• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Rate the 2017 Paris-Roubaix

Rate the 2017 Paris-Roubaix

  • 10

    Votes: 2 2.1%
  • 9

    Votes: 8 8.2%
  • 8

    Votes: 20 20.6%
  • 7

    Votes: 38 39.2%
  • 6

    Votes: 11 11.3%
  • 5

    Votes: 9 9.3%
  • 4

    Votes: 4 4.1%
  • 3

    Votes: 4 4.1%
  • 2

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1

    Votes: 1 1.0%

  • Total voters
    97
Went for a six. Some decent action and a deserving winner, but was all a bit messy. Too many punctures to big riders kept upsetting the rhythm of the race, and too many riders in that chase group at the end, suggests it was a relatively easy edition.

I think it missed a rider who could really create havoc on the cobbles. No Cancellara and no Vanmarcke left it pretty much to Sagan - and though he looked threatening a couple of times, there wasn't enough decisive splits made.
 
5. Very hard early part of the race but the final wasn't very spectacular. The most agressive rider went out with a puncture, the decisive move sorta happened off screen, and the fight between the final 3 was very anticlimactic with Langeveld cooperating and being satisfied with a 3rd place and Stybar brainfarting at every turn in the last 5km.
 
Thought it was very good. Not as great as last year of course, but nothing ever is. I thought the finale was good - not sure why some didn't like it. Certainly, mechanicals and punctures affected the race but it's Roubaix - they always do.

8
 
Agreed, great race. Didn't leave the tv in the last 100k because it felt like I could miss a great move anytime. Granted the finale wasn't really spectacular (could've been different with Sagan not puncturing but oh well), but enjoyed the race very much. Nice winner as well ;)
 
I gave it a 3 : we haven't seen any power moves on the cobbles, which led to extremely disappointing final sectors (Carrefour de l'Arbre and the Pevele ones). It felt like no one was strong enough to try something and the winning move just happened like that, almost by chance... Very anticlimactic, as pointed out by other posters.
Yes, the race started to blow out well before Arenberg, but this is not enough to make a great race: there was still a large group of 40-50 riders in front at 40-30 km to go, which is never a good sign. At 8 km to go, it was quite obvious that GVA would win and I just left and went out to enjoy the sun...
Oh, and it doesn't help that I am no fan of GVA :mad:
 
Score depends on whether you compare it to other PRs or to the annual universe of races that includes LBL/flat Tour stages etc. It was an alright race but a long way off last year's. Genuine edge of the seat moments before the velodrome were few and far between.

Another thing - has a chase group made it back to the lead group all spring? It's hard for tension to build when you have some of the lousiest most disorganised chases in living memory.
 
Re:

TommyGun said:
there was still a large group of 40-50 riders in front at 40-30 km to go, which is never a good sign.

It's all the fault of the tailwind - when I heard the tailwind was strong enough that they were delaying the start I was looking forward to teams miscalculating and giving the break too much rope, but there was no break of note in the end and the tailwind meant people used less energy than normal and we didn't have an entire lead group punch-drunk out on their feet for the run-in like we had last year.
 
Re:

Netserk said:
Tailwind and fast race = hard(er) to stay in the bunch.
Headwind and slower race = Easier to stay in the bunch.
I don't think the tailwind was strong enough to make drafting in the bunch significantly harder. It was supposed to only be about 15km/h - that's not going to make following 30 guys noticeably more difficult. But it was still enough to effectively make the race shorter and so it was a bit less of an endurance test than it often is. 22 riders finished within 12 seconds of the winner, and there were a lot of non-big names in there. I think that suggests, even taking into account the slowing down of the front group in the last 500m, that it was a pretty easy edition to ride.
 
I think there's other factors at play that make for a softer race.

Weak field at the very top end. Cancellara retired, Boonen was past it for a long time. Also no dominant team to destroy the field and keep it broken. Also riders were talking about headwind on the most important cobbles section, so making the selection there is very tough.
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Netserk said:
Tailwind and fast race = hard(er) to stay in the bunch.
Headwind and slower race = Easier to stay in the bunch.

I don't think the tailwind was strong enough to make drafting in the bunch significantly harder. It was supposed to only be about 15km/h - that's not going to make following 30 guys noticeably more difficult. But it was still enough to effectively make the race shorter and so it was a bit less of an endurance test than it often is.
22 riders finished within 12 seconds of the winner, and there were a lot of non-big names in there. I think that suggests, even taking into account the slowing down of the front group in the last 500m, that it was a pretty easy edition to ride.
Lol, ever had physics?

It's not the tailwind in itself that makes it harder to sit in the bunch. It is the increased speed it causes (when it has full effect on the race speed). In two bunches riding the same speed, it is easier to sit in the one with a tailwind.
 
Re: Re:

Netserk said:
DFA123 said:
Netserk said:
Tailwind and fast race = hard(er) to stay in the bunch.
Headwind and slower race = Easier to stay in the bunch.

I don't think the tailwind was strong enough to make drafting in the bunch significantly harder. It was supposed to only be about 15km/h - that's not going to make following 30 guys noticeably more difficult. But it was still enough to effectively make the race shorter and so it was a bit less of an endurance test than it often is.
22 riders finished within 12 seconds of the winner, and there were a lot of non-big names in there. I think that suggests, even taking into account the slowing down of the front group in the last 500m, that it was a pretty easy edition to ride.
Lol, ever had physics?

It's not the tailwind in itself that makes it harder to sit in the bunch. It is the increased speed it causes (when it has full effect on the race speed). In two bunches riding the same speed, it is easier to sit in the one with a tailwind.
Yes, but the point is that the fractionally greater amount of effort riding in a bunch in a lightish taliwind; is greatly outweighed by the fact that the tailwind makes the race some 10-30 minutes shorter in duration. The size and composition of the big 2nd group at the end tells you that it wasn't an especially hard race to sit in and follow wheels - at least by Roubaix standard.
 
Re: Re:

Netserk said:
DFA123 said:
Netserk said:
Tailwind and fast race = hard(er) to stay in the bunch.
Headwind and slower race = Easier to stay in the bunch.

I don't think the tailwind was strong enough to make drafting in the bunch significantly harder. It was supposed to only be about 15km/h - that's not going to make following 30 guys noticeably more difficult. But it was still enough to effectively make the race shorter and so it was a bit less of an endurance test than it often is.
22 riders finished within 12 seconds of the winner, and there were a lot of non-big names in there. I think that suggests, even taking into account the slowing down of the front group in the last 500m, that it was a pretty easy edition to ride.
Lol, ever had physics?

It's not the tailwind in itself that makes it harder to sit in the bunch. It is the increased speed it causes (when it has full effect on the race speed). In two bunches riding the same speed, it is easier to sit in the one with a tailwind.
Tailwind reduces air resistance at a given speed, and actually decreases the drag at a given wattage for the rider pulling the group.

If two pelotons are pulled by a rider with the same aerodynamics with 400W, sitting in a peloton with headwind is easier than a peloton with tailwind.

I'm being an 'ant ***' I know

Anyway, I think time and place of tailwind matters a lot more.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
Netserk said:
DFA123 said:
Netserk said:
Tailwind and fast race = hard(er) to stay in the bunch.
Headwind and slower race = Easier to stay in the bunch.

I don't think the tailwind was strong enough to make drafting in the bunch significantly harder. It was supposed to only be about 15km/h - that's not going to make following 30 guys noticeably more difficult. But it was still enough to effectively make the race shorter and so it was a bit less of an endurance test than it often is.
22 riders finished within 12 seconds of the winner, and there were a lot of non-big names in there. I think that suggests, even taking into account the slowing down of the front group in the last 500m, that it was a pretty easy edition to ride.
Lol, ever had physics?

It's not the tailwind in itself that makes it harder to sit in the bunch. It is the increased speed it causes (when it has full effect on the race speed). In two bunches riding the same speed, it is easier to sit in the one with a tailwind.
Tailwind reduces air resistance at a given speed, and actually decreases the drag at a given wattage for the rider pulling the group.

If two pelotons are pulled by a rider with the same aerodynamics with 400W, sitting in a peloton with headwind is easier than a peloton with tailwind.

I'm being an 'ant ****' I know

Anyway, I think time and place of tailwind matters a lot more.
Aren't you both saying two slightly different things there? I think you are both right. Netserk is right that the same speed is easier to follow in a tailwind than a headwind - e.g. it's still easier to go 40km/h in a peloton with a tailwind than it is to go 40km/h in a peloton with a headwind. A you are saying that following a rider putting out 400w is easier into a headwind than a tailwind - which is also true. They aren't mutually exclusive arguments are they, or am I missing something?

And my point is slightly different still. :) That it may be slightly harder to follow wheels in a slight tailwind, but that is outweighed by the reduced time the race takes when a tailwind is pushing the average speed up. It could be half an hour less racing than if there is a headwind, which is a big difference at PR intensity.
 
4

- Break took too long to go and the few riders that did get away were irrelevant - it's always a nicer dynamic/more interesting race when guys have some teammates ahead, and guys from the break can do something in the final.
- Nothing happened on Arenberg and for a while after it. Big regrouping after and a there was a big group together for a lot of the race.
- Sagan's first puncture ruined an interesting move (edit: actually without this, the race would be torn apart with 80km to go). His second meant GVA was basically unchallenged.
- Boonen should've gone all-out on Camphin-en-Pévèle - by Carrefour it was too late already.
- After Carrefour de l'Arbre everybody already knew who would win. No real suspense in the final. The most thrilling part was when Moscon and Stuyven appeared.
- Boonen didn't win.
 
Probably 7. Really good race until the last 30 or so, everyone who have been watching cycling this season knew GvA was going to smoke those wannabees in the velodrome, so it took the excitement out for me. Did you guys see how he closed Stybar on the hill? Mean.