Tour de France Tour de France 2022: Stage 3 (Vejle – Sønderborg, 182k)

[Zoef-Lightning]

Seems a bit biased. Case closed defiantly, but your perspective is very one sided if you really think that what Van Aert did there was fair. However, I do agree he normally doesn't do this, but if we went in for total fair play he would have gotten deducted points or relegated to last place in the group.

So, become member of the jury. Bt i don't think you will pass the exams

 

[Blanco]

Seems like a fair call. However, this is probably the first time i have ever seen Van Aert deviate from his line, as he is one of the few who usually sprints dead straight. If they could ever make an exception, it would be for him. Funny though that Sagan of all people is the one to point the finger, literally.

Van Aert point the finger to Sagan last year, if I remember correctly, although it was a different finger
Maybe Van Aert's deviation has something to do with Sagan being the rider who tried to pass him...

 

[Mosul]

Quinn Simmons was fined 500 Swiss francs and loss some points for riding on the grass.

I was wondering how he was second in the KOM classification with -1pt. That explains it.

 

[tobydawq]

I was wondering how he was second in the KOM classification with -1pt. That explains it.

Shouldn't he be 176th?

 

[CyclistAbi]

It happened and van Aert was fined.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Same post calling Van Aert an idiot while feeling sorry for Groenewegen for what happened in Poland and after ... What? Is this candid camera? AM I BEING PUNKED?

Perfectly reasonable and consistent:
What Groenewegen did in Katowice was not acceptable, neither was what van Aert did in Sonderberg;
The hatred directed towards Groenewegen was not reasonable or acceptable: calling him an idiot is may have been.
Two quite separate, non-contradictory and perfectly tenable positions to hold.


Allow what happened in Sonderberg (and many other places before) and you get what happened in Katowice: numerous commisaires over many years bear contributory responsibility for what happened to Jakobsen that day.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Sorry guys for this false alert.

Someone manages to be angry for you having the decency to apologise???

 

[Frankschleck]

So, become member of the jury. Bt i don't think you will pass the exams

Haha I like Van Aert. I believe in my chances but I am gonna stop this discussion here, nothing to gain, agree to disagree.

 

[kingjr]

The CAV winning 4 stages and green in the Tour last year. The Cav of this year with 5 victories, one in the Giro. The Cav winning the British championship last week. Seriously ?
Of course Cav isn't as strong as 10 years ago. But some days, in the position of Jacobsen two days ago and of Groenewegen yesterday could have won the stage. Actually we should look up what you wrote about Cav just before the Tour last year.
I suspect that you, like many other "connoisseurs" did not predict at all that he would win four stages and the green jersey.

I don't know what you mean by "connoisseur". The first definition that came up was "an expert judge in matters of taste". I don't see how taste enters into this discussion. To be sure, I don't consider myself an expert in any sense.
Generally, I don't predict anything. I prefer to watch sports without having a prediction in the back of my mind that I hope comes true. I would certainly not have predicted four stage wins, though, that is true. However, while Cavendish is still very fast, he wins sprints mostly with his brain these days, and with good team support (The fact about 5 or 6 of his biggest potential rivals either weren't there or took themselves out last year ddin't hurt, either). Still, I don't think the 2022 version of him would have won stage 2 this year the way Jakobsen did.
Yesterday, perhaps he would have stayed on Morkov's wheel. But who knows, perhaps he would have had to open up the sprint from too far. Or wait a bit too long and get swarmed and boxed in by the others. It remains pure speculation.

 

[kingjr]

They don't care about cycling in Germany.

True, but maybe not as true as it used to be:

Tour de France: Der teure Kampf um Aufmerksamkeit

Die Tour de France ist nicht nur Sportereignis, sondern auch Markenspektakel. Das Interesse am Radsport nimmt stark zu – und das vor allem aus drei Gründen.

www.faz.net

For non-German speakers, it's an article bout how interest in cycling is growing in Germany, and new opportunities for sponsors opening up as a result.

 

[geisterhome]

The CAV winning 4 stages and green in the Tour last year. The Cav of this year with 5 victories, one in the Giro. The Cav winning the British championship last week. Seriously ?
Of course Cav isn't as strong as 10 years ago. But some days, in the position of Jacobsen two days ago and of Groenewegen yesterday could have won the stage. Actually we should look up what you wrote about Cav just before the Tour last year.
I suspect that you, like many other "connoisseurs" did not predict at all that he would win four stages and the green jersey.

The stages are done and Cav wasn't there, we will never know. The Future will show how good he is, on the other hand discussing and speculating here will not get us far

 

[Zoef-Lightning]

The stages are done and Cav wasn't there, we will never know. The Future will show how good he is, on the other hand discussing and speculating here will not get us far

I think choosing one sprinter, Jacobsen, is the right one. But that doesn't mean Cav didn't have a chance at a stage win here

 

[geisterhome]

I think choosing one sprinter, Jacobsen, is the right one. But that doesn't mean Cav didn't have a chance at a stage win here

Probably he would have a fair chance but since he isnt taking part its not relevant, there will be other races where he can prove himself.

 

[RobertCrawley]

I don't know what you mean by "connoisseur". The first definition that came up was "an expert judge in matters of taste". I don't see how taste enters into this discussion. To be sure, I don't consider myself an expert in any sense.
Generally, I don't predict anything. I prefer to watch sports without having a prediction in the back of my mind that I hope comes true. I would certainly not have predicted four stage wins, though, that is true. However, while Cavendish is still very fast, he wins sprints mostly with his brain these days, and with good team support (The fact about 5 or 6 of his biggest potential rivals either weren't there or took themselves out last year ddin't hurt, either). Still, I don't think the 2022 version of him would have won stage 2 this year the way Jakobsen did.
Yesterday, perhaps he would have stayed on Morkov's wheel. But who knows, perhaps he would have had to open up the sprint from too far. Or wait a bit too long and get swarmed and boxed in by the others. It remains pure speculation.

You are right. It is speculation whether Cavendish would have lost Morkov's wheel in that turn because Cavendish was not there. The only evidence we have is that Cavendish has never lost Morkov's wheel. I looked at the turn again and, correct me if I'm wrong, it appears that Sagan is the one who took over Morkov's wheel. If Fabio wanted it, he would have had to fight Sagan for it -- no easy or fun task, but a necessary task in the life of a successful sprinter.

I'm not the only one who feels this way about Cavendish, by the way. You might check the Never Strays Far podcast where David Millar talks about this turn. The discussion with Peter Kennaugh reading Morkov's quote starts around 9:15.

‎NEVER STRAYS FAR: NEVER STRAYS CAR: STAGE THREE. on Apple Podcasts

‎Show NEVER STRAYS FAR, Ep NEVER STRAYS CAR: STAGE THREE. - Jul 3, 2022

podcasts.apple.com

Millar says: "Mark Cavendish doesn't lose a lead out guy. That's what consistency is."

 

[kingjr]

You are right. It is speculation whether Cavendish would have lost Morkov's wheel in that turn because Cavendish was not there. The only evidence we have is that Cavendish has never lost Morkov's wheel. I looked at the turn again and, correct me if I'm wrong, it appears that Sagan is the one who took over Morkov's wheel. If Fabio wanted it, he would have had to fight Sagan for it -- no easy or fun task, but a necessary task in the life of a successful sprinter.

I'm not the only one who feels this way about Cavendish, by the way. You might check the Never Strays Far podcast where David Millar talks about this turn. The discussion with Peter Kennaugh reading Morkov's quote starts around 9:15.

‎NEVER STRAYS FAR: NEVER STRAYS CAR: STAGE THREE. on Apple Podcasts

‎Show NEVER STRAYS FAR, Ep NEVER STRAYS CAR: STAGE THREE. - Jul 3, 2022

podcasts.apple.com

Millar says: "Mark Cavendish doesn't lose a lead out guy. That's what consistency is."

I'm glad that you went from "never lost a wheel in his entire career" to "never lost Morkov's wheel," and that you "feel about it this way" rather than claiming it to be an outright fact. I think we can leave it at that.
Regarding Jakobsen, while I'm sure he didn't deliberately lose the wheel, having one rider between him and Morkov could have been a blessing in disguise, as Quickstep's leadout was slightly on the early side, I believe.

 

[RobertCrawley]

I'm glad that you went from "never lost a wheel in his entire career" to "never lost Morkov's wheel," and that you "feel about it this way" rather than claiming it to be an outright fact. I think we can leave it at that.
Regarding Jakobsen, while I'm sure he didn't deliberately lose the wheel, having one rider between him and Morkov could have been a blessing in disguise, as Quickstep's leadout was slightly on the early side, I believe.

A good idea to leave it there. Instead of having a conversation about cycling, you sound like one of those must-win-internet-argument guys.

 

[Zoef-Lightning]

I don't know what you mean by "connoisseur". The first definition that came up was "an expert judge in matters of taste". I don't see how taste enters into this discussion. To be sure, I don't consider myself an expert in any sense.
Generally, I don't predict anything. I prefer to watch sports without having a prediction in the back of my mind that I hope comes true. I would certainly not have predicted four stage wins, though, that is true. However, while Cavendish is still very fast, he wins sprints mostly with his brain these days, and with good team support (The fact about 5 or 6 of his biggest potential rivals either weren't there or took themselves out last year ddin't hurt, either). Still, I don't think the 2022 version of him would have won stage 2 this year the way Jakobsen did.
Yesterday, perhaps he would have stayed on Morkov's wheel. But who knows, perhaps he would have had to open up the sprint from too far. Or wait a bit too long and get swarmed and boxed in by the others. It remains pure speculation.

It was not a question of whether Cav should be selected instead of Jacobsen. I think Jacobsen was the right choice . But the point was whether Cav was still able to win a stage like Jacobs. Then I say yes.

 

[kingjr]

It was not a question of whether Cav should be selected instead of Jacobsen. I think Jacobsen was the right choice . But the point was whether Cav was still able to win a stage like Jacobs. Then I say yes.

Yes, that's what I was talking about...

 

[Jumbot]

Chris Horner's take is that Wout should have been relegated to the back of the big first group (allowing him to keep the yellow jersey but losing all the green jersey points from today's finish).

Maybe I remember it wrong, but didn't daddy Chris mention recently how Sagan shouldn't have been relegated for his move in 2020? A bit weird to hold these two opinions...

 

[memyselfandI]

Same post calling Van Aert an idiot while feeling sorry for Groenewegen for what happened in Poland and after ... What? Is this candid camera? AM I BEING PUNKED?

Two different persons and two different cases..

 

[Davesta]

Seems like a fair call. However, this is probably the first time i have ever seen Van Aert deviate from his line, as he is one of the few who usually sprints dead straight. If they could ever make an exception, it would be for him. Funny though that Sagan of all people is the one to point the finger, literally.

IIRC there was a crosswind from the left on the finishing straight, so likely Van Aert wanted to sprint along the right hand barrier to prevent anybody from using the draft to come over the top of him, hence his unusually diagonal sprint. He was lucky though, I think, not to have been relegated. And personally I wish the jury would penalise these sort of moves more consistently rather than only doing so when somebody loses some skin…

 

[memyselfandI]

The only idiot is Sagan. Almost every sprint involved in incidents. Yesterday too. It is an unwritten law that whoever leads the way can choose his own line. As long as he doesn't ride anyone into the barriers. Sagan never got past the rear wheel of Van Aert. Which also left just enough space. The jury knows more about it than you do.

Must keep line after started sprint. Yeah I know jury knows, been in jury for myself. And been relegated myself in that type of sprint in amateur level but anyway.

How can you say Sagan almost every sprint involved in incidents? Tiny tiny fraction for him in reality, numbers please..Sprints total, sprints crashed, sprints won for example, thank you.

 

[RobertCrawley]

Maybe I remember it wrong, but didn't daddy Chris mention recently how Sagan shouldn't have been relegated for his move in 2020? A bit weird to hold these two opinions...

He did. And Christian took the other side, saying the Tour should try to avoid Poland all over again. I can see why Sagan was relegated when he put his head into WVA, and WVA kept his line when Sagan muscled in. I think they could have let it go, but the relegation was justified.

Maybe I should not open this can of worms, but I thought it was a huge injustice to throw Sagan out after the crash with Cavendish in 2017. Cavendish never owned his fault with this crash, and it is the single reason I am not a fan.