Wiggins Discussion Thread

[Mambo95]

Exactly. Top ranked CQ team of 2011 says something.

And the top team on the UCI rankings is an interesting three way battle between Leopard, OPL and Sky.

When Sky first started and they said that they could change road cycling, everyone laughed, confident in their old ways. Two years in, those people are worried that they were right all along.

 

[Machu Picchu]

When Sky first started and they said that they could change road cycling, everyone laughed, confident in their old ways. Two years in, those people are worried that they were right all along.

Really, how so?_?

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

And the top team on the UCI rankings is an interesting three way battle between Leopard, OPL and Sky.

That just goes to show how screwed up the UCI's rankings are. While OPL has killed it with Gilbert, Leopard has failed at its every goal, so much so that the team's owner replaced its management, and Sky has grabbed points from the UCI's pet races that no one cares about.

 

[hatcher]

That just goes to show how screwed up the UCI's rankings are. While OPL has killed it with Gilbert, Leopard has failed at its every goal, so much so that the team's owner replaced its management, and Sky has grabbed points from the UCI's pet races that no one cares about.

Genuinely, do you care how utterly nonsensical your posts are? Go take a look at where Sky have scored points.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Genuinely, do you care how utterly nonsensical your posts are? Go take a look at where Sky have scored points.

Yeah, a fantastic race like ENECO, the tour that every cyclist dreams of one day winning.

 

[hatcher]

Yeah, a fantastic race like ENECO, the tour that every cyclist dreams of one day winning.

Yes, Sky got all their points from Eneco. They haven't won 4 grand tour stages, they didn't win the Dauphine, get 3rd at Paris-Nice, win stages at Basque country, Paris-Nice and others, they didn't podium at AGR, get 5th at LBL, Catalunya, and on and on and on. And they don't currently sit 2nd and 3rd in the Vuelta.

So "no" you don't care that you write utter nonsense.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Yes, Sky got all their points from Eneco. They haven't won 4 grand tour stages, they didn't win the Dauphine, get 3rd at Paris-Nice, win stages at Basque country, Paris-Nice and others, they didn't podium at AGR, get 5th at LBL, Catalunya, and on and on and on. And they don't currently sit 2nd and 3rd in the Vuelta.

Sorry, dude, but the points system is screwed up. It overvalues high placings relative to wins and it overvalues races that are not prestigious. It also overvalues stage wins within stage races. And many races do not even count. The Tour Down Under. the Tour of Bejing, and the ENECO Tour being worth the same as the Tour de Suisse? Girl, please. Let us not forget that winning the Tour de Romandie is worth as much as the Tour de Suisse. Winning the Tour of Poland is worth more than winning Paris-Roubaix because the winner will have placed in the top five of one or more stages. Four of the eleven small stages races included in the rankings are crap races that no one cares about, while the remaining seven vary considerably in length and prestige. Then there are two Canadian races each worth 80% of winning Flanders. Win the Giro del Trentino and you get nothing. It goes on and on.

Your own list is made up of a crap stage race, stage wins, and close but no cigars.

 

[Mambo95]

Really, how so?_?

Sky came into road cycling thinking they could repeat what they did in track cycling (domination in 2007-8). Well in their first year they weren't so good and they learnt - the one thing Sky do well is learn. Now, in their second year they are on top of the CQ rankings and they are threatening to be no.1 on the World Tour rankings.

That's a huge step forward. And maybe their methods might actually be game changing. This year they can get rid of the deadwood and bring in big names. There is talk of BMC, Radio Luxembourg and OPLQSDFF being superteams, but Sky is the team that will seriously contend ever single race next year.

 

[Mambo95]

That just goes to show how screwed up the UCI's rankings are. While OPL has killed it with Gilbert, Leopard has failed at its every goal, so much so that the team's owner replaced its management, and Sky has grabbed points from the UCI's pet races that no one cares about.

I would agree with you that the rankings need adjusting. Personally I think evewry point should count not just the top five riders (a scheme that favours OPL and BMC and disadvantages Rabo and Garmin particularly). I also thin a bigger deal should be made of it, with a big trophy at the end of the season.

But whatever the short-comings of the rankings, they do give a good indictation of team success. Last year Sky were 15th, I think, this year they will be top three. That's a big improvement. And in year three they are jettisoning the deadwood and tooling up.

They were an internet laughing stock, but they are fast becoming the future.

 

[The Hitch]

Sky came into road cycling thinking they could repeat what they did in track cycling (domination in 2007-8). Well in their first year they weren't so good and they learnt - the one thing Sky do well is learn. Now, in their second year they are on top of the CQ rankings and they are threatening to be no.1 on the World Tour rankings.

That's a huge step forward. And maybe their methods might actually be game changing. This year they can get rid of the deadwood and bring in big names. There is talk of BMC, Radio Luxembourg and OPLQSDFF being superteams, but Sky is the team that will seriously contend ever single race next year.

They win races, so what?

How does that change cycling?

Sorry, dude, but the points system is screwed up. It overvalues high placings relative to wins and it overvalues races that are not prestigious. It also overvalues stage wins within stage races. And many races do not even count. The Tour Down Under. the Tour of Bejing, and the ENECO Tour being worth the same as the Tour de Suisse? Girl, please. Let us not forget that winning the Tour de Romandie is worth as much as the Tour de Suisse. Winning the Tour of Poland is worth more than winning Paris-Roubaix because the winner will have placed in the top five of one or more stages. Four of the eleven small stages races included in the rankings are crap races that no one cares about, while the remaining seven vary considerably in length and prestige. Then there are two Canadian races each worth 80% of winning Flanders. Win the Giro del Trentino and you get nothing. It goes on and on.

Your own list is made up of a crap stage race, stage wins, and close but no cigars.

I care about those races.

Hence the statement "no once cares about them" is false because people do exist who care.

Though yes i agree that the UCI rankings are messed up and i hate them. to call who ever is top of the UCI rankings (often because they won TDU) the number 1 is a disgrace.

 

[greenedge]

Hell no one thought Cobo would win the Vuelta.

 

[daveinzambia]

These dicussions would all be moot if it was not for the failure of the rest of the team

where were possini, loftkvist, Zandio, Cioni. The other riders even let them down when making a hash of the team time trial at the start.

think it says something that Sky have 2 of top 3 yet waay down on teams classfication.

I think Froome was knackered after time trial and rest day and he suffered slightly on that day and a lot of people thought he would lose a bucket full of time like he has before.

no doubt now that Cobo and Froome and the fastest two guys in the race this year. Cannot say if Froome would have won had sky done things differently but do think that Wiggins arrogance would make it hard for him to concede leadership. Would any other team leader have done things differently?

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

Hell no one thought Cobo would win the Vuelta.

How isn't that totally off topic? (Besides, if asked before the Vuelta if Cobo on his top performance could win the Vuelta you'd had have "yes" a lot of times as your answer.)

 

[Shardi]

Genuinely, do you care how utterly nonsensical your posts are? Go take a look at where Sky have scored points.

Don't bother. You're arguing with a whiny, hurt little boy with a big napoleon-complex

For the record, people care about the races that Cunego cannot win aswell, believe it or not Damiano Machiavelli !

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Don't bother. You're arguing with a whiny, hurt little boy with a big napoleon-complex

For the record, people care about the races that Cunego cannot win aswell, believe it or not Damiano Machiavelli !

Yeah, we all waited with bated breath to see who would win the ENECO tour and thought it was so fair that he would get more points for doing so than the winner of Paris-Roubaix.

Suck it.

 

[Chris L]

Interesting to see Froome single out Wiggins for a nod at the end:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10150212348709364

There are only two stages where Cobo conceded time to Wiggins, 1 second on the TTT and 1:41 on the TT. Cobo put time into both Froome and Wiggins on 6 different stages.

Can't think Sky are going to be disappointed with the Vuelta at all, potentially two podium spots and two very different stage wins - they don't come easy.

I'm bias but I think Sky have had a cracking season.

 

[ferryman]

Sky came into road cycling thinking they could repeat what they did in track cycling (domination in 2007-8). Well in their first year they weren't so good and they learnt - the one thing Sky do well is learn. Now, in their second year they are on top of the CQ rankings and they are threatening to be no.1 on the World Tour rankings.

That's a huge step forward. And maybe their methods might actually be game changing. This year they can get rid of the deadwood and bring in big names. There is talk of BMC, Radio Luxembourg and OPLQSDFF being superteams, but Sky is the team that will seriously contend ever single race next year.

The desparation of the Sky/Brit fans on here sort of makes it worth while checking in. Even if it's just for a laugh.

 

[jens_attacks]

Can't think Sky are going to be disappointed with the Vuelta at all, potentially two podium spots and two very different stage wins - they don't come easy.

I'm bias but I think Sky have had a cracking season.

same here.awesome vuelta for sky.

 

[hatcher]

The desparation of the Sky/Brit fans on here sort of makes it worth while checking in. Even if it's just for a laugh.

Sometimes the best way to argue against ridiculous anti-Sky rhetoric is with ridiculous pro-Sky rhetoric.

Also, are you enjoying Sky's successful season?

 

[Moncoutie]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing!

 

[Captain_Cavman]

These dicussions would all be moot if it was not for the failure of the rest of the team

where were possini, loftkvist, Zandio, Cioni. The other riders even let them down when making a hash of the team time trial at the start.

think it says something that Sky have 2 of top 3 yet waay down on teams classfication.

I think Froome was knackered after time trial and rest day and he suffered slightly on that day and a lot of people thought he would lose a bucket full of time like he has before.

no doubt now that Cobo and Froome and the fastest two guys in the race this year. Cannot say if Froome would have won had sky done things differently but do think that Wiggins arrogance would make it hard for him to concede leadership. Would any other team leader have done things differently?

Yes, it's interesting to note the performance of the two Italians especially.

Xandio and Lovqvist were visible very occasionally but it would seem likely that if Froome had been performing at his prior level, Wiggins would have been totally isolated on every climb.

So what was the intention before Wiggins withdrew from the TdF? Was it that Lovqvist was going to lead in the Vuelta but when he found out he wasn't going to, he just gave up training?

 

[thehog]

I couldn't agree more. The UCI are weighting the krap races so teams send decent riders. Its a way of trying to promote the global cycling initiative.

I agree that middle rung teams like Sky hit these races hard to pick up easy points to keep themselves in contention.

Sorry, dude, but the points system is screwed up. It overvalues high placings relative to wins and it overvalues races that are not prestigious. It also overvalues stage wins within stage races. And many races do not even count. The Tour Down Under. the Tour of Bejing, and the ENECO Tour being worth the same as the Tour de Suisse? Girl, please. Let us not forget that winning the Tour de Romandie is worth as much as the Tour de Suisse. Winning the Tour of Poland is worth more than winning Paris-Roubaix because the winner will have placed in the top five of one or more stages. Four of the eleven small stages races included in the rankings are crap races that no one cares about, while the remaining seven vary considerably in length and prestige. Then there are two Canadian races each worth 80% of winning Flanders. Win the Giro del Trentino and you get nothing. It goes on and on.

Your own list is made up of a crap stage race, stage wins, and close but no cigars.

 

[Nielsa]

These dicussions would all be moot if it was not for the failure of the rest of the team

I think it's a bit much to blame the domestiques for this. Possoni did a monster pull for Sky in some stage (don't remember which), and I remember Cioni at the front a few times too. Lofkvist was the one who bridged the peleton to Nibali and Kessiakoff when they attacked on that descent.

Also there's a lot of the race that's not televised and teams do have to chase breaks in those early hours as well.

In the TTT, Arvesen clipped a wheel and crashed like 5 minutes in.... that's bad luck. (I don't think long TTTs have a place in a GT but that's a different discussion.)

Imho the Sky domestiques did at least as much as the BMC domestiques. I don't remember any BMC or Saxo domestique helping their leader bridge a gap or set the pace up a difficult climb.

 

[Richeypen]

Yes, it's interesting to note the performance of the two Italians especially.

Xandio and Lovqvist were visible very occasionally but it would seem likely that if Froome had been performing at his prior level, Wiggins would have been totally isolated on every climb.

So what was the intention before Wiggins withdrew from the TdF? Was it that Lovqvist was going to lead in the Vuelta but when he found out he wasn't going to, he just gave up training?

Think it was more likely that Uran was going to lead but after Wiggins pulled out of the Tour he was given leadership there instead. Thought I read somewhere that TL was only riding the Vuelta at Wiggins' request (might well have imagined that though)

 

[hatcher]

Yes, it's interesting to note the performance of the two Italians especially.

Xandio and Lovqvist were visible very occasionally but it would seem likely that if Froome had been performing at his prior level, Wiggins would have been totally isolated on every climb.

So what was the intention before Wiggins withdrew from the TdF? Was it that Lovqvist was going to lead in the Vuelta but when he found out he wasn't going to, he just gave up training?

Froome was always down to ride for GC. Uran was supposed to do it with him, but they were wary of overracing him after his early season.

Lofkvist and Zandio weren't meant to be riding it at all. They got drafted in when the focus changed to Wiggins. Lofkvist has had good days and bad days, while Zandio has been pretty anonymous, but who knows what domestique work he's been doing?

Not sure you could expect Cioni to be there on the last mountain with Wiggins and Froome. At this point in his career he's not among the best 30 climbers at the Vuelta.