The New World Champion! Appreciation

[patterson_hood]

Puncheurs, time trial specialists à la Cancellara and sprinters can definitely compete against one and other as long as the race has some decent obstacles in it. This WC didn't have a single obstacle in it and it's the reason why so many people see it as a joke.

Besides, Vinokourov won a flat stage at the Tour once Sure, he only did it for the time bonuses and the sprinter teams were already decimated at that point of the race, but he still won one.

I posted a reply, clicked post and went to the sign in page so this'll be shorter.

I see no problem with a worlds course that pretty much guarantees a large bunch sprint finish, although I think people are maybe not giving the GB team enough credit for forcing the sprint finish. Without them it could have been a different result, they made the course less selective through brilliant riding.

I would also like to see a cobbled worlds, a hilly worlds and a MTF worlds every now and then so every aspect of road cycling has its' chance.

rhubroma was saying on a tough course Cav wouldn't be close, but then on a MTF probably neither would Gilbert, Husovd, Friere etc. this was obviously too tough a course for Gilbert to win on because his sprint isn't good enough, the toughness of a course depends entirely on the type of rider, and while I admire riders who can compete on many different types of terrain I also admire guys who are the absolute best on a specific terrain.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

Bekele does not and never will compete against Bolt. Please don't try and compare cycling to track and field. Because I do like Bolt a lot and don't give a sh*t about sprinters in cycling. Bolt does it in 9 seconds, not 6 hours of a complete waste of time. *

* I'm only talking about totally flat stages without any obstacle in them. The stage Greipel won in the Tour was one of my favorite ones.

Sheesh it was just a put down of an argument that was based on the point that rhubroma prefers strong riders to the "merely fast ones", and on such a flimsy foundation, layered concepts such as strength, weakness and calibre.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Puncheurs, time trial specialists à la Cancellara and sprinters can definitely compete against one and other as long as the race has some decent obstacles in it. This WC didn't have a single obstacle in it and it's the reason why so many people see it as a joke.

Besides, Vinokourov won a flat stage at the Tour once Sure, he only did it for the time bonuses and the sprinter teams were already decimated at that point of the race, but he still won one.

So why did Gilbert and Cancellara even turn up to the event if it was going to be such a joke?
If they had won would they say it wasn't a real win because the course was so easy? So why did they waste a good Sunday afternoon?

 

[Maxiton]

So why did Gilbert and Cancellara even turn up to the event if it was going to be such a joke?
If they had won would they say it wasn't a real win because the course was so easy? So why did they waste a good Sunday afternoon?

They obviously haven't been reading these forums, else they wouldn't have bothered. Oh, wait, no one on these forums was complaining about the course in the months leading up to the race. So maybe Gilbert and Cancellara were reading this forum, and it left them with the wrong idea of what to expect at the race.

PS. Enjoyed your forum 1940s version. Brilliant.

 

[Hawkwood]

So why did Gilbert and Cancellara even turn up to the event if it was going to be such a joke?
If they had won would they say it wasn't a real win because the course was so easy? So why did they waste a good Sunday afternoon?

Exactly. I suspect most teams didn't think that GB was going to, or could, lay down the rules for almost the whole race, and hence thought that they might get in a late sneaky attack.

 

[El Pistolero]

So why did Gilbert and Cancellara even turn up to the event if it was going to be such a joke?
If they had won would they say it wasn't a real win because the course was so easy? So why did they waste a good Sunday afternoon?

Cancellara almost got a medal? And what other race takes place on 25 September? This WC was good training for the real races that start in Italy next month. Why waste 6 hours behind the derny if you can ride the WC.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Exactly. I suspect most teams didn't think that GB was going to, or could, lay down the rules for almost the whole race, and hence thought that they might get in a late sneaky attack.

I know some people though the GB execution was flawless, but there were some weaknesses that could have been exposed. No way was it to have Wiggins on the front that long and when he swung over have no-one take up the running.

Actually the Australians did the hard part and unshipped Cav from the train, but they (& others) didn't take full advantage for it.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Cancellara almost got a medal? And what other race takes place on 25 September? This WC was good training for the real races that start in Italy next month. Why waste 6 hours behind the derny if you can ride the WC.

He nearly got a medal in a joke of a race?
Maybe he slowed up coming to the line when he realized he was on the podium and was relieved to have been beaten? Hmm?

Or was he just working on his sprint for Lombardia?

 

[El Pistolero]

He nearly got a medal in a joke of a race?
Maybe he slowed up coming to the line when he realized he was on the podium and was relieved to have been beaten? Hmm?

Or was he just working on his sprint for Lombardia?

Speed is something you're born with. You either have it or you don't. Just because some riders aren't fast enough to get a medal at a course like this doesn't mean this race was too hard for them. That's just twisting words. This course was a joke, but that sadly doesn't change the prestige of getting a medal at the Worlds Championships.

If anything Cancellara getting fourth says a lot of Cav's competition.

 

[rhubroma]

Sheesh it was just a put down of an argument that was based on the point that rhubroma prefers strong riders to the "merely fast ones", and on such a flimsy foundation, layered concepts such as strength, weakness and calibre.

Flimsy foundation? So what's your criteria for a strong rider? Or better what determines the caliber of a rider? A course in which 100 men arrive all at once, or one in which by simple attrition and elimination only the most gifted arrive at the front? Whom we may conventionally call champions. I was talking about engine size. I don't know how much you've raced, but believe me the pure sprinters are not the true champions of the sport. They are exceptional specialists, though I think a course that bears the title of World's shouldn't be designed to award a pure velocity specialist, with all the brutal aerobic qualities that the sport otherwise demands and brings out in its most sensational athletes. This is what separates the men form the boys as far as road cycling goes and hence a world champion should be representative of the most demanding hardships that this sport places upon its athletes: and these are not measured in seconds, but minutes; not in meters, but kilometers; not in flat out speed over an easy course, but ferocious and sustained energy output over brutal terrain. In short selectivity.

As much as I enjoyed watching Super Mario sprint at the Tour and Giro, for example, I could hardly consider him even a 1/4 of the cyclist Indurain was if you follow my point. Therefore he was not a very representative nor exemplary as world champion, like Cavendish isn't.

In our sport the guys with the most phenomenal engines are not the pure sprinters, therefore, as I have repeated many times before, I would like to see a world championship course that's not so banal and which permits the better gifted athletes to express themselves to establish a more representative pecking order. If not what type of World's event is it? Or how does the title bearer in any way correspond to the actual hierarchy within the sport and thus the real differences in caliber between some athletes and others? A sprint finish is only an evaluation of top end speed, but that is not the stuff of a certain type of class that is at all becoming of one called cycling World Champion IMO. It's too big of a name for someone who has no hope in winning, I don't say the Tour de France, but not even Leige-Bastone-Liege and probably not even Paris-Roubaix or the Tour of Flanders. I don't think that a pure velocity specialist who would otherwise finish minutes back on a more demanding course is worthy of it.

And all this business of comparing track sprinters to road cyclists is totally inane: like exchanging apples for oranges.

I have to say Captain Caveman, your obvious national sympathies have clouded your judgement here. In the sense that if you find no qualitative difference in a World Champion who bears the name Mark Cavendish and one who bears the name of say Cadel Evans, with all that this implies about the difficulty level of the types of respective courses that permitted each to hold the title, then obviously there is no argument of mine that could possibly make you see things differently.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Speed is something you're born with. You either have it or you don't. Just because some riders aren't fast enough to get a medal at a course like this doesn't mean this race was too hard for them. That's just twisting words. This course was a joke, but that sadly doesn't change the prestige of getting a medal at the Worlds Championships.

If anything Cancellara getting fourth says a lot of Cav's competition.

It still doesn't answer why Cancellara would even bother trying to win a medal on a joke of a course.

 

[El Pistolero]

It still doesn't answer why Cancellara would even bother trying to win a medal on a joke of a course.

Because his biggest goal is to become World champion, so it would be stupid to skip a year even if your chances of winning are abysmal. Do you honestly think Cavendish cares if all the fans think this Worlds is a joke? Nope, same goes for Cancellara. But that still doesn't change the fact that the course was indeed a joke. The course was a joke, not the event behind it.

 

[maltiv]

Speed is something you're born with. You either have it or you don't. Just because some riders aren't fast enough to get a medal at a course like this doesn't mean this race was too hard for them. That's just twisting words. This course was a joke, but that sadly doesn't change the prestige of getting a medal at the Worlds Championships.

If anything Cancellara getting fourth says a lot of Cav's competition.

Cancellara has been surprisingly fast this year though so he must have worked on his sprint for this purpose. He was even 5th on Champs-Elysees, and really strong in the sprint in M-SR.

 

[The Hitch]

Basically, you prefer Bekele to Bolt.

Most definately.

Bekele does not and never will compete against Bolt. Please don't try and compare cycling to track and field. Because I do like Bolt a lot and don't give a sh*t about sprinters in cycling. Bolt does it in 9 seconds, not 6 hours of a complete waste of time. *

Actually Bekele was supposed to compete against Bolt in a 600m race but Team Bolt realised that Bolts undeserved status as Best athlete in the world (granted to him by the media) would be lost once Bekele crushed him on a course that should in theory be far more favourable to him.

So he didnt agree and Bekele continues to be seen as a nobody.

Feels a bit like the Count of Monte Christo story. A phony screwing the real hero and getting his title.

 

[El Pistolero]

Most definately.



Actually Bekele was supposed to compete against Bolt in a 600m race but Team Bolt realised that Bolts undeserved status as Best athlete in the world (granted to him by the media) would be lost once Bekele crushed him on a course that should in theory be far more favourable to him.

So he didnt agree and Bekele continues to be seen as a nobody.

Feels a bit like the Count of Monte Christo story. A phony screwing the real hero and getting his title.

Bolt is good friends with a lot of these Kenyan and Ethiopian long distance runners by the way. And Bolt is not really a one trick pony. I think he has a very good chance of being the first to jump over 9 meters at long jump. He'll try it someday, I'm sure of it.

I my self am more of a Rudisha fan than a Bekele fan anyway.

 

[uphillstruggle]

I would also like to see a cobbled worlds, a hilly worlds and a MTF worlds every now and then so every aspect of road cycling has its' chance.

rhubroma was saying on a tough course Cav wouldn't be close, but then on a MTF probably neither would Gilbert, Husovd, Friere etc. this was obviously too tough a course for Gilbert to win on because his sprint isn't good enough, the toughness of a course depends entirely on the type of rider, and while I admire riders who can compete on many different types of terrain I also admire guys who are the absolute best on a specific terrain.

I agree with this completely. This years WC was dull but well ridden by GB, but still there is nothing wrong with every 6-7 years or so having a pure sprinters course. Contador's only hope of being world champ is either a mountain top finish or a Fleche Wallone type finish and he is one of the best cyclists of his generation.

 

[Escarabajo]

I agree with this completely. This years WC was dull but well ridden by GB, but still there is nothing wrong with every 6-7 years or so having a pure sprinters course. Contador's only hope of being world champ is either a mountain top finish or a Fleche Wallone type finish and he is one of the best cyclists of his generation.

Or a 1995 Duitama type race.

 

[The Hitch]

I agree with this completely. This years WC was dull but well ridden by GB, but still there is nothing wrong with every 6-7 years or so having a pure sprinters course. Contador's only hope of being world champ is either a mountain top finish or a Fleche Wallone type finish and he is one of the best cyclists of his generation.

Why not. Hes never really tried 1 day races. But if Cadel and Andy Schleck and Frank Schleck can manage them why cant Contador who is stronger than those in all departments? He has said he wants to go for them.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Because his biggest goal is to become World champion, so it would be stupid to skip a year even if your chances of winning are abysmal. Do you honestly think Cavendish cares if all the fans think this Worlds is a joke? Nope, same goes for Cancellara. But that still doesn't change the fact that the course was indeed a joke. The course was a joke, not the event behind it.

I thought your whole point was because the course was so bad that it devalues the Worlds.

Now you are saying that the Worlds is prestigious enough for people to attempt even when the course does not suit them.

Which is it?

 

[LugHugger]

I agree with this completely. This years WC was dull but well ridden by GB, but still there is nothing wrong with every 6-7 years or so having a pure sprinters course. Contador's only hope of being world champ is either a mountain top finish or a Fleche Wallone type finish and he is one of the best cyclists of his generation.

100% agree

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I'm not telling anyone what they think. Who am I telling what they think?

I'm saying that some people have an over romantic and idealistic view of what has always been a cynical sport, and try to show their show their superior cycling fan credentials by pushing that romanticism.

The previous implication was that anybody who says they didn't like the Worlds (and anybody who says they don't like Coldplay) are liars, who were pretending not to like them in order to feel superior.

In your opinion, is it possible for a rational human being to dislike the music of Coldplay?

 

[rhubroma]

I posted a reply, clicked post and went to the sign in page so this'll be shorter.

I see no problem with a worlds course that pretty much guarantees a large bunch sprint finish, although I think people are maybe not giving the GB team enough credit for forcing the sprint finish. Without them it could have been a different result, they made the course less selective through brilliant riding.

I would also like to see a cobbled worlds, a hilly worlds and a MTF worlds every now and then so every aspect of road cycling has its' chance.

rhubroma was saying on a tough course Cav wouldn't be close, but then on a MTF probably neither would Gilbert, Husovd, Friere etc. this was obviously too tough a course for Gilbert to win on because his sprint isn't good enough, the toughness of a course depends entirely on the type of rider, and while I admire riders who can compete on many different types of terrain I also admire guys who are the absolute best on a specific terrain.

Yes but there is a big difference between the quality of one who can win Liege-Bastone-Liege, but who can't win the Tour, and one who can only win field sprints. Whereas with proper approach, Gilbert might be able to crack top 20 at the Tour and, under ideal conditions, perhaps even top 10. Though a pure sprinter has no hope of arriving at least an hour behind. In any event, being able to win Liege is sufficient to be papabile at the Worlds.

The title of World Champion has to at least have some bearing on realty to be taken seriously and live up to its name.

Otherwise we could make the Tour a points classification with absolute values awarded to top ten finishers of each stage. In that case Cavendish would be one of the all time greats, even though this is merely ridiculous.

Wheres if you think "toughness" of a course isn't based on anything but natural selection, where natural selection means group decimation, or that being too slow to win a sprint has any bearing on it, then you obviously know nothing, absolutely nothing, about road cycling.

 

[El Pistolero]

I thought your whole point was because the course was so bad that it devalues the Worlds.

Now you are saying that the Worlds is prestigious enough for people to attempt even when the course does not suit them.

Which is it?

For me it devalues the Worlds. I doubt Cavendish or Cancellara shares the same opinion.

 

[palmerq]

well done to cavendish and very good preperation work from britain they did good a lot of good work in advance for this race.

on the subject of this devauling the worlds thing.. I dont think they should make courses for sprinters, climbers or cobblestoners, in my opinion that is just stupid and isnt really a good reflection of a world champion, and all these fellows have races throughout the year that are very important for them and have all of their specialist field there...I think because road racing is a broad sport then the world championship race should be a balanced race that has flat parts and climbing.. I think to make it a sprinters race is a bit stupid and I dont think cipollinis win is anywhere near as important as the rest after him.. to take hills out the world championship is like taking mountains out of the tour..

 

[uphillstruggle]

Why not. Hes never really tried 1 day races. But if Cadel and Andy Schleck and Frank Schleck can manage them why cant Contador who is stronger than those in all departments? He has said he wants to go for them.

Yeah I suppose you're right in that he has more ability than the Shlecks so why not but he will only win on a very hilly course or MTF in my opinion. Contador is the kind of rider someone will always mark and he is a crap sprinter in the grand scheme of things. He does, however, ride for Spain so he could get away a la Ballan. Personally I think Cadel is better suited to classics than Contador - much better finisher.