Teams & Riders Official Wout Van Aert thread

[RedheadDane]

We all know Wout is gonna be in the breakaway on Saturday.

No, he isn't!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1681920252790161411

 

[Peter von]

No, he isn't!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1681920252790161411

not legally anyway. Maybe just want's to show his co-workers his new baby.

good on him, would be terrible to miss the birth of his child because he was sprinting for top 5 or getting dropped by Felix Gall or someone on Saturday.

 

[Berniece]

So he recorded that message yesterday morning but still rode the stage... I thought it was "family comes first"? It probably is, only in this case Jumbo is the family.

 

[SafeBet]

This is Van Aert first DNF (DNS) since... his crash in the Tour 2019!
What a streak.

 

[Peter von]

So he recorded that message yesterday morning but still rode the stage... I thought it was "family comes first"? It probably is, only in this case Jumbo is the family.

Or they knew it might be coming so being a stand up guy he did the press team a solid and recorded a video just in case they needed it so if he had to leave in a hurry it wouldn’t look like he had been in a fight with Hooijdonck

 

[Blanco]

Wva is way more dominant in the fight for green jersey than Sagan has ever been. So stating that Wva is not Sagan level… is simply ignoring wva’s tt, climbing and overal strength.

And just looking at PCS points, Sagan was everywhere in 2016. He was dominant in the worlds in Richmond in 2015, so saying he wasn’t head and shoulders above others in his world’s… not true either.

Guy who won the jersey once is more dominant than guy who won it 7 times?!
Interesting view...
Van Aert is a very, very strong rider, constantly one of the top 5-6 riders in the world for the past 3-4 years, but to claim a spot among the very best you need biggest wins, and in his case evident is lack of those.
So Van Aert with one monument, couple of classics, couple of GT stages and one green jersey, is certainly no match to guy who won 3 World titles, 2 monuments, more classics, more GT wins and 7 green jersey's, and a lot more wins generally. Sagan is simply in another league, at least as things stands now.

 

[Volderke]

Guy who won the jersey once is more dominant than guy who won it 7 times?!
Interesting view...
Van Aert is a very, very strong rider, constantly one of the top 5-6 riders in the world for the past 3-4 years, but to claim a spot among the very best you need biggest wins, and in his case evident is lack of those.
So Van Aert with one monument, couple of classics, couple of GT stages and one green jersey, is certainly no match to guy who won 3 World titles, 2 monuments, more classics, more GT wins and 7 green jersey's, and a lot more wins generally. Sagan is simply in another league, at least as things stands now.

You don't need to win 7 times to show what dominance is, re-read what I wrote:
Wva is way more dominant in the fight for green jersey than Sagan has ever been.
Prove me wrong that WvA's win was more dominant than ANY of Sagan's 7 wins: WvA targeted the green jersey once and he won with most points and the biggest margin.
And on top of that, he did incredible work for Vingegaard (like in the Roubaix stage). Sagan never worked as much for any GC leader.

You are focusing on wins but I focus on WvA's dominance as a rider who can singledhandedly bear the weight of a bike race as if he was a team on his own. Vingegaard can win the Tour, Sagan can win 7 green jerseys, Pogacar can win everything, but they can't control stage after stage like WvA can. The only rider in the last 20 years who was able to pull off similar feats was Cancellara, but WvA is still a much better climber and sprinter (and I'm not the only one saying this; just listen to a lot of ex-pros and current pros).

ps: you have your opinion about Sagan, and I don't necessarily disagree, but you seem to want to make your point parallel to what I'm writing about, and aren't reading / seeing the context of my comment. My original comment was a reaction on the (factually wrong) comment below), not on Sagan's merits as a formidable rider, but pro WvA as a rider that is as formidable (if you care about bike racing, and not just about wins / results / ...):

Sagan had the problem everyone was riding against him, fortunately WVA doesn't have this problem but he is tactically inept ...

pps:

Van Aert is a very, very strong rider, constantly one of the top 5-6 riders in the world for the past 3-4 years, but to claim a spot among the very best you need biggest wins, and in his case evident is lack of those.

That's called a contradictio in terminis. Either you are one of the top 5-6 riders and thus one of the best, or you are not one of the best, but that doesn't go well with being one of the top 5-6 (and thus one of the best in the world).

You seem to have the (imho narrow, but each their own ofcourse) view that classifying the strength of a rider is within the number of wins. Most people, admittedly, only remember the (record) number of wins, but I'm seeing riders as more than their wins. I like and respect riders for more than the number of times they crossed the finish first. Some riders with records in certain categories are very forgettable. Some riders who never won the Worlds / olympics / certain classics /... I hold in much higher esteem. Cancellara never won the Worlds but he's still twice the rider that Sagan is, for example. Boonen won the World's and Flanders / Roubaix a record number, but Philippe Gilbert is still higher in my book thanks to his polyvalence / transformation later in his career (while Boonen was limited in his possibilities). I will remember Alaphilippe more for his incredible 2019 TdF where he pushed far above his weight, and his Flanders race in 2020 where he totally lit up the race, than for his Imola world title which was a one-trick-pony-trick (even if it was a good one). Etcetera.
And in this context, I will remember WvA as the most dominant / active rider of the last 4 years in the TdF: he's on the TV screen more than any other rider. I remember Alaphilippe and Sagan winning the world's with 5 minutes of footage after their last-5K attack. I will, as much or even more, remember hours of WvA during summer in which he dominated certain stages of the TdF going all out from the start of the stage. Whether he won or not.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Good decision to leave the Tour and to be there for the birth of his child.

 

[Rackham]

Good decision to leave the Tour and to be there for the birth of his child.

Jumbo team bus meeting this morning with WvA 'asking' to go home:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2NU4F_vDnc

 

[Lequack]

It was perfect timing. His unborn child clearly waited for Pog to lose significant time before deciding to come out.

 

[CyclistAbi]

The thing going for van Aert is he sacrificed his own ambitions for the team leader to win the race. So any talk about being selfish or things like that. For that he would at minimum need a couple of stage wins. For such talks to even start. He did his part now he will pull for Team Wife. Pun intended.

 

[Blanco]

You don't need to win 7 times to show what dominance is, re-read what I wrote:
Wva is way more dominant in the fight for green jersey than Sagan has ever been.
Prove me wrong that WvA's win was more dominant than ANY of Sagan's 7 wins: WvA targeted the green jersey once and he won with most points and the biggest margin.
And on top of that, he did incredible work for Vingegaard (like in the Roubaix stage). Sagan never worked as much for any GC leader.

You are focusing on wins but I focus on WvA's dominance as a rider who can singledhandedly bear the weight of a bike race as if he was a team on his own. Vingegaard can win the Tour, Sagan can win 7 green jerseys, Pogacar can win everything, but they can't control stage after stage like WvA can. The only rider in the last 20 years who was able to pull off similar feats was Cancellara, but WvA is still a much better climber and sprinter (and I'm not the only one saying this; just listen to a lot of ex-pros and current pros).

ps: you have your opinion about Sagan, and I don't necessarily disagree, but you seem to want to make your point parallel to what I'm writing about, and aren't reading / seeing the context of my comment. My original comment was a reaction on the (factually wrong) comment below), not on Sagan's merits as a formidable rider, but pro WvA as a rider that is as formidable (if you care about bike racing, and not just about wins / results / ...):

I see that you compare Wout to another big boy here, Cancellara. Yes, it's true that Van Aert is better climber and also a better sprinter than Fabian, but what all that means in the bigger picture?
Was he a better domestique than him? Probably yes.
Was he a better stage hunter? Probably yes.
Did he won more? No.
Did he win bigger races? Of course no.
Was he a better rider? Clearly no.
He indeed is controlling race pretty impressive, probably better than anyone, but that is not the work he should do, at least not to such an extent. He should think of himself more, or his career will pass as a rider who was incredibly strong but won way too little considering his strength. He should watch what Van Der Poel is doing, or Boonen before, ride TDF as some sort of a training, or not ride at all. He must forget this donkey business. Cancellara became aware of all this, and in the later part of his career (in which he, not accidentally, had more success) didn't pull at the Tour like a madman. We had before this riders who control the peloton on basically every terrain: Hincapie, Cancellara before he focused on classics, Geraint Thomas before he became a GT rider, Castroviejo, Kwiatkowski (saddest example of wasting exceptional talent), and so on.
Van Aert if continues could become a new improved Kwiatkowski.

Edit: Yes, I understood what are you trying to say, and you're probably right, he is exceptional, but he is wasting his strength heavily on things that won't matter much, when the dust settles.
And one more thing, I don't find it appropriate to say that a rider who won one thing once, no matter how dominant that win was, is more dominant than a rider who won it seven times.

 

[Volderke]

I see that you compare Wout to another big boy here, Cancellara. Yes, it's true that Van Aert is better climber and also a better sprinter than Fabian, but what all that means in the bigger picture?
Was he a better domestique than him? Probably yes.
Was he a better stage hunter? Probably yes.
Did he won more? No.
Did he win bigger races? Of course no.
Was he a better rider? Clearly no.
He indeed is controlling race pretty impressive, probably better than anyone, but that is not the work he should do, at least not to such an extent. He should think of himself more, or his career will pass as a rider who was incredibly strong but won way too little considering his strength. He should watch what Van Der Poel is doing, or Boonen before, ride TDF as some sort of a training, or not ride at all. He must forget this donkey business. Cancellara became aware of all this, and in the later part of his career (in which he, not accidentally, had more success) didn't pull at the Tour like a madman. We had before this riders who control the peloton on basically every terrain: Hincapie, Cancellara before he focused on classics, Geraint Thomas before he became a GT rider, Castroviejo, Kwiatkowski (saddest example of wasting exceptional talent), and so on.
Van Aert if continues could become a new improved Kwiatkowski.

Edit: Yes, I understood what are you trying to say, and you're probably right, he is exceptional, but he is wasting his strength heavily on things that won't matter much, when the dust settles.
And one more thing, I don't find it appropriate to say that a rider who won one thing once, no matter how dominant that win was, is more dominant than a rider who won it seven times.

What WvA should or should not do, is his decision. He probably realizes he is just happy with how things are going: he is in an environment with great staff, coaches, material, and a very good salary, and he probably rides the way he does because he's fine with that. You can call it a waste of talent, but probably, those guys (like Kwiatkowski, and WvA) have peace of mind with less pressure to win, and more predictable work in e.g. the TdF with sometimes the outcome that a stage can be won.

I already noticed you give much more weight to winning than I do. I think we can differ about how we personally rate the impact a rider has for our own memory, so let's move on.

 

[Ricco']

Prove me wrong that WvA's win was more dominant than ANY of Sagan's 7 wins: WvA targeted the green jersey once and he won with most points and the biggest margin.

Not true.

In absolute terms, WVA won in 2022 with 480 points and with 194 points of advantage to 2nd place rider. Sagan won in 2018 with 477 points.

The question is that in relative terms, WVA won in 2022 with 42% of the maximum points (1140) that could be achieved if only one rider won the 21 stages and was 1st in each intermediate. In 2018 Sagan won with 477 points but back then stages of coefficient 2 only gave 30 points to the winner (in 2022 they gave 50), so the maximum a rider could attain was only 1070 points. In relative terms Sagan won with 44,5% of the maximum points attainable, a bigger percentage than WVA in 2022.

In respect to margins, Sagan won in 2016 with 242 points to 2nd place rider and in 2018 with 231, both of them greater then 2022.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

He had a big celebration after emulating his idol and finishing 4th in world championships in Australia?

 

[Volderke]

Not true.

In absolute terms, WVA won in 2022 with 480 points and with 194 points of advantage to 2nd place rider. Sagan won in 2018 with 477 points.

The question is that in relative terms, WVA won in 2022 with 42% of the maximum points (1140) that could be achieved if only one rider won the 21 stages and was 1st in each intermediate. In 2018 Sagan won with 477 points but back then stages of coefficient 2 only gave 30 points to the winner (in 2022 they gave 50), so the maximum a rider could attain was only 1070 points. In relative terms Sagan won with 44,5% of the maximum points attainable, a bigger percentage than WVA in 2022.

In respect to margins, Sagan won in 2016 with 242 points to 2nd place rider and in 2018 with 231, both of them greater then 2022.

I didn't start this pi..ng contest, again, but thanks for pointing out once more (in bold).

I just wanted to point out that WvA is no worse than Sagan, to those who claim Sagan is God. Your info in terms of maximum achievable points doesn't change that (and you know it): if WvA wins e.g. a stage with coefficient 2 and gets more points, it only proves he is a more versatile / dominant rider, and that is the point I'm trying to make since I came in this topic.

2022 WvA sacrificed his chances in the Roubaix stage and didn't even sprint on the Champs Elysees, or in other words, he could have easily gotten 500, but he said himself he wasn't busy with that. He only wanted to secure the jersey, stage wins and help Vingegaard.
Sagan's only goal during his Tours were the jersey (mainly through placing in sprints and intermediate sprints he dominated in e.g. mid-mountain stages, before sitting up completely, contrary to WvA who almost never sits up) and stage wins, but definitely not playing donkey for his GC teammate.

 

[KZD]

Van Aert's Tour was one of the most impressive that I've watched a rider doing without getting even a single stage win in return.

Given that he has only two wins this season, he will be under a lot of pressure to get the rainbow jersey in Glasgow otherwise his season will be a big disappointment even if he wins the Benelux Tour or something like that afterwards.

 

[Netserk]

I didn't start this pi..ng contest, again, but thanks for pointing out once more (in bold).

I just wanted to point out that WvA is no worse than Sagan, to those who claim Sagan is God. Your info in terms of maximum achievable points doesn't change that (and you know it): if WvA wins e.g. a stage with coefficient 2 and gets more points, it only proves he is a more versatile / dominant rider, and that is the point I'm trying to make since I came in this topic.

2022 WvA sacrificed his chances in the Roubaix stage and didn't even sprint on the Champs Elysees, or in other words, he could have easily gotten 500, but he said himself he wasn't busy with that. He only wanted to secure the jersey, stage wins and help Vingegaard.
Sagan's only goal during his Tours were the jersey (mainly through placing in sprints and intermediate sprints he dominated in e.g. mid-mountain stages, before sitting up completely, contrary to WvA who almost never sits up) and stage wins, but definitely not playing donkey for his GC teammate.

How many more points would Sagan have scored without his injury in the 2018 Tour?

And in 2015 he was at least as dedicated a dom as Van Aert has been.

 

[Blanco]

pps:

That's called a contradictio in terminis. Either you are one of the top 5-6 riders and thus one of the best, or you are not one of the best, but that doesn't go well with being one of the top 5-6 (and thus one of the best in the world).

By being among the very best I had in mind being among the cycling greats, where Sagan and Cancellara surely belong. Van Aert in my book still isn't there.
Sorry if I wasn't clear enough...

 

[Volderke]

How many more points would Sagan have scored without his injury in the 2018 Tour?

And in 2015 he was at least as dedicated a dom as Van Aert has been.

but he didn't score more points.

The fact remains WvA has the highest score.

And your argument (if he didn't injure) is as good as the argument 'if WvA only committed more to the green jersey, he would have won 3 or 4 already'. If and if.

With regards to Sagan being a dom in 2015: nowhere as good as WvA has ever been. And in terms of results, not very effective it seems.

 

[Netserk]

but he didn't score more points.

The fact remains WvA has the highest score.

And your argument (if he didn't injure) is as good as the argument 'if WvA only committed more to the green jersey, he would have won 3 or 4 already'. If and if.

With regards to Sagan being a dom in 2015: nowhere as good as WvA has ever been. And in terms of results, not very effective it seems.

You started with if and if and if. Read your own post.

 

[Volderke]

You started with if and if and if. Read your own post.

I started with: he has more points, to back up my claim that he has been more impressing aiming for that one time green, compared to any of Sagan’s 7. I”ll end with that, and I see you're to lame to reply on this last comment, but grasping at straws looking for previous comments. Keep trying.

 

[RedheadDane]

Looks like he made it home right on time!

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[Netserk]

2022 WvA sacrificed his chances in the Roubaix stage and didn't even sprint on the Champs Elysees, or in other words, he could have easily gotten 500, but he said himself he wasn't busy with that.

If, if, if.

 

[Peter von]

Looks like he made it home right on time!

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

nice!

congrats to the family and good on Wout to make it home with time to spare, he might not have won a stage this year yet he still had the best Tour of the lot.