Rate the Giro 2018

[Climbing]

Re: Re:

@ TheGreenMonkey

He won similar to Pantani 1998 TdF style... .

He really didn't. Pantani in 1998, put out 6.5w/kg on Plateau de Beille, for example.

Froome put out 5.4w/kg on Finestre. That is an absolutely enormous difference. Even taking into account the differences in the stage designs. To put that into context, Froome climbed Finestre in almost exactly the same time as Contador did in 2015, when Contador 'cracked'.

The attack succeeded because the GC field was weak and the chasers made tactical errors. It really wasn't a Landis or Pantani type move - it was more of a tactical triumph than a physical one. The power he put out wasn't that impressive.

Yeah, an 80 km solo attack Coppi style is a tactical master pieces, nothing physical about it at all.

 

[lartiste]

Re: Re:

@ TheGreenMonkey

He won similar to Pantani 1998 TdF style... .

He really didn't. Pantani in 1998, put out 6.5w/kg on Plateau de Beille, for example.

Froome put out 5.4w/kg on Finestre. That is an absolutely enormous difference. Even taking into account the differences in the stage designs. To put that into context, Froome climbed Finestre in almost exactly the same time as Contador did in 2015, when Contador 'cracked'.

The attack succeeded because the GC field was weak and the chasers made tactical errors. It really wasn't a Landis or Pantani type move - it was more of a tactical triumph than a physical one. The power he put out wasn't that impressive.

Sorry, you did not get the point. Pantani was simply sleeping at the back of the peloton, then woke up and destroyed the field in two stages, which was enough. How many stages Froome won? Similar is also that after the first stage win he was still not the leader and second stage he won was won is similar fashion to Froome one. Long range attack, huge gaps.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Well if you compare the numbers to Landis for example, Froome has nothing on them.. while it was a legendary performance, I definitely think its inside the realms of possibility. Froome had a good day under perfect circumstances and his rival messed the chase a bit up. In hindsight, Im not really surprised it played out as it did. The Landis attack is of different dimensions, that shouldn't be possible.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re:

Well if you compare the numbers to Landis for example, Froome has nothing on them.. while it was a legendary performance, I definitely think its inside the realms of possibility. Froome had a good day under perfect circumstances and his rival messed the chase a bit up. In hindsight, Im not really surprised it played out as it did. The Landis attack is of different dimensions, that shouldn't be possible.

I think the question becomes less and less "how could Froome pull this off" and more "how could his rivals not pull this off". I mean it's not like the 2015 giro was easy so they could fly in the third week and stage 19 in 2015 was arguably harder than stage 18 this year. Did Lys have such a huge impact?
It's as if Froome always dropped deliberately not going into the red once in this giro just to be good on the one day he marked on his calendar. I mean I also get that they didn't want to go too deep as the finish was further away this time but if Hesjedal was faster on that climb Dumoulin and Pinot definitely should have been able to stay with Froome. But they weren't and it wasn't even close

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

Well if you compare the numbers to Landis for example, Froome has nothing on them.. while it was a legendary performance, I definitely think its inside the realms of possibility. Froome had a good day under perfect circumstances and his rival messed the chase a bit up. In hindsight, Im not really surprised it played out as it did. The Landis attack is of different dimensions, that shouldn't be possible.

I think the question becomes less and less "how could Froome pull this off" and more "how could his rivals not pull this off". I mean it's not like the 2015 giro was easy so they could fly in the third week and stage 19 in 2015 was arguably harder than stage 18 this year. Did Lys have such a huge impact?
It's as if Froome always dropped deliberately not going into the red once in this giro just to be good on the one day he marked on his calendar. I mean I also get that they didn't want to go too deep as the finish was further away this time but if Hesjedal was faster on that climb Dumoulin and Pinot definitely should have been able to stay with Froome. But they weren't and it wasn't even close

Circumstances are really weird this year. Looking at climbing times in isolation is the dumbest thing there is in the context of long solo's

Froome climbed Finestre exactly 2s faster than Contador in 2015, who was dropped by 6 other riders.
Froome climbed Finestre 2 full minutes slower than Rujano in 2011, and climbed Sestriere over half a minute faster. It's super clear that the circumstances are vastly different.

And to say that 5.4 W/kg is nothing, you have to look it relative to the competition as well.

If you want to look at how efforst like that work, you're looking more at breakaway climbers than anything else, although breakaway climbers aren't GT winners, so they'll be a bit lower, normally.

I mean, you can just compare climbing times of climbs that are used in the same GT multiple times, and see that they don't correlate all that well. Zoncolan was very fast this year. It was slow as hell in 2011. Finestre 2011 was very fast. Etc, etc, etc.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Dumounlin was ALMOST as strong as Froome, he just lost under 45 seconds on Finestre and nothing once he went to the front alone with 20 km or something to go. The chase was simply messing around too much in my opinion, the FDJ-riders werent really helping too much.Id be very intrigued to see what had happened if Dumoulin chased Froome solo for 80 km. Where they (Dumoulin) messed up was the downhill from Finestre and Sestriere in general.

 

[Pricey_sky]

Re:

Dumounlin was ALMOST as strong as Froome, he just lost under 45 seconds on Finestre and nothing once he went to the front alone with 20 km or something to go. The chase was simply messing around too much in my opinion, the FDJ-riders werent really helping too much.Id be very intrigued to see what had happened if Dumoulin chased Froome solo for 80 km. Where they (Dumoulin) messed up was the downhill from Finestre and Sestriere in general.

I agree, he really should have just carried on over the top of Finestre, and he pretty much admitted that after the stage. Ok he may have lost more time to Lopez and Carapaz on the final climb, but that wouldn’t have mattered as they were a fair way behind on GC.

 

[topcat]

Suckers

 

[DBotero]

Those people who didn't liked this race must have really enjoyed the TDF 2017.To each their own,I suppose.

 

[Bot. Sky_Bot]

Well,
so far we have quite clear poll results. 110 of total 145 votes (ca. 76 %) are between 8 and 10, and only 10 votes for 1-3 (7%).
Yes, this Giro was amazing!

 

[myrideissteelerthanyours]

10 despite the fact that organizers in Israel attempted to politicize this great race.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re: Re:

Dumounlin was ALMOST as strong as Froome, he just lost under 45 seconds on Finestre and nothing once he went to the front alone with 20 km or something to go. The chase was simply messing around too much in my opinion, the FDJ-riders werent really helping too much.Id be very intrigued to see what had happened if Dumoulin chased Froome solo for 80 km. Where they (Dumoulin) messed up was the downhill from Finestre and Sestriere in general.

I agree, he really should have just carried on over the top of Finestre, and he pretty much admitted that after the stage. Ok he may have lost more time to Lopez and Carapaz on the final climb, but that wouldn’t have mattered as they were a fair way behind on GC.

I think Dumoulin would have lost the giro on that stage anyway however if Dumoulin hadn't waited you can be sure that everyone would have called him stupid because he didn't wait. I definitely would have done that

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

@ TheGreenMonkey

He won similar to Pantani 1998 TdF style... .

He really didn't. Pantani in 1998, put out 6.5w/kg on Plateau de Beille, for example.

Froome put out 5.4w/kg on Finestre. That is an absolutely enormous difference. Even taking into account the differences in the stage designs. To put that into context, Froome climbed Finestre in almost exactly the same time as Contador did in 2015, when Contador 'cracked'.

The attack succeeded because the GC field was weak and the chasers made tactical errors. It really wasn't a Landis or Pantani type move - it was more of a tactical triumph than a physical one. The power he put out wasn't that impressive.

Sorry, you did not get the point. Pantani was simply sleeping at the back of the peloton, then woke up and destroyed the field in two stages, which was enough. How many stages Froome won? Similar is also that after the first stage win he was still not the leader and second stage he won was won is similar fashion to Froome one. Long range attack, huge gaps.

Fair enough, but I think even though there are similarities there is a huge difference. Pantani destroyed everyone with pure power - he was untouchable. Froome destroyed the field, because the field wasn't very good.

His time on the Finestre would have seen him dropped by the leaders in any other year on the climb. It just wasn't that great by the standards of elite GC riders. Likewise, his time on Sestriere was way slower than the GC riders in 2015 and 2011.

This wasn't Pantani lying dormant and smashing the field to pieces with record climbing numbers. It was just a GT rider who is a level above everyone else in the race, putting out numbers that would have achieved absolutely nothing in previous years on the same climbs.

 

[rick james]

I’m bumping my vote up to a 10....just for the bitter tears we’ve seen

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Well if you compare the numbers to Landis for example, Froome has nothing on them.. while it was a legendary performance, I definitely think its inside the realms of possibility. Froome had a good day under perfect circumstances and his rival messed the chase a bit up. In hindsight, Im not really surprised it played out as it did. The Landis attack is of different dimensions, that shouldn't be possible.

I think the question becomes less and less "how could Froome pull this off" and more "how could his rivals not pull this off". I mean it's not like the 2015 giro was easy so they could fly in the third week and stage 19 in 2015 was arguably harder than stage 18 this year. Did Lys have such a huge impact?
It's as if Froome always dropped deliberately not going into the red once in this giro just to be good on the one day he marked on his calendar. I mean I also get that they didn't want to go too deep as the finish was further away this time but if Hesjedal was faster on that climb Dumoulin and Pinot definitely should have been able to stay with Froome. But they weren't and it wasn't even close

Circumstances are really weird this year. Looking at climbing times in isolation is the dumbest thing there is in the context of long solo's

Froome climbed Finestre exactly 2s faster than Contador in 2015, who was dropped by 6 other riders.
Froome climbed Finestre 2 full minutes slower than Rujano in 2011, and climbed Sestriere over half a minute faster. It's super clear that the circumstances are vastly different.

And to say that 5.4 W/kg is nothing, you have to look it relative to the competition as well.

If you want to look at how efforst like that work, you're looking more at breakaway climbers than anything else, although breakaway climbers aren't GT winners, so they'll be a bit lower, normally.

I mean, you can just compare climbing times of climbs that are used in the same GT multiple times, and see that they don't correlate all that well. Zoncolan was very fast this year. It was slow as hell in 2011. Finestre 2011 was very fast. Etc, etc, etc.

This is absolute nonsense. Numbers are numbers - they are by far the most objective metric. And by far the best way to compare performances across years.

And what the numbers tell us was that Froome didn't do anything outrageous on Stage 19. His opposition just crumbled. Because they are not very good.

 

[bassano]

I gave it 8,
Finestre stage was epic, I am not fan of Froome but he had courage to do that, so I admire him for that, even if that would not work if at least one GC rider could stay with him on Finestre (I think Quintana or Nibali last year could do that)
but apart that stage, Zoncolan was not so exciting as should be, Pratonevoso neither, Yates did most of the race and he was aggressive, so my symphaty points go for him
for me Lopez and Carapaz ruined race a bit by their atitude to fight each other and did not care about the rest, they just waited behind wheels
2015 and 2010 was just better

and do not rate performance simply by numbers, there was cold and snow on finestre, last time road was harder, this time there was some mug and wet, numbers say something but they are not absolute

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

Well if you compare the numbers to Landis for example, Froome has nothing on them.. while it was a legendary performance, I definitely think its inside the realms of possibility. Froome had a good day under perfect circumstances and his rival messed the chase a bit up. In hindsight, Im not really surprised it played out as it did. The Landis attack is of different dimensions, that shouldn't be possible.

I think the question becomes less and less "how could Froome pull this off" and more "how could his rivals not pull this off". I mean it's not like the 2015 giro was easy so they could fly in the third week and stage 19 in 2015 was arguably harder than stage 18 this year. Did Lys have such a huge impact?
It's as if Froome always dropped deliberately not going into the red once in this giro just to be good on the one day he marked on his calendar. I mean I also get that they didn't want to go too deep as the finish was further away this time but if Hesjedal was faster on that climb Dumoulin and Pinot definitely should have been able to stay with Froome. But they weren't and it wasn't even close

Circumstances are really weird this year. Looking at climbing times in isolation is the dumbest thing there is in the context of long solo's

Froome climbed Finestre exactly 2s faster than Contador in 2015, who was dropped by 6 other riders.
Froome climbed Finestre 2 full minutes slower than Rujano in 2011, and climbed Sestriere over half a minute faster. It's super clear that the circumstances are vastly different.

And to say that 5.4 W/kg is nothing, you have to look it relative to the competition as well.

If you want to look at how efforst like that work, you're looking more at breakaway climbers than anything else, although breakaway climbers aren't GT winners, so they'll be a bit lower, normally.

I mean, you can just compare climbing times of climbs that are used in the same GT multiple times, and see that they don't correlate all that well. Zoncolan was very fast this year. It was slow as hell in 2011. Finestre 2011 was very fast. Etc, etc, etc.

This is absolute nonsense. Numbers are numbers - they are by far the most objective metric. And by far the best way to compare performances across years.

And what the numbers tell us was that Froome didn't do anything outrageous on Stage 19. His opposition just crumbled. Because they are not very good.

Why look at context when it doesn't suit your narrative hey?

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Well if you compare the numbers to Landis for example, Froome has nothing on them.. while it was a legendary performance, I definitely think its inside the realms of possibility. Froome had a good day under perfect circumstances and his rival messed the chase a bit up. In hindsight, Im not really surprised it played out as it did. The Landis attack is of different dimensions, that shouldn't be possible.

I think the question becomes less and less "how could Froome pull this off" and more "how could his rivals not pull this off". I mean it's not like the 2015 giro was easy so they could fly in the third week and stage 19 in 2015 was arguably harder than stage 18 this year. Did Lys have such a huge impact?
It's as if Froome always dropped deliberately not going into the red once in this giro just to be good on the one day he marked on his calendar. I mean I also get that they didn't want to go too deep as the finish was further away this time but if Hesjedal was faster on that climb Dumoulin and Pinot definitely should have been able to stay with Froome. But they weren't and it wasn't even close

Circumstances are really weird this year. Looking at climbing times in isolation is the dumbest thing there is in the context of long solo's

Froome climbed Finestre exactly 2s faster than Contador in 2015, who was dropped by 6 other riders.
Froome climbed Finestre 2 full minutes slower than Rujano in 2011, and climbed Sestriere over half a minute faster. It's super clear that the circumstances are vastly different.

And to say that 5.4 W/kg is nothing, you have to look it relative to the competition as well.

If you want to look at how efforst like that work, you're looking more at breakaway climbers than anything else, although breakaway climbers aren't GT winners, so they'll be a bit lower, normally.

I mean, you can just compare climbing times of climbs that are used in the same GT multiple times, and see that they don't correlate all that well. Zoncolan was very fast this year. It was slow as hell in 2011. Finestre 2011 was very fast. Etc, etc, etc.

This is absolute nonsense. Numbers are numbers - they are by far the most objective metric. And by far the best way to compare performances across years.

And what the numbers tell us was that Froome didn't do anything outrageous on Stage 19. His opposition just crumbled. Because they are not very good.

Why look at context when it doesn't suit your narrative hey?

lol, I'm not the one trying to shoe-horn in a narrative where it doesn't fit. The numbers are there, they are clear to interpret. Froome really did nothing outrageous, nothing unbelievable and nothing that damages the image of the sport on the Finestre.

He climbed it at 5.4w/kg in a time which any GT contender worth their salt should have been able to match. And that was before the solo break - so that is the sole context for the Finestre climb.

Then on the solo break, he continued to climb at a pretty slow pace for the sharp end of the GT. I mean he lost nearly half a minute to Carapaz on the final climb.

His ride should really be celebrated for what it is. A massively ballsy ride by a rider who wasn't able to put out numbers close to what he could at his peak, but who still found a way to punish the tactical mistakes and the physical weaknesses of his rivals, to win a GT. It was like Fuente De, but 1000 times more impressive.

 

[veji11]

Because the end result is a nightmare for our sport, it gets a 1... simple. Collective cowardice could be lived with when luck meant that Christopher Froome was behind and despite doing his best not competing for the win, à la Contador 2011 on the Tour de France. The revolution of the 19th stage is a catastrophe, and seeing the Sky train riding out the final mountain stage with Froome in pink is just bad for cycling considering the procedure going on.

So a 1. Nothing much further to discuss.

 

[TheGreenMonkey]

Re:

@ Tonton at the moment I was excited, but expected, that he will fade away a bit and the gap shall decrease. Now I am more sceptical, strange things are going around:

https://twitter.com/LottoJumbo_road/status/1000133284301623297

"He did Landis, Jesus!" means: Disclaimer to avoid any misinterpretation: this is not an insinuation, but a way to express the admiration for an exceptional achievement. Congratulations to Chris Froome and Team Sky.

At the beginning, they were sharing the video and now they are trying to explain? What to explain, the content is clear and straight forward.

@ TheGreenMonkey

He won similar to Pantani 1998 TdF style... .

No he did not.

 

[tobydawq]

Re: Re:

To the mods: I realise it is difficult to navigate for you, choosing which posts to delete and which to not these days, but don't all the posters who say the race is a farce, call Froome names (like Puff Daddy or Alien) or give this Giro 1 star in this thread deserve a ban if you want to adhere to the rule that you can't talk doping in this area of the forum?

Because as it is for the moment, the line has been completely wiped out and people are talking doping just as much in here as in any other cycling-related forum on the internet, although maybe a bit more subdued but the innuendoes are there in great abundancy.

Which I personally don't mind, but it seems to be contrary to the idea with this forum.

Right now, it seems to be the people admiring Froome's ride on the 19th stage that are ridiculed and in the minority.

 

[Brullnux]

Probably worth mentioning that since Finestre is half sterrato the condition of the road matters a lot, more than 2%. 2005 had perfect conditions, 2015 was overcast but the road was pretty dry while in 2017 the weather was perfect but the road was decidedly damp in places. I mostly do mtb, and I know that I go much slower than these guys but depending on the condition of the dirt I can do a 5 or 6km stretch a couple of minutes slower. This year did have mud in some places and more snow than 2015. And sestriere, all things was considering, was ridden really fast. The 2015 time came from a group of five working well together on the last stage with nothing beyond it. Froome's time was still faster than 2011.

Oh, and the stage was stupidly fast coming into it. The valley section was done at 60kmh and there was no break for 40km. That takes its toll.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

Probably worth mentioning that since Finestre is half sterrato the condition of the road matters a lot, more than 2%. 2005 had perfect conditions, 2015 was overcast but the road was pretty dry while in 2017 the weather was perfect but the road was decidedly damp in places. I mostly do mtb, and I know that I go much slower than these guys but depending on the condition of the dirt I can do a 5 or 6km stretch a couple of minutes slower. This year did have mud in some places and more snow than 2015. And sestriere, all things was considering, was ridden really fast. The 2015 time came from a group of five working well together on the last stage with nothing beyond it. Froome's time was still faster than 2011.

Oh, and the stage was stupidly fast coming into it. The valley section was done at 60kmh and there was no break for 40km. That takes its toll.

Purito climbed Sestriere in 2011 a minute faster than Froome did this year. Having also climbed Finestre significantly more quickly.

 

[Brullnux]

Yeah but nobody else did

 

[DFA123]

Re:

Yeah but nobody else did

Right, so when you wrote that "Froome's time was still faster than 2011". What you meant was the Froome's time was faster than most riders in 2011, but a minute slower than the rider who climbed the fastest?

Seems a little misleading.