Tour de France Stage 4: Lorient - Mur de Bretagne - 172.5 km

Page 18 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 8, 2009
1,003
0
0
Tuarts said:
I think people have different perspective than being "wrong".

I think its wrong to compare the sport to the past. You don't do it for any of sport do you? Footballers were (generalising) alcoholic, chain-smoking bludgers in comparison to todays professionals - do you compare them, or even can you compare?

Sport changes, cycling is no different. For me, any cycling is interesting, in all its new incarnations and you should ask Chavanel if he thinks breakways don't succeed in Grand Tours. Or De Gendt about Paris-Nice.

The UCI shouldn't be imposing new rules to liven up the racing and create more 'spectacles' for fans. If the pros for the riders and teams to have something like radios, which have become essential, far outweigh the cons then leave them.

New technology, new tactics, new riders, everything changes, lets not try to be bogged down by "glory days"
replace everything Ive said with that........i was trying to make that point (not very well but trying)
 
Feb 1, 2011
9,403
2,275
20,680
c&cfan said:
he was skinny back then with 80kg and 1.90m. i am 84kg and 1.80m.

but 68 kg with 1.90m?????????????

:eek:

it isn't healthy!

Probably not, but neither is riding 4000km over several different mountain ranges in 3 weeks in general. I'm assuming that saying he has superb medical supervision is an understatement so I wouldn't worry about that.
 
Mar 18, 2009
843
642
12,180
rhubroma said:
Just watching the RAI coverage of the stage today and there was a side presentation on the 1949 Tour which had a time trial that passed over the Mur de Bretagne that was 139 KILOMETERS LONG.

Now that's a freakin time trial! :D
In 1979, they had a team time trial which covered a similar distance.
 
Aug 18, 2010
11,435
3,594
28,180
Tuarts said:
New technology, new tactics, new riders, everything changes, lets not try to be bogged down by "glory days"

I've no problem with that, but equally we shouldn't treat the current set up as sacrosanct. It evolved and it should continue to evolve. Sports of all kind change the rules to thwart tactics which become dominant at the expense of entertainment.
 
Feb 1, 2011
9,403
2,275
20,680
Zinoviev Letter said:
I've no problem with that, but equally we shouldn't treat the current set up as sacrosanct. It evolved and it should continue to evolve. Sports of all kind change the rules to thwart tactics which become dominant at the expense of entertainment.

The viewers' entertainment is merely a side-effect of the athletes trying to win in professional sports.
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,644
2
0
c&cfan said:
he was skinny back then with 80kg and 1.90m. i am 84kg and 1.80m.

but 68 kg with 1.90m?????????????

:eek:

it isn't healthy!

According to Gesink's website he is 189cm and 69kg.

Think it is pretty standard for the mountain men. see braj. for unhealthy. His weight is F**ded up.
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Is there any point or purpose served by having riders in the saddle five to eight hours a day, or having so many climbs, one after the other? Wouldn't it be just as exciting if it were, say, three hours and one or two climbs? Not being hindbound by nostalgia means being able to make real changes.
 
Jun 7, 2010
19,196
3,092
28,180
Timmy-loves-Rabo said:
According to Gesink's website he is 189cm and 69kg.

Think it is pretty standard for the mountain men. see braj. for unhealthy. His weight is F**ded up.

Brajkovic has twigs for arms though. He also isn't very tall, wiki says 1.75.
 
Aug 18, 2010
11,435
3,594
28,180
spalco said:
The viewers' entertainment is merely a side-effect of the athletes trying to win in professional sports.

That's completely the wrong way around. Professional cycling exists to advertise products to an audience attracted by the promise of entertainment. Professional cycling has been about that from the start.
 
Jul 6, 2009
446
15
9,310
This is the first break that had better then a .1 percent chance of staying away. If one of those leaders have enough power to attack his breakaway companions, they might have a 5% chance of winning the stage.

Obviously, Omega is worried forcing Griepel to work on the front.
 
May 25, 2010
3,371
0
0
Zinoviev Letter said:
I've no problem with that, but equally we shouldn't treat the current set up as sacrosanct. It evolved and it should continue to evolve. Sports of all kind change the rules to thwart tactics which become dominant at the expense of entertainment.

Of course not, keep things regimented and you'll fall behind but change shouldn't be done just for the sake of appearing to do something.
 
May 18, 2011
186
0
0
spalco said:
The viewers' entertainment is merely a side-effect of the athletes trying to win in professional sports.
And the fact that they can focus on their sport as professional athletes comes from the money that sponsors put in, because people watch it for entertainment...Bit of an chicken/egg kind of thing
 
May 18, 2011
186
0
0
Do you watch the sport for your entertainment or because you want to know who the winner is?
Of course you remember who the winner is, but also the entertaining riders, everytime Hoogerland or De Gendt is at the front, you have people on this board cheering for them. A lot more then when Cav wins a stage...
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
1
0
I'd love to see these five just hold on and Hoogerland win the stage - it won't happen, but it would be sweet if....
 

TRENDING THREADS