Teams & Riders Official Wout Van Aert thread

[Netserk]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6oLUODkJo

 

[Peyroteo94]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6oLUODkJo

Spoke like a real man! Congrats for showing accountability.

 

[Rackham]

I know you want to turn Van Aert into some kind of victim, but apparently it was his call to go for the sprint. If you can blame the team for anything it's that they somehow regard his personal ambitions as more important than playing it smart and hedging their bets.

I don't dislike Van Aert, but he's not someone you bet everything on. He's no Van der Poel, who always wins in a situation like this. It's incomprehensible even for Van Aert to want this pressure... but he did, and he asked for it.

Jorgenson said "Wout and the car decided to go for the sprint" in his post race interview:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGVcIc4O8u8


It's all good WvA showing accountability and taking the blame but come on now, the DS's are his bosses. It's their responsibility.

 

[James M]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=me6oLUODkJo

Certaintly never been a fan but WVA is anything but a selfish rider. If anything, he has consistently demonstrated an exceptional level of unselfishness over the years.

The external pressure is clearly getting to him, as evident in his statement, and it’s never good to witness that. Half of those people seem to be living in an alternate vacuum, always viewing the glass from a half empty viewpoint. A doesnt need to mean B.

 

[theyoungest]

It's all good WvA showing accountability and taking the blame but come on now, the DS's are his bosses. It's their responsibility.

If you actually read my post, that's what I'm saying. But Van Aert asked for it. He wanted this. So don't turn him into the victim of Richard Plugge's hybris or whatever.

I do respect Van Aert for always telling it like it is. He never sugarcoats things, he's always honest. That's what I like about the guy, along with his tendency to never give up.

 

[Rackham]

If you actually read my post, that's what I'm saying. But Van Aert asked for it. He wanted this. So don't turn him into the victim of Richard Plugge's hybris or whatever.

I do respect Van Aert for always telling it like it is. He never sugarcoats things, he's always honest. That's what I like about the guy, along with his tendency to never give up.

Well, you have your opinion, I have mine. But since WvA is already 'down', I don't see why letting him kick himself is entirely appropriate either.

The car needs to take responsibility, especially with regards the other two riders. They somehow turned a 99.9% chance of victory into defeat. It was literally in cycling terms unlosable. Losing 3 versus 1 on a pan flat finale is not the fault of one rider. It can't be.

 

[Netserk]

Well, you have your opinion, I have mine. But since WvA is already 'down', I don't see why letting him kick himself is entirely appropriate either.

The car needs to take responsibility, especially with regards the other two riders. They somehow turned a 99.9% chance of victory into defeat. It was literally in cycling terms unlosable. Losing 3 versus 1 on a pan flat finale is not the fault of one rider. It can't be.

Even if they played it perfectly, it was never a sure thing. They worked hard from a long way out, so numerical superiority can look much more advantageous than it is when the responsibility falls on the trio. Powless had worked the least and should always have a better sprint than Benoot and Jorgenson, and legs just always count for a lot in a race like that.

 

[YavorD]

Tbh as tough mentally it is to lose like that, I think they went with the right decision.
Imagine they didn't trust WVA's sprint against Powless and still lose Stannard style. It would be even more telling and demoralising that they don't trust him against Powless (with all due respect) only to lose in a different way.

 

[Rackham]

Even if they played it perfectly, it was never a sure thing. They worked hard from a long way out, so numerical superiority can look much more advantageous than it is when the responsibility falls on the trio. Powless had worked the least and should always have a better sprint than Benoot and Jorgenson, and legs just always count for a lot in a race like that.

Niermann has at least taken responsibility and pretty much laid it out as I said, i.e. one of them could have gone to the line solo if they'd attacked 3v1.

Grischa Niermann neemt schuld van fout Wout van Aert op zich na Dwars door Vlaanderen

Video Als het aan ploegleider Grischa Niermann ligt, is niet Wout van Aert, maar wel hijzelf verantwoordelijk voor de nederlaag van Visma | Lease a Bike in Dwars door Vlaanderen. De Duitser geeft ook toe dat de ploeg een fout heeft gemaakt. De drie renners voorin maakten zelf de tactiek. “En ik...

www.wielerflits.nl

So at last, yes, finally thank you Grischa Niermann for taking the blame. He's the 'car'. It's his job, not Van Aert's.

 

[repre]

Tbh as tough mentally it is to lose like that, I think they went with the right decision.
Imagine they didn't trust WVA's sprint against Powless and still lose Stannard style. It would be even more telling and demoralising that they don't trust him against Powless (with all due respect) only to lose in a different way.

Maybe the best tactics was to make couple of attacks by Matteo and Benout, but wva still had to beat Powless in sprint easily.

Second thought, if they know wva lacks sprint power then this decision looks dumb and also they could released him later. If Jorgenson worked more before Benout then wva wins too.

They had multiple winning choices and went with only losing one with the belief that WvA is still great, while he isn't.

 

[Netserk]

Niermann has at least taken responsibility and pretty much laid it out as I said, i.e. one of them could have gone to the line solo if they'd attacked 3v1.

Grischa Niermann neemt schuld van fout Wout van Aert op zich na Dwars door Vlaanderen

Video Als het aan ploegleider Grischa Niermann ligt, is niet Wout van Aert, maar wel hijzelf verantwoordelijk voor de nederlaag van Visma | Lease a Bike in Dwars door Vlaanderen. De Duitser geeft ook toe dat de ploeg een fout heeft gemaakt. De drie renners voorin maakten zelf de tactiek. “En ik...

www.wielerflits.nl

So at last, yes, finally thank you Grischa Niermann for taking the blame. He's the 'car'. It's his job, not Van Aert's.

The youtube video of the interview and the automated translation of it:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZPm8Sf5oHU

Q: At a certain point, did you decide that you had the confidence to win the sprint?

A: Yes, at a certain point, I decided that we had the confidence to win the sprint. In hindsight, I should have made the decision that we needed to attack one by one to drop Powless. Of course, this was a crucial moment in the final kilometres. I haven’t spoken to Wout yet, but anything can happen in a sprint. That was my mistake, my responsibility to consider and say, “No, guys, we need to play our chances differently, we must win this race.” I didn’t do that. Naturally, I’m very disappointed because the team rode a fantastic race right up to the final straight. This is really just a continuation of the last few races. Today was a beautiful race, I really enjoyed it, but the way it ended just wasn’t right.

Q: Was the decision made because it might have been better for Wout’s confidence if he won?

A: I want to see everyone win, but of course, it would have been great if Wout had taken this victory. Again, the breakaway stayed so close to the chasing group for a long time, so attacking would have been a big risk. But in the final stretch, it could have been possible. We had confidence that Wout would win the sprint. But if he gets cramp in such a long and tough finale, strange things can happen. And that’s exactly what happened today. Nine times out of ten, Wout would beat Nielsen in a sprint, but this time it didn’t happen. That’s no excuse, and I definitely take responsibility for it.

Q: When was the decision made to go for the sprint?

A: Just before the final metres, we were in contact with the guys. We were quite far behind, but then they decided to let it come down to a sprint. That’s when I should have said, “No, that doesn’t seem like a good idea, we should attack.”

Q: Did you put too much trust in Wout?

A: I don’t know. Normally, he would win a sprint like this. As far as I can tell, he had great legs today and rode an amazing race. But this was an unexpected scenario. If you break away with four riders and three of them are from the same team, then the easiest way to win is for one of them to go solo to the finish. That’s what we’ve done in previous years. Looking back, it was simply a big mistake.

Q: What do you take away from this for the Tour of Flanders?

A: Right now, disappointment is the main feeling. But we should remember that the whole team rode an incredible race today. We controlled the race. However, at this moment, disappointment is what stands out.

Q: Because of that lost sprint, we have to ask—how strong is Wout at the moment?

A: Up until that moment, he showed how strong he is. If he had won a sprint for 20th place, that wouldn’t have been good either. One thing is certain: Van der Poel and Pogacar are the absolute top favourites for the Tour of Flanders. There’s no question about that. They are the men to beat. But I think we have a very strong team overall.

Q: How can you use that strength to your advantage? Should you attack earlier or wait until the final?

A: We will have to see. It’s a very tough race with a long finale. In the coming days, we’ll put our heads together and hopefully come up with the best possible strategy for Sunday.

Q: Am I right in understanding that the riders themselves decided to go for the sprint, and you didn’t overrule it?

A: Yes, that’s correct. Who exactly made the decision doesn’t matter—we made it as a team. But again, ultimately, I’m responsible for the strategy, and in hindsight, I should have stepped in and said, “No, we’re not doing that, you have to attack.”

Q: Looking at the decisive moment when four riders broke away, was this part of the plan?

A: Yes, this was the plan. The guys executed it brilliantly. We wanted to be in position together earlier, but that didn’t work out. The second time, it did. We knew that with the tailwind, it would be tough, and that the race would likely split even before that. Once again, they executed that part perfectly.

Q: In previous races, positioning was the main issue. Was today a different story?

A: Yes, today was a completely different story.

 

[YavorD]

Maybe the best tactics was to make couple of attacks by Matteo and Benout, but wva still had to beat Powless in sprint easily.

Second thought, if they know wva lacks sprint power then this decision looks dumb and also they could released him later. If Jorgenson worked more before Benout then wva wins too.

They had multiple winning choices and went with only losing one with the belief that WvA is still great, while he isn't.

But what if an attack just dropped Van Aert and within 500 metres they went from 3:1 with the best sprinter to 2:1 without him?

It would still look stupid, no?

 

[Low is rhe new high]

After splitting the race, Wout did the least work of the Vismas in the group and then tied up in the sprint of a 180k race. It seems his base/stamina is really lacking. Usually it's just sharpness you might be missing in your first few race day or two coming down from altitude.

I do not agree with you when I watched the race from the start of the tv coverage he was leading the group on every hill and he did his turn in front until 10 k from the finish. So what do you call a sprint? Sharpness or stamnia I would call it Sharpness.

I think he has have had a full training program until he returned and that will as well have an effect on how much he can take out in effort. But we only have to wait until Sunday to see. I also believe that MvP is the favorite but wout will be 2nd. As I sad his only chance ever of beating MvP is to be at his absolute best and it’s been like that in cx as well so he has to try something different then before to get there for ronde and PR.

 

[AmRacer]

I do not agree with you when I watched the race from the start of the tv coverage he was leading the group on every hill and he did his turn in front until 10 k from the finish. So what do you call a sprint? Sharpness or stamnia I would call it Sharpness.

I think he has have had a full training program until he returned and that will as well have an effect on how much he can take out in effort. But we only have to wait until Sunday to see. I also believe that MvP is the favorite but wout will be 2nd. As I sad his only chance ever of beating MvP is to be at his absolute best and it’s been like that in cx as well so he has to try something different then before to get there for ronde and PR.

There's a Pog too.

 

[repre]

But what if an attack just dropped Van Aert and within 500 metres they went from 3:1 with the best sprinter to 2:1 without him?

It would still look stupid, no?

They could've waited for him then as tempo would drop significally and Powless wasn't going to attack anyway. But yes, this is risk. And if WvA was so weak that such attacks could've dropped him, then Visma shouldn't ride for him in any case.

That is a lot of ifs and buts though.

 

[Rackham]

But what if an attack just dropped Van Aert and within 500 metres they went from 3:1 with the best sprinter to 2:1 without him?

It would still look stupid, no?

Being 'afraid' in a 3v1 situation versus Neilson Powless of all riders would be even more insane. In the end their problem was the opposite one, i.e. they totally underestimated their rival and overestimated their own sprinter.

The 'get WvA the win at all costs' was asinine considering what's happened over the past few years in that team (I'm looking at WvA handing Laporte Gent-Wevelgem).

It's like it all came back to bite their butt.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Maybe the best tactics was to make couple of attacks by Matteo and Benout, but wva still had to beat Powless in sprint easily.

Attack him in turn until he cracks and someone gets a gap. Let Powless try and close the gap (which he shouldn't be able to do anymore at one point after numerous attacks) creating a new situation with 1 visma in front and two in Powless' wheel. Then repeat the same process until the second guy gets a gap. Then it is 2 guys ahead with 1v1 behind and after all the efforts, the last man should also be able to drop Powless. The 3 vismas can then wait on each other and clear the podium, however they see fit.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Well, you have your opinion, I have mine. But since WvA is already 'down', I don't see why letting him kick himself is entirely appropriate either.

The car needs to take responsibility, especially with regards the other two riders. They somehow turned a 99.9% chance of victory into defeat. It was literally in cycling terms unlosable. Losing 3 versus 1 on a pan flat finale is not the fault of one rider. It can't be.

Servais Knaven approves of this message

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

The youtube video of the interview and the automated translation of it:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZPm8Sf5oHU

Kinda missing in all of that is the fact that Powless is a great ****ing bike racer.

 

[LookProGoSlow]

Attack him in turn until he cracks and someone gets a gap. Let Powless try and close the gap (which he shouldn't be able to do anymore at one point after numerous attacks) creating a new situation with 1 visma in front and two in Powless' wheel. Then repeat the same process until the second guy gets a gap. Then it is 2 guys ahead with 1v1 behind and after all the efforts, the last man should also be able to drop Powless. The 3 vismas can then wait on each other and clear the podium, however they see fit.

Perfect outline. This is the way.

 

[Low is rhe new high]

There's a Pog too.

I am aware but so far he was not able to beat Ganna in MSR so he has not impressed this year when it comes to sprint’s either. I think he will be third both on Sunday and in roubaix

 

[Rackham]

Kinda missing in all of that is the fact that Powless is a great ****ing bike racer.

It was straight-up delirious arrogance to take Powless to the line like that, 3v1, sitting around him like idiots. From a basic cycling tactics 1.01 standpoint Benoot and Jorgenson worked for Powless as much as they did Van Aert because they just pulled and pulled all the way.

The memes will be brutal.

 

[AmRacer]

I am aware but so far he was not able to beat Ganna in MSR so he has not impressed this year when it comes to sprint’s either. I think he will be third both on Sunday and in roubaix

Tadej would easily beat Ganna if Mathieu doesn't ride. For the two upcoming races, when Tadej and Mathieu attack, rest of the peloton will never see them again.

 

[kingjr]

Attack him in turn until he cracks and someone gets a gap. Let Powless try and close the gap (which he shouldn't be able to do anymore at one point after numerous attacks) creating a new situation with 1 visma in front and two in Powless' wheel. Then repeat the same process until the second guy gets a gap. Then it is 2 guys ahead with 1v1 behind and after all the efforts, the last man should also be able to drop Powless. The 3 vismas can then wait on each other and clear the podium, however they see fit.

I've seen Jan Kirsipuu be in a similar position and pull it off. But in fairness, he was an actual sprinter and his opponents were Michael Sandstød and "de Boemeltrein van Kasterlee"...

 

[Lequack]

Wout's knee really took a beating in that Vuelta crash

https://twitter.com/x/status/1907496572599832866

View: https://x.com/Jokke_vlo/status/1907496572599832866