Mark Cavendish excuses for 2016

[Nick C.]

I think Cav and Bennati were going head to head when Cav got his first Giro wins. I think his first win Cav complimented Bennati for "being a gentlemen" and not closing the door on him.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

Cav isn't even better than Petacchi.

BS

Petacchi was not winning til he was about 26.

Cav started beating the seasoned pros like Mcewen from when he was 20.

 

[Angliru]

Re:

Cipo's major problem was that as soon as the land started to rise, he abandoned which is why not a lot of tdf wins

...and he could have been a bit tired from riding the Giro a month earlier.

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

Cav isn't even better than Petacchi.

BS

Petacchi was not winning til he was about 26.

Cav started beating the seasoned pros like Mcewen from when he was 20.

Cav beat Mcewen once (Scheldeprijs) when he was 22. Mcewen was never the same after Canterbury anyway.

And why would it matter when a rider peaks during his career. More important is how good he was in his peak and Petacchi between 2003 and when he blew out his knee in 2006 was much better than Cav ever was.

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

Cipo's major problem was that as soon as the land started to rise, he abandoned which is why not a lot of tdf wins

...and he could have been a bit tired from riding the Giro a month earlier.

indeed. Same with Petacchi.

 

[blackcat]

i just cant take a guy nor a gal seriously with a matthew mcconaughey avatar even if you wanna justify it as a character avatar from true detective it is still matthew freeking i will take my shirt off coz i wanna mcconaughey

 

[Mr.White]

Re:

if Ciolek or Bennati were a few years older and came thru with Thor Hushovd and Boonen, they would be absolute champions.

This is the true "tell" or insight, the "meta", on why Cav was GOAT, is GOAT.

Ciolek and Bennati become significant champions in the annals of procycling in the 2000s if Cavendish is not there.

That Ciolek and Bennati did not fulfill their potential is down to one thing, Mark Cavendish.

Are you some kind of troll?! I mean all that talk about how Cavendish is great, and Cippolini and Petacchi aren't... They're on similar level if you ask me, Cippolini slightly better than both because of number and quality of his wins (he got more wins and he got more quality wins than both). But let me tell you something, sprinting and cycling didn't start in the 2000's. You're naming Ciolek and Bennati as some kind of a great sprinters, but the truth is they wouldn't even make the Top 50 of all-times (well maybe Bennati would..), and Robbie McEwen who is far from Top 10. If you really think Cav is some kind of a GOAT (as you say), you need to compare him with true sprinting greats, from previous eras. Cippolini and Petacchi are in that company, but there are many, many more... You need to research cycling history before you make such claims!

 

[Ramon Koran]

Re: Re:

if Ciolek or Bennati were a few years older and came thru with Thor Hushovd and Boonen, they would be absolute champions.

This is the true "tell" or insight, the "meta", on why Cav was GOAT, is GOAT.

Ciolek and Bennati become significant champions in the annals of procycling in the 2000s if Cavendish is not there.

That Ciolek and Bennati did not fulfill their potential is down to one thing, Mark Cavendish.

Are you some kind of troll?! I mean all that talk about how Cavendish is great, and Cippolini and Petacchi aren't... They're on similar level if you ask me, Cippolini slightly better than both because of number and quality of his wins (he got more wins and he got more quality wins than both). But let me tell you something, sprinting and cycling didn't start in the 2000's. You're naming Ciolek and Bennati as some kind of a great sprinters, but the truth is they wouldn't even make the Top 50 of all-times (well maybe Bennati would..), and Robbie McEwen who is far from Top 10. If you really think Cav is some kind of a GOAT (as you say), you need to compare him with true sprinting greats, from previous eras. Cippolini and Petacchi are in that company, but there are many, many more... You need to research cycling history before you make such claims!

Modern sprinting only really started though in the 90's before that sprints were in reduced bunches etc. So I think from abdujaporov is only when you can start comparing. And from there there definitely is case of cav being GOAT. He dominated sprinting way mor than the others cippo never won by many bike lengths. Of course you can make a case for cippo for pettachi from there it comes down to personal opinion.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

if Ciolek or Bennati were a few years older and came thru with Thor Hushovd and Boonen, they would be absolute champions.

This is the true "tell" or insight, the "meta", on why Cav was GOAT, is GOAT.

Ciolek and Bennati become significant champions in the annals of procycling in the 2000s if Cavendish is not there.

That Ciolek and Bennati did not fulfill their potential is down to one thing, Mark Cavendish.

Are you some kind of troll?! I mean all that talk about how Cavendish is great, and Cippolini and Petacchi aren't... They're on similar level if you ask me, Cippolini slightly better than both because of number and quality of his wins (he got more wins and he got more quality wins than both). But let me tell you something, sprinting and cycling didn't start in the 2000's. You're naming Ciolek and Bennati as some kind of a great sprinters, but the truth is they wouldn't even make the Top 50 of all-times (well maybe Bennati would..), and Robbie McEwen who is far from Top 10. If you really think Cav is some kind of a GOAT (as you say), you need to compare him with true sprinting greats, from previous eras. Cippolini and Petacchi are in that company, but there are many, many more... You need to research cycling history before you make such claims!

Modern sprinting only really started though in the 90's before that sprints were in reduced bunches etc. So I think from abdujaporov is only when you can start comparing. And from there there definitely is case of cav being GOAT. He dominated sprinting way mor than the others cippo never won by many bike lengths. Of course you can make a case for cippo for pettachi from there it comes down to personal opinion.

Fast guy is a fast guy if you know what I mean. Sprinting is as old as cycling, and there were great sprinters in every era. Nowadays bunch sprints are more usual because of a greater quality field, but there were bunch sprints before 90's as well. We're talking about greatest sprinter of all time, that doesn't exclude reduced bunch sprints. Guys like Van Steenbergen, Van Looy and Maertens won in all scenarios, solo, reduced sprints, bunch sprints, you name it. Everyone of them won +200/300 races in their careers, beating fastest sprinters of their time in the process. So you can't exclude these guys, including Girardengo, Leducq, Darrigade, Poblet, from the discussion who the greatest sprinter, or the fastest guy was!

 

[blackcat]

Cipo focuses on Italy, and Italian competition.

Cav was up against world competition.

Petacchi equivalent to Cipo I reckon. There are lots of fast guys who showed the peloton a clean pair of wheels in the last two decades, Steels, Quaranta, but as you have said, Petacchi and Cipo far superior. But Cipo would lose to Zabel and Mcewen and Steels, and Petacchi would lose to Mcewen and Boonen, and even Goss could beat him mano-a-mano.

I am not a fan of Cav, he is a bit of a chav, but he can sprint like none before, as Mcewen said, he has an advantage no one else has, his CdA.

coincidentally, this is why Sutton and Bailsford wont select him for the TP in Rio. (or London gone).

But I reckon they should, because he still allows some slipstream, negligble as it may be, but look at Kennaugh, he is 5'10 and 140lbs, Cav cannot be so materially worse. If Sir Wiggins is behind him, as if Wiggins needs a windbreak, he can do double turns no probs.

 

[Jspear]

Re:

Cipo focuses on Italy, and Italian competition.

Cav was up against world competition.

Petacchi equivalent to Cipo I reckon. There are lots of fast guys who showed the peloton a clean pair of wheels in the last two decades, Steels, Quaranta, but as you have said, Petacchi and Cipo far superior. But Cipo would lost to Zabel and Mcewen and Steels, and Petacchi would lose to Mcewen and Boonen, and even Goss could beat him mano-a-mano.

I am not a fan of Cav, he is a bit of a chav, but he can sprint like none before, as Mcewen said, he has an advantage no one else has, his CdA.

coincidentally, this is why Sutton and Bailsford wont select him for the TP in Rio. (or London gone).

But I reckon they should, because he still allows some slipstream, negligble as it may be, but look at Kennaugh, he is 5'10 and 140lbs, Cav cannot be so materially worse. If Sir Wiggins is behind him, as if Wiggins needs a windbreak, he can do double turns no probs.

So which of his 150+ wins was against just an Italian field?

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

So which of his 150+ wins was against just an Italian field?

about 100 of them.

 

[blackcat]

like someone said earlier in this thread, before 2013, he/she had only seen one person beat Cav mano-a-mano. I think it was, like the person said, Tyler Farrar at Tirrenno Adriatico in 2011. Cav really struggled and sat-up in that sprint, may have even finished 8th (ish)... so something was not right. He did do an ok San Remo the week after, but that one stage was not indicative of the season he was to have, he would still be his dominant self.

 

[Jspear]

Re: Re:

So which of his 150+ wins was against just an Italian field?

about 100 of them.

Just took a quick look, and at least 70+ of his wins were outside of an "Italian - italian competition definition." You're sounding a little silly. You have a completely different standard for judging Cav.

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

like someone said earlier in this thread, before 2013, he/she had only seen one person beat Cav mano-a-mano. I think it was, like the person said, Tyler Farrar at Tirrenno Adriatico in 2011. Cav really struggled and sat-up in that sprint, may have even finished 8th (ish)... so something was not right. He did do an ok San Remo the week after, but that one stage was not indicative of the season he was to have, he would still be his dominant self.

Petacchi at the 2010 Tour? Hushovd at the 2009 Tour? Greipel and Sagan at the 2012 Tour? EBH at the 2011 Tour?

Cavendish is an excellent sprinter yes, one of the very best but not the greatest of all time. He was lucky enough to be the best during a transition period - McEwen was never the same after the '07 Tour, Boonen lost his way and focused on the classics after '08, Hushovd and Freire focused on being more versatile as they lost speed, Cipo and Zabel had retired, Petacchi was past his best (and still able to challenge Cav).

Then you need to remember that half of Cav's potential opponents were leading him out - Greipel, Goss, Renshaw, EBH for a long period during Cav's peak.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

like someone said earlier in this thread, before 2013, he/she had only seen one person beat Cav mano-a-mano. I think it was, like the person said, Tyler Farrar at Tirrenno Adriatico in 2011. Cav really struggled and sat-up in that sprint, may have even finished 8th (ish)... so something was not right. He did do an ok San Remo the week after, but that one stage was not indicative of the season he was to have, he would still be his dominant self.

Petacchi at the 2010 Tour? Hushovd at the 2009 Tour? Greipel and Sagan at the 2012 Tour? EBH at the 2011 Tour?

Cavendish is an excellent sprinter yes, one of the very best but not the greatest of all time. He was lucky enough to be the best during a transition period - McEwen was never the same after the '07 Tour, Boonen lost his way and focused on the classics after '08, Hushovd and Freire focused on being more versatile as they lost speed, Cipo and Zabel had retired, Petacchi was past his best (and still able to challenge Cav).

Then you need to remember that half of Cav's potential opponents were leading him out - Greipel, Goss, Renshaw, EBH for a long period during Cav's peak.

So why were they leading him out if they were better? Cav proved himself to be better, and it's not like they didn't have a chance to get away. Petacchi wasn't really challenging Cav much, and before his EQS days, it was impossible to beat him if he got a good leadout, whereas he showed time and time again he was capable beating others even if they had a perfect leadout.

This year is vital for Cav imho. If he can show that he is back to his best, then you can truly make a case for him depending on how well he does (Although from the sounds of things, he's looking to be more of a classics rider now as opposed to a pure sprinter. Time will tell)

 

[Jspear]

Re: Re:

like someone said earlier in this thread, before 2013, he/she had only seen one person beat Cav mano-a-mano. I think it was, like the person said, Tyler Farrar at Tirrenno Adriatico in 2011. Cav really struggled and sat-up in that sprint, may have even finished 8th (ish)... so something was not right. He did do an ok San Remo the week after, but that one stage was not indicative of the season he was to have, he would still be his dominant self.

Petacchi at the 2010 Tour? Hushovd at the 2009 Tour? Greipel and Sagan at the 2012 Tour? EBH at the 2011 Tour?

Cavendish is an excellent sprinter yes, one of the very best but not the greatest of all time. He was lucky enough to be the best during a transition period - McEwen was never the same after the '07 Tour, Boonen lost his way and focused on the classics after '08, Hushovd and Freire focused on being more versatile as they lost speed, Cipo and Zabel had retired, Petacchi was past his best (and still able to challenge Cav).

Then you need to remember that half of Cav's potential opponents were leading him out - Greipel, Goss, Renshaw, EBH for a long period during Cav's peak.

So why were they leading him out if they were better? Cav proved himself to be better, and it's not like they didn't have a chance to get away. Petacchi wasn't really challenging Cav much, and before his EQS days, it was impossible to beat him if he got a good leadout, whereas he showed time and time again he was capable beating others even if they had a perfect leadout.

This year is vital for Cav imho. If he can show that he is back to his best, then you can truly make a case for him depending on how well he does (Although from the sounds of things, he's looking to be more of a classics rider now as opposed to a pure sprinter. Time will tell)

Maybe he could develop that, but right now he'd get beaten by someone like Kristoff or Degenkolb any day in most classics.

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

like someone said earlier in this thread, before 2013, he/she had only seen one person beat Cav mano-a-mano. I think it was, like the person said, Tyler Farrar at Tirrenno Adriatico in 2011. Cav really struggled and sat-up in that sprint, may have even finished 8th (ish)... so something was not right. He did do an ok San Remo the week after, but that one stage was not indicative of the season he was to have, he would still be his dominant self.

Petacchi at the 2010 Tour? Hushovd at the 2009 Tour? Greipel and Sagan at the 2012 Tour? EBH at the 2011 Tour?

Cavendish is an excellent sprinter yes, one of the very best but not the greatest of all time. He was lucky enough to be the best during a transition period - McEwen was never the same after the '07 Tour, Boonen lost his way and focused on the classics after '08, Hushovd and Freire focused on being more versatile as they lost speed, Cipo and Zabel had retired, Petacchi was past his best (and still able to challenge Cav).

Then you need to remember that half of Cav's potential opponents were leading him out - Greipel, Goss, Renshaw, EBH for a long period during Cav's peak.

So why were they leading him out if they were better? Cav proved himself to be better, and it's not like they didn't have a chance to get away. Petacchi wasn't really challenging Cav much, and before his EQS days, it was impossible to beat him if he got a good leadout, whereas he showed time and time again he was capable beating others even if they had a perfect leadout.

This year is vital for Cav imho. If he can show that he is back to his best, then you can truly make a case for him depending on how well he does (Although from the sounds of things, he's looking to be more of a classics rider now as opposed to a pure sprinter. Time will tell)

Where did I say that they were better? I said that they would have been sprinting against Cav if they were on different teams. If you look at what EBH did in 2011 and Greipel post HTC you can see that if they weren't lead out or second sprinter they certainly could have taken some wins away from Cav.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Petacchi at the 2010 Tour? Hushovd at the 2009 Tour? Greipel and Sagan at the 2012 Tour? EBH at the 2011 Tour?

Cavendish is an excellent sprinter yes, one of the very best but not the greatest of all time. He was lucky enough to be the best during a transition period - McEwen was never the same after the '07 Tour, Boonen lost his way and focused on the classics after '08, Hushovd and Freire focused on being more versatile as they lost speed, Cipo and Zabel had retired, Petacchi was past his best (and still able to challenge Cav).

Then you need to remember that half of Cav's potential opponents were leading him out - Greipel, Goss, Renshaw, EBH for a long period during Cav's peak.

valid post.

but my validity trumps ur validity

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

like someone said earlier in this thread, before 2013, he/she had only seen one person beat Cav mano-a-mano. I think it was, like the person said, Tyler Farrar at Tirrenno Adriatico in 2011. Cav really struggled and sat-up in that sprint, may have even finished 8th (ish)... so something was not right. He did do an ok San Remo the week after, but that one stage was not indicative of the season he was to have, he would still be his dominant self.

Petacchi at the 2010 Tour? Hushovd at the 2009 Tour? Greipel and Sagan at the 2012 Tour? EBH at the 2011 Tour?

Cavendish is an excellent sprinter yes, one of the very best but not the greatest of all time. He was lucky enough to be the best during a transition period - McEwen was never the same after the '07 Tour, Boonen lost his way and focused on the classics after '08, Hushovd and Freire focused on being more versatile as they lost speed, Cipo and Zabel had retired, Petacchi was past his best (and still able to challenge Cav).

Then you need to remember that half of Cav's potential opponents were leading him out - Greipel, Goss, Renshaw, EBH for a long period during Cav's peak.

So why were they leading him out if they were better? Cav proved himself to be better, and it's not like they didn't have a chance to get away. Petacchi wasn't really challenging Cav much, and before his EQS days, it was impossible to beat him if he got a good leadout, whereas he showed time and time again he was capable beating others even if they had a perfect leadout.

This year is vital for Cav imho. If he can show that he is back to his best, then you can truly make a case for him depending on how well he does (Although from the sounds of things, he's looking to be more of a classics rider now as opposed to a pure sprinter. Time will tell)

I reckon the Cuban or Argentinean or where he was from, JJ Haedo was also a potential champion with Bennati and Ciolek.

People do not see Bennati and Ciolek as champions. But do the meta summation. Do it for Haedo too.

The only reason they did not put themselves in the annals of the best sprinters like Kittel and Greipel will, is because they had to go head to head with Cav.

Cav was a champion because he drowned them, he depressed their status.

 

[blackcat]

Cavendish would be stupid to attempt to win any classics or one day races besides Ghent, and besides Brussels. No need to win San Remo again, his win was one of the best ever, and he did it in a sprint, when usually just winning in a sprint will invalidate that status as one of the best ever.

Cav needs to add those 3kgs back of typeII fibres, because his weight was never ever a problem for him being (unable/able) to make a finish. He could always make the finishes and still have the punch and terminal velocity and speed endurance.

Cav needs to go back to winning stages in the Giro and Tour and make this thread moot. make the GOAT conversation moot. His terminal velocity is still if not the best, the second or third best then. His CdA is still the best, therefore his ability to sprint for 13-14 seconds and maintain a finish for ~250 metres and prolong the adenosine triphosphate (atp) energy system for longer than the 10secs will still be able to win him half a dozen GT sprint wins a year.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

(Although from the sounds of things, he's looking to be more of a classics rider now as opposed to a pure sprinter. Time will tell)

Maybe he could develop that, but right now he'd get beaten by someone like Kristoff or Degenkolb any day in most classics.

Cav, a little like Mcewen, is one of the most savvy riders. I can't believe he would be stupid enough or delused enough or had the hubris that he could win anything besides Ghent.

I don't rate his intellect, but his professional cycling acumen, it is up there with Mcewen, Horner, Armstrong... significant acumen. You read about he kept of pestering Heiko Salzwedal for information, and the background of Mcewen as the cyclist Mcewen, and then as a pro, he used Mcewen and Zabel for information.

He did say around 2010, that he wanted to ride and be competitive in Roubaix, but I think that must have been 90% bluff and bluster. He would have known then that this demand was beyond his ability. I dont think he would have now reckoned he could even win one major doyenne besides San Remo, doing it off his own bat like a Kristoff or Degenkolb, he just does not have that ability. Ciolek maybe, Goss maybe, definitely Hagen if he so aspired. not Cav tho, he will hurt his sprint, and never win a GT stage again, because he cannot win in a breakaway, because like the London olympics, who in their right mind will ride Cavendish to the finish in a breakaway. He may as well effectively retire now if he goes down this route, because he will not win or be successful. he will just be phoning it in, and taking the cheque.

 

[Jspear]

Re:

Cavendish would be stupid to attempt to win any classics or one day races besides Ghent, and besides Brussels. No need to win San Remo again, his win was one of the best ever, and he did it in a sprint, when usually just winning in a sprint will invalidate that status as one of the best ever.

Cav needs to add those 3kgs back of typeII fibres, because his weight was never ever a problem for him being (unable/able) to make a finish. He could always make the finishes and still have the punch and terminal velocity and speed endurance.

Cav needs to go back to winning stages in the Giro and Tour and make this thread moot. make the GOAT conversation moot. His terminal velocity is still if not the best, the second or third best then. His CdA is still the best, therefore his ability to sprint for 13-14 seconds and maintain a finish for ~250 metres and prolong the adenosine triphosphate (atp) energy system for longer than the 10secs will still be able to win him half a dozen GT sprint wins a year.

What a ridiculous thing to say. It's a monument! Of course there's a need to win it again! By that logic there's no need for him to win anything again. He might as well retire.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

What a ridiculous thing to say. It's a monument! Of course there's a need to win it again! By that logic there's no need for him to win anything again. He might as well retire.

errrr,

I was making an estimation, that to win sprints again in GTs, he must combine all resources and energy into that goal, and he can get back to his imperious best and absolute dominance in the bunch kicks.

If he starts his season early to be able to ride the 270km in San Remo, he risks taking an edge off his top-end in july.

I made a reasoned analysis. You cant win San Remo by flipping a coin, Cav would have to expend crucial resources and start his season too early, and this is a risk he cannot afford. Because it would still be a crapshoot to win San Remo again, but it is well within his armory to return to winning 10 sprint stages a year at France and Giro.

San Remo, smaller chances, and chances he cannot tip in his favour, but to tip it more in his favour, he subtracts these resources from July, and the festival of May.

 

[Jspear]

Re: Re:

What a ridiculous thing to say. It's a monument! Of course there's a need to win it again! By that logic there's no need for him to win anything again. He might as well retire.

errrr,

I was making an estimation, that to win sprints again in GTs, he must combine all resources and energy into that goal, and he can get back to his imperious best and absolute dominance in the bunch kicks.

If he starts his season early to be able to ride the 270km in San Remo, he risks taking an edge off his top-end in july.

I made a reasoned analysis. You cant win San Remo by flipping a coin, Cav would have to expend crucial resources and start his season too early, and this is a risk he cannot afford. Because it would still be a crapshoot to win San Remo again, but it is well within his armory to return to winning 10 sprint stages a year at France and Giro.

San Remo, smaller chances, and chances he cannot tip in his favour, but to tip it more in his favour, he subtracts these resources from July, and the festival of May.

Only if Greipel is weaker next year and Kittel doesn't find his 2013, 14 form.