Mark Cavendish excuses for 2016

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Jspear said:
Only if Greipel is weaker next year and Kittel doesn't find his 2013, 14 form.
And noone else will step up in his form likr Greipel this year
but there is also problem of much less stages for sprinters in Tour and even if Giro
 
Re: Re:

Jspear said:
PremierAndrew said:
42x16ss said:
blackcat said:
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.
He'd be idiotic to go for classics, I was surprised by how well he did at the national British Championships, but he simply isn't the type of rider who is capable of challenging the Kristoffs Sagans and Degenkolbs of the world, and if he does follow this, he'd lose his sprint. Instead he should train to be a pure sprinter. Cav is smart enough to realise this, which is why I found Brian Holm's (I think) comments that we'll see a different, more classics-orientated Cav next year so surprising
 
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
Jspear said:
PremierAndrew said:
42x16ss said:
blackcat said:
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.
He'd be idiotic to go for classics, I was surprised by how well he did at the national British Championships, but he simply isn't the type of rider who is capable of challenging the Kristoffs Sagans and Degenkolbs of the world, and if he does follow this, he'd lose his sprint. Instead he should train to be a pure sprinter. Cav is smart enough to realise this, which is why I found Brian Holm's (I think) comments that we'll see a different, more classics-orientated Cav next year so surprising
I think that Cav can be a good classics guy.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
He'd be idiotic to go for classics, I was surprised by how well he did at the national British Championships, but he simply isn't the type of rider who is capable of challenging the Kristoffs Sagans and Degenkolbs of the world, and if he does follow this, he'd lose his sprint. Instead he should train to be a pure sprinter. Cav is smart enough to realise this, which is why I found Brian Holm's (I think) comments that we'll see a different, more classics-orientated Cav next year so surprising
ok ok, so it was Brian Holm.

then its Paris Brussels and Ghent Wevelgem. And Paris Tours.


But Cav is savvy, he has unpeered cycling acumen wrt ability to plan out his career and see the sweetspots.

He knows that anything besides the three races i mentioned, is beyond him, and outside the sweetspot. He will be back, I have faith. All champions get beaten, all champions have a lull, coming back is what makes them great.
 
Aug 17, 2009
62
0
0
Re:

jsem94 said:
Britain just raced like retards in that Olympic race, thinking that they could just ride tempo in the front of the bunch, even when half of the peloton broke free. The team size was way too small to be able to control the race like that.
+1
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re:

nayr497 said:
Oh no, no, no. Can we please leave that dopey "GOAT" term to the idiot talking head NFL commentators? Please keep it out of cycling.
what about an emoji

a #goatemoji?



or



or

 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
PremierAndrew said:
Jspear said:
PremierAndrew said:
42x16ss said:
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.
He'd be idiotic to go for classics, I was surprised by how well he did at the national British Championships, but he simply isn't the type of rider who is capable of challenging the Kristoffs Sagans and Degenkolbs of the world, and if he does follow this, he'd lose his sprint. Instead he should train to be a pure sprinter. Cav is smart enough to realise this, which is why I found Brian Holm's (I think) comments that we'll see a different, more classics-orientated Cav next year so surprising
I think that Cav can be a good classics guy.
The closest he's got to showing endurance is showing that his sprint can last longer than other sprinters. Apart from that, it would be a hell of a risk, that simply isn't worth it (of course, if he went on to have success in the classics, it would be worth it, but that's a big and very unlikely if)
 
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
Jspear said:
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.
Isn't MSR considered the sprinter's unofficial world championship? I would think winning MSR trumps any grand tour stage win or maybe even any collection of specific grand tour stage wins.
I would also think that his schedule could be easily adjusted to allow for recovery from MSR. It's not as cut and dried as you make it out to be.
 
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
The closest he's got to showing endurance is showing that his sprint can last longer than other sprinters. Apart from that, it would be a hell of a risk, that simply isn't worth it (of course, if he went on to have success in the classics, it would be worth it, but that's a big and very unlikely if)
But Kristoff already has this ability as well and he is a better monument rider so....wouldn't help Cav much.
 
From the recent CN article:

Smith claims he would even like to see Cavendish ride Paris-Roubaix, to find new motivation and inspire his new teammates.

"I want to see what else Cav has in his locker," Smith says. "He is a character but I want to encourage that character to come out in our team. I want him to be himself but also help the other riders, and especially the African riders. He's got so much experience. Edvald Boasson Hagen has won two Tour de France stages, Cavendish has won 26…"
This is definitely going to be a very new experience for Cav. It'll be interesting to see how he handles it. He doesn't always seem to do very good if things aren't going perfectly for him.
 
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
Jspear said:
PremierAndrew said:
42x16ss said:
blackcat said:
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.
He'd be idiotic to go for classics, I was surprised by how well he did at the national British Championships, but he simply isn't the type of rider who is capable of challenging the Kristoffs Sagans and Degenkolbs of the world, and if he does follow this, he'd lose his sprint. Instead he should train to be a pure sprinter. Cav is smart enough to realise this, which is why I found Brian Holm's (I think) comments that we'll see a different, more classics-orientated Cav next year so surprising
He's not winning in the manner that he used to because the competition is stiffer, with more quality depth in the sprinter ranks than during his heyday. If he were to attempt to expand his options in terms of chances for victories, just as Holm implies, he would become a more well rounded rider, or maybe just utilize talents that he seldom in the past took advantage of due to his narrow focus.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

PremierAndrew said:
The closest he's got to showing endurance is showing that his sprint can last longer than other sprinters. Apart from that, it would be a hell of a risk, that simply isn't worth it (of course, if he went on to have success in the classics, it would be worth it, but that's a big and very unlikely if)
San Remo is what, 270? and the poggio and cipressa is where the race was raced and won with the previous route.

I think Cav may have had one or two helpers on the climb like Hincapie and Martin.

even tho the 270 is not really raced as 270 and the first 4 hours is nothing but tempo and freewheeling and hiding in the bunch, Cav has showed he can win Worlds at 250/260, and be there in the mix.

The knew longer weekend edition of Ghent Wevelgem should be a piece of pi$$ for Cav, and Paris Tours at ~230, he just needs to juggle the happy-medium so he does not lose anything off his terminal velocity so he can sustain the extra one hour of endurance in Ghent and Paris Tours.

I cant think that Brian Holm meant anything more than Wevelgem, Paris Tours, Paris Brussels... I dont even think Cav can be in the mix when the sm@ck goes down in Harelbeke.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

Angliru said:
He's not winning in the manner that he used to because the competition is stiffer, with more quality depth in the sprinter ranks than during his heyday. If he were to attempt to expand his options in terms of chances for victories, just as Holm implies, he would become a more well rounded rider, or maybe just utilize talents that he seldom in the past took advantage of due to his narrow focus.
not correct.

Cav just does not have the ability like a Philippe Gilbert or Simon Gerrans. His ability lies in his CdA and torque, and triangulating those factors in a sprint.

If Bennati, Greipel, and Ciolek, do not come into the peloton at the same time as Cav, they become champions.

If Mcewen comes into the peloton a decade later and has to go head to head with Cav, he never becomes a champion and he would only have half a dozen GT stage wins to his name when he retires, unlike the two dozen GT stage wins he held. And he should have won the worlds where Dave Millar let the gap go under the bridge overpass that Worlds around 2005 when Beat beat Valverde who beat Zabel when Zabel opened the sprint too early... or did Sammy Sanchez open the sprint. Millar was a dumb@rse and let the gap go with about 1 mile or 1 km left when they went under that overpass
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

Angliru said:
Isn't MSR considered the sprinter's unofficial world championship? I would think winning MSR trumps any grand tour stage win or maybe even any collection of specific grand tour stage wins.
I would also think that his schedule could be easily adjusted to allow for recovery from MSR. It's not as cut and dried as you make it out to be.


I thought it would be Paris-Tours or the Champs Elysees which were unofficial world champs for the sprinters, like the GP des Nations was the unoffical worlds for the race against the clock for most of pro-cycling history

(re: not as cut and dried as i made out to be).

well, yes, i concede this point.

I just thought that is Cav has to make it back to winning 10 GT stage wins a year, he has to keep focus on that one end. And I think that another 10 wins in GT stages, does trump MSR only because, he has won MSR previously, he will not eclipse Freire or Zabel's classics record, but he has the chance to win another 30 odd stages in GT sprints, so he should focus on that.

and mebbe try to juggle winning Paris Tours and Ghent Wevelgem, and this does not even take into account Paris Brussels which will be a piece o' p!ss for him, if Mcewen won it four times.
 
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
Angliru said:
He's not winning in the manner that he used to because the competition is stiffer, with more quality depth in the sprinter ranks than during his heyday. If he were to attempt to expand his options in terms of chances for victories, just as Holm implies, he would become a more well rounded rider, or maybe just utilize talents that he seldom in the past took advantage of due to his narrow focus.
not correct.

Cav just does not have the ability like a Philippe Gilbert or Simon Gerrans. His ability lies in his CdA and torque, and triangulating those factors in a sprint.

If Bennati, Greipel, and Ciolek, do not come into the peloton at the same time as Cav, they become champions.

If Mcewen comes into the peloton a decade later and has to go head to head with Cav, he never becomes a champion and he would only have half a dozen GT stage wins to his name when he retires, unlike the two dozen GT stage wins he held. And he should have won the worlds where Dave Millar let the gap go under the bridge overpass that Worlds around 2005 when Beat beat Valverde who beat Zabel when Zabel opened the sprint too early... or did Sammy Sanchez open the sprint. Millar was a dumb@rse and let the gap go with about 1 mile or 1 km left when they went under that overpass
Bennati and Cioleks moment in the sun was so brief that I just can't accept the idea that Cavendish had much effect on their being champions. They both peaked early and then fell off significantly. On Greipel, I would be inclined to agree with you.
 
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
I thought it would be Paris-Tours or the Champs Elysees which were unofficial world champs for the sprinters, like the GP des Nations was the unoffical worlds for the race against the clock for most of pro-cycling history

(re: not as cut and dried as i made out to be).

well, yes, i concede this point.

I just thought that is Cav has to make it back to winning 10 GT stage wins a year, he has to keep focus on that one end. And I think that another 10 wins in GT stages, does trump MSR only because, he has won MSR previously, he will not eclipse Freire or Zabel's classics record, but he has the chance to win another 30 odd stages in GT sprints, so he should focus on that.

and mebbe try to juggle winning Paris Tours and Ghent Wevelgem, and this does not even take into account Paris Brussels which will be a piece o' p!ss for him, if Mcewen won it four times.
Champs elysees? no way, I know that is a very prestige sprint but competition there is usually so weak, last 5 years is not so evident but before that only like half of real sprinters came through alps or pyrenees and another half not even rode a Tour de France anyway so champs elysees not really
and how many sprinters really won Paris Tours in last 15 years? not even close to how many of them won MSR because it is probably more suitable for breakaways and it is not nearly prestigious race as MSR
so MSR is definitelly most prestigious sprint that ever could be, maybe World Champs for pure sprinters as 2002 or 2011 can be equally prestigious
 
Mar 13, 2015
2,637
0
0
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
Angliru said:
Isn't MSR considered the sprinter's unofficial world championship? I would think winning MSR trumps any grand tour stage win or maybe even any collection of specific grand tour stage wins.
I would also think that his schedule could be easily adjusted to allow for recovery from MSR. It's not as cut and dried as you make it out to be.


I thought it would be Paris-Tours or the Champs Elysees which were unofficial world champs for the sprinters, like the GP des Nations was the unoffical worlds for the race against the clock for most of pro-cycling history

(re: not as cut and dried as i made out to be).

well, yes, i concede this point.

I just thought that is Cav has to make it back to winning 10 GT stage wins a year, he has to keep focus on that one end. And I think that another 10 wins in GT stages, does trump MSR only because, he has won MSR previously, he will not eclipse Freire or Zabel's classics record, but he has the chance to win another 30 odd stages in GT sprints, so he should focus on that.

and mebbe try to juggle winning Paris Tours and Ghent Wevelgem, and this does not even take into account Paris Brussels which will be a piece o' p!ss for him, if Mcewen won it four times.
First of all, Cav never won 10 GT stages in one year (maybe you confused him with Petacchi ;) ). And second, in last two years he won ONE GT stage, so to win those 30 he'll need some 60 years :p He's past his prime, deal with it
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

bassano said:
Champs elysees? no way, I know that is a very prestige sprint but competition there is usually so weak, last 5 years is not so evident but before that only like half of real sprinters came through alps or pyrenees and another half not even rode a Tour de France anyway so champs elysees not really
but some riders value making it thru the 21 stages, and that is what gives the final stage sprint merit.

not the first stage when everyone is fresh.

ask Mcewen.

now, the way that sprint trains have started to dominate sprints, that last sprints what were without dominant trains were over a decade ago. they have changed sprinting to where you need a support from your team to be competitive over the last 5 kms of the race. This has managed Mark Cavendish to tilt the odds WAY in his favour.

his team always gives him an opportunity to sprint for the win.

Ask Mcewen how many times he had the opportunity to sprint for the win, not just sprint for a top ten or podium. Ask Freire. Cavendish had the odds tipped in his favour.

And re: the final stage on the Champs Elysees, this is why it is the unnoficial worlds.

this is why, ask Tyler Farrar about the day that Cav was dropped from the gruppetto/autobus, but his Columbia team car, gave his the tow like Nibali got from Astana this year at the Vuelta. the difference was, Cav got back onto the autobus with the tow, Nibali was dq'ed from the race, but Cav got to win more stages after this stage in the Dolomites or Alps.

That is why the final stage is worthy, otherwise, Theo Bos could put on back his 10kg of track sprinter weight, and smash the first stage, like Cipollini used to smash the first stage, but pull out after a week. Cipollini never had to do preparation in the hills for the mtn passes, Cipo could just focus on training his sprint knowing that he would pull out on the first stage in the Pyrenees or Alps and then sleep with a few podium girls then go home to Milan. Cipo was tilting the stages in his favour by not preparing for the 21 stages. Just like Mcewen pulled out after 12 stages in the Giro, and Cav pulled out after 14 stages in the Giro. (I think Cav has finished one Giro however)
 
Mar 13, 2015
2,637
0
0
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
Angliru said:
He's not winning in the manner that he used to because the competition is stiffer, with more quality depth in the sprinter ranks than during his heyday. If he were to attempt to expand his options in terms of chances for victories, just as Holm implies, he would become a more well rounded rider, or maybe just utilize talents that he seldom in the past took advantage of due to his narrow focus.
not correct.

Cav just does not have the ability like a Philippe Gilbert or Simon Gerrans. His ability lies in his CdA and torque, and triangulating those factors in a sprint.

If Bennati, Greipel, and Ciolek, do not come into the peloton at the same time as Cav, they become champions.

If Mcewen comes into the peloton a decade later and has to go head to head with Cav, he never becomes a champion
and he would only have half a dozen GT stage wins to his name when he retires, unlike the two dozen GT stage wins he held. And he should have won the worlds where Dave Millar let the gap go under the bridge overpass that Worlds around 2005 when Beat beat Valverde who beat Zabel when Zabel opened the sprint too early... or did Sammy Sanchez open the sprint. Millar was a dumb@rse and let the gap go with about 1 mile or 1 km left when they went under that overpass
And maybe Merckx wouldn't won so many stages if he had to ride against Cav :D
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

Mr.White said:
First of all, Cav never won 10 GT stages in one year (maybe you confused him with Petacchi ;) ). And second, in last two years he won ONE GT stage, so to win those 30 he'll need some 60 years :p He's past his prime, deal with it
oh mate, I can deal with it.
I reckon it is better for cycling to throw up Kittel and Greipel as the best sprinters in 2014 and 1015 and relegate Cav to one of the sprinters just making up the numbers.

and I have criticised Cavendish, quite vociferously
i) the Tyler Farrar anger over Cav reaching a finish at the Giro after being dropped by the gruppetto, apparently hanging on to the Columbia team car, then, and proceeding to win following stages at the said same Giro
ii) Cav is not a classics rider, he may have a Worlds 260km circuit in him, and MSR, but the only big one-day race in his hiting zone would be Wevelghem. (I am not considering ParisTours ParisBrussels or others, cos in Cav's words, they are $hit small races)
iii) he is a bit of a chav, and he spits the dummy easily. But this is maybe why he is so dominant, like Armstrong, his competitive heart.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
also, could win HEW Cyclassics, or Hamburg, whatever they call it now, Vatenfall Hamburg Cyclassics and portmanteaus
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

Mr.White said:
And maybe Merckx wouldn't won so many stages if he had to ride against Cav :D
nah, prolly Sean Kelly tho.

we need a strikethru function pls mods
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
sheit, i did not realise he was off to MTN-Qhubeka or Dimension Data next year for 2016.

I dont think he will get enough help to win many races. He should have taken no money, and stayed at Quickstep, and proven himself worthy of support for the TdF.

damn, I just realised this now.
 
Oct 10, 2015
2,059
0
0
Re:

blackcat said:
sheit, i did not realise he was off to MTN-Qhubeka or Dimension Data next year for 2016.

I dont think he will get enough help to win many races. He should have taken no money, and stayed at Quickstep, and proven himself worthy of support for the TdF.

damn, I just realised this now.
He will get more support at Dimension Data next season than he would of gotten if he stayed with Etixx, he will have Renshaw, Eisel, Boasson Hagen and possibly Farrar in his train. Also I don't think it was money that caused him to leave Etixx, Lefevere didn't want him anymore as Cav requires x amount of riders for his train in the big races which curtails Etixx chances to do what they do best in GT's and stage hunt. You'd expect Dimension will get invited to basically any race they want to compete in so Cavendish will win his share of races next season.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY