- Mar 13, 2009
- 29,413
- 3,482
- 28,180
- Apr 5, 2015
- 1,018
- 317
- 11,180
Must admit I wasn't convinced about his form, but yesterday's performance gives me confidence ahead of the Zoncolan stage.
- Oct 23, 2011
- 3,846
- 2
- 0
Re: Re:
By that time, Superman will have done enough damage for him to rely on his friends to finish it off. Betancur fights only for absolute power and revenge, Superman fights for his friends. Pello Bilbao will finish off what Superman started.
DNP-Old said:Superman when he's on the brink of starting the time trial:Maaaaaaaarten said:DNP-Old said:Dekker_Tifosi said:
Betancur about to start his revenge tour this weekend.
Too bad Superman will soon go
By that time, Superman will have done enough damage for him to rely on his friends to finish it off. Betancur fights only for absolute power and revenge, Superman fights for his friends. Pello Bilbao will finish off what Superman started.
classicomano
BANNED
- May 5, 2011
- 2,965
- 0
- 11,480
- Oct 14, 2017
- 12,196
- 3,232
- 23,180
Some of my Spanish friends are starting to compare Dumoulin to Indurain. Figured I'd bring that thought I bring this here and ssee what all of you think about this comparison. Since I started watching in 2003 I never saw Indurain race live (well on TV), only saw his races in highlights. Is this a fair comparison?
- May 17, 2013
- 7,558
- 2,414
- 20,680
Re:
Referring TD as "Dumourain" is a great comparison IMO. I would say that Indurain was a better climber, but other opponents, other times, I could be wrong. With as much ITT as there was in the '90s, Tom would win the TdF a bunch of times, use the same recipe. Back then it often was a week of flat, then an ITT before the first mountains, and Indurain would bludgeon the field. Then control (he had a great team), and if need be, there was still the final ITT to annihilate a possible rival. On occasions he would let a pure climber take off and tempo his way back. Not as much as Dumoulin, but he had a team that could set the pace. BigMig could also respond to attacks. I see a lot of similarities between the two.Koronin said:
- Jun 27, 2013
- 5,217
- 9
- 17,495
Re:
No. Indurain's supposed successor Olano is about as close to Dumoulin in abilities as I've ever seen two riders be.
But Indurain? No, definitely not.
Winning TTs by minutes - Rominger aside since he was a freak of nature himself - crushing everyone on the first climbing stage to establish supremacy, almost never losing any time at all in climbs, never seeming to be pushing hard, that's not Dumoulin.
Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.
Of course, Dumoulin is yet to amass anything even remotely like Olano's palmares, but he has time on his side.
While I respect Tonton's opinions, I have to disagree on the great team. Indurain had an average team for his first Tours and a downright terrible team later on. From about 94 onwards it was a source of constant fan criticism that they couldn't surround him with anyone even halfway decent.
Koronin said:
No. Indurain's supposed successor Olano is about as close to Dumoulin in abilities as I've ever seen two riders be.
But Indurain? No, definitely not.
Winning TTs by minutes - Rominger aside since he was a freak of nature himself - crushing everyone on the first climbing stage to establish supremacy, almost never losing any time at all in climbs, never seeming to be pushing hard, that's not Dumoulin.
Indurain is the sexier comparison, if you will, because people daydream of the days of Indurain crushing everyone in the first mountain finish of each race and the subsequent time trials, then just following easily without losing time in the remaining climbs. There's no romance in remembering Olano grimly limiting losses with tremendous effort in the mountains to them win the TTs.
Of course, Dumoulin is yet to amass anything even remotely like Olano's palmares, but he has time on his side.
While I respect Tonton's opinions, I have to disagree on the great team. Indurain had an average team for his first Tours and a downright terrible team later on. From about 94 onwards it was a source of constant fan criticism that they couldn't surround him with anyone even halfway decent.
- May 17, 2013
- 7,558
- 2,414
- 20,680
Re: Re:
1. You kind of contradict yourself, dismissing the comparison with BigMig and mentioning Olano. They were clones, looked alike. Now, it's true that Olano was BigMig-Light. Fair enough.
2. Yes, before comparing the two, Dumoulin needs more GT credentials, a bigger body of work. I agree that the first MTF would often see BigMig do great, but those were ______/ and Dumoulin at the Blockhaus, under similar circumstances, was very competitive last year.
3. Reading the Zoncolan thread and how Dumoulin may be more vulnerable in medium gradient climbs reminds me of stage 4 of the '94 when Indurain struggled and lost a lot of time to Berzin.
4. Team-wise, Banesto was overtaken by GB and Telekom starting in'94, but before then, it was a machine. I would argue that Dumoulin doesn't have the second, third, or fourth best team.
So Dumoulin is Olano is Big-Mig-Light still makes the comparison valid. You make great points though. But give Dumoulin a few years and routes like BigMig (ain't gonna happen), he would race the same, pretty much. His first ITT at Il Giro last year was very Luxembourg...we're not too far apart.
hehehe...I can't disagree much with your point. But I disagree some.GuyIncognito said:
1. You kind of contradict yourself, dismissing the comparison with BigMig and mentioning Olano. They were clones, looked alike. Now, it's true that Olano was BigMig-Light. Fair enough.
2. Yes, before comparing the two, Dumoulin needs more GT credentials, a bigger body of work. I agree that the first MTF would often see BigMig do great, but those were ______/ and Dumoulin at the Blockhaus, under similar circumstances, was very competitive last year.
3. Reading the Zoncolan thread and how Dumoulin may be more vulnerable in medium gradient climbs reminds me of stage 4 of the '94 when Indurain struggled and lost a lot of time to Berzin.
4. Team-wise, Banesto was overtaken by GB and Telekom starting in'94, but before then, it was a machine. I would argue that Dumoulin doesn't have the second, third, or fourth best team.
So Dumoulin is Olano is Big-Mig-Light still makes the comparison valid. You make great points though. But give Dumoulin a few years and routes like BigMig (ain't gonna happen), he would race the same, pretty much. His first ITT at Il Giro last year was very Luxembourg...we're not too far apart.
Re: Re:
Dumoulin's margin at last year's ITT world championships was definitely in the same ballpark as Indurain's margins. Especially when you consider that Indurain's one (1) ITT world championship came with "only" a 49" margin over 43 km's.
Time trials aren't really conducted the same way anymore in grand tours, so this is an apples to oranges comparison. Grand Tours don't put that many chrono kms like they did in the 90s. And then combine that with Clinic stuff, and you can you see how having a 1-2 second per km advantage can result in huge time differentials.
On a seconds per km basis, Dumoulin has an Indurain-esque time trial. Take a look at the first ITT in the last Giro. His closest rivals were Thomas and Jungels, who are both good time trialists, and they dropped 49 seconds and 56 seconds respectively over less than 40km of parcours. He put >2 mins in all the other GC contenders.
Indurain won his first GT at the same age that Dumoulin is now. The year prior to his first win, he finished 10th. Over 12 minutes down on LeMond. The year he first won it, there were four time trial stages. A prologue (5.4km), a team trial (36.5km), and two ITTs (73km and 57km).
In fact, here are all the time trial miles of all the tours that Indurain won:
1991: 171.9 km
1992: 200.5 km
1993: 194.8 km
1994: 137.7 km
1995: 174.8 km
If there were that many TT km's in modern tours, would there be any doubt that Dumoulin would be a very strong contender every year?
I'm not going to suggest that Indurain isn't one of the greatest cyclists ever, or that Dumoulin will end up with a career like his (he won't, in large part because the Giro-Tour double isn't really possible anymore), but Indurain was the perfect cyclist for the parcours in the races he won.
Too much mythology hereGuyIncognito said:
Dumoulin's margin at last year's ITT world championships was definitely in the same ballpark as Indurain's margins. Especially when you consider that Indurain's one (1) ITT world championship came with "only" a 49" margin over 43 km's.
Time trials aren't really conducted the same way anymore in grand tours, so this is an apples to oranges comparison. Grand Tours don't put that many chrono kms like they did in the 90s. And then combine that with Clinic stuff, and you can you see how having a 1-2 second per km advantage can result in huge time differentials.
On a seconds per km basis, Dumoulin has an Indurain-esque time trial. Take a look at the first ITT in the last Giro. His closest rivals were Thomas and Jungels, who are both good time trialists, and they dropped 49 seconds and 56 seconds respectively over less than 40km of parcours. He put >2 mins in all the other GC contenders.
Indurain won his first GT at the same age that Dumoulin is now. The year prior to his first win, he finished 10th. Over 12 minutes down on LeMond. The year he first won it, there were four time trial stages. A prologue (5.4km), a team trial (36.5km), and two ITTs (73km and 57km).
In fact, here are all the time trial miles of all the tours that Indurain won:
1991: 171.9 km
1992: 200.5 km
1993: 194.8 km
1994: 137.7 km
1995: 174.8 km
If there were that many TT km's in modern tours, would there be any doubt that Dumoulin would be a very strong contender every year?
I'm not going to suggest that Indurain isn't one of the greatest cyclists ever, or that Dumoulin will end up with a career like his (he won't, in large part because the Giro-Tour double isn't really possible anymore), but Indurain was the perfect cyclist for the parcours in the races he won.
- Nov 7, 2010
- 8,820
- 246
- 17,880
Re: Re:
The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context. Like the fact that Indurain was riding as a loyal domestique to Delgado until the year before his first win. He was still racking up wins in big stage races where he was the leader - so nothing like Dumoulin really.Katabatic said:
- Jun 27, 2013
- 5,217
- 9
- 17,495
Re: Re:
Apparently Karabatic is
You're knocking him for only winning one? You do realize the first ever edition was when his career was almost over, right?
He took part in one. He won it.
And Dumoulin's winning margin while excellent, really wasn't "in the same ballpark as Indurain" as you claim. It's in the same ballpark as Indurain's one world TT, but that's one TT out of many.
What do you mean not conducted the same way? The distance?
If you want to discuss how clinic stuff increases gaps in TTs (I don't see how it would), feel free to open a topic in the clinic, I'll be there.
1.23 sec/km in the first TT. Beaten by Jos van Emden in the second.
Let's compare that with Indurain
1 Miguel Indurain (Esp) en 1h19’31’’ @ 65km
2 Armand De Las Cuevas (Fra) à 3’
2.65 sec/km. More than double the advantage. In a better field.
Losing 12 minutes in one stage where he was sacrificed on the front to help Delgado. The talk at the end of that Tour was that he had been strongest and would've won it if he wasn't a domestique. He was let loose on the last mountain stage and won it.
What's your point? Nobody said Dumoulin wouldn't be a strong contender. I said Dumoulin doesn't drop everyone by minutes on the first mountain stage of every GT to establish dominance, neither does he win nearly every TT. He's simply nowhere near the same level of dominance.
And aside from all this which is about time trials, Indurain was winning major races - both stage races and single day - regularly even before being team leader at the Tour. Dumoulin isn't doing that at all.
Koronin said:
Apparently Karabatic is
Katabatic said:
You're knocking him for only winning one? You do realize the first ever edition was when his career was almost over, right?
He took part in one. He won it.
And Dumoulin's winning margin while excellent, really wasn't "in the same ballpark as Indurain" as you claim. It's in the same ballpark as Indurain's one world TT, but that's one TT out of many.
Katabatic said:
What do you mean not conducted the same way? The distance?
Katabatic said:
If you want to discuss how clinic stuff increases gaps in TTs (I don't see how it would), feel free to open a topic in the clinic, I'll be there.
Katabatic said:
1.23 sec/km in the first TT. Beaten by Jos van Emden in the second.
Let's compare that with Indurain
1 Miguel Indurain (Esp) en 1h19’31’’ @ 65km
2 Armand De Las Cuevas (Fra) à 3’
2.65 sec/km. More than double the advantage. In a better field.
Katabatic said:
Losing 12 minutes in one stage where he was sacrificed on the front to help Delgado. The talk at the end of that Tour was that he had been strongest and would've won it if he wasn't a domestique. He was let loose on the last mountain stage and won it.
Katabatic said:
What's your point? Nobody said Dumoulin wouldn't be a strong contender. I said Dumoulin doesn't drop everyone by minutes on the first mountain stage of every GT to establish dominance, neither does he win nearly every TT. He's simply nowhere near the same level of dominance.
And aside from all this which is about time trials, Indurain was winning major races - both stage races and single day - regularly even before being team leader at the Tour. Dumoulin isn't doing that at all.
- Mar 13, 2009
- 29,413
- 3,482
- 28,180
No if he loses 1 minute the Giro is already over (for him). For it to stay interesting it needs to be between 20-40s (to Yates). Anything less and the TT will have a too big buffer. Anything more and he will have too few seconds of a lead after the TT.Tonton said:
This debating style is obnoxious. Debate the entire point, not segmenting things down into easily manageable soundbites that you can take out of context to try to score points. It's so prevalent on the internet and every time I see it, it makes an otherwise interesting discussion into a chore.
And you just proved my point entirely:
I made no attempt to say Dumoulin was as good as Indurain. Rather the opposite, actually. Just that your assertion that Dumoulin is nothing like Indurain is canonizing Indurain to a rather unreasonable degree.
His one ITT WC (against the best ITTs in the world, not just the best ITTs who happen to be racing in the same GT field) is actually worse, if you want to go by this very standard.
Indurain won his WC by a margin of 49" over a 43km course, gaining 1.14 sec/km.
Dumoulin won his WC by a margin of 57" over a 31km course, gaining 1.84 sec/km.
What, that clinic stuff allows you to hold on to marginal advantages for longer by giving people superhuman threshold endurance? I don't see how that's even a debate. That's literally what Clinic stuff does. That's literally why people do it.
And I suppose it's easy to cherry pick certain ITTs where Indurain smashed the competition. How about the 73km '91 ITT into Alençon where Indurain won by 8 seconds? Or how about the 54km '95 ITT into Séraing where Indurain won by 12 seconds? Or the '93 ITT where Indurain lost more than 40 seconds to Rominger?
If you want to do a career average as them as GC leaders and calculating their sec/km over the nearest competition, that would be an interesting discussion. But what do you think you're actually proving by picking one or two examples against each other?
I don't even believe that Dumoulin is a better ITT than Indurain, just that Indurain is not some unassailable paragon that you seem to believe. It's not sacrilegious to compare riders to Indurain.
I would also caution talk about "better field" because it's very difficult to compare things across eras. Many riders (including very good time trialists like Greg Lemond), for instance, raced ITTs without a helmet. There's so much more technology and volume of research now that goes into time trialing and aerodynamics that it's very difficult to compare how good fields are.
Except this didn't actually happen for Indurain either.
1991: Lost more than 6 minutes to Mottet and Leblanc on Stage 12.
1992: Lost 1:45 to Chiapucci on Stage 13.
1993: st as stage winner Rominger on Stage 10.
1994: Lost 2" to Leblanc. He did beat a young Pantani, so that's certainly to be commended.
1995: Lost 2 minutes to Zülle on Stage 9.
Indurain frequently lost minutes to the best climbers. He won by being very consistently near the top (limiting his losses), and smashing them in the time trials. The strategy is the same as Dumoulin's.
Some of these past tours are almost an alien landscape compared to modern tours. The 1992 TdF had two (count them, 2) stages listed as mountain stages. This year's Giro has 8. The 92 Tour had 200 km of TT. This year's Giro has 44km of TT. Dumoulin would be a huge favorite of any GT with those kinds of parcours.
As to what's the point, I've already stated it, except you willfully ignored it. Indurain was a perfect cyclist for the era of cycling he was in. He has the palmares to prove it. But you don't need to deify or mythologize his already incredible accomplishments. There are riders who ride like him, and if Indurain rode in an era like today where GT's have very few ITT miles and prioritize uphill sprints, he might not have the same palmares. It's really not that hard.
GuyIncognito said:
And you just proved my point entirely:
I made no attempt to say Dumoulin was as good as Indurain. Rather the opposite, actually. Just that your assertion that Dumoulin is nothing like Indurain is canonizing Indurain to a rather unreasonable degree.
GuyIncognito said:
His one ITT WC (against the best ITTs in the world, not just the best ITTs who happen to be racing in the same GT field) is actually worse, if you want to go by this very standard.
Indurain won his WC by a margin of 49" over a 43km course, gaining 1.14 sec/km.
Dumoulin won his WC by a margin of 57" over a 31km course, gaining 1.84 sec/km.
GuyIncognito said:
What, that clinic stuff allows you to hold on to marginal advantages for longer by giving people superhuman threshold endurance? I don't see how that's even a debate. That's literally what Clinic stuff does. That's literally why people do it.
GuyIncognito said:
And I suppose it's easy to cherry pick certain ITTs where Indurain smashed the competition. How about the 73km '91 ITT into Alençon where Indurain won by 8 seconds? Or how about the 54km '95 ITT into Séraing where Indurain won by 12 seconds? Or the '93 ITT where Indurain lost more than 40 seconds to Rominger?
If you want to do a career average as them as GC leaders and calculating their sec/km over the nearest competition, that would be an interesting discussion. But what do you think you're actually proving by picking one or two examples against each other?
I don't even believe that Dumoulin is a better ITT than Indurain, just that Indurain is not some unassailable paragon that you seem to believe. It's not sacrilegious to compare riders to Indurain.
I would also caution talk about "better field" because it's very difficult to compare things across eras. Many riders (including very good time trialists like Greg Lemond), for instance, raced ITTs without a helmet. There's so much more technology and volume of research now that goes into time trialing and aerodynamics that it's very difficult to compare how good fields are.
GuyIncognito said:
Except this didn't actually happen for Indurain either.
1991: Lost more than 6 minutes to Mottet and Leblanc on Stage 12.
1992: Lost 1:45 to Chiapucci on Stage 13.
1993: st as stage winner Rominger on Stage 10.
1994: Lost 2" to Leblanc. He did beat a young Pantani, so that's certainly to be commended.
1995: Lost 2 minutes to Zülle on Stage 9.
Indurain frequently lost minutes to the best climbers. He won by being very consistently near the top (limiting his losses), and smashing them in the time trials. The strategy is the same as Dumoulin's.
Some of these past tours are almost an alien landscape compared to modern tours. The 1992 TdF had two (count them, 2) stages listed as mountain stages. This year's Giro has 8. The 92 Tour had 200 km of TT. This year's Giro has 44km of TT. Dumoulin would be a huge favorite of any GT with those kinds of parcours.
As to what's the point, I've already stated it, except you willfully ignored it. Indurain was a perfect cyclist for the era of cycling he was in. He has the palmares to prove it. But you don't need to deify or mythologize his already incredible accomplishments. There are riders who ride like him, and if Indurain rode in an era like today where GT's have very few ITT miles and prioritize uphill sprints, he might not have the same palmares. It's really not that hard.
Being on a lower tier WT team (which is what a team like Argos-Shimano was) as a young rider doesn't really promote great GC or stage win potential either. That's exactly why this comparison is apples to oranges. You're supporting my point if anything.DFA123 said:
- Jun 7, 2010
- 19,196
- 3,092
- 28,180
You may call me obnoxious, but there is more to debating than picking results off the internet.
Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.
Google 1995 Tour stage 9 a bit more first.
Re:
And I like how people like to assume that just because I enjoy looking at old results and seeing if the data supports the assertion, that I never actually watched the races. I've probably watched as much racing as you have, and my eye test is just as valid as your eye test.
I know exactly what happened in Stage 9 of the '95 Tour, and Zülle's early attack was legendary, as was Indurain reeling him back. But it doesn't change the fact that he didn't smash everybody on the first mountain stage.
Did you just out your sock?roundabout said:
And I like how people like to assume that just because I enjoy looking at old results and seeing if the data supports the assertion, that I never actually watched the races. I've probably watched as much racing as you have, and my eye test is just as valid as your eye test.
I know exactly what happened in Stage 9 of the '95 Tour, and Zülle's early attack was legendary, as was Indurain reeling him back. But it doesn't change the fact that he didn't smash everybody on the first mountain stage.
- Jun 27, 2013
- 5,217
- 9
- 17,495
Re:
Warning to others: don't bother reading this. It's just him claiming that my opinions are things I never claimed anywhere, and me replying "where did I say that?". Rinse, repeat
If you make several different arguments, be sure I'm going to discuss them one by one.
It's popular precisely because it means people can't get away with one generic reply to one argument while ignoring others. In other words, it ensures what you just accused me of doing can't be done.
For example several of the points you raised before, you've conveniently dropped in this post without another word. I could raise them again as "soundbites" if I were doing what you claim, but I let it slide.
I realize you said that at the end, and I quoted it.
But the rest of your post said the opposite. Each point you tried to make compared Dumoulin favorably to Indurain. Putting in a discardable line at the end saying "but I'm not saying it" doesn't change the fact that you said it
Now who's picking and choosing "soundbytes"? You took out my main point: that you picked one TT from each guy, the ones that you felt supported the conclusion you wanted, and you decided to compare them as if the rest of their respective careers didn't exist
I'll say it again: feel free to open a topic in the clinic, not here.
You still don't get it. I'm precisely pointing out that you picked the one TT from each guy that you wanted. I picked this one to show you how ridiculous it can get when cherry picking.
When did I make any of those claims? Any at all? I hardly have Indurain on a pedestal, if anything I think he's overrated. You're the one hyping Dumoulin, although I guess that's to be expected in this topic.
Several riders rode without a helmet that day and it had nothing to do with lack of progress. There was significant climbing that day - Indurain called it harder than the 1993 Giro Sestriere TT - and as is usual in such TTs there were discrepancies in what each rider though was faster. LeMond went without a helmet because he believed it was faster. Several others did.
LeMond was precisely the rider who pushed the edge of TT technology, he's the poster child for it.
DFA123's line is on the money here: "The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context." Nearly every one of those is wrong.
1991: That wasn't the first day in the mountains, that was a medium mountain stage where the break of the day was allowed to stay away by minutes. Leblanc was a young rider not considered a danger, Mottet was already minutes down. The next day was the first day in the high mountains and both were shelled quickly. Indurain had a 3 minute lead by the end of it.
1992: Yes, Chiappucci gambled on an attack from a very long way out that cracked Indurain. Aside from the fact that everyone else lost minutes to Indurain, you're mostly right about this one
1993: Everyone was dropped except for Rominger who was 6 minutes down due to the events of the early flat stages. Indurain summarily dispatched anyone who was a GC threat to him
1994: Indurain set the pace on the climb - again - and dropped everyone who was a contender. Leblanc was over 8 minutes down even before the stage so Indurain didn't care that Leblanc hung on.
1995: Zulle was in the break of the day because he'd lost minutes already and everyone was expecting him to abandon due to injuries. On the final climb Indurain took the front - as usual - and rode everyone off his wheel. He sliced Zulle's advantage from 6 to 2 minutes and none of the GC guys finished within 2 minutes of him despite starting the final climb with him
1992 aside, it was domination every time.
As shown above, not really, no. He didn't care about the ones who weren't GC threats, but he was never dropped by any where were threats other than Sestriere 1992 and of course his 11th place finish in 1996
In this we agree. But it's like saying Andrea Guardini and Marcel Kittel have the same strategy. The level to which they can execute it differs
Again: Yes, and? No argument from me, but that's like saying I have a green car: it's irrelevant because we're not discussing their palmares. We're discussing their abilities. Nowhere did I talk about Indurain winning X or Y except in the one case where you made a big point that Indurain was only TT world champion a single time. Once it was pointed out why that was, you - as usual - immediately dropped the subject and harped on something else.
As with most of the discussion in here, you're creating a strawman and pretending I've said something I never did.
I didn't ignore it. You ignored my points:
- Dumoulin isn't in the same quality as Indurain
- I never compared their palmares, I compared Dumoulin and Olano's palmares.
That....doesn't even begin to make sense. And once again you're dodging giving him an answer.
I eagerly await another round of you putting words in my mouth
Warning to others: don't bother reading this. It's just him claiming that my opinions are things I never claimed anywhere, and me replying "where did I say that?". Rinse, repeat
Katabatic said:
If you make several different arguments, be sure I'm going to discuss them one by one.
It's popular precisely because it means people can't get away with one generic reply to one argument while ignoring others. In other words, it ensures what you just accused me of doing can't be done.
For example several of the points you raised before, you've conveniently dropped in this post without another word. I could raise them again as "soundbites" if I were doing what you claim, but I let it slide.
Katabatic said:
I realize you said that at the end, and I quoted it.
But the rest of your post said the opposite. Each point you tried to make compared Dumoulin favorably to Indurain. Putting in a discardable line at the end saying "but I'm not saying it" doesn't change the fact that you said it
Katabatic said:
Now who's picking and choosing "soundbytes"? You took out my main point: that you picked one TT from each guy, the ones that you felt supported the conclusion you wanted, and you decided to compare them as if the rest of their respective careers didn't exist
Katabatic said:
I'll say it again: feel free to open a topic in the clinic, not here.
Katabatic said:
You still don't get it. I'm precisely pointing out that you picked the one TT from each guy that you wanted. I picked this one to show you how ridiculous it can get when cherry picking.
Katabatic said:
When did I make any of those claims? Any at all? I hardly have Indurain on a pedestal, if anything I think he's overrated. You're the one hyping Dumoulin, although I guess that's to be expected in this topic.
Katabatic said:
Several riders rode without a helmet that day and it had nothing to do with lack of progress. There was significant climbing that day - Indurain called it harder than the 1993 Giro Sestriere TT - and as is usual in such TTs there were discrepancies in what each rider though was faster. LeMond went without a helmet because he believed it was faster. Several others did.
LeMond was precisely the rider who pushed the edge of TT technology, he's the poster child for it.
Katabatic said:
DFA123's line is on the money here: "The problem with regurgitating a load of stats from Wikipedia like this, is that it doesn't explain the whole context." Nearly every one of those is wrong.
1991: That wasn't the first day in the mountains, that was a medium mountain stage where the break of the day was allowed to stay away by minutes. Leblanc was a young rider not considered a danger, Mottet was already minutes down. The next day was the first day in the high mountains and both were shelled quickly. Indurain had a 3 minute lead by the end of it.
1992: Yes, Chiappucci gambled on an attack from a very long way out that cracked Indurain. Aside from the fact that everyone else lost minutes to Indurain, you're mostly right about this one
1993: Everyone was dropped except for Rominger who was 6 minutes down due to the events of the early flat stages. Indurain summarily dispatched anyone who was a GC threat to him
1994: Indurain set the pace on the climb - again - and dropped everyone who was a contender. Leblanc was over 8 minutes down even before the stage so Indurain didn't care that Leblanc hung on.
1995: Zulle was in the break of the day because he'd lost minutes already and everyone was expecting him to abandon due to injuries. On the final climb Indurain took the front - as usual - and rode everyone off his wheel. He sliced Zulle's advantage from 6 to 2 minutes and none of the GC guys finished within 2 minutes of him despite starting the final climb with him
1992 aside, it was domination every time.
Katabatic said:
As shown above, not really, no. He didn't care about the ones who weren't GC threats, but he was never dropped by any where were threats other than Sestriere 1992 and of course his 11th place finish in 1996
GuyIncognito said:
In this we agree. But it's like saying Andrea Guardini and Marcel Kittel have the same strategy. The level to which they can execute it differs
Katabatic said:
Again: Yes, and? No argument from me, but that's like saying I have a green car: it's irrelevant because we're not discussing their palmares. We're discussing their abilities. Nowhere did I talk about Indurain winning X or Y except in the one case where you made a big point that Indurain was only TT world champion a single time. Once it was pointed out why that was, you - as usual - immediately dropped the subject and harped on something else.
As with most of the discussion in here, you're creating a strawman and pretending I've said something I never did.
Katabatic said:
I didn't ignore it. You ignored my points:
- Dumoulin isn't in the same quality as Indurain
- I never compared their palmares, I compared Dumoulin and Olano's palmares.
Katabatic said:
That....doesn't even begin to make sense. And once again you're dodging giving him an answer.
I eagerly await another round of you putting words in my mouth
- Jun 27, 2013
- 5,217
- 9
- 17,495
Katabatic said:
Not sure if you're talking to me or DFA123, but in any case read this:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=29991
TRENDING THREADS
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s RR, September 28- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 2K
-
European Championship 2025: Men’s RR, October 5- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 855
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 35K
-
World Championship 2025: Men’s ITT, September 21- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 942
-
Tre Valli Varesine 2025, one day race, October 7- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 169
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 40K
-
Il Lombardia 2025, monument, October 11- Started by Krzysztof_O
- Replies: 168
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram