The New World Champion! Appreciation

[patterson_hood]

Thats kinda pathetic really, comparing guys who play team sports where individual positions are key. you seem to miss the point that those guys are crucial to their teams success whilst with Cavendish, the team is crucial to his success. They are in fact opposites. As for the Usain Bolt comparison, your having a laugh.

As I said before, all the Brits would be doing just as much complaining if Cavendish didnt exist. Hell, they did when Cipo won in 02.

Err... You should probably rethink this argument as the two paragraphs are pretty much the biggest contradiction of each other that is possible...

 

[Hawkwood]

Thats kinda pathetic really, comparing guys who play team sports where individual positions are key. you seem to miss the point that those guys are crucial to their teams success whilst with Cavendish, the team is crucial to his success. They are in fact opposites. As for the Usain Bolt comparison, your having a laugh.

As I said before, all the Brits would be doing just as much complaining if Cavendish didnt exist. Hell, they did when Cipo won in 02.

Not sure I understand your second para, I'm British and thought it was great that Cipo won, am I missing something?

 

[Mambo95]

Sampras, Edberg, Stich, Becker, etc. were good at every shot and could play on every surface and that's why they were the best tennis players of their era.

Those four, in turn, couldn't win on clay, reasonable all rounder, Wimbledon one-hit wonder, couldn't win on clay. The basic requirements of tennis aren't really that different from surface to surface. It's just a vague balance of serve and fitness.

Modern cycling is a squad sport. You can hark back to the pre-80s days all you like, but focusing everything on a single rider is a pre-historic strategy.

 

[Ragerod]

Thats kinda pathetic really, comparing guys who play team sports where individual positions are key. you seem to miss the point that those guys are crucial to their teams success whilst with Cavendish, the team is crucial to his success. They are in fact opposites. As for the Usain Bolt comparison, your having a laugh.

No. You seem to be failing to grasp the idea that Cavendish was the only irreplaceable member of the GB team. They would not have won without Cavendish but would still of been overwhelming favourites without any other member of the team.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Oh come on, any sprint with Cavendish in it at present is likely to end in a Cavendish victory at least 8-9 times out of 10. Its hardly exciting unless you are cheering for him. I would already put Cavendish as the greatest sprinter of all time so its not amazing.

Two things here - I actually thought Team GB had blown in and done a Team Sky on things and lead it out perfectly until 2 to go and then let someone else claim the win.
Both Italy and Australia were in a better position at that point.

If you would "already put Cavendish as the greatest sprinter of all time", then why shouldn't he also have a chance at becoming a World Champion?
Surely that is the idea of the race.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

However, once in a while, maybe a decade or so, it makes a change to have a sprinter's one day course - they are racers too, and like it or nor they are the guys with the most kmh.

you mean like San Remo, Scheldeprijs, Paris-Tours or Vattenfall?

 

[spanky wanderlust]

Thats kinda pathetic really, comparing guys who play team sports where individual positions are key. you seem to miss the point that those guys are crucial to their teams success whilst with Cavendish, the team is crucial to his success. They are in fact opposites. As for the Usain Bolt comparison, your having a laugh.

As I said before, all the Brits would be doing just as much complaining if Cavendish didnt exist. Hell, they did when Cipo won in 02.

just because a point is devastating to your position does not make it "pathetic."

 

[Libertine Seguros]

If you would "already put Cavendish as the greatest sprinter of all time", then why shouldn't he also have a chance at becoming a World Champion?
Surely that is the idea of the race.

But the point is, he should have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

On a parcours where other riders also have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

Which we didn't have in Copenhagen.

 

[daveinzambia]

I really do think I've read Libertine's and El P's arguments so many times I could type them verbatim.

However, once in a while, maybe a decade or so, it makes a change to have a sprinter's one day course - they are racers too, and like it or nor they are the guys with the most kmh. It is just as admirable quality as climbing or TTing or descending or puncheuring and so once in a while the worlds should reflect that.

To keep going on like this, is not going to make me think any less of cav/GB's win but it may make me think otherwise intelligent and reasonable posters are a bit of a stuck record.

And Wiggins and Froome's efforts were huge, particularly Brad - if anything they made the race boring by being so fecking epic!

Yay go GB I want Rod's babies etc etc

Please just shut up.

I think you are right. Was about to post another Cav deserved it for being best sprinter post. Think I am starting to argue with myself

i think agree to disagree is the phrase we are looking for

 

[Mambo95]

But the point is, he should have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

On a parcours where other riders also have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

Which we didn't have in Copenhagen.

Other riders could have had a chance on such a parcours. I've seen flat courses provide exciting races, and 'awesome' parcours provide borefests. On this occasion one country saw an opportunity and went for it over a three year period. They prepared and planned and then executed it brilliantly.

But when the course was chosen, those riders were neo-pros and trackies. They were at teams like Barloworld and Mr Bookmaker.

Without GB, the race would have been different. It probably would have been more exciting. It may not have ended in a sprint. Had it done so, no-one would have said the course was 'unworthy'.

What we got was not excitement, but one of the great Worlds team performances inspired by 100% faith in a great rider. For that reason, this is a far more 'worthy' victory than many winners who just happened to get in the right break.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But the point is, he should have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

On a parcours where other riders also have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

Which we didn't have in Copenhagen.

What was stopping other teams coming up with their own ideas?

Too many teams let GB take the initiative - if you are not going to try and attack them then the team with the best plan will succeed, thats hardly their fault.

 

[hrotha]

you mean like San Remo, Scheldeprijs, Paris-Tours or Vattenfall?

Plus Geelong, Salzburg, Zolder and arguably Madrid. Somehow I have trouble thinking the sprinters get few opportunities to shine.
(Only Zolder was a true sprinters course, but the others gave the tougher sprinters a good chance)

 

[El Pistolero]

What was stopping other teams coming up with their own ideas?

Too many teams let GB take the initiative - if you are not going to try and attack them then the team with the best plan will succeed, thats hardly their fault.

Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands were working together in making it a hard race for the sprinters. It's not fair to say no one did something. But when they're riding up to 65km an hour on the flat straight parts do you honestly expect anyone to get away for more than a few minutes? It's pretty much impossible to go faster on a flat road. On the hills you can make a difference in modern cycling. If this course was like Milan-San Remo you would have seen less complainers. A simple Poggio and Cipressa like hill would have been fine for the final. But this had well nothing.

I blame circuit racing for it. Great for the crowds that get to watch live, not so great for the ones watching on TV.

 

[Winterfold]

you mean like San Remo, Scheldeprijs, Paris-Tours or Vattenfall?

As if it needed saying, World's course.

I am happy to admit to being completely one-eyed on this. If Cav was built like Gilbert then I would find nothing wrong with a Worlds course that spent 6 hours in the Surrey Hills with a 1km 15% finish.

But, it's good to share it around a bit, it did not harm to cycling in any way that Cipo was world champion, and as Cav is clearly his illegitimate offspring it will not harm cycling in any way for Cav to be World Champion either.

I am more bothered about riders who should be RR WC but may not be, eg, Spartacus.

 

[El Pistolero]

Other riders could have had a chance on such a parcours. I've seen flat courses provide exciting races, and 'awesome' parcours provide borefests. On this occasion one country saw an opportunity and went for it over a three year period. They prepared and planned and then executed it brilliantly.

But when the course was chosen, those riders were neo-pros and trackies. They were at teams like Barloworld and Mr Bookmaker.

Without GB, the race would have been different. It probably would have been more exciting. It may not have ended in a sprint. Had it done so, no-one would have said the course was 'unworthy'.

What we got was not excitement, but one of the great Worlds team performances inspired by 100% faith in a great rider. For that reason, this is a far more 'worthy' victory than many winners who just happened to get in the right break.

Give me one example of an interesting flat course in recent cycling that wasn't interesting because of:

- Crashes: these things should never be counted on for making a good race.
- Wind: echelon racing is exciting, but was never going to happen here.
- Bad weather: has nothing to do with the course and should also never be counted on.
- Road surfaces: please don't give Paris-Roubaix as an example.
- Mario Cipolini throwing bottles at a moto guy.

 

[Mambo95]

Give me one example of an interesting flat course in recent cycling that wasn't interesting because of:

- Crashes: these things should never be counted on for making a good race.
- Wind: echelon racing is exciting, but was never going to happen here.
- Bad weather: has nothing to do with the course and should also never be counted on.
- Mario Cipolini throwing bottles at a moto guy.

The 2010 Commonwealth Games. Not so much as a speed bump, but the best one day race of last year. Everyone knew it would be a sprint finish until Australia blew out most of their own team ensuring it wouldn't be.

I've seen some good Paris-Tours too.

 

[The Sheep]

The 2010 Commonwealth Games. Not so much as a speed bump, but the best one day race of last year. Everyone knew it would be a sprint finish until Australia blew out most of their own team ensuring it wouldn't be.

I've seen some good Paris-Tours too.

Well that bring up another good point, the worlds should have teams of 5 riders instead of what they have now.

 

[El Pistolero]

The 2010 Commonwealth Games. Not so much as a speed bump, but the best one day race of last year. Everyone knew it would be a sprint finish until Australia blew out most of their own team ensuring it wouldn't be.

I've seen some good Paris-Tours too.

Paris-Tours has hills in it and isn't completely flat.

And I knew I should have put weak competition in my list!

But if you ride a flat race with teams of 5 men, it's always going to make for a better race. Sadly that almost never is the case.

 

[simo1733]

Give me one example of an interesting flat course in recent cycling that wasn't interesting because of:

- Crashes: these things should never be counted on for making a good race.
- Wind: echelon racing is exciting, but was never going to happen here.
- Bad weather: has nothing to do with the course and should also never be counted on.
- Road surfaces: please don't give Paris-Roubaix as an example.
- Mario Cipolini throwing bottles at a moto guy.

Commonwealth games was a great race last year.Flat as a pancake.

 

[The Hitch]

Well that bring up another good point, the worlds should have teams of 5 riders instead of what they have now.

Which is why olympics might be more interesting.

 

[Ferminal]

The 2010 Commonwealth Games. Not so much as a speed bump, but the best one day race of last year. Everyone knew it would be a sprint finish until Australia blew out most of their own team ensuring it wouldn't be.

Yes it was, but try doing that without the horrible conditions and more than two dozen recognised pros in the race.

 

[PCutter]

Commonwealth games was a great race last year.Flat as a pancake.

I must have watched something different, because the Commonwealth Games race was f'n awful. There were about a dozen riders from PT teams and a lot of riders who wouldn't hold a wheel in local crit.

Australia then proceeded to take turns in sending guys off the front until Cav and his 3 man Isle of Man team couldn't follow any more. Finally the Aussies got a group off the front they liked, with two riders to the others one, which they took to the finish. Watching a big kid beat up on some little kids is hardly entertaining.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

But the point is, he should have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

On a parcours where other riders also have a chance at becoming a World Champion.

Which we didn't have in Copenhagen.

it is not cav's fault that he is so blisteringly fast. maybe if some of the other riders were faster than they might have won. i don't see your point. if 80 riders come in together than MORE have a chance, not fewer.

 

[Gingerale]

though i wont be thrilled seeing cavendish riding in the rainbow jersey, i cant say he doesn't deserve it. his team did the most to earn it on the day, i credit his team more for the win.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

Other riders could have had a chance on such a parcours. I've seen flat courses provide exciting races, and 'awesome' parcours provide borefests. On this occasion one country saw an opportunity and went for it over a three year period. They prepared and planned and then executed it brilliantly.

But when the course was chosen, those riders were neo-pros and trackies. They were at teams like Barloworld and Mr Bookmaker.

Without GB, the race would have been different. It probably would have been more exciting. It may not have ended in a sprint. Had it done so, no-one would have said the course was 'unworthy'.

What we got was not excitement, but one of the great Worlds team performances inspired by 100% faith in a great rider. For that reason, this is a far more 'worthy' victory than many winners who just happened to get in the right break.[/QUOTE]

exactly! except that i actually was pretty excited about it.