PR was close to perfection. One rider who deserves a special mention because I think he has been kinda underappreciated this season is Philipp Gilbert. His constant presence was imo the main key to many of qs wins as he is a leader who unlike former leaders didn't race for himself but the team. I find it very telling that qs only tactical f*ck up came in the one race he desperately wanted to win and I think that if Gilbert would have commited 100% to his early move in arenberg the race would have ended very differently. He didn't commit though as he knew the move didn't give him the best chances to win and it all went downwards from there onwards
And who made the podium?tobydawq said:Gigs_98 said:Yeah Movistar was tactically as bad as it gets this season. But if there is one specific tactical move which was so bad it deserves special attention it was Lotto NL on the aubisque. They had Froome in the ropes but Roglic refused to keep his pace high and always allowed Froome to get back. And then when he finally had a big gap on Froome of all people it was Steven Kruijswijk to help Froome and bernal to close the gap again. Moreover you could add that not sending Kruijswijk up the road with landa, bardet,... on the tourmalet in that stage was so stupid it would deserve its own mention. That stage was just one gigantic rabofail
When it comes to good tactics you just can't get around qs this year. How they played it in almost all classics except PR was close to perfection. One rider who deserves a special mention because I think he has been kinda underappreciated this season is Philipp Gilbert. His constant presence was imo the main key to many of qs wins as he is a leader who unlike former leaders didn't race for himself but the team. I find it very telling that qs only tactical f*ck up came in the one race he desperately wanted to win and I think that if Gilbert would have commited 100% to his early move in arenberg the race would have ended very differently. He didn't commit though as he knew the move didn't give him the best chances to win and it all went downwards from there onwards
And who won the stage?
Gigs_98 said:Yeah Movistar was tactically as bad as it gets this season. But if there is one specific tactical move which was so bad it deserves special attention it was Lotto NL on the aubisque. They had Froome in the ropes but Roglic refused to keep his pace high and always allowed Froome to get back. And then when he finally had a big gap on Froome of all people it was Steven Kruijswijk to help Froome and bernal to close the gap again. Moreover you could add that not sending Kruijswijk up the road with landa, bardet,... on the tourmalet in that stage was so stupid it would deserve its own mention. That stage was just one gigantic rabofail
When it comes to good tactics you just can't get around qs this year. How they played it in almost all classics except PR was close to perfection. One rider who deserves a special mention because I think he has been kinda underappreciated this season is Philipp Gilbert. His constant presence was imo the main key to many of qs wins as he is a leader who unlike former leaders didn't race for himself but the team. I find it very telling that qs only tactical f*ck up came in the one race he desperately wanted to win and I think that if Gilbert would have commited 100% to his early move in arenberg the race would have ended very differently. He didn't commit though as he knew the move didn't give him the best chances to win and it all went downwards from there onwards
Red Rick said:Not really sure about the best tactical moves, all of the monuments were really great wins tactically. Finestre is tactically whatever. It's picking the right option when there's one option.
Worst tactical decision: France riding for Alaphilippe during the Worlds.
They left it really late, and Pinot wasn't that aggressive. Pinot was reacting to attacks on the final Igls climb, which was just a waste of energy cause at that point nothing stays away.Blanco said:Red Rick said:Not really sure about the best tactical moves, all of the monuments were really great wins tactically. Finestre is tactically whatever. It's picking the right option when there's one option.
Worst tactical decision: France riding for Alaphilippe during the Worlds.
And how would you set tactics if you're on Guimard's place? I don't think he made such big mistake.
Pinot was active earlier trying to escape, Ala waited for that final wall, and Bardet hang on with him to have numerical advantage over Valverde or whoever in that final descent/sprint. The problem is their main guy, who seemed to have perfect shape, ran out of steam on that goat track, leaving Bardet with the fastest man who could possibly be there.
Only other possibility was trying earlier with all-out attacks from Pinot and Bardet, but this way you risk to blow them up completely, and not only them, but Alaphilippe also if the race becomes very, very hard (and I repeat, he seemed to have great shape, and was one of the two main favorites). The risk was too big, and I don't think the outcome would be different, except maybe they wouldn't get that medal at all.
Spain was very strong that day and controlled things perfectly, Valverde was superb also, and I really doubt anybody could beat him that day. Maybe only Nibali in top shape would have some kind of a chance.
Red Rick said:Not really sure about the best tactical moves, all of the monuments were really great wins tactically. Finestre is tactically whatever. It's picking the right option when there's one option.
Worst tactical decision: France riding for Alaphilippe during the Worlds.
Nothing in his incredible season suggested he could survive this parcours.Akuryo said:Red Rick said:Not really sure about the best tactical moves, all of the monuments were really great wins tactically. Finestre is tactically whatever. It's picking the right option when there's one option.
Worst tactical decision: France riding for Alaphilippe during the Worlds.
He had an incredible season and until the last kilometer of that hill it looked like the best option. He was also the only French rider who at least would have had a chance in a sprint against Valverde. So I dont think it was tactically wrong move. Just bad luck that he did not have the legs anymore after a hard season. You could argue that the final of the worlds did not favor him but I think in April or July he would've won! Alaphilippe said so himself that he already felt tired after San Sebastian...
Red Rick said:Nothing in his incredible season suggested he could survive this parcours.Akuryo said:Red Rick said:Not really sure about the best tactical moves, all of the monuments were really great wins tactically. Finestre is tactically whatever. It's picking the right option when there's one option.
Worst tactical decision: France riding for Alaphilippe during the Worlds.
He had an incredible season and until the last kilometer of that hill it looked like the best option. He was also the only French rider who at least would have had a chance in a sprint against Valverde. So I dont think it was tactically wrong move. Just bad luck that he did not have the legs anymore after a hard season. You could argue that the final of the worlds did not favor him but I think in April or July he would've won! Alaphilippe said so himself that he already felt tired after San Sebastian...
If he really already felt tired after San Sebastian and knew he wasn't in his best shape, he screwed over the French team big time.
Alaphilippe's best use would have been to be leverage while Bardet or Pinot actually attack, everyone looks behind and nobody wants to do the work for Alaphilippe or Valverde.
Red Rick said:Solo on the final hill was quite possible if you're the strongest there. Think that if one of them was the strongest on that hill it was probably Valverde, and I guess by a small enough margin that he didn't feel comfortable going for it, but then this is Valverde.
Cause you cannot lose a tactical battle obviouslyKoronin said:Red Rick said:Solo on the final hill was quite possible if you're the strongest there. Think that if one of them was the strongest on that hill it was probably Valverde, and I guess by a small enough margin that he didn't feel comfortable going for it, but then this is Valverde.
He may well have been the strongest, and if he was, why go solo when you know you can win the sprint?