Teams & Riders Mark Cavendish Discussion Thread

[Libertine Seguros]

I understood what you meant with the abbreviations I just don't see having a 'sans jour' at Milan - San Remo and misfortune at Gent - Wevelgem as 'It all going wrong'. It's not great, but he's won KBK before that and there's plenty of the season left.

Eating Pizza, not winning his last two races... To the tower!

Misfortune is only part of it at G-W though. Positioning is important, for sure, but Rojas had a worse position than Cavendish at the top of the climb, but when the split occurred he was in front of it. Perhaps Cavendish was unlucky in being behind the guy causing the split, but clearly Rojas saw the risk of something happening that Cav either didn't see, or did see and didn't recognise as the threat it was, and moved up in the group.

 

[hatcher]

MSM and FLW if you want to talk cycling.

Honestly, I thought the rainbow jersey covered the cycling part. Yeah he had an awful day at MSR, and didn't make the sprint at GW, but he's missed plenty of targets before and has always come back strong. If at year's end he doesn't have a handful of GT stage wins, no green jersey, and no Olympic gold, then his cycling would have gone wrong.

Peta Todd, pizza, daughter. That would still be pretty good though.

 

[hatcher]

Misfortune is only part of it at G-W though. Positioning is important, for sure, but Rojas had a worse position than Cavendish at the top of the climb, but when the split occurred he was in front of it. Perhaps Cavendish was unlucky in being behind the guy causing the split, but clearly Rojas saw the risk of something happening that Cav either didn't see, or did see and didn't recognise as the threat it was, and moved up in the group.

From the pictures we got it's almost impossible to tell what happened on the descent. I've watched it numerous times now, and I still can't figure out when/where Rojas moved up.

To be fair to him he looked pretty darn strong at GW.

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

Have a sense of humour, man.

Ha ha! need to add more characters..............

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

Misfortune is only part of it at G-W though. Positioning is important, for sure, but Rojas had a worse position than Cavendish at the top of the climb, but when the split occurred he was in front of it. Perhaps Cavendish was unlucky in being behind the guy causing the split, but clearly Rojas saw the risk of something happening that Cav either didn't see, or did see and didn't recognise as the threat it was, and moved up in the group.

It may have been misjudgment, hard to tell.

 

[Caruut]

Rojas is also a stronger all-round rider. Thus the split did for Cavendish what it wouldn't do for Rojas.

There is a small sweet spot between the sheer banality and tedium of clichéd answers from sportspeople, and the other end of the spectrum the somewhat "arrogant" or "whiney" answers. I prefer hearing what someone has to say, even if I think it's stupid.

 

[Mambo95]

Rojas is also a stronger all-round rider

And Rojas has won six races in six years. The idea that he is a better cyclist because he finishes 8th in a lumpy stage and 5th in a sprint stage is stupid.

 

[Caruut]

And Rojas has won six races in six years. The idea that he is a better cyclist because he finishes 8th in a lumpy stage and 5th in a sprint stage is stupid.

I agree Cavendish is better - I didn't say Rojas was the better cyclist, I said he was the better all-rounder, if you see what I mean between the two. Just saying that the fact that Rojas made it back but Cav didn't is probably just because he's a better all-round rider, rather than not interpreting the situation as well.

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

Rojas is also a stronger all-round rider. Thus the split did for Cavendish what it wouldn't do for Rojas.

There is a small sweet spot between the sheer banality and tedium of clichéd answers from sportspeople, and the other end of the spectrum the somewhat "arrogant" or "whiney" answers. I prefer hearing what someone has to say, even if I think it's stupid.

When you say 'Also a stronger all-rounder' do you mean Rojas is better at positioning and/or decision making too?

 

[Mambo95]

I agree Cavendish is better - I didn't say Rojas was the better cyclist, I said he was the better all-rounder, if you see what I mean between the two. Just saying that the fact that Rojas made it back but Cav didn't is probably just because he's a better all-round rider, rather than not interpreting the situation as well.

But why the obsession with being an all-rounder. It's specific to cycling. No-one cares that Glenn McGrath can't bat or Lionel Messi can't tackle.

Rojas may be able to do various things quite well. He may be the 10th best sprinter and the 30th best climber, but he's not great at anything. Who cares about that?

Sport is about excellence in specific areas, not competence in many areas.

 

[Caruut]

But why the obsession with being an all-rounder. It's specific to cycling. No-one cares that Glenn McGrath can't bat or Lionel Messi can't tackle.

Rojas may be able to do various things quite well. He may be the 10th best sprinter and the 30th best climber, but he's not great at anything. Who cares about that?

Sport is about excellence in specific areas, not competence in many areas.

I know, people were discussing how Cavendish maybe shouldn't say the gap messed him up (an excuse, some might say), because it didn't mess Rojas up. I was saying Cav has every right to say "this was one reason I was unable to win" because Rojas is simply better equipped to bridge gaps. I think that the main usage of all-round talent is to give specific talent the platform to shine.

 

[Caruut]

When you say 'Also a stronger all-rounder' do you mean Rojas is better at positioning and/or decision making too?

Hmm, I would say I meant it independently of whether you think he is or not. I haven't watched either enough in detail to know who is the better "instinctive" positioner, if you will.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

But why the obsession with being an all-rounder. It's specific to cycling. No-one cares that Glenn McGrath can't bat or Lionel Messi can't tackle.

Rojas may be able to do various things quite well. He may be the 10th best sprinter and the 30th best climber, but he's not great at anything. Who cares about that?

Sport is about excellence in specific areas, not competence in many areas.

The argument here (not sure that I believe it, think it came down to observation and attentiveness if anything) is that Rojas was able to make the move and stay in the front group due to those all-round skills.

You are correct in pointing out that Mark Cavendish should not care about Rojas being more of an all-rounder than him, or even the accusations of being a one-trick pony, on the basis that that trick is a phenomenally successful one, and it's better to be the master of one trade than the jack of all. Especially when that one trade is the one that comes with the biggest upside in terms of number of wins.

However, it is equally the case that if your big weapon is your sprint, then you have to be there at the end to get involved in it (remember Tirreno-Adriatico 2010, where Cavendish was dropped early in every stage except the last one, when he crashed out?). This problem is amplified in the Classics, with more people fighting over less road, and no second chances. If Cavendish makes it to the finish, there are very few who can even consider they have a chance against him, but his limited repertoire means that there are many situations that will prevent him getting there. Rojas will get to the finish more often, but there are lots of riders who'll beat him when he gets there.

 

[gingerwallaceafro]

Hmm, I would say I meant it independently of whether you think he is or not. I haven't watched either enough in detail to know who is the better "instinctive" positioner, if you will.

Generally Cav is very, very good at quick decision- making and positioning, probably the best in the peleton IMO.

 

[Mambo95]

The argument here (not sure that I believe it, think it came down to observation and attentiveness if anything) is that Rojas was able to make the move and stay in the front group due to those all-round skills.

You are correct in pointing out that Mark Cavendish should not care about Rojas being more of an all-rounder than him, or even the accusations of being a one-trick pony, on the basis that that trick is a phenomenally successful one, and it's better to be the master of one trade than the jack of all. Especially when that one trade is the one that comes with the biggest upside in terms of number of wins.

However, it is equally the case that if your big weapon is your sprint, then you have to be there at the end to get involved in it (remember Tirreno-Adriatico 2010, where Cavendish was dropped early in every stage except the last one, when he crashed out?). This problem is amplified in the Classics, with more people fighting over less road, and no second chances. If Cavendish makes it to the finish, there are very few who can even consider they have a chance against him, but his limited repertoire means that there are many situations that will prevent him getting there. Rojas will get to the finish more often, but there are lots of riders who'll beat him when he gets there.

All that matters is that Cavendish is great at what he does. Possibly the greatest that the sport has seen. He may not be to your taste but he wins.

What he does is cycling. You may not like it, but that's the way it is. If you don't like it find another sport.

You may not like his style, fair enough, but anyone who thinks he is not a worthy cyclist is absolutely an idiot who has no idea about sport.

(And by sport, I don't mean the hobby that all of you indulge in. I mean the professional bleak stats of win and lose.)

 

[Caruut]

Generally Cav is very, very good at quick decision- making and positioning, probably the best in the peleton IMO.

I haven't watched Rojas enough to judge who is better. It also helps Cav that in the tight spaces of the sprint, he is probably the best-equipped to act on his decisions, in that he is such a quick, small rider.

 

[BroDeal]

"Listen, my son. Trust no one! You can count on no one but yourself. Improve your skills, son. Harden your body. Become a number one man. Do not ever let anyone beat you!" -- Gekitotsu! Satsujin ken

Reading this little gem is revealing, using this as your daily mantra you have become paranoid and don't know when you are beat!

Is this the muttering of someone treading gently into mental illness themselves?

That's the problem with cranks. They like to project their disorders onto others, and they are always muttering about beating someone in arguments based purely on the voices in their head.

I just got back from three hours of riding. You should try it sometime instead of spending your Saturday mooning about Chav.. The calming effect might help with your treatment.

 

[Mambo95]

I haven't watched Rojas enough to judge who is better. It also helps Cav that in the tight spaces of the sprint, he is probably the best-equipped to act on his decisions, in that he is such a quick, small rider.

Someone brought Rojas into the discussion a few pages back. And you can't bring Rojas into any real discussion. He's a decent journeyman pro. Like many before. He's an all rounder who is not good at anything.

Comparing Rojas to Cavendish is like comparing One Direction to Bob Dylan.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

All that matters is that Cavendish is great at what he does. Possibly the greatest that the sport has seen. He may not be to your taste but he wins.

What he does is cycling. You may not like it, but that's the way it is. If you don't like it find another sport.

You may not like his style, fair enough, but anyone who thinks he is not a worthy cyclist is absolutely an idiot who has no idea about sport.

(And by sport, I don't mean the hobby that all of you indulge in. I mean the professional bleak stats of win and lose.)

I'm saying why somebody may be claiming Rojas got to the finish of Gent-Wevelgem due to all-round skills.

Rojas can do a bit of everything. He kind of needs to, since he's not the best at anything, and therefore that versatility is what enables him to get wins and placings.

Cavendish is the best at something, therefore he gets more wins and better placings. But sometimes, because he hasn't needed to develop the versatility that Rojas has needed to develop owing to not being among the best at anything, he won't be able to make it to the finish to use that weapon.

Think of it like J-Rod on the Green Mountain last year. Who cares if J-Rod's the best climber at the race, if he's two minutes back on most of the field at the start of the climb he's not going to win.

It's why "best cyclist" is such a difficult thing to quantify. Only somebody living under a rock would claim that Rojas is a better rider than Cavendish. Cavendish wins so much more often and has such a great win percentage in the sprints he contests. But if you have a linear points accumulated system (like CQ) then a guy who can contest more sprints by getting over the obstacles gets points that a guy like Cavendish can't... being able to contest the finish unsuccessfully in a massive range of places made José Joaquín Rojas ranked 14th on CQ last year. That's just crazy talk.

Rojas only came into the discussion because Gent-Wevelgem was brought up. And there, Rojas was behind Cavendish at the start of the descent where the gap was made, and yet when the split happened, Rojas was in front of it and Cavendish was behind it. Cavendish made a point of blaming Schär for leaving the gap, but then, the question is, how was Rojas in the front group and Cavendish not? Something must have happened, but none of us can see where it happened. It wasn't any direct attempt to state Rojas is a better cyclist than Cavendish. If I was going to try to make a case for a sprinter being better than Cavendish, then Rojas wouldn't be the first guy to come to mind!

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Someone brought Rojas into the discussion a few pages back. And you can't bring Rojas into any real discussion. He's a decent journeyman pro. Like many before. He's an all rounder who is not good at anything.

Comparing Rojas to Cavendish is like comparing One Direction to Bob Dylan.

Now that would be blasphemy and it will start world war 3

 

[Caruut]

Someone brought Rojas into the discussion a few pages back. And you can't bring Rojas into any real discussion. He's a decent journeyman pro. Like many before. He's an all rounder who is not good at anything.

Comparing Rojas to Cavendish is like comparing One Direction to Bob Dylan.

All I said was that you can't assume Cav made a misjudgement just because Rojas bridged a gap that he didn't, I feel like you trying to put words in my mouth.

 

[El Pistolero]

But why the obsession with being an all-rounder. It's specific to cycling. No-one cares that Glenn McGrath can't bat or Lionel Messi can't tackle.

Rojas may be able to do various things quite well. He may be the 10th best sprinter and the 30th best climber, but he's not great at anything. Who cares about that?

Sport is about excellence in specific areas, not competence in many areas.

If that was true, Boonen would have won 0 Monuments and 0 WC(unlike Cav, he didn't win an easy one) on his palmares.

 

[Mambo95]

I don't really know where Rojas came from. There's no way he should be in a discussion with the greats.

Cavendish will probably not rival the all round achievements of the likes of van Looy, Kelly, Maertens etc.

But so what. He is the best at what he does - maybe the best ever. The idea of a more 'rounded' cyclist is more eclectic (a debate for the cycling fan). Wins are what counts. Cav has many. They may not be your favourites. But he has won many races due to an extraordinary ability.

 

[Mambo95]

If that was true, Boonen would have won 0 Monuments and 0 WC(unlike Cav, he didn't win an easy one) on his palmares.

The problem you are struggling with is that you think that only one of the two can be a great - despite being quite different. It's like comparing Dickens to Shakespeare.

Here's the simple plan for you:

Tom Boonen: All time great classics rider and sprinter
Mark Cavendish: Phenomenal bunch sprinter - maybe the best ever.

Do you see that two great cyclists can be lauded at the same time?

You, and any others, need to learn to discuss cycling rather than argue about it.

 

[The Hitch]

And Rojas has won six races in six years. The idea that he is a better cyclist because he finishes 8th in a lumpy stage and 5th in a sprint stage is stupid.

And straight back to putting words in other peoples mouths.