Teams & Riders Vincenzo Nibali discussion thread

Page 387 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
If you don't take seriously this thread then why bother writing long theories about why Nibali won the Giro? I also have my doubts about the gastro but it just came up when you said Nibali was shitting himself. And to finish this debate, my opinion is irelevant compared to what Vincenzo said that without SK's mistake he probably couldn't have won. My opinion was never different but that wasn't the point. The point was always that the race ends in Torino and there is only one winner.
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
Well you know it isn't over until it's over and Steve's hubris ('I have no weaknesses') led him to chase a man he Didn't Need To and go beyond his limits to do it, so he paid the price.

Nibali = 4 GTs and a Monument it's time people stop downgrading his achievements :)
 
Re: Re:

Carols said:
rhubroma said:
If you don't take seriously this thread then why bother writing long theories about why Nibali won the Giro? I also have my doubts about the gastro but it just came up when you said Nibali was shitting himself. And to finish this debate, my opinion is irelevant compared to what Vincenzo said that without SK's mistake he probably couldn't have won. My opinion was never different but that wasn't the point. The point was always that the race ends in Torino and there is only one winner.
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
Well you know it isn't over until it's over and Steve's hubris ('I have no weaknesses') led him to chase a man he Didn't Need To and go beyond his limits to do it, so he paid the price.

Nibali = 4 GTs and a Monument it's time people stop downgrading his achievements :)
How about Steve 'I can't lose' Krujsbris?
 
Re:

El Pistolero said:
Where did Nibali say he won't defend his national title? And does anyone have a picture of the profile? Come to think of it: has there been a better national champion than Nibali this century (and possibly even further back): he won the Tour de France, the Giro d'Italia and the Giro di Lombardia during his two years as a national champion.

It would be a shame to see someone else in the Italian jersey... And it's also a shame Astana didn't allow for a real national jersey like this:

Want to see the jersey in the proper tricolor. Better for somebody else to win who wants to show the jersey properly. Its an outrage that the national jersey hasn't been displayed properly for the last 2 years :mad: but given only as much importance as a sponsor logo.
 
Re: Re:

CheckMyPecs said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.
And SK crashed because he wasn't as good descending as Nibali.
I realize you are master of the obvious, but considering this fact without recognizing the other does cheapen the merit of Nibali's triumph.
 
Re: Re:

Carols said:
rhubroma said:
If you don't take seriously this thread then why bother writing long theories about why Nibali won the Giro? I also have my doubts about the gastro but it just came up when you said Nibali was shitting himself. And to finish this debate, my opinion is irelevant compared to what Vincenzo said that without SK's mistake he probably couldn't have won. My opinion was never different but that wasn't the point. The point was always that the race ends in Torino and there is only one winner.
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
Well you know it isn't over until it's over and Steve's hubris ('I have no weaknesses') led him to chase a man he Didn't Need To and go beyond his limits to do it, so he paid the price.

Nibali = 4 GTs and a Monument it's time people stop downgrading his achievements :)
I have every right to grade Nibali's achievements as I watched them. On a scale of 1-10, I'd say his victory in this Giro was an 8. :)
 
Re: Re:

The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
 
Apr 2, 2013
769
0
0
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
I'm not selling, nothing I wrote in the first paragraph is open to debate and the rest is open for you, like everyone else to discuss but an opinion does not change what we all know to be true - Nibali won the Giro.
 
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
Carols said:
rhubroma said:
If you don't take seriously this thread then why bother writing long theories about why Nibali won the Giro? I also have my doubts about the gastro but it just came up when you said Nibali was shitting himself. And to finish this debate, my opinion is irelevant compared to what Vincenzo said that without SK's mistake he probably couldn't have won. My opinion was never different but that wasn't the point. The point was always that the race ends in Torino and there is only one winner.
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
Well you know it isn't over until it's over and Steve's hubris ('I have no weaknesses') led him to chase a man he Didn't Need To and go beyond his limits to do it, so he paid the price.

Nibali = 4 GTs and a Monument it's time people stop downgrading his achievements :)
I have every right to grade Nibali's achievements as I watched them. On a scale of 1-10, I'd say his victory in this Giro was an 8. :)
8 is good, I'd give him a 9 :).
 
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
1
0
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
Nibali ia like uran, they always have a excuse. First he and his team didn't know what was going on, in final stage he remembered "hey guys, i actually had gastro issues before the MTT..." loooooool
 
Re: Re:

portugal11 said:
jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
Nibali ia like uran, they always have a excuse. First he and his team didn't know what was going on, in final stage he remembered "hey guys, i actually had gastro issues before the MTT..." loooooool
Luckily, its nothing compared to the excuses that Contador-fan come up with.

He may very well have had gastro issues. That will explain his performance on stage 15 and 16 considering he seemed on his way to top form in Corvara.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
1
0
Re: Re:

Top form? Kruisjvick left him behind on col d'agnello... kruijsvick would not concede any time to him in that stages. Even valverde was very close to nibali in stage 20...
 
Re: Re:

portugal11 said:
jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
Nibali ia like uran, they always have a excuse. First he and his team didn't know what was going on, in final stage he remembered "hey guys, i actually had gastro issues before the MTT..." loooooool
Revisionist recollection makes a poor argument. Check the dates and then get back to us so that we can discuss...
 
Re: Re:

The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
I'm not selling, nothing I wrote in the first paragraph is open to debate and the rest is open for you, like everyone else to discuss but an opinion does not change what we all know to be true - Nibali won the Giro.
Well that's obvious. Indeed what you wrote in the first paragraph is not subject to contradiction. However, the analysis is bland, so it is essential that we interpret the evidence.

Which is why I say, no way in hell Enzo wins the Giro without Kruijswijk going down. While this doesn't change the outcome, it does qualify the merit of his victory for me. I don't like the outcome of races being so drastically conditioned by the crash of a leader, otherwise it makes no difference how one wins. I'd feel the same way if the only way Contador beats Froome, is if Froome crashes hard late in the Tour while in the Yellow Jersey. And I'd be perfectly fine with admitting that AC didn't win on a show of strength, that it qualifies differently on the rating scale.
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
Not the gastro issues again. He started shitting himself when he realized Kruijswijk was way stronger on the road to Corvara.
 
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
Not the gastro issues again. He started shitting himself when he realized Kruijswijk was way stronger on the road to Corvara.
Whats your nationality? :p
 
Re:

Brullnux said:
There's a little 200m (I think) stretch at 17% which someone could attack on, so it's not completely out of the question that he wins it, just exremely difficult, especially with Bardiani and Trek and Lampre maybe chasing him down. Colbrelli ftw, it Ulissi in a group of 5 or 6, unless Sonny is in it too.
Unfortunately Sonny has been diagnosed with pneumonia, 20 days rest so the Italian championships are in danger.
 
Re: Re:

rhubroma said:
jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
The Principal Sheep said:
rhubroma said:
What theory? We all saw what happened. Nibali won the Giro, because SK crashed. This fact must be considered when assessing the nature of his triumph.

Whether or not he would still have had that not been the case is what's entirely theoretical.
We know for fact that Nibali won the Giro, we know for fact that Kruijswijk crashed, we know for fact that Nibali was over 4 minutes adrift in 4th place and after two stages was sitting proudly in pink, we know people crashing is part of racing, we know that the winner is decided at the finish.

Everything else is open for discussion, but what we have is a worthy winner in Nibali while a rider who would have been a worthy winner lost due to his own mistake whilst under pressure.
Nah, I'm not buying it. Without the crash, no way Nibs pulls back 4:43 on Kruisjwijk.
Without the gastro issues VN wouldn't have needed to pull back time since he would have been leading.
Not the gastro issues again. He started shitting himself when he realized Kruijswijk was way stronger on the road to Corvara.
After the Stage 15 TT he complained about something not being good. You could argue that he was just making excuses for his poor result in the TT, but then he had several more bad days after that as well.
 
No he later claimed that on the eve of the TT, that is between Corvara and the next day as I have said, he had stomach problems.

The problem was obviously connected to the stress of realizing that, despite wanting to "strafare" (demonstrate with great superbia) on Corvara, he was no match for the Dutchman.
 
Re:

rhubroma said:
No he later claimed that on the eve of the TT, that is between Corvara and the next day as I have said, he had stomach problems.

The problem was obviously connected to the stress of realizing that despite wanting to "strafare" (demonstrate with great superbia) on Corvara, he was no match for the Dutchman.
Press Conference after the TT:
“Vincenzo was about 20 watts lower than we expected him to be for the second week of the Giro d’Italia. The whole Astana staff, from the management, to the coaches, to the medical staff and the soigneur, none of us can understand why Vincenzo lost so much time. He performed at a much lower level than usual. If you look at Michele Scarponi, who finished fifth, that’s where Vincenzo should have been.

“I was following him in the team car and we immediately noticed he was suffering, even without looking at the times. His pedal stroke was heavier than usual, he never found his rhythm and that costs you a lot in a mountain time trial. Of course it can happen, it's all part of cycling. But if it happens on a flat stage, you can get through it. But if it happens on massively important stage like a mountain time trial, it’s the worst thing that can happen and there’s nowhere to hide.”

Granted he didn't say "what" was wrong, but he likely didn't know yet.
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
rhubroma said:
No he later claimed that on the eve of the TT, that is between Corvara and the next day as I have said, he had stomach problems.

The problem was obviously connected to the stress of realizing that despite wanting to "strafare" (demonstrate with great superbia) on Corvara, he was no match for the Dutchman.
Press Conference after the TT:
“Vincenzo was about 20 watts lower than we expected him to be for the second week of the Giro d’Italia. The whole Astana staff, from the management, to the coaches, to the medical staff and the soigneur, none of us can understand why Vincenzo lost so much time. He performed at a much lower level than usual. If you look at Michele Scarponi, who finished fifth, that’s where Vincenzo should have been.

“I was following him in the team car and we immediately noticed he was suffering, even without looking at the times. His pedal stroke was heavier than usual, he never found his rhythm and that costs you a lot in a mountain time trial. Of course it can happen, it's all part of cycling. But if it happens on a flat stage, you can get through it. But if it happens on massively important stage like a mountain time trial, it’s the worst thing that can happen and there’s nowhere to hide.”

Granted he didn't say "what" was wrong, but he likely didn't know yet.
In the la Gazzetta dello Sport interview when the Giro was over, Nibali and his staff further admitted that the night before the MTT he suffered from intestinal problems. They kept silent not to tip off his rivals. They thus knew the intestinal problems started after the Corvara stage. ;)
 
Jul 16, 2010
17,455
2
0
It doesn't matter, he won. And Uran has been on the podium twice in the Giro, so it's not like he's some sort of shitty rider. He's just inconsistent.

And with regards to Kruijswijk, bike handling is a part of cycling. Nibali pressured him into making a mistake and it worked. He created his own luck. If anyone had decided to follow Nibali during his fabulous descent in Lombardia they would have crashed quite horribly as well. Nibali has won numerous races by attacking on the penultimate climb: stage 19 in the Tour last year, stage 19 in the Giro this year and the Giro di Lombardia last year. I'll take that every day over the Froome way of cycling.
 
Re:

El Pistolero said:
It doesn't matter, he won. And Uran has been on the podium twice in the Giro, so it's not like he's some sort of shitty rider. He's just inconsistent.

And with regards to Kruijswijk, bike handling is a part of cycling. Nibali pressured him into making a mistake and it worked. He created his own luck. If anyone had decided to follow Nibali during his fabulous descent in Lombardia they would have crashed quite horribly as well. Nibali has won numerous races by attacking on the penultimate climb: stage 19 in the Tour last year, stage 19 in the Giro this year and the Giro di Lombardia last year. I'll take that every day over the Froome way of cycling.
Nobody is questioning his win. It is simply a fact under the circumstances, however one chooses to regard them.
 
Re:

El Pistolero said:
It doesn't matter, he won. And Uran has been on the podium twice in the Giro, so it's not like he's some sort of shitty rider. He's just inconsistent.

And with regards to Kruijswijk, bike handling is a part of cycling. Nibali pressured him into making a mistake and it worked. He created his own luck. If anyone had decided to follow Nibali during his fabulous descent in Lombardia they would have crashed quite horribly as well. Nibali has won numerous races by attacking on the penultimate climb: stage 19 in the Tour last year, stage 19 in the Giro this year and the Giro di Lombardia last year. I'll take that every day over the Froome way of cycling.
Guessing Nibali also pressured Landa, the guy who was supposed to lose 4 mins on Nibs in the TTs and only lost 30 secs, into gastro problems.
And yes, Nibali's palmares reflect his ability. 4 GTs - a better stage racer than the likes of Lemond and Fignon, double the rider of Froome etc. One of the top 12 stage racers of all time.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY