Rate the WCRR

[ItalianJoe]

I've watched or studied a lot of Worlds races from '79 forward, and this year was among my favorites. I gave it a 10. It seems like forever since the best rider in the world won the worlds, as strange as it is to say.

Maybe the course wasn't super exciting, but it did exactly what a course should do. It tested the riders. You can tell that it was successful by looking at the final standings. The best riders were in the mix until the very end. The attack from GvA followed by Dekenkolb was magic. It didn't work, but it was part of an ideal script. The final top 10 is pure class. Most courses don't result in such a perfect top 10 -- maybe RvV is the only one that is as reliable.

 

[orangerider]

Would have to say this was a great course, 10/10 for me. It was designed not just for brute strength but individual race tactics. Anyone can build a course with 20% grades gaining 20k feet overall and that would eliminate all but perhaps 3-4 people left of the peloton. But that wouldn't make it a great course, it would only test the strength of the most strongest climbers. This course had a good balance of everything, including the prerequisite of using your brain in tactics. Sagan also showed you didn't need a large team, or in many ways any team at all since he was riding solo once the laps starting getting fast towards the end.

 

[jaylew]

I guess we were overdue one of Echoes' angry, hate-filled tirades. Seriously, LGBT-like jersey? The guy is seriously becoming a caricature

 

[gunara]

8 out of 10. I love a race when riders make the most out of the parcours. Sure, there will be many attacks that don't stick, but when they come in waves, it's only entertainment. I prefer it too an unforgivingly selective route that turn into an inept chess game among few riders, annoying.
Oh, and that endless final K in distorted tv view when you cheer for the man in front and think he deserve it and how you fear the Aussies will take over humanity, I should've given it a 10.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

Would have to say this was a great course, 10/10 for me. It was designed not just for brute strength but individual race tactics. Anyone can build a course with 20% grades gaining 20k feet overall and that would eliminate all but perhaps 3-4 people left of the peloton. But that wouldn't make it a great course, it would only test the strength of the most strongest climbers. This course had a good balance of everything, including the prerequisite of using your brain in tactics. Sagan also showed you didn't need a large team, or in many ways any team at all since he was riding solo once the laps starting getting fast towards the end.

In my opinion, a good world championship course should provide almost equal opportunities for sprinter-puncheurs and climber-puncheurs. This can be done in several different ways, but basically it has to give a good opportunity for a break to get away before the last few kms. This course was far too heavily in favour of sprinter-puncheurs; it basically gave no chance to win for half of the classics specialists in the world.

Pure sprinters and pure climbers that can't do much else have no business wearing the world champions jersey.

 

[yaco]

I love it. According to the knowledgeable experts on this forum every rider wheel sicker.

I have no idea why they follow cycling.

 

[WC Roadie]

The TV coverage ( pictures ) was deplorable for any bike race,let alone a World Championship.

Strange that people say that Sagan attacked with 3 kms to go which was brilliantly planned and executed - Strangest thing he was invisible for nearly all the race. What was he doing for the other 261kms.

Could have sworn that Germany and Australia worked at the front of peleton - People see what they want - I am CERTAIN some don't watch the actual races.

Epic fail to all those who claimed an attacker won. They surely don't know what a real cycling breakaway is.

Neither of you obviously know how to win a race, of course Sagan was invisible until 3K to go, he conserved his energy and played his 1 card, perfectly. Had he been animating the race, he would not have had enough left in the tank to win.

No one said it was a break away, it was an attack in the final few K's and it was brilliantly timed to perfection. A few seconds of hesitation and he would not have won, that's what makes winning bike races spectacular, the narrow window of opportunity. SMH.

I've watched or studied a lot of Worlds races from '79 forward, and this year was among my favorites. I gave it a 10. It seems like forever since the best rider in the world won the worlds, as strange as it is to say.

Maybe the course wasn't super exciting, but it did exactly what a course should do. It tested the riders. You can tell that it was successful by looking at the final standings. The best riders were in the mix until the very end. The attack from GvA followed by Dekenkolb was magic. It didn't work, but it was part of an ideal script. The final top 10 is pure class. Most courses don't result in such a perfect top 10 -- maybe RvV is the only one that is as reliable.

^^^Yes, this exactly. The WC is often a classics course, where a classics type finish happens, which is often a selective group. Only the top 25 were close, everyone else came in groups after and about half the field DNF'd. I'd say that was a hard, classics style race.

 

[Blakeslee]

I attended the race in person and can't say enough about how well the finishing section of the circuit was designed. This was a challenging and technical finish where the organizers made the most of the terrain available. The climbs were much steeper than they looked on television, particularly the climb in the final kilometer up to the finishing straight. All of the tight turns between the climbs opened the possibility for a strong rider to consolidate any gap created on the climbs, the downhill corners between 23rd street and the final climb looked downright hair raising to navigate.

I watched the finale from Libby Hill, the atmosphere there was tremendous. The crowd was thunderous as the riders passed through on the final lap and continued to cheer Peter Sagan all the way to the line after he made his winning move at the top of 23rd street. My favorite part of the afternoon may have been the loud ovation each rider who had been dropped received when passing up the climb, particularly when the rider from Eritrea came through.

I loved Sagan's celebration at the finish when he flipped his bike down and walked back to the finish line giving high fives to the finishing riders. There was some genuine joy and sportsmanship displayed in this moment.

 

[Tonton]

I give it a 4, because the finish was somewhat entertaining. Although GVA and EBH had no balls down the stretch: as a result, they got nothing.
I agree with most of what Echoes wrote. And when I read that the organizers did the best course they could with what they had, excuse me: that means the race should have taken place where a good course can be designed. Yep, the course was crap. I like the take about the cobbles being better aligned than the citadelle de Namur . Those were not cobbles, but ceramic tiles like in my kitchen. It was advertised to give an artificial taste of PR for a course not as good as most kermesses (and definitely not as good as a classique). Puke! For Italian Joe, if you followed the WC since '79, you can't possibly state that you liked it; or you forgot '80 (domination), '81 (Hinault's come back, the greatest sprint ever), '82 (LeMOnd chasing Boyer, Il Beppe's revenge), and many more, the Bauer/Claudy collision, or even Cuddle's first ever attack as a professional cyclist , when he turns around realizes that he created a gap, wondered what he had just done, and kept going.
Echoes quote the great Jean Gabin, I'll quote Paul: "Money can't buy me love", or buy me a good course .

 

[ItalianJoe]

Don't get me wrong -- of course there were other good races. I loved Maertens' win and Hinault's. The one that always comes into my mind was Zoetemelk in '85. I just loved the character; he simply took the race away when the others were jockeying. What class.

In more recent memory, both Evans and Gilbert won in incredible style.

This one, however ... perfect. As another commentator said, any of the sprinters or strongmen could have won it. Yet, it was Sagan that was so disciplined in staying protected all race. He was the one that made the powerful attack and never let up. I was worried that he would sit up when he didn't have much gap at the top of the hill where he attacked. But, no. Full commitment, full gas, all the way. Sagan was the best in Richmond, and he won with the heart of a champion.

For Italian Joe, if you followed the WC since '79, you can't possibly state that you liked it; or you forgot '80 (domination), '81 (Hinault's come back, the greatest sprint ever), '82 (LeMOnd chasing Boyer, Il Beppe's revenge), and many more, the Bauer/Claudy collision, or even Cuddle's first ever attack as a professional cyclist , when he turns around realizes that he created a gap, wondered what he had just done, and kept going.

 

[WC Roadie]

I give it a 4, because the finish was somewhat entertaining. Although GVA and EBH had no balls down the stretch: as a result, they got nothing.

No balls? Some of you obviously never raced a bike in your life, maybe if you did more than ride to the coffee shop and eat donuts, you would understand bike racing more.

Did you ever think perhaps EBH and GVA just didn't have enough left in the tank? Probably because they did work, unlike Sagan who played it perfectly. Watch the finish again and tell me they had no balls, look at their faces.

 

[Jspear]

This route was poor, that's why Satan could win. It's not because the race has a bombastic name and because you have an LGBT-like jersey at stake that it's a hard one.

As a religious man don't you believe the rainbow is just a promise from God that he will never again flood the world?

Satan is a star (in the Hollywoodian sense of the word) in an era when cycling is going awry. The frivolous, bourgeois era of Jawbones glasses, the era of sport betting, the era of mandatory helmets, the era of Olga Tinkov (such employer, such employee after all), the era of Internet forums with their own set of stupid gifs and lame posts) an era in which spectators are groupies/fans. The era of ipods and Internet forums. Cycling is long dead and the Slovakian is the perfect embodiment of a post-cycling era He's just a bourgois, obsessed with money. A Coca-Cola cyclist! True cyclists did a hard sport. A hard sport that made you humble. That's not what the poor Slovakian is. Would you imagine Brik Schotte wheelying after each of his win? What is so great in wheelying? even my grampa who is 85 year old can do a wheelie. It's really like a despicable "look at me, I'm the best, I'm the most handsome" attention-seeking attitude. Would Girardengo ever do a "dunce cap" behind a fellow rider on a podium? Lol even my little cousin who is 10 years old no longer does "dunce cap" because it's so plain stupid. This guy really has a grain. The bit about the "migrant crisis" is just the height of his media-attention personality. And to hell with this distinction: he's great on the bike but "controversial" off it. A true champion is never so arrogant and attention-seeking. He's a wheelsucker on the bike who could only be bothered to train hard when it's financially worth it.

So why are contributing then?

 

[MTroon]

I was in Richmond Friday thru Sunday and I give the overall event a 10. If it had rained on Sunday for the elite men I would have given it an 11. The course was very spectator friendly and with my singlespeed I could easily see the race from 2 or 3 different spots every lap. The early laps were an amazing sight as the entire peloton massed on the narrow cobbled climbs. The face time for the US riders in the breaks got the huge local crowds going wild. The winning attack by Sagan was electric especially because of the steep descents into 90 deg corners that you could only appreciate if you were there. It was a win or die attack. Sagan was never assured of winning that race. If the late break with Boonen, Kwia, etal had included maybe Gerrans or a German it is likely that the winner would have come from that break and if it had rained it would have been more likely that a break or a longer solo flyer would have won. Sagan took a chance that the race would come back together and closed the deal with class. I watched it again on dvr and I agree that the TV coverage sucked. Based on TV alone I would have scored it lower for sure.

 

[Asero831]

Would anyone here know who did the sprint for 2nd played out?

Why did Kristoff placed behind Matthews?

 

[WC Roadie]

Re:

Would anyone here know who did the sprint for 2nd played out?

Why did Kristoff placed behind Matthews?

??? Cause Matthews was faster? I am not sure what you mean.

 

[Tonton]

I give it a 4, because the finish was somewhat entertaining. Although GVA and EBH had no balls down the stretch: as a result, they got nothing.

No balls? Some of you obviously never raced a bike in your life, maybe if you did more than ride to the coffee shop and eat donuts, you would understand bike racing more.

Did you ever think perhaps EBH and GVA just didn't have enough left in the tank? Probably because they did work, unlike Sagan who played it perfectly. Watch the finish again and tell me they had no balls, look at their faces.

Ahahahaha...as a matter of fact, I have raced, and still ride a bike at least twice weekly. So keep the donuts. The fact is that none of the two wanted to do the work and be burnt in the finish. Too bad: at least it would have guaranteed a medal. Instead, they looked at each other "your turn, no, your turn". And ended up with nothing.

 

[DBotero]

I give it a 4, because the finish was somewhat entertaining. Although GVA and EBH had no balls down the stretch: as a result, they got nothing.

No balls? Some of you obviously never raced a bike in your life, maybe if you did more than ride to the coffee shop and eat donuts, you would understand bike racing more.

Did you ever think perhaps EBH and GVA just didn't have enough left in the tank? Probably because they did work, unlike Sagan who played it perfectly. Watch the finish again and tell me they had no balls, look at their faces.

Ahahahaha...as a matter of fact, I have raced, and still ride a bike at least twice weekly. So keep the donuts. The fact is that none of the two wanted to do the work and be burnt in the finish. Too bad: at least it would have guaranteed a medal. Instead, they looked at each other "your turn, no, your turn". And ended up with nothing.

Hard for EBH to do anything considering he was holding back through team orders as they were all in for Kristoff.

 

[WC Roadie]

I give it a 4, because the finish was somewhat entertaining. Although GVA and EBH had no balls down the stretch: as a result, they got nothing.

No balls? Some of you obviously never raced a bike in your life, maybe if you did more than ride to the coffee shop and eat donuts, you would understand bike racing more.

Did you ever think perhaps EBH and GVA just didn't have enough left in the tank? Probably because they did work, unlike Sagan who played it perfectly. Watch the finish again and tell me they had no balls, look at their faces.

Ahahahaha...as a matter of fact, I have raced, and still ride a bike at least twice weekly. So keep the donuts. The fact is that none of the two wanted to do the work and be burnt in the finish. Too bad: at least it would have guaranteed a medal. Instead, they looked at each other "your turn, no, your turn". And ended up with nothing.

OK, so when you raced, did you always stick you nose in the wind, wasting energy or did you stay tucked in the pack until you played your card?

Yeah those two hesitated for seconds in the finale, which often happens, but watch the attack up libby hill or 23rd st, they tried to get on Sagans wheel but couldnt.

Also from this very site's wrap up article "In theory the course suited many different riders, inspiring so many to believe they had a chance of victory. This lead to an aggressive race, with riders and nations using different and contrasting tactics. It was a perfect course for a world championships."

Not sure what else you would want from a WC race.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Also from this very site's wrap up article "In theory the course suited many different riders, inspiring so many to believe they had a chance of victory. This lead to an aggressive race, with riders and nations using different and contrasting tactics. It was a perfect course for a world championships."

In theory, but with all of the obstacles being so close to the finish of the circuit, it led to several short skirmishes, then a ceasefire until the next round, and everybody knew the last 4km would settle it. I gave it a 6 for the racing and a KILLITWITHFIRE for the finale, and I stand by that.

Not sure what else you would want from a WC race.

Mendrisio.

 

[WC Roadie]

OK, I never said Richmond was the best ever and people here are making it out to be a sleeper/bore fest. How many others were like Mendrisio? Evans attacked near the end of the race, and, per this very site, regarding 2009 "As is often the case in the World Championships, however, the race didn't erupt until the final two laps."

There were some fireworks in Richmond before Sagan, before the final lap. Again, I am not saying Richmond was the greatest ever, but it was a great race. It's not like it was a bunch sprint and Sagan popped out at the line like when Thor won, or Cav.

 

[mb2612]

Re:

OK, I never said Richmond was the best ever and people here are making it out to be a sleeper/bore fest. How many others were like Mendrisio? Evans attacked near the end of the race, and, per this very site, regarding 2009 "As is often the case in the World Championships, however, the race didn't erupt until the final two laps."

There were some fireworks in Richmond before Sagan, before the final lap. Again, I am not saying Richmond was the greatest ever, but it was a great race. It's not like it was a bunch sprint and Sagan popped out at the line like when Thor won, or Cav.

Thor won the best worlds I've ever seen (was at Mendrizo, so can't judge it). There was a 30 rider group that looked like they were going to make it, before being pulled back. Gilbert attacked and almost made it, then in the final 5k a small group was just pulled back by the reduced bunch.

No break in Richmond had a chance of staying away.

 

[WC Roadie]

Again, look at the results, the top 25 were almost all together, then small groups rolled in, like when Thor won, meh whatever, to each their own.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re:

Again, look at the results, the top 25 were almost all together, then small groups rolled in, like when Thor won, meh whatever, to each their own.

The course in Geelong had the climbs near the start and middle of the circuit meaning that the moves had to be made, consolidated and then worked upon. It meant that while it ended with a sprint of a select group, it was unsure whether the attackers on the final lap would be able to stay away (they weren't). In Richmond, all the climbs being towards the end of the circuit meant that once the selection was forced, the whole last lap was waiting until the last 4km, so there was more waiting and less tension after the moves had been made. The results on their own don't tell you everything about a race.

Otherwise you could interpret falsely, e.g. that Anthony Roux beat Greipel in a flat sprint in a GT or Tony Martin was a protected sprinter in a boring stage.

 

[IndianCyclist]

The Australian team had members till the very end of the race which they utilised to pull most of the breakaways back except for Sagan. Had Gerrans pulled probably Mathews would have been the WC. However if there is attrition, he has no teammates and Mathews has to consider tactics. If the race has highly intensive hills like in Flanders, then it is a chase between the group in front vs the peloton. The best however was rain and wind like Gent Wevelgem where the race was completely exploded. With rain &/or wind Richmond course would be lethal.

 

[glassmoon]

5
+ great racing, awesome winning move by the winner
- bad route, bad TV coverage, disgraceful ceremonies and those rooftops, man... rooftops everywhere