Why are British cyclists so much better than Australian cyclists?

[SpartacusRox]

thats a ridiculous argument.. you had three non finishers, gb had three non finishers.

medal table, we both had a gold, both had a silver, and you had a bronze where we had a 4th place.

Hardly OWNING, so the clincher is Alan Davis getting 3rd While Nicole Cooke got 4th. Perhaps they should have a race-off.

Nicole Cook...muahahaha

You were owned, face up to it. stop trying to get desperate by bringing chicks into the mix. Pom riders were pathetic in the Tour of Britain in the main and they have continued that rich vein of crap form into the world's. At least the ones who DNF'd did better than the no shows like Wiggo and Thomas.

 

[delbified]

i think the aussies are better than the poms right now, but apparently the poms are putting a lot of effort into their development programs so it will be interesting to see how they go in the next few years.

 

[SpartacusRox]

It wasnt just that Australia are better in road race,(which atm they are). Remember Australia was rewarded with places, for its great Giro with the 3 jerseys and few stage wins, but Britain was not rewarded for its good Vuelta with 3 stage wins and a green jersey.

Yeah, lucky they have Cav or they wouldn't have any wins at all! Personally i think it has to do with the pie and chips diet they are on.

 

[BigChain]

I don't understand how they would of had to do more work? They were never on the front andjust hung mid pack untilthey popped out the
back.

Martin318is, I think these champs do prove the strength of aus cycling against british cycling. If Brits did stuff all and Aus were omnipresent then that does mean Australia are a better cycling nation. You can not say they did stuff all and also say that they are not worse than a country that did lots!

My God, ACF not only gives Australians a bad name as far as cycling goes, he follows Collingwood as well. . From another Australian.

 

[Martin318is]

My God, ACF not only gives Australians a bad name as far as cycling goes, he follows Collingwood as well. What a wan***. From another Australian.

you have something bad you wish to say about Collingwood? (thats related to the Geelong World's of course)..

from an Australian.... Collingwood supporter

 

[BroDeal]

Yeah, lucky they have Cav or they wouldn't have any wins at all! Personally i think it has to do with the pie and chips diet they are on.

I attribute it to environmental factors.

Australians live in a danger filled environment rife with poisonous critters, insects, reptiles, crazy birds, and many other horrors that we in the rest of the world only see in movies shown on Halloween. Almost from birth, aussies are on the run from almost certain death. It is survival of the fastest. This speed is carried on through adolescence and into maturity. This Darwinian selection creates a breed of supercyclists desperate to get away from their god forsaken homeland and mortally terrified that they will be sent back if they don't win enough.

The British on the other hand live on a tiny island with weather more appropriate for sitting inside, sipping tea while watching the rain, and making jokes about those living in countries with better weather, like the French. This produces a pallid and effete race of men who are apt to spend their time reminiscing about their empire of the past when they ruled over countries with climates more suited for athletic endeavor. Curious enough they seem to have developed a knack for time trialing, but it is understandable when the foundation of this talent, the ten mile time trial, is explained to have come about from the average distance from a home to an eating establishment with palatable food.

 

[delbified]

could also explain why the colombians make good climbers, from ferrying the national produce from the mountains to the port where it is exported to the world.

remember also that the spanish survived the inquisition and are very good liars, next time you see a teary eyed spanish rider declare his innocence on TV.

 

[auscyclefan94]

but you CAN say that one race does not successfully survive analysis as a basis for generalisation.

If you could do that then you would happily argue (for a minute or two) that Swiss cycling is much stronger than Belgium on the basis of Fabian vs Tom at this year's Roubaix.

Don't get me wrong, I do think that Cavendish in particular should probably be quite embarrassed now - with good reason.

yes, but the world championships qualifications indicate already that British cycling is not overly strong and then guys like Millar, Cavendish and Hunt who were never present in the race and popped out the back straight away. This peformance along with how many riders they qualified shows that the cycling in there nation is not great.

i think the aussies are better than the poms right now, but apparently the poms are putting a lot of effort into their development programs so it will be interesting to see how they go in the next few years.

They have been doing that for ages, even before beijing. The government has been pumping lots of money into the sport because of the london games because they are strong on the track and have also pumped money into road because they were getting stronger.

 

[Roland Rat]

I don't know what the problem is with the British men, they can't handle the Worlds at all. But the biggest problem is Dave Brailsford. Yes, he's done brilliantly on the track, but he's out of his depth on the road. He should recognise this, move himself "upstairs" and get a DS who knows what he's doing. For both Sky and GB.

 

[bobbins]

I don't know what the problem is with the British men, they can't handle the Worlds at all. But the biggest problem is Dave Brailsford. Yes, he's done brilliantly on the track, but he's out of his depth on the road. He should recognise this, move himself "upstairs" and get a DS who knows what he's doing. For both Sky and GB.

Treats the team like his personal play-thing. Should hire Bobby Julich or someone like Brad McGee to sort out the DS problem.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

I attribute it to environmental factors.

Australians live in a danger filled environment filled with poisonous critters, insects, reptiles, crazy birds, and many other horrors that we in the rest of the world can only see in movies shown on Halloween. Almost from birth, aussies are on the run from almost certain death. It is survival of the fastest. This speed is carried on through adolescence and into manhhod. This natural Darwinian selection creates a breed of supercyclists desperate to get away from the god forsaken homeland and mortally terrified that they will be sent back if they don't win enough.

The British on the other hand live on a tiny island with weather more appropriate for sitting inside, sipping tea while watching the rain, and making jokes about those living in countries with better weather, like the French. This produces a pallid and effete race of men who are apt to spend their time reminiscing about the empire of the past when they ruled over countries with climates more suited for athletic endeavor. Curious enough they seem to have developed a knack for time trialing, but it is understandable when the foundation of this talent, the ten mile time trial, is understood to have come about from the average distance from a home to an eating establishment with palatable food.

Post of the year

 

[The Hitch]

Nicole Cook...muahahaha

You were owned, face up to it. stop trying to get desperate by bringing chicks into the mix. Pom riders were pathetic in the Tour of Britain in the main and they have continued that rich vein of crap form into the world's. At least the ones who DNF'd did better than the no shows like Wiggo and Thomas.

If you are going to exclude women then you have to exclude under 23s. In fact, in the Womens event, Britain does actually have the best time triallist in the world. In the men under 23 catergory, you had Sagan for example riding the main race. Michael Mathews is not the best under 23 rider in the world, thats for sure.

So if you exclude women, then you have to exlude under 23s. In which case Britain have 1 silver, and Australia have 1 bronze.

 

[sublimit]

If you are going to exclude women then you have to exclude under 23s. In fact, in the Womens event, Britain does actually have the best time triallist in the world. In the men under 23 catergory, you had Sagan for example riding the main race. Michael Mathews is not the best under 23 rider in the world, thats for sure.

So if you exclude women, then you have to exlude under 23s. In which case Britain have 1 silver, and Australia have 1 bronze.

In the under 23 race they were missing plenty of quality riders so it doesnt really count. Whereas the womens road race had all the best riders competing .

Like your signature BTW.. very good.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't understand how they would of had to do more work? They were never on the front andjust hung mid pack untilthey popped out the
back.

Martin318is, I think these champs do prove the strength of aus cycling against british cycling. If Brits did stuff all and Aus were omnipresent then that does mean Australia are a better cycling nation. You can not say they did stuff all and also say that they are not worse than a country that did lots!

Im starting to feel like the only race you watched, and the only race you think is relevant is the mens road race. Did you not watch the womens? Like i say, both had a gold, both had a silver, you had a bronze v nicole cookes 4th.

Ive come to the conclusion that this thread is merely an outlet for your insane nationalistic ramblings. Does ACF stand for Antipodean Crazy *&^%'er

 

[Anonymous]

Don't get me wrong, I do think that Cavendish in particular should probably be quite embarrassed now - with good reason.

To be honest, I dont think Cavendish should ever have been selected. Worlds squad for me would have been Hammond, Millar, Wiggins.

Nicole Cook...muahahaha

You were owned, face up to it. stop trying to get desperate by bringing chicks into the mix. Pom riders were pathetic in the Tour of Britain in the main and they have continued that rich vein of crap form into the world's. At least the ones who DNF'd did better than the no shows like Wiggo and Thomas.

Im just winding up ACF to be honest.

 

[euanli]

I struggle to think of a British rider who would have been any good on that course. Ah well.

 

[rolfrae]

To be honest, I dont think Cavendish should ever have been selected. Worlds squad for me would have been Hammond, Millar, Wiggins.

Couldn't agree more. It's a bit daft that Brailsford's "Project Worlds" or whatever it is supposed to be couldn't even afford the airfare to send someone over to recon the course. That should have happened early in the year and then a decent team (a core of three with maybe 2 subs) could have been picked to suit the course. Instead we've had a year of hot air and then Cav, Hunt and Millar going on an expensive and embarrassing end of season training ride.

 

[Ferminal]

thats a ridiculous argument.. you had three non finishers, gb had three non finishers.

medal table, we both had a gold, both had a silver, and you had a bronze where we had a 4th place.

Hardly OWNING, so the clincher is Alan Davis getting 3rd While Nicole Cooke got 4th. Perhaps they should have a race-off.

You do realise Porte got fourth?

 

[Anonymous]

Couldn't agree more. It's a bit daft that Brailsford's "Project Worlds" or whatever it is supposed to be couldn't even afford the airfare to send someone over to recon the course. That should have happened early in the year and then a decent team (a core of three with maybe 2 subs) could have been picked to suit the course. Instead we've had a year of hot air and then Cav, Hunt and Millar going on an expensive and embarrassing end of season training ride.

But imagine the public outcry if Britians best rider hadnt gone to the worlds, the same outcry there was for Britains best Tour Rider not riding the Vuelta.

I wonder if geraints real reason for not being on Form for the worlds was "Cav hasnt got a hope in hell of winning so why should i travel to the other side of the world to work my **** off for him"

Oh my goodness, the word for bottom beginning with B is censored. What is this, playschool?

 

[rolfrae]

But imagine the public outcry if Britians best rider hadnt gone to the worlds, the same outcry there was for Britains best Tour Rider not riding the Vuelta.

I wonder if geraints real reason for not being on Form for the worlds was "Cav hasnt got a hope in hell of winning so why should i travel to the other side of the world to work my **** off for him"

Oh my goodness, the word for bottom beginning with B is censored. What is this, playschool?

And if they had bothered to check out the course they could have saved Cav's blushes, let him plan for 2011 and allowed a few guys to aim for an end of year peak of form. I just don't get how the team that is apparently so meticulous over every minute aspect of detail got this worlds road race so horribly wrong. We'd have been better gifting our 3 spots to a better country, like the Japanese.

 

[Anonymous]

You do realise Porte got fourth?

oh shush. This is purely a ridiculously stupid argument with ACF, its doesnt have to be an exact science.

 

[Winterfold]

I struggle to think of a British rider who would have been any good on that course. Ah well.

Which is a joke really because I live in just about the most cycled bit of the UK - and those kind of 'savage climbs ' ie undulations and mounds should be meat and drink to UK riders.

Instead eg Surrey League choose circuits carefully so they cover the small bit of the South close to London that does not feature one or two 1-2km at 10% hills. I am sure their reasons make sense from a practical point of view (eg is there a village hall with a kettle nearby? what is the liklihood of meeting a tractor coming downhill at 70kmh? will there be a cowpat on the apex of > 50% of the corners? will we lose half the field down a pothole?) but we have the terrain to turn out good racers on hard Classics style circuits like that.

Instead as (Brodeal?) so amusingly pointed out we are a nation of bloody testers, self included

All that said, we may lose, but at least we are not morons and bogans eh ACF?

 

[Roland Rat]

Which is a joke really because I live in just about the most cycled bit of the UK - and those kind of 'savage climbs ' ie undulations and mounds should be meat and drink to UK riders.

Instead eg Surrey League choose circuits carefully so they cover the small bit of the South close to London that does not feature one or two 1-2km at 10% hills. I am sure their reasons make sense from a practical point of view (eg is there a village hall with a kettle nearby? what is the liklihood of meeting a tractor coming downhill at 70kmh? will there be a cowpat on the apex of > 50% of the corners? will we lose half the field down a pothole?) but we have the terrain to turn out good racers on hard Classics style circuits like that.

Surrey League courses make it easier for the sole commissaire in his 15 year old Rover to keep an eye on proceedings. It would be impossible if the bunch was splattered all over Leith Hill.

The Premiers need to be longer, too. It's ridiculous the highest level racing in the UK consists of 8 races lasting around 3-4 hours, and a bunch of crits. Our "Elite" level isn't elite at all, and it shows when we go to the continent. The Premier Calendar died with the Tour of the Peak. Now that was a road race.

 

[Roland Rat]

To be honest, I dont think Cavendish should ever have been selected. Worlds squad for me would have been Hammond, Millar, Wiggins.

I wouldn't have picked Wiggins, he can't do one-day racing. Look at stage (thing) of the ToB when he was in that break (not the one with Henderson, but a couple of days later), he didn't have any idea of how to get away from the rest. He's our Frank Schleck. Millar, Hammond, Hunt would have been my choices.

It's looking good for a few years when G, Peter Kennaugh, Adam Blythe, Johnny Bellis etc have matured though. Peter Kennaugh will win something big in his career.

 

[maltiv]

Couldn't agree more. It's a bit daft that Brailsford's "Project Worlds" or whatever it is supposed to be couldn't even afford the airfare to send someone over to recon the course. That should have happened early in the year and then a decent team (a core of three with maybe 2 subs) could have been picked to suit the course. Instead we've had a year of hot air and then Cav, Hunt and Millar going on an expensive and embarrassing end of season training ride.

I was initially criticising the Norwegians for not having sent someone down to recon the course, but it's even more embarrassing that the GB team, which I assume has a bigger budget, didn't do it. Cavendish has said the whole year that he wanted to win this world championship, and that it was his main season goal, but in reality there was never any chance whatsoever for him to win on a course like this. He might have a chance in 2011 though.