Giro Stage 20 - De Gendt

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 30, 2011
2,642
0
0
This thread translated:

hiero2 said:
Yes - and I will be cheering for Ryder every minute of it! Go, Ryder, go! He has come close many times - but this year it looks like we have the right combination with the team and the competitors. It will be grand to see the pink jersey hanging in Canada! (knock on wood!)
 
Apr 19, 2010
1,112
0
0
LaFlorecita said:
Yeah and that's why it would be hilarious if he'd test +
Possibly not as hilarious as Bert Contador getting popped after a blood bag cockup. As HWSNBN once said "he's got a lot to learn".


180mmCrank said:
What we saw today was a group of cyclists grinding it out on a tough climb. This is completely different from the doped/EPO fuelled fireworks we regularly saw a few years ago.
I think you mean one year ago. But I agree.
 
Well I never :rolleyes:

To me De Gendt's ride appeared as legit as these heroic 50k breaks get. He did not exactly pull a Landis. I am usually quite suspicious, and perhaps, during this Giro, have been too willing to give the contenders the benefit of doubt.

If Caruut's characterisation of this thread as mudslinging, to which I'm actually quite willing to grant some merit, is indeed valid, then I only have this to say:

Yesterday De Gendt was simply determined and very good; a chance emerged both because of his strength and tactics, and he took it. By the looks of it his riding was none more clinically enhanced than any other contender's. The numbers say the same. You can take all of this one way or the other, but most of all, as De Gendt's strong riding goes: Deal with it.
 
Apr 25, 2011
74
2
8,685
Last year, he won the queen stage in The Tour de Suisse, on a climb he stayed in front of Andy Schleck. This guy has an enormous talent, which he is only discovering since last year. This is a future winner of the Tour and a clean one too!

Don't forget he has been to the Stelvio 30 times before yesterday. He has been training on this climb for over 6 years. The climb has no secrets for him as it was his favorite climb. All in all, he lost 2 minutes on the favorites. If you think he is suspicious, you should come up with some better evidence than you have now. Otherwise, this thread is bulls***
 
Aug 12, 2010
128
0
0
He got more than five minutes as a gift, without really having to do a lot to get 'em.

When the big names started going at it, he lost two of those five minutes, which is pretty much the same as what he did on the other stages.

In conclusion, there was nothing strange about what De Gendt did yesterday, not compared to other stages. He just took perfect advantage of the circumstances, which isn't even a discussion or an opinion, but a fact which is quite clear and obvious to someone who knows something about cycling (and isn't a troll)
 
Aug 2, 2010
1,502
0
0
Race Radio said:
Who knew that all you had to do is give up sausages and you can win the Cima Coppi?
who are you? a failure? someone who wanted to be a cyclist but wasn't good enough?

man up and stop with the bullish*t.
 
hrotha said:
Yes. If you watched it it was obvious. It was all down to tactics. The favourites wouldn't ride until some Garmin domestiques got there. Then, it was the front group vs Vande Velde (dropped from the break) and Stetina (not very strong).

Once Hesjedal took the lead, the gap went down, although De Gendt still held his own and climbed faster than most because he's good and he hadn't spent that much before.
Dude, I would not say Stetina is not very strong, and CVV waited, he was not dropped. Given how long CVV was leading, I think the tactic of keeping things in check and taking time slowly made sense. The others were racing for Hesjedal to lose, so a quick catch would not have done him any good.
 
Jun 20, 2009
654
0
0
Clean. End of story. Naive OPs like this thread make it easier for the real dopers to escape scrutiny. Shame on the OP.
 
Ripper said:
Dude, I would not say Stetina is not very strong, and CVV waited, he was not dropped. Given how long CVV was leading, I think the tactic of keeping things in check and taking time slowly made sense. The others were racing for Hesjedal to lose, so a quick catch would not have done him any good.
Stetina is not very strong in the context of bringing back a group with De Gendt, Nieve and Cunego. I know he's good, but he had already been dropped, and his level at this Giro was roughly that of a top 20-25. Which wasn't enough to bring back the likes of De Gendt because when the contenders go the domestiques simply can't keep up.
 
Jun 11, 2011
473
0
0
hiero2 said:
How can I believe that De Gendt is clean today? I don't think so. Nobody else is keeping up with him - they ALL look uncomfortable, EXCEPT De Gendt. Nope. I don't see it. It reminds me of a certain stage in the TdF - where a famous admitted doper doped, and got caught.
troll
our brain helps us think before we speak, try it
 
Aug 27, 2010
970
0
0
There is a thing i dont quite understand that I hope you can help me with that relates to a stage like this.

Effort at going faster is not linear, right? So De Gendt is spending a bit more effort earlier on the stage, and the chasers has to go faster than him later on to catch him. So what costs more energy? Just going by my own nonpowermetered/HR-monitored bike experienced i would say the latter is harder (assuming they have to finish the stage in the same time). I know this ignores drafting etc, but that shouldnt be TOO important on a proper mountainstage.

So basically I dont understand why it is so OMG-Surprising that a steady speed De Gendt takes time on GC contenders having to race the last part of the stage a lot faster than De Gendt in order to catch him.
 
May 26, 2012
19
0
0
De Gendt stayed away because the Italians were racing for Ryder to lose. That's the only reason. No doping involved in that attack. Let him not gain 2-3 minutes on the flat and another minute or two from VdV and he's caught quite easily. Just good timing and a lot of luck
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,642
0
0
Ney the Viking said:
There is a thing i dont quite understand that I hope you can help me with that relates to a stage like this.

Effort at going faster is not linear, right? So De Gendt is spending a bit more effort earlier on the stage, and the chasers has to go faster than him later on to catch him. So what costs more energy? Just going by my own nonpowermetered/HR-monitored bike experienced i would say the latter is harder (assuming they have to finish the stage in the same time). I know this ignores drafting etc, but that shouldnt be TOO important on a proper mountainstage.

So basically I dont understand why it is so OMG-Surprising that a steady speed De Gendt takes time on GC contenders having to race the last part of the stage a lot faster than De Gendt in order to catch him.
Great point - De Gendt could just ride at a pretty much equal effort all the way up. The fact that he knew the climb inside out must have been a huge help in knowing how to pace himself.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Interesting - now I've been called a troll, and told my thread is stupid. Well, I did start the thread with the idea of getting some conversation going, but I don't think that makes me a troll.

As for being suspicious - hey - didn't we learn anything from the Lance years - after all, wasn't he the most tested athlete in history? I was willing to give the peloton the benefit of the doubt at the time. Later, it all started coming out, and it became apparent that pretty much everybody in the pro peloton was juicing.

Ney the Viking said:
There is a thing i dont quite understand that I hope you can help me with that relates to a stage like this.

Effort at going faster is not linear, right? So De Gendt is spending a bit more effort earlier on the stage, and the chasers has to go faster than him later on to catch him. So what costs more energy? Just going by my own nonpowermetered/HR-monitored bike experienced i would say the latter is harder (assuming they have to finish the stage in the same time). I know this ignores drafting etc, but that shouldnt be TOO important on a proper mountainstage.

So basically I dont understand why it is so OMG-Surprising that a steady speed De Gendt takes time on GC contenders having to race the last part of the stage a lot faster than De Gendt in order to catch him.
Why was this OMG surprising, eh? At the speeds these guys climb (>12mph), drafting is still a big deal. You have a large group trying to get a leader back. That leader attacked a small but elite group and gapped them. Now that leader has no draft. He has been out front for a long time, with a much smaller group - therefore the larger group is logically fresher, and should be bringing him back. But they are not.

Did De Gendt ride well tactically? Yes. Does that mean he didn't dope? No. Nor do I agree at all with the posters who say that negative riding in the pink jersey group kept the gap alive. Rodriquez and Basso also stood to lose a great deal, and both were riding to win. But their teams were spent, and so were they.

So why wasn't De Gendt spent and wasted? Everybody else in the peloton seemed to be. There was more fatigue rolling off their backs then you get off a RAAM rider on day 4. He was highly placed. For him to NOT be spent and wasted almost as much as these other guys means one of two things, I think. Either he is a better talent than the rest of the guys who were at the Giro this year, or he found some refreshment somewhere.

I can see the possibility that this guy is still young enough that he really had not tried as hard as the others. It is possible that he really did have enough, and took the advantage when he saw it. If that is true, we will be seeing more of him in future GTs. But I still believe there is good reason to be suspicious. We'll see.
 
Oct 30, 2011
2,642
0
0
hiero2 said:
Interesting - now I've been called a troll, and told my thread is stupid. Well, I did start the thread with the idea of getting some conversation going, but I don't think that makes me a troll.

Why was this OMG surprising, eh? At the speeds these guys climb (>12mph), drafting is still a big deal. You have a large group trying to get a leader back. That leader attacked a small but elite group and gapped them. Now that leader has no draft. He has been out front for a long time, with a much smaller group - therefore the larger group is logically fresher, and should be bringing him back. But they are not.

Did De Gendt ride well tactically? Yes. Does that mean he didn't dope? No. Nor do I agree at all with the posters who say that negative riding in the pink jersey group kept the gap alive. Rodriquez and Basso also stood to lose a great deal, and both were riding to win. But their teams were spent, and so were they.

So why wasn't De Gendt spent and wasted? Everybody else in the peloton seemed to be. There was more fatigue rolling off their backs then you get off a RAAM rider on day 4. He was highly placed. For him to NOT be spent and wasted almost as much as these other guys means one of two things, I think. Either he is a better talent than the rest of the guys who were at the Giro this year, or he found some refreshment somewhere.

I can see the possibility that this guy is still young enough that he really had not tried as hard as the others. It is possible that he really did have enough, and took the advantage when he saw it. If that is true, we will be seeing more of him in future GTs. But I still believe there is good reason to be suspicious. We'll see.
De Gendt lost 2 minutes to the other in the last few kilometers. I think that counts as, errr, "spent and wasted".

Of course nobody is saying that a very good tactical rider means he didn't dope. They're disagreeing with your assertion that because he gained a lot of time, it's probably dope.

Look at this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OwrwrercBo&t=1h57m40s. They basically stop dead in the road all watching each other. This is in the valley just after the Mortirolo, when de Gendt and Nieve had both gone up the road with a teammate each, who were drilling it. The domestiques of the favourites hadn't yet caught back up. That in itself tells you a lot about the pace - the domestiques of the favourites caught up with them - I think you can conclude that it wasn't 100%.

Basso, Scarponi and Rodríguez did have a lot to lose, yes, but they also had a lot to win. Their tactic was based on making Hesjedal do all the work and hoping he would crack. Throughout the 3 weeks, they all rode as if Ryder would, at some point, just crack. They continued to do this all the way up the Stelvio.

Refusing to accept that the favourites rode it way too easy in the middle and then went harder at the end (which we know to be a less efficient way of riding) makes me feel like you are determined to sling mud at de Gendt whatever the evidence.
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Caruut said:
De Gendt lost 2 minutes to the other in the last few kilometers. I think that counts as, errr, "spent and wasted".

. . . Refusing to accept that the favourites rode it way too easy in the middle and then went harder at the end (which we know to be a less efficient way of riding) makes me feel like you are determined to sling mud at de Gendt whatever the evidence.
Sling mud at de Gendt? Not my intention - but it might seem that way, I'll admit. No, it is that his performance - vs that of everyone else's on the stage - reminds me too much of other "marvelous" performances I have seen in the past. Landis, Pantani, Vino - they all seemed to find that little extra to make a performance that is "too good to be true". Listen to Sean Kelly on Eurosport as it happens, if you can find it on youtube. He was thinking it was a "too good to be true" kind of performance.

But I am not the only one saying that Basso and Rodriquez had no bullets left - or Basso and Liquigas at least. VdV said the same in an interview
VN: Were you surprised that Scarponi or Basso never truly laid down a major attack? Everyone was waiting for that and it just never came …
VdV: The big surprise was how good we were. I kept thinking, ‘Oh man, they’re going to throw everything at us today.’ But they never did. One day, I said to Ryder to get ready for some big attacks, and he said to me, ‘We’re the strongest in the peloton.’ Even on the Mortirolo, I was expecting everyone to come roaring down our necks. That’s when I realized that they guys were just dead. That’s when I realized they didn’t have anything left to attack Ryder.
from velonews /2012/06/ vande-velde-we-won-the-giro-with-chip-on-our-shoulders

On the other hand, I find evidence from VdV that de Gendt is indeed a young and promising rider who just happened to still have some juice left and decided to burn it up.
VN: How big of a surprise or a threat was De Gendt? He came out of nowhere and almost won the Giro …
VdV: To be honest, that was our biggest scare. I knew how strong he was and how good he is in the time trial. Even in that final time trial, after we took some time back on him, I thought it was possible he could win the Giro. That was scary, when he attacked on the Stelvio stage. He was always there, always eighth, ninth, 11th. De Gendt was always just there, and then suddenly he’s riding away, everyone was like, ‘holy ****!’ I don’t think when the Giro started that he expected to be on the podium. I am sure he’s pleasantly surprised to be there.
So, like I said, the ride still makes me suspicious. The contention that the pink jersey group was riding negatively after the Motirolo still holds no water with me. According to VdV, Katusha was riding negatively, but at the same time, when VdV was done pulling, NO OTHER lieutenants in that group had anything left to take over. They were cooked. But, the future will tell us true. I am more optimistic now - seeing that VdV noticed that De Gendt "was always there" - that he is a young rider who has juice and a future.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY