Renewi Tour - 20-24 August 2025

[Armchair Cyclist]

The quality of a victory can be measured by the name of the second,

Van der Poel's 2024 Ronde victory was rather inconsequential?

 

[jmdirt]

No, because the stage is part of a whole. In a stage race, you race with GC in mind if you aim for winning that. Those two things cannot be compartmentalised.

WHAT?!
You are also saying that we can not discuss stages in multi stage races? You guys can keep your silly rules.

MvdP won a stage because he was racing hard. < that's a period.

SPACE because this IS separate of what I was discussing before today.

If we can only discuss GC, he can't win the GC if he doesn't win and/or finish with the winner.

I can't even believe that this is a discussion!

 

[jmdirt]

As the 'someone else', this is simply not true. This is the chain of posts before you replied to mine:

So you were talking about GC when you said "It's always a shame when the obvious favourite rides a tactically poor race and wins anyway."

 

[tobydawq]

WHAT?!
You are also saying that we can not discuss stages in multi stage races? You guys can keep your silly rules.

MvdP won a stage because he was racing hard. < that's a period.

SPACE because this IS separate of what I was discussing before today.

If we can only discuss GC, he can't win the GC if he doesn't win and/or finish with the winner.

I can't even believe that this is a discussion!

I can see you're one of those people who point-blank refuse to try to take in the arguments presented against you. It seems obvious to be a futile endeavour to continue arguing with you.

'The winner is always right' is the laziest argument in cycling (and one that's often wrong) and it wasn't even appropriate here which you continue to pretend that it was given how GC is apparently not something that has anything to do with the individual stages of which it is based and given that apparently 'racing hard' equals 'riding tactically well'.

 

[Devil's Elbow]

So you were talking about GC when you said "It's always a shame when the obvious favourite rides a tactically poor race and wins anyway."

If you're going to cherrypick one post from a series of posts (there were more than the two I quoted) relating to the same point and double down when corrected, then you are actively and deliberately misrepresenting my viewpoint, and then there is obviously no point in having a discussion with you.

And considering that the other person you were arguing with has just concluded the same thing, maybe it's time for some good old self-reflection.