Looking for the latest race results? - We got you covered right here!
I'm pretty sure yesterday van Aert and Gesink were supposed to take it easy and Bennett and Kuss should've controlled the climb. Van Aert didn't see Bennett and Kuss so he stuck around, which was the right decision cause Bennett is still recovering and got dropped.
Yes, that is exactly what van Aert told Belgian media afterwards. The plan was for Bennett and Kuss to control the climb but they were nowhere to be seen once the climb started. Apparently they always struggle with positioning and easily get pushed away so van Aert decided to stay with Roglic and Dumoulin. When Jungels and Nieve were done pulling, he felt that he still had a few minutes of pushing 500 watts left so he started pulling. In the end Kuss made it to the front and could take over when van Aert was done.
Please forgive my ignorance but what does it mean when you say that the climb was ridden in a negative split?
They did the end of the climb at a higher power than the start. I think this is an underrated tactical aspect especially in terms of when gaps are big and when they're really small. I think Dumoulin does best with a consistent pace or when they just throws themselves at a climb, he gets dropped early then he drives himself back. Negative splits really favor riderse who have a huge 1 minute power after going most of the climb at or just below their limit.Yes, that is exactly what van Aert told Belgian media afterwards. The plan was for Bennett and Kuss to control the climb but they were nowhere to be seen once the climb started. Apparently they always struggle with positioning and easily get pushed away so van Aert decided to stay with Roglic and Dumoulin. When Jungels and Nieve were done pulling, he felt that he still had a few minutes of pushing 500 watts left so he started pulling. In the end Kuss made it to the front and could take over when van Aert was done.
Please forgive my ignorance but what does it mean when you say that the climb was ridden in a negative split?
Just by interviews and when riders drop and stop dropping etc. Strava files are incredibly inconsistent, cause it has Pinot averaging 700W on the final climb.How do we know they did a negative split on the climb, has there been an article written about that or a Strava file analysis ?
It's actually a pretty weird situation for JV as they have two gc riders who prefer climbs to be ridden very differently. Dumoulin will never beat Roglic if they climb like yesterday but I'm not sure if Roglic could pace himself up a mountain as well as Dumoulin.They did the end of the climb at a higher power than the start. I think this is an underrated tactical aspect especially in terms of when gaps are big and when they're really small. I think Dumoulin does best with a consistent pace or when they just throws themselves at a climb, he gets dropped early then he drives himself back. Negative splits really favor riderse who have a huge 1 minute power after going most of the climb at or just below their limit.
I think the whole "negative split" thing often isn't really meant literally. It's mostly about how the climb is approached and if the riders drop out of the group slowly but surely we are inclined to think it was a negative split. Meanwhile if the peloton explodes right at the beginning of the climb we are inclined to think it was a positive split. I've never actually looked at the exact numbers before claiming one or the other cause it doesn't change the way a climb was ridden and at the end that's the only thing that matters. If the pace steadily seems to increase I call it a negative split, if it's super high right from the start I call it a positive split.How do we know they did a negative split on the climb, has there been an article written about that or a Strava file analysis ?
I think they can actually do pretty negative splits literally, but it will largely depend on the climb itself being steeper all the way to the end, or the team leader doing a final km attack or something. Mostly makes sense when sheer numberical advantage already discourages attacks on a flatter gradient, like Sierra Nevada 2017.It's actually a pretty weird situation for JV as they have two gc riders who prefer climbs to be ridden very differently. Dumoulin will never beat Roglic if they climb like yesterday but I'm not sure if Roglic could pace himself up a mountain as well as Dumoulin.
I think the whole "negative split" thing often isn't really meant literally. It's mostly about how the climb is approached and if the riders drop out of the group slowly but surely we are inclined to think it was a negative split. Meanwhile if the peloton explodes right at the beginning of the climb we are inclined to think it was a positive split. I've never actually looked at the exact numbers before claiming one or the other cause it doesn't change the way a climb was ridden and at the end that's the only thing that matters. If the pace steadily seems to increase I call it a negative split, if it's super high right from the start I call it a positive split.
Roglic wasn't the only one who smoked him, though. He got dropped by about 10 GC guys when Kuss was at the front.Current fav yeah, but only shot? Dumoulin remains one of the best third week riders with a great TT. Plus these kind of finishes are made for Roglic.
I recall his early 1v1 with Chaves in the vuelta. He seemed quite punchy at that time. But he was very young. Longer climbs with a higher pace should suit it better now.Wasn't that always his style though? Even when he was racing Aru or Froome back when, he would always not react immediately and just TT his way back.
Which team can make Kuss (or even Van Aert) suffer? And that's without G. Bennett, who might recover sooner than later.
So, from what i understand, it was Tom's own decision to start working for Roglic, because he felt he wasn't going to be able to win the Tour...
Well Tom, you're a dumbass. Even if it were true, that you could feel that you would not be able to win the Tour, even if you could sense your legs wouldn't improve over the next two weeks... Roglic's rivals don't know that, not for sure. It would have been a huge tactical advantage, being able to bluff having two leaders. If you don't start pulling the peloton, you might have bridged (or not even have dropped at all).
(Or, you're a genius. Nobody expects much from you in GC anymore, and you can start ninja'ing the next two weeks, and then BAM... blow eveybody away in the ITT.)
![]()