Teams & Riders Vincenzo Nibali discussion thread

[Rollthedice]

Re:

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.

In fact on stage 19 TdF last year, he attacked on the last stages of Croix de Fer, some 60k to finish before the penultimate climb, Col du Mollard.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

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.

What has Landa proven in his career exactly? He certainly wasn't climbing well before he abandoned. Nibali also had gastro problems.

 

[Red Rick]

Col du Mollard is easy to forget, in my mind its never more than a bump in the descent though its somehow a cat 2.

 

[Rollthedice]

Landa had no business in the Giro, nobody had to put pressure on him since he went home so long ago that it is almost completely forgotten that he was actually at the start. The hype this lad got on these forums might've caused the gastro problems. It is odd how these Sky captains all get so ill in the Giro that they have to abandon, Wiggo, Porte, Landa. That being said I consider Landa a very good climber but that's about all, he is too one dimensional and inconsistent to challenge a GT and I'm afraid he'll end up as a dom for Froome.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

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.

It is what it is!

 

[The Principal Sheep]

Re: Re:

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.

How could someone watch those final stages and fail to witness the 'show of strength' by Nibali? besides Kruijswijk's crash was not a matter of luck but poor judgement and riding, perhaps not something meriting victory.

 

[The Principal Sheep]

Re: Re:

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.

Why mention a rider who quit so early in the Giro? and wasn't he behind Nibali when he gave up?

 

[huge]

Re: Re:

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.

Pretty obvious, lapalissian

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

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.

What has Landa proven in his career exactly? He certainly wasn't climbing well before he abandoned. Nibali also had gastro problems.

That he's one of the best climbers in the peloton

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

Landa had no business in the Giro, nobody had to put pressure on him since he went home so long ago that it is almost completely forgotten that he was actually at the start. The hype this lad got on these forums might've caused the gastro problems. It is odd how these Sky captains all get so ill in the Giro that they have to abandon, Wiggo, Porte, Landa. That being said I consider Landa a very good climber but that's about all, he is too one dimensional and inconsistent to challenge a GT and I'm afraid he'll end up as a dom for Froome.

Not debating that, but while I think he just happened to have two of the best days of his life on both TTs, by the time he quit, there wasn't much left apart from climbing and descending.

And although whether Landa is a better climber than Nibali is speculation given their lack of history against each other, I struggle to believe that Landa would have lost 5 mins to Kruijswijk in the way that Nibali did.

 

[rhubroma]

Re: Re:

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.

How could someone watch those final stages and fail to witness the 'show of strength' by Nibali? besides Kruijswijk's crash was not a matter of luck but poor judgement and riding, perhaps not something meriting victory.

Nibali's "show of strenghth" was directly proportional to the condition of his rivals, one off whom was debilitated by the crash, while the other was no champion. I've already stated that my assessment of Nibali's victory (indeed Nibili's real status as a GT champion) factors this in and that I don't consider beating Kruijswijk the way he did to be of the same merit as had he without the crash. I don't even think he would have beaten SK without the crash, as I have said. This means that his win in this Giro, just as his win in the 2014 Tour, has an asterisk after it.

 

[rhubroma]

And please, Nibali is no Lemond or Fignon.

 

[The Principal Sheep]

Re: Re:

Nibali's "show of strenghth" was directly proportional to the condition of his rivals, one off whom was debilitated by the crash, while the other was no champion. I've already stated that my assessment of Nibali's victory (indeed Nibili's real status as a GT champion) factors this in and that I don't consider beating Kruijswijk the way he did to be of the same merit as had he without the crash. I don't even think he would have beaten SK without the crash, as I have said. This means that his win in this Giro, just as his win in the 2014 Tour, has an asterisk after it.

Nibali's show of strength was disproportionate to his condition in this Giro, for whatever reason he had been performing well below expected levels and thus the show of strength when it mattered was a great performance.

An asterisk? oh please, I'll take this as a joke, these are meant for victory's tainted by cheating or outside influences, a rider crashing is very much part of this sport.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

And please, Nibali is no Lemond or Fignon.

No, he's better than both of them! Luck wasn't a factor in any of his victories, he made his own!

 

[SafeBet]

Re: Re:

And although whether Landa is a better climber than Nibali is speculation given their lack of history against each other, I struggle to believe that Landa would have lost 5 mins to Kruijswijk in the way that Nibali did.

Landa has lost at least 5 minutes to the best climber in the race in every GT he's ridden bar one.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

And although whether Landa is a better climber than Nibali is speculation given their lack of history against each other, I struggle to believe that Landa would have lost 5 mins to Kruijswijk in the way that Nibali did.

Landa has lost at least 5 minutes to the best climber in the race in every GT he's ridden bar one.

It's not like cyclists improve with age when they're young...

He was very good in both the Giro last year despite working for Aru, and in the Vuelta when he went stage hunting

 

[SafeBet]

Re: Re:

[
He was very good in both the Giro last year despite working for Aru, and in the Vuelta when he went stage hunting

And Nibali was very good in like his last 10 GTs ridden. So?

I don't even understand why Landa is being discussed here. It's like saying Froome was lucky cause TJVG abandoned during last year TdF. Happens in every GT.

 

[SeriousSam]

The difference is that Landa was the most likely rider to win the Giro at the time of his exit, whereas TJVG's odds to win the Tour were hovering around 0 at all times.

Although Landa was the most likely rider to win the Giuro at the time of his exit, Nibali wasn't far behind.

By contrast, SK was by far the most likely rider to win the Giro at the time of his crash, with Nibali very unlikely to win. But that also reflected his very poor form, which then very unexpectedly improved.

I will later post an estimate as to what the chance is Nibali would have won the Giro, had SK nor crashed, knowing what we know now (as opposed to before it happened, when the chance Nibali would win was like <5%). An interesting question in my view, that adds some context to his victory.

 

[The Principal Sheep]

Re: Re:

And Nibali was very good in like his last 10 GTs ridden. So?

I don't even understand why Landa is being discussed here. It's like saying Froome was lucky cause TJVG abandoned during last year TdF. Happens in every GT.

Simple really, Mikel Landa (who quit early in stage 10 whilst behind Nibali & Kruisjwijk) has won the Giro del Trentino and so is currently one of the best Grand Tour riders in the peloton, whereas Vincenzo only has overall victories in the Giro d'Italia (x2), Tour de France, Vuelta a Espana, Tirreno-Adriatico (x2) and the Giro del Trentino (x2) and so was obviously out of his depth riding against Landa.

Please also bear in mind that whilst we can say it was luck that played a part in what happened to Landa (& Kruisjwijk somehow) we cannot ascribe any such notion of Nibali being unlucky for the health issues which he had to endure.

 

[boasson]

Re:

Niba never won a GT against Froome, A.C and Quinti.

So he is the best of the rest.

He beats Mosquera, Peraud, Chaves and Uran to win his 4 GT. And failed against Wiggins, Horner, Arroyo and Basso at his Podium places. Niba is at the same GT-level like Purito in the last 5 or 6 years. His problem was, that his rivals were A.C in Vuelta 12; Froome and Quinti in Tour 13, a fresh A.C and Froome in Vuelta 14 and a fresh Aru with a superb squad in Vuelta 15. Thats all.

 

[richo36]

I don't know how everyone considers nibali "lucky". To me, luck is something out of your control that benefits you. So if I was to put that in cycling terms, a GT favourite being caught up in a crash on a flat sprinters stage.

If you look at SK crash, it was nibali who pushed the pace at the top of the climb. Which SK said him self put him into the red. Then nibali then continued to force the pace on the descent, which forced SK to make a choice of either let nibali go or try and hold on even though you are on you limit. SK followed and ended up crashing due to a lapse in concentration but this lapse of concentration was caused directly by nibali applying the pressure. Therefore he was not "lucky" as he was the person that essentially put SK in that position. As the saying goes you create your on luck.

honestly you can't say that he was lucky that landa dropped out as well. If landa is a proven GT winner then to a degree you can make that call, but not when we are just judging it off last years giro. For example I can see the argument for tour 14 with froome crashing out to say he was lucky.

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

And please, Nibali is no Lemond or Fignon.

No, he's better than both of them! Luck wasn't a factor in any of his victories, he made his own!

3 Tours is better than two Giri, one Vuelta and one Tour.

 

[rhubroma]

Re: Re:

Nibali's "show of strenghth" was directly proportional to the condition of his rivals, one off whom was debilitated by the crash, while the other was no champion. I've already stated that my assessment of Nibali's victory (indeed Nibili's real status as a GT champion) factors this in and that I don't consider beating Kruijswijk the way he did to be of the same merit as had he without the crash. I don't even think he would have beaten SK without the crash, as I have said. This means that his win in this Giro, just as his win in the 2014 Tour, has an asterisk after it.

Nibali's show of strength was disproportionate to his condition in this Giro, for whatever reason he had been performing well below expected levels and thus the show of strength when it mattered was a great performance.

An asterisk? oh please, I'll take this as a joke, these are meant for victory's tainted by cheating or outside influences, a rider crashing is very much part of this sport.

Watch it now, or this goes to the clinic. And if you're satisfied with Enzo winning GTs because the stronger riders crash out, so be it.

 

[rhubroma]

Re: Re:

And please, Nibali is no Lemond or Fignon.

No, he's better than both of them! Luck wasn't a factor in any of his victories, he made his own!

Lucky Vinnie.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

Landa had no business in the Giro, nobody had to put pressure on him since he went home so long ago that it is almost completely forgotten that he was actually at the start. The hype this lad got on these forums might've caused the gastro problems. It is odd how these Sky captains all get so ill in the Giro that they have to abandon, Wiggo, Porte, Landa. That being said I consider Landa a very good climber but that's about all, he is too one dimensional and inconsistent to challenge a GT and I'm afraid he'll end up as a dom for Froome.

Not debating that, but while I think he just happened to have two of the best days of his life on both TTs, by the time he quit, there wasn't much left apart from climbing and descending.

And although whether Landa is a better climber than Nibali is speculation given their lack of history against each other, I struggle to believe that Landa would have lost 5 mins to Kruijswijk in the way that Nibali did.

It's true. He would lose half an hour, it wouldn't be the first time for him certainly..