Well I am doubtless older than you. 2006 is yesterday.2004 is a pretty old reference.
What about 2012 London as well?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsHCLXvYRW0
Or 2016 Rio?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dO451o1sB0
Well I am doubtless older than you. 2006 is yesterday.2004 is a pretty old reference.
What about 2012 London as well?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsHCLXvYRW0
Or 2016 Rio?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dO451o1sB0
Well I am doubtless older than you. 2006 is yesterday.
Nah, nothing compared to the Tour starting in Britain for cycling for those beyond the Continent.Haha, perhaps.
But back to the Olympics being in London in 2012 is probably one of the most important/significant events that have affected this sport the most we if we look back on the last 10 years of this sport and the pro peloton.
So the Olympics is something that has impacted greatly what we see today.
Nah, nothing compared to the Tour starting in Britain for cycling for those beyond the Continent.
Yes, in the Anglo-Saxon world, non of which changed much for European cycling other than marginal gains and warmdowns.You are correct,. The grand depart was in 2007.
The evolution is then Sky forming in 2009/2010, two years before the Olympics, with most of the best talents in Britain on the team. Many of them who rode track. It was an initiative with many different interests.
In 2012 they reached their first peak when Wiggins won the Tour. They had of course targeted the Olympics as well. With riders both on the road and a couple of riders on the track team. It was years of work coming into fruition.
These were all significant events that affected the last 10 years with Sky/Ineos then dominating and interest growing even more.
We now see new British talents coming through all the time, where these events had huge impact on them when they were kids, years afterwards.
It has had a great impact on the sport.
The Olympics, like Worlds, however, is a "championship" event, unlike monuments. So it's natural that announcers point out "the Olympic champion," but not necessarily a monument winner, because the general public can relate to it. Although inside cycling it is a different matter, especially in Europe.Just like you’d have to go to the clinic for monuments, Worlds, and GT history and for a longer period. Like I said previously, any monument or Worlds would love to have the podiums of the ORR or OTT. That’s insulting to the careers of GVA and Carapaz when they’ve had better careers than some of those who won Worlds. Oh wait it’s hard to look at Worlds history without the clinic.
Neither does SB have any history yet it was put above the Olympics. Like I said they’re referred to in every race they enter as the Olympic Champion for 4 years and former after that period. A former monument winner doesn’t get that attention unless they’re racing the type of monument they won.
And those events get the most attention because they give out the most medals.
Roubaix winners are clear winners of "a rock"The Olympics, like Worlds, however, is a "championship" event, unlike monuments. So it's natural that announcers point out "the Olympic champion," but not necessarily a monument winner, because the general public can relate to it. Although inside cycling it is a different matter, especially in Europe.
But then I dont understand why you have quoted me?
Duh... it used to be only an amateur race... but it was the amateur race to win. Many went pro afterwards.
The best trophy in cycling, a piece of the surface of suffering.Roubaix winners are clear winners of "a rock"
Lordy. What do you not get, seriously?
Can’t help you any longer. I tried. Lol. But I’m done.
On the bolder part the Worlds ITT is a much later creation that also lacks those kinds of names.At least for the first 10-16 years you have to look in the clinic for that list, another thing that lessens the importance in overall cycling lore. Arguably we have only two recent winners to go on GVA and Carapaz. Great riders but not the type of list we have at the Worlds…
No one is arguing that the Olympics are not important to athletes in general. Which is what you seem to be arguing. It is that it simply does not represent what you think it does in a cyclist’s palmares. It has little history or tradition within the pro sport.
As @Extinction I think posted, there is no Merckx, no Coppi, no Hinault…no history in the sport.
On top of that, it is a minor event of something that traditionally puts track and field and perhaps swimming at the top of the agenda. A Cycling Worlds is all about cycling and has an amazing list of winners. Kelly rues most of all that he never won and particularly when he got beat in 1989….
On the bolder part the Worlds ITT is a much later creation that also lacks those kinds of names.
For Roglic it was a much bigger deal winning the Olympics TT than winning a Worlds TT or even road race ever would be due to the lack of Gold medals in any sport for Slovenia.
Just like the World's can be a lottery. Not to diminish those that have won one on strategic opportunism but bad team tactics can take a country's squad out of the picture. I'm sure folks here can name of few instances. Italy languished year after year.Just like people have been saying the monuments and Worlds are a lottery?
That’s what I mean and was referring too. To say the Olympics are a lottery is in my opinion calling the kettle black considering the lottery that can happen in monuments or Worlds. Heck MSR is said to be the hardest monument to win but easiest to finish.Just like the World's can be a lottery. Not to diminish those that have won one on strategic opportunism but bad team tactics can take a country's squad out of the picture. I'm sure folks here can name of few instances. Italy languished year after year.
If belgium wins the world cup, i think courtouis deserves that. But i don't know, i'm not belgian,so it's difficult to me, to understand what belgian people give more importance. I think cycling is the number one sport in belgium if i'm corret, probably remco also can win because of that.
It's a different situation in my country. If joao almeida won what remco won this year, and Portugal wins the world cup, probably the winner of sports personality of the year would go to ronaldo, or bernardo silva because the number one sport here is footbal, not cycling.
I'm not sure this is the Remco Evenepoel thread anymore.
With all due respect i also don't think belgium is going to far in the world cup. I was just talking in a scenario where belgium wins the world cup, who would be the winner of the award for sports personality of the year.As much as I would love Belgium to win the World Cup it's not happening. Hazard would need to find his 2018 form and he's been next to useless since his move to Real.
Belgium probably goes out in the R16/Quarters
Yup, understood.Not much is going on with Remco atm save for training. Even then it's not very exciting. Things will pick up in January
8 golds in 8 Olympics including the one Roglic won is not exactly a massive haul.What lack of gold medals?
Not really competition as can only think of:Seen training with competition, aka MVDP, in Spain
![]()
8 golds in 8 Olympics including the one Roglic won is not exactly a massive haul.
Yup, understood.
Just question if that means this is the place for a 5-page discussion on which pro races are most prestigious.![]()