Tour Match Up: Gesink v Van Den Broeck

[El Pistolero]

Which is not true. whenver I make a prediction I don't make outlandisch claims like El Pistoletje or ACF mine usually make sense and more often than not they outperform my expectations.
So there.

The only thing I'm different than you guys is that I don't see how the **** people think the likes of Nibali or worse, even Kreuziger, could possible be better than Gesink for instance.

I don't make outlandish claims. Looking at the votes of who will win the Tour this year however... Haha, who the hell voted for Gesink. 9 times.

The only claim I've made here that others seem to find so outlandish is that Gilbert could one day do good at the Vuelta if he wanted to do so and started focusing on it(leaving aside if it would be smart of not smart, just saying he could). I don't think you'll disagree since you don't find Nibbles a good climber anyway. Who by the way won the Vuelta and podiumed 2 Giro's while Gesink has never gotten a top 5

Just sayin'

And I'm still pretty high in the 2011 prediction game despite forgetting my entry 3 times How's that for outlandish claims?

 

[Franklin]

It's not just about rough talent, it's also about actual and tangible wins on the road.

Gesink has Emilia (x2), Montreal and Oman.
Nibali has a stage in the Giro (+2 podiums in the GC) and has won the Vuelta.

I personally believe Gesink is better, but I do understand why people rate Nibali higher. An important part of being a good racer is winning (big) races, something which Gesink has sucked at so far.

Indeed, an actual Gt winner is simply in a different league (sorry Cadel)

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Gesink has only finished 3 gt's (and ridden 4)

Let's look at Nibali's GT finishes, when he was at the same age of Gesink.
Oh look, at 20 minutes in the Giro. Oh look, not even in the top 15 of the Tour de France.

Well, guess that comparison falters

 

[El Pistolero]

It's not just about rough talent, it's also about actual and tangible wins on the road.

Gesink has Emilia (x2), Montreal and Oman.
Nibali has a stage in the Giro (+2 podiums in the GC) and has won the Vuelta.

I personally believe Gesink is better, but I do understand why people rate Nibali higher. An important part of being a good racer is winning (big) races, something which Gesink has sucked at so far.

Gesink is perhaps the better climber, but overall Nibali is the better cyclist.

 

[El Pistolero]

Gesink has only finished 3 gt's (and ridden 4)

Let's look at Nibali's GT finishes, when he was at the same age of Gesink.
Oh look, at 20 minutes in the Giro. Oh look, not even in the top 15 of the Tour de France.

Well, guess that comparison falters

Let's look at Gilbert's monument finishes at age 25 compared to Boonen Oh look, no podiums in Monuments. Oh look, not even a top 15 in a hilly classic(analogy).

What's up with thinking someone can't become better than someone else because he wasn't better at the same age as that other person?

Ps: Nibbles was seventh at the Tour at age 24. Gesink 6th at same age. Big deal.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Lets look at their comparitve age/experience when they finished GT's

Nibali - Giro 2007 - 19th at 31 minutes of Di Luca
Gesinks - Vuelta 2008 - 7th at 6'55 of Contador

Advantage - Gesink

Nibali's - Giro d'Italia 2008 - 11th at 20'14 of Contador
Gesinks - Vuelta a España 2009 - 6th at 6'40 of Valverde, noted that he was 2nd up until the final mountain stage at '32 and only lost 6 minutes because of a whole in his knee

Nibali's 1st Tour de France - 18th at 28'33 of Sastre
Gesinks 1st (finished, not fallen after 4 flat stages) TDF - 6th at 9'30 or so from Contador

Comparitve to their age, Gesink always did better. He is more talented and in their head-to-head races always did better.
If Gesink would have done Giro/Vuelta last year he'd outperform Nibali quite easily.

 

[The Hitch]

And I'm still pretty high in the 2011 prediction game despite forgetting my entry 3 times How's that for outlandish claims?

Lol. Pisti comes out with the weiredest arguments.

This one above is the argument for authority taken to new levels. Im high in a cycling fantasy game ergo I am right.

The funniest thing was when after one of those posts (directed at hrotha) he came out with some Latin. I can imagine hrotha reading through the drivel then seeing the Latin come after it and do a facepalm

BTW Pisti im above you in that game, and i say Gilbert couldnt win the Vuelta.

Guess that settles that debate then

 

[boomcie]

Gesink has only finished 3 gt's (and ridden 4)

Let's look at Nibali's GT finishes, when he was at the same age of Gesink.
Oh look, at 20 minutes in the Giro. Oh look, not even in the top 15 of the Tour de France.

Well, guess that comparison falters

I don't think it really falters.
Some riders mature faster than others. Gesink clearly matured faster than Nibali. Also the age difference between them is roughly one and a half year, not two years.

But like I said, I personally believe Gesink is better, but he fails to deliver results just yet. Unfortunately though results are the only thing that counts in sports, despite the Olympic motto.

 

[El Pistolero]

Lol. Pisti comes out with the weiredest arguments.

This one above is the argument for authority taken to new levels. Im high in a cycling fantasy game ergo I am right.

The funniest thing was when after one of those posts (directed at hrotha) he came out with some Latin. I can imagine hrotha reading through the drivel then seeing the Latin come after it and do a facepalm

BTW Pisti im above you in that game, and i say Gilbert couldnt win the Vuelta.

Guess that settles that debate then

If I make outlandish predictions I wouldn't get them right so often. I thought that was easy to comprehend Hitch. Do you really need everything explained to you?

And what? Never heard of Latin proverbs? It means don't talk against the sun--> No point in arguing about the obvious.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

I don't think it really falters.
Some riders mature faster than others. Gesink clearly matured faster than Nibali. Also the age difference between them is roughly one and a half year, not two years.

But like I said, I personally believe Gesink is better, but he fails to deliver results just yet. Unfortunately though results are the only thing that counts in sports, despite the Olympic motto.

Gesink delivers results an entire year.
So how can you say that?

Nibali has 2 podiums and a GT on him, but that's in the Vuelta/Giro. And he's about 4 GT's ahead in amount of GT's ridden. He has been pro 2 years longer, and in those GT's Gesink was not there (because he rode the Tour duh).

Ergo. You can't say he is better based on that, you can compare when they rode against eachother. And 90% of the times Gesink comes ahead -> Gesink is clearly better, always will be too.

 

[boomcie]

If Gesink would have done Giro/Vuelta last year he'd outperform Nibali quite easily.

You know D_T, I actually think you're right about that.
But that doesn't change jack. He did not do that performance and a hypothetical performance doesn't mean anything. Gesink needs a big win to establish himself. Nibali has it.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Regarding the Dutchies hype dutchies too much part of the debate.




Timmy, you had Kruijswijk down for 17th before the Giro started but didnt have Gadret in your top 20.

Was Kruijswijk really your biggest surprise

Was there not someone else who performed beyond expectations



To a lesser extent you to Moondance. You had Gadret 14th and Kruisjwick 20th. Surely the guy scraping the top 10 from 20th rather than owning several gt contenders from 14th deserves the "honorable mention" side of the equation.

Its just a shame DT didnt particpate in this, as it would have been nice to see him explain how the guy he probably would have predicted for a podium, can be the biggest surprise when coming 9th

to be honest I totally disregarded Gadret in my 20 pick, I knew he could do a top 20 at the giro no problem, but I forgot about him. I didn't expect 4th, I would have expected just outside the top 10 actually, that was great for him, but I was unsurprised to see him do better then someone like Kruijswijk Like I said, I didn't expect Kruijswijk to be this good, for me more surprising. A fantasy game tells little. I had Kruijswijk in the top 20 more for reasons that I like him, I even said before the giro I was unsure if he would make the top 20 (I said somewhere between 15-30). So meh, I stand by my comment, not a dutch hype thing, genuine surprise like so many other posters.

The pushing of 'fanboyism' is meh. I'll defend a dutch rider when I think someone is talking trash (el pistle 99% of the time, who just has clear anti-dutch behaivour here) but I wont say something I don't think is true.

 

[boomcie]

Gesink delivers results an entire year.
So how can you say that?

Being second or third are good results for a domestique. They aren't sufficient for a leader (except maybe in the GC of a GT).

 

[El Pistolero]

You mean when Nibali crushed Gesink at LBL this year? Or when he finished 7th in the Tour while Gesink had to abandon? Or when he outclimbed Gesink in the Tirreno-Adriatico this year?

I wonder where this 90% figure comes from. They've only done one GT together.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

it comes from the times Gesink easily outclimbed Nibali in dauphine before that tour where Gesink fell for instance, and nearly every stage-race they ridden together that Gesink finished higher in the mountain stages AND in the time trials.

You just named the entire 10% of Nibali
Btw I'm ignoring you anyway since 90% what you post is hate against dutchies

 

[El Pistolero]

it comes from the times Gesink easily outclimbed Nibali in dauphine before that tour where Gesink fell for instance, and nearly every stage-race they ridden together that Gesink finished higher in the mountain stages AND in the time trials.

You just named the entire 10% of Nibali
Btw I'm ignoring you anyway since 90% what you post is hate against dutchies

You mean the DL after Nibali just did the Giro?

Lol...

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

You mean the DL after Nibali just did the Giro?

Lol...

2009. Gesink rode suisse last year

 

[El Pistolero]

2009. Gesink rode suisse last year

Ah, true. But Nibali was seventh at the Tour that year while Gesink crashed out. Which is why I think Nibali is a better overall cyclist than Gesink. We all like to trash Cuddles for messing up at some point in a GT, but Gesink is showing the same tendency. Vuelta 2009, Tour 2009, Tour 2010, Pais Vasco, etc

Nibali's bike handling skills and descending is a lot better than Gesink. Which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see him finish higher on a GC than Gesink. Just my opinion though. But to say Gesink is clearly better by bringing up results from the past is just not looking at the context. Nibali won a GT, let's not forget that one. Gesink still has to make a podium in a GT. Nibali has 3 podiums in 12 months time.

And well, looking at this year alone Nibali has been much more impressive even if we leave out the Giro.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

2009 pistoletje, when he rode no Giro to prepare himself percetly for the tour

http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=11935

TT - Gesink 13th Nibali 14th (thought that was Nibali's weapon??)
Ventoux - Gesink 4th Nibali 9th +26 seconds from Gesink
Briancon - finished same time
Longchamp - Gesink 3rd Nibali 8th +1m38s from Gesink

And you don't tell me there was a form difference there. They were both gearing up for the TDF. (Where Nibali would finish 7th in the famous backpedal tour with Wiggins and Armstrong in the top 5)

 

[El Pistolero]

Seventh is better than crashing out, no?

Nibali's weapon is his descending and bike handling skills. He will not so easily have to abandon a GT because of a crash and can make up time in descends if he got dropped in the mountains. His time trial isn't bad as well. But those things are hard to compare as it can change over time.

Gesink might be a better climber, but that still doesn't mean he'll finish in front of Nibali who is in my opinion a lot more experienced and has better bike handling skills. He's also better on intermediate stages than Gesink.

His climbing can't be that terrible if he finishes 7 seconds off Contador at the Zoncolan

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

So I guess Wouter Weylandt died because he was such a poor bike handler

Do you even realise how *** that is? As if Gesink falls every race like Soler.
Gesink hardly ever falls. He just had bad luck that when he fell, it was serious. That usually indicates you fall not because of yourself, but others. Which was also the case in the Vuelta 2009 btw (Mosquera fell into a hole and Gesink happened to ride behind him, what can you do??)


Don't get offended now that I used Weylandt, it was just the perfect example of how backwards your argumentation is

 

[El Pistolero]

So I guess Wouter Weylandt died because he was such a poor bike handler

Do you even realise how *** that is? As if Gesink falls every race like Soler.
Gesink hardly ever falls. He just had bad luck that when he fell, it was serious. That usually indicates you fall not because of yourself, but others. Which was also the case in the Vuelta 2009 btw (Mosquera fell into a hole and Gesink happened to ride behind him, what can you do??)

Ride in front of him. Why do you think Contador almost never ever crashes? He was always up front this Giro.

Uhm, Gesink actually does fall bad a lot. As in every GT he enters. It's a worrying statistic.
WW has nothing to do with this. He died because of lack of focus. Nothing to do with bike handling in his case. Although lack of focus would be just as bad.

 

[The Hitch]

2009 pistoletje, when he rode no Giro to prepare himself percetly for the tour

http://cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/race.asp?raceid=11935

TT - Gesink 13th Nibali 14th (thought that was Nibali's weapon??)
Ventoux - Gesink 4th Nibali 9th +26 seconds from Gesink
Briancon - finished same time
Longchamp - Gesink 3rd Nibali 8th +1m38s from Gesink

And you don't tell me there was a form difference there. They were both gearing up for the TDF. (Where Nibali would finish 7th in the famous backpedal tour with Wiggins and Armstrong in the top 5)

But since then Nibali has improved a lot.

Come on we dont need to tell you Ruben that rider's performances when they are young dont tell us what they will be like when they are older. You pay a lot of attention to the youth races. You keep pointing out how popo and dekker owned all those races, and look at Yaroslaw now.

Nibali just stayed with Contador on Zoncolan. Last year he stayed with Basso on Mortirolo and Grappa and beat him on Kronplatz.thats a big improvement on the giuy who lost to Gesink in Dauphine.

We all like to trash Cuddles for messing up at some point in a GT, but Gesink is showing the same tendency. Vuelta 2009, Tour 2009, Tour 2010, Pais Vasco, etc

The comparison with Cuddles is an interesting one in that Dekker uses the pluperfect subjunctive and says Gesink would have beaten Nibali had he ridden it.

Same way that Cuddles would have won a few Grand Tours in 07 08 maybe 06 and 09 had he ridden them, but he didnt so he has 0 while Menchov has 3.

No one is going to say in 10 years that Cadel would have won those tours ergo is legitimate winner and in the same way when people see the 2010 Vuelta they will see that Nibali won not that Gesink would have won.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

They will both ride the Vuelta so there you will see. Wanna bet? Even if Gesink does the Tour/Vuelta double he'll be better than a rested Nibali there

 

[MisterX]

Ride in front of him. Why do you think Contador almost never ever crashes? He was always up front this Giro.

Uhm, Gesink actually does fall bad a lot. As in every GT he enters. It's a worrying statistic.
WW has nothing to do with this. He died because of lack of focus. Nothing to do with bike handling in his case. Although lack of focus would be just as bad.

Ugh....your beloved Contador again. Please refrain yourself from this discussion, because you're not objective at any stretch of the imagination. I'm no Dutchie but really you belittle every accomplishment a Dutch rider made, knowing this because I've been lurking this for quite some time now.