Roman Kreuziger Discussion Thread

[Netserk]

No, the implication is that a single win doesn't prove a point. The contention wrt to Kreuziger is that of his qualities as a classics man, not whether he is it or not. But sure, we'll see if D_T confirms that I'm all wrong. and that you read him correctly.

 

[Blanco]

Kreuziger is very good hilly classics rider. Not one of the highest caliber like Valverde or Gilbert, but very good. In my opinion he stands above both Poels and Jungels, regardless their Monument win.

 

[loge1884]

Re: Re:

So? No one is stating that Kreuziger is not a classics man.

I read the Poels remark more as a single win doesn't prove a point. In this case that Kreuziger "doesn't have the punch or sprint to finish it off, and he's not a strong enough time trial / solo rider like Jungels".

It's just nonsense. Kreuziger has eleven top ten finishes in the four biggest hilly classics (Ardennes + San Sebastian). And he has won twice.

(..).

apart of Amstel 2013, which other win in a classic are you referring to?

(I get it: sorry I still had Carlos Barredo as the winner of San Sebastian 2009 in my books ... damn clinical issues)

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Re:

No, the implication is that a single win doesn't prove a point. The contention wrt to Kreuziger is that of his qualities as a classics man, not whether he is it or not. But sure, we'll see if D_T confirms that I'm all wrong. and that you read him correctly.

This is what I meant exactly.

Poels 1 win doesn't mean he is a classics men
Kreuzigers 1 win doesn't mean he has the strength to finish of solo's. He is by all means very much a classics men.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

No, the implication is that a single win doesn't prove a point. The contention wrt to Kreuziger is that of his qualities as a classics man, not whether he is it or not. But sure, we'll see if D_T confirms that I'm all wrong. and that you read him correctly.

This is what I meant exactly.

Poels 1 win doesn't mean he is a classics men
Kreuzigers 1 win doesn't mean he has the strength to finish of solo's. He is by all means very much a classics men.

Yeah, course you did.

 

[Netserk]

Gracious admission of misinterpretation, especially considering the derision for how others couldn't understand the implication. But hey, it's not like you had been given the opportunity to back down any sooner.

 

[DFA123]

What he is now claiming also doesn't make sense, that's why I know its bs. Poels didn't win solo in his isolated victory. Kreuziger has won solo - in one of his two big Classic victories. Poels can sprint well from a small group, Kreuziger can't. So, once again, claiming that Kreuziger 'is just like Poels winning' is nonsense of the highest order.

The two riders, their ability in classics, the number of wins they have, nor the nature of those wins have anything in common. It's a terrible comparison and does a massive disservice to Kreuziger, who is the far more accomplished rider.

 

[Netserk]

Re:

What he is now claiming also doesn't make sense, that's why I know its bs.

If only you read what was posted and didn't attribute to others what isn't there...

Poels didn't win solo in his isolated victory.

So? Irrelevant.

Kreuziger has won solo - in one of his two big Classic victories.

To stress this again, it's not a discussion of palmarès, but of abilities. It doesn't matter who won on paper several years after the fact. Kreuziger didn't solo, and he beat no one in the sprint to the line.

Poels can sprint well from a small group, Kreuziger can't.

Bingo, getting close to the actual contention in question.

So, once again, claiming that Kreuziger 'is just like Poels winning' is nonsense of the highest order.

The two riders, their ability in classics, the number of wins they have, nor the nature of those wins have anything in common. It's a terrible comparison and does a massive disservice to Kreuziger, who is the far more accomplished rider.

You know, if you countered what others have written and not what you have decided that they meant (even when they explicitly states that your interpretation is incorrect, which was clear from the get go to others) this could maybe go somewhere.


What was actually written:

Typical Kreuziger results. The man doesn't have the punch or sprint to finish it off, and he's not a strong enough time trial / solo rider like Jungels

Amstel 2013 proves you and others wrong.

No it doesn't prove me wrong Kokoso. That was 1 race, just after a course change, where the favorites didn't really know what to do with that course.

It's just like Poels winning LBL. He still is no classics man (to me).

As has been stated and confirmed, the last line translates more or less as "No, the Amstel '13 win doesn't disprove the point. A single win without context is not enough. Just like when Poels won Liège, it didn't prove him as a classics man."

And quite obviously, there's something in the nature of their single wins that is very much comparable (and it's a comparison that can be made between their single wins; not their careers and not their abilities). Hint: It's a full sentence written just before the one that mentions Poels.

 

[SHAD0W93]

Can't we all get along? Looking at it, this looks like a misunderstanding by quite a bit of people.

Kreuziger is a hilly specialist and I wish he did have the ability, form, or team to finish solo more so he can win. Off the top of my head I only remember him winning Amstel and the 12 giro stage solo while he has had a couple rides were he wasnt strong enough to finish it off solo. The top of my head being 16 lbl and the tour stage that put him in the top 10 when he was in the breakaway.

Hopefully he has a good giro and second half of the year. I'm still hoping he can win either a monument or put everything in for a gt ride before his career is done.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

What he is now claiming also doesn't make sense, that's why I know its bs.

If only you read what was posted and didn't attribute to others what isn't there...

Poels didn't win solo in his isolated victory.

So? Irrelevant.

Kreuziger has won solo - in one of his two big Classic victories.

To stress this again, it's not a discussion of palmarès, but of abilities. It doesn't matter who won on paper several years after the fact. Kreuziger didn't solo, and he beat no one in the sprint to the line.

Poels can sprint well from a small group, Kreuziger can't.

Bingo, getting close to the actual contention in question.

So, once again, claiming that Kreuziger 'is just like Poels winning' is nonsense of the highest order.

The two riders, their ability in classics, the number of wins they have, nor the nature of those wins have anything in common. It's a terrible comparison and does a massive disservice to Kreuziger, who is the far more accomplished rider.

You know, if you countered what others have written and not what you have decided that they meant (even when they explicitly states that your interpretation is incorrect, which was clear from the get go to others) this could maybe go somewhere.


What was actually written:

Typical Kreuziger results. The man doesn't have the punch or sprint to finish it off, and he's not a strong enough time trial / solo rider like Jungels

Amstel 2013 proves you and others wrong.

No it doesn't prove me wrong Kokoso. That was 1 race, just after a course change, where the favorites didn't really know what to do with that course.

It's just like Poels winning LBL. He still is no classics man (to me).

As has been stated and confirmed, the last line translates more or less as "No, the Amstel '13 win doesn't disprove the point. A single win without context is not enough. Just like when Poels won Liège, it didn't prove him as a classics man."

And quite obviously, there's something in the nature of their single wins that is very much comparable (and it's a comparison that can be made between their single wins; not their careers and not their abilities). Hint: It's a full sentence written just before the one that mentions Poels.

lol, just no.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Strong comeback. Dude, you are as wrong as last year the final 2 weeks of the Giro when you claimed every day Dumoulin would collapse and lose the Giro. (let's see if you get this hyperbole, probably not). You're simply not good at admitting when you've missed something

 

[DFA123]

Re:

Strong comeback. Dude, you are as wrong as last year the final 2 weeks of the Giro when you claimed every day Dumoulin would collapse and lose the Giro. (let's see if you get this hyperbole, probably not). You're simply not good at admitting when you've missed something

Oh dear, here comes the fanboy bs. I'm out.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Just as I thought.

 

[Kokoso]

Re:

while he has had a couple rides were he wasnt strong enough to finish it off solo. The top of my head being 16 lbl and the tour stage that put him in the top 10 when he was in the breakaway.

It is not that simple. Actually he has quite high (I dare to say unusually high) percentage of wins when he goes solo or in small group. Pro Ötztaler 5500, 2009 Tour de Romandie stage 5, above mentioned Giro stage 18, Amstel 2013, USPCC stage 6 and Classica San Sebastian 2009 werent't probably quite solo but he wasn the strongest there.

Rarely attacks or is allowed to attack for a some reasons; he's still high profile rider who is not allowed to attack more often than not; often he's domestique who's doing his duty (that especially hindered him in Contador helper era where he never was allowed to go for a stage win as far as I remember); often he's team's backup for GC un stage races which does not allow him to lose enough time not to be GC danger.

Of course slearly wins as such are not his main goal. He's still going for big wins or results.

 

[Kokoso]

Re:

No it doesn't prove me wrong Kokoso. That was 1 race, just after a course change, where the favorites didn't really know what to do with that course.

It's just like Poels winning LBL. He still is no classics man (to me).

Course changed, right. Kreuziger attacked from far away, on his way he swept some other attackers, among them for example back then very strong rouleur Grivko, and finished 22 seconds ahead. Do you think that was not show of huge engine/strong rouleur?

 

[gregrowlerson]

And it's all over (GT GC contending) for another year (unless he is allowed to skip the Tour and ride the Vuelta).

What went wrong post the 2013 TDF?

Or do we need to take that elsewhere?

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

And it's all over (GT GC contending) for another year (unless he is allowed to skip the Tour and ride the Vuelta).

What went wrong post the 2013 TDF?

Or do we need to take that elsewhere?

I don't think he was riding for GC was he ? He could still be valuable to Chaves and Yates later on.

 

[StryderHells]

Re: Re:

And it's all over (GT GC contending) for another year (unless he is allowed to skip the Tour and ride the Vuelta).

What went wrong post the 2013 TDF?

Or do we need to take that elsewhere?

I don't think he was riding for GC was he ? He could still be valuable to Chaves and Yates later on.

You have that right, he's a domestique in the GT's these days which I thought would be obvious to most.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re: Re:

And it's all over (GT GC contending) for another year (unless he is allowed to skip the Tour and ride the Vuelta).

What went wrong post the 2013 TDF?

Or do we need to take that elsewhere?

I don't think he was riding for GC was he ? He could still be valuable to Chaves and Yates later on.

You have that right, he's a domestique in the GT's these days which I thought would be obvious to most.

I understand that, and that's kind of my point. Why did he go from 5th in the Tour De France to not even being a semi protected second team leader in GT's? He is not even all that old now.

Anyway, hopefully he can get himself a stage win later on in this giro.

 

[movingtarget]

Re: Re:

And it's all over (GT GC contending) for another year (unless he is allowed to skip the Tour and ride the Vuelta).

What went wrong post the 2013 TDF?

Or do we need to take that elsewhere?

I don't think he was riding for GC was he ? He could still be valuable to Chaves and Yates later on.

You have that right, he's a domestique in the GT's these days which I thought would be obvious to most.

I understand that, and that's kind of my point. Why did he go from 5th in the Tour De France to not even being a semi protected second team leader in GT's? He is not even all that old now.

Anyway, hopefully he can get himself a stage win later on in this giro.

I had the impression in his first few GTs as team leader that the pressure got to him but then he had a really good Tour riding for Contador and even looked better than Contador. I guess he is similar in a way to Tejay in that he never achieved the results his early career hinted at. Both of them seem to struggle under expectations but Kreuziger has had a really good spring in the classics this year and Tejay went much better in the Giro as a stage hunter. Both of them should maybe concentrate on what they can do well instead of what they might do well. But it seems that their teams have made the decision for them.

 

[yaco]

I am unsure whether Kreuziger sat up because MS had the stage under control or whether he had a bad day - It was only his second bad day of the season which is good going - Has plenty to offer in the Giro.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Kreuziger is smarter now and knows hanging on a bad day won't bring him anything, especially with Yates and Chaves in the team.

 

[HelloDolly]

Doubt he can go stage hunting while the team are riding for both Yates & Chaves

Maybe he will get a chance later on in the season to lead in some stage races

 

[Frankschleck]

On his way to retirement?

 

[SHAD0W93]

On his way to retirement?

Looks like it. Very underwhelming so far.