|
On July 29 2018 04:32 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2018 00:10 palexhur wrote: Well it is clear that if you can build a TdF champion like GT, you can do whatever you want in this modern cycling. I'm sorry, but you guys are ridiculous. You're remotely suprised a big 76kg powerhouse pursuit TT champion with good skills over cobbles, a HUGE engine, and excellent race skills evolves into a Tour winner? The formula to win the tour is to be a massive engine that tolerates losing weight while holding most of that power and hangs on in the mountains. Thomas fits this script and development to a T, perhaps even more so than Froome ever did.
At 29 years old, u cannot evolve anymore L_Master... you can just get a little bit better or worse at what you do. Not becoming something completely different.
That's the thing, he didn't hang in the mountains "Cadel Evans" style (I loose 15 + 20 + 0 + 10 in mountain stages, then take 2 mins on TT)...not even Wiggo style... he crushed them. He had way more power than the rest of the field. In all mountain stages he hunged on easily, never got dropped once and destroyed them at sprint, which means he only didn't drop them because of Froome. That's not a great timetrialist who can hang on with the climbers. That's the best climber by far. You say he had a HUGE engine, he started to climb decently like 3 yeasr ago, at 29yo... where was that climbing engine who will make him a Tour winner?
That formula also suits people like Tony Martin, Cancellara, GvA, Stefan Kung, etc. People with a massive engine who can ride up shorts periods of time or little mountains.
I mean, i think it's just fucking clear that seeing all the stuff with Froome and maybe not being able to ride the Tour, they decided to transform him into the Tour winner, as they have done already with other riders of the team.
|
|
On July 29 2018 05:39 Elmonti wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2018 04:32 L_Master wrote:On July 29 2018 00:10 palexhur wrote: Well it is clear that if you can build a TdF champion like GT, you can do whatever you want in this modern cycling. I'm sorry, but you guys are ridiculous. You're remotely suprised a big 76kg powerhouse pursuit TT champion with good skills over cobbles, a HUGE engine, and excellent race skills evolves into a Tour winner? The formula to win the tour is to be a massive engine that tolerates losing weight while holding most of that power and hangs on in the mountains. Thomas fits this script and development to a T, perhaps even more so than Froome ever did. At 29 years old, u cannot evolve anymore L_Master... you can just get a little bit better or worse at what you do. Not becoming something completely different.
Of all the things you've written, this is the one where I disagree with you the most. To be honest I think this statement is completely inaccurate.
In fact, late twenties is precisely when this evolution occurs most typically. Athletics is a good example. Great 1500 or 5000m runners rarely blossom into great marathoners until their late twenties or early thirties. A combination of time building up focus on fatigue resistance and threshold and shifting focus in that direction.
I need to emphasize one thing though. This development goes ONLY one way. A punchy rider can develop into a good climber over time with better endurance/aerobic power and fatigue resistance, both aspects are the most trainable aspects of physiology as well and the ones that mature with age.
A rider developing a sprint, or serious punch/short power later than early twenties would be VERY abnormal and extremely suspicious. I can't think of any examples. You know right away if you have sprint and/or punch.
That's the thing, he didn't hang in the mountains "Cadel Evans" style (I loose 15 + 20 + 0 + 10 in mountain stages, then take 2 mins on TT)...not even Wiggo style... he crushed them. He had way more power than the rest of the field. In all mountain stages he hunged on easily, never got dropped once and destroyed them at sprint, which means he only didn't drop them because of Froome.
If you watched, Thomas never attacked. He just sat in and punched it in the end. Not surprising. If you've ever paid attention to athletics, take a look at what happens to the pure 10000m guys or half marathon runners if a former mile makes it around to the end. The miler SMASHES them. Thomas did the same. If two guys race at 10000m, one guy that can run 26:30 and another guy that can run 27:00, but their ability at 1500 is 3:34 vs 3:28, the 27' runner will SMASH the 26:30 guy on a regular basis. Usually putting on 3-5 seconds in the last 200m of the race.
This is exactly what's happening with Thomas. It's like, would you be surprised to see Valverde hang with the climbers and, if he did, outsprint them brutally at the end? Of course not. Thomas did the same thing. He just drilled it at 600w for the last 40s and nobody else can follow because those other guys don't have that speed.
I assure you Thomas was on his limit just as much as Dumoulin, Froome, Roglic, etc. Moreover, consider who Thomas beat:
Froome (Weak from Giro) Dumoulin (Weak from Giro) Bardet (low A list climber, struggling with fatigue) Roglic (unknown quantity, seemed to be solid climber but still solidly below weak Froome, Dumo) Quintana (seemingly past peak, dealing with injuries) Landa (major injury issues)
If Porte had been here, he would have dropped Thomas' ass brutally on both Alp and the Stage 17 climb. Those climbs are hard enough for Porte to do that. I'm not sure if Thomas could have been dropped anywhere else due to draft.
So, kinda like Nibali in 2014, Thomas beat up on a bunch of weakened, subpar, climbers.
That also perfectly parallels what we see in track to at 10,000m. The 1500m specialists are a bit slower at 10,000, but not slow enough to be dropped with draft advantages. The only guys that ever can drop those kinds of runners are absolutely cream of the crop 10000m runners on excellent form.
Guess what? No good rider was on form in this Tour. Moreover, Thomas was the only one to make it through without crashes and injuries. A HUGE advantage.
That's not a great timetrialist who can hang on with the climbers. That's the best climber by far. You say he had a HUGE engine, he started to climb decently like 3 yeasr ago, at 29yo... where was that climbing engine who will make him a Tour winner?
That huge engine was a) developing and b) in too big of a vehicle. Thomas has, by all reports, consistently lost some weight each of the past several seasons, even after his big initial drop. His training was also still refining that threshold, giving him a little more endurance at end of stages and climbing power. Maybe that's 5-10w of small improvement in three years, along with a drop of 3kg, but taken together that's 3-5%, which is the difference between being best of injured/tired top riders and average level climber.
That formula also suits people like Tony Martin, Cancellara, GvA, Stefan Kung, etc. People with a massive engine who can ride up shorts periods of time or little mountains.
GvA =/= Cancellara =/= Kung + Martin.
GvA is a punchy rider with a major kick. I guarantee you GvA watts at 1' would destroy Thomas. Thomas is a bigger engine guy than GvA, but GvA is punchier. Moreover, GvA also has a pretty good sprint, which usually opposes the development of a massive threshold due to fiber types. This makes GvA an unlikely GT winning candidate. He's also a top level rider of classics and other races, and is never going to take a career risk to try and go GT contender.
Cancellara is interesting. One of the most versatile all around riders of all time. Could sprint, could time trial, could punch. I think he needed his size for all of those things, and like GvA was a classics star and wasn't going to try GTs. He may have had the engine that would have been needed for it, but would have needed a particularly dramatic amount of weight loss.
Kung and Martin are both candidates, although Kung is kinda ridiculously huge. Most guys much above 6'1-6'2 (187cm) really have a hard time developing the needed w/kg to hang. It's just too big, and the smaller you are height wise the more it favors pure w/kg. Martin is the most interesting. He checks all the boxes of TT guys that looks like he could have been a Tour contender. I'm not sure if he tried or what stopped him. If he failed, it was probably a case of a guy who couldn't handle weight drop. Some guys can, some guys can't; and to the extent of what is known you can't tell by looking. Some riders can tolerate it and others can't. If TM tried to ride for general, my guess is this is what inhibited him.
|
I mean, i think it's just fucking clear that seeing all the stuff with Froome and maybe not being able to ride the Tour, they decided to transform him into the Tour winner, as they have done already with other riders of the team.
Thomas IS almost certainly a product of the sky factory. Whether the shit they do is sketch or outright cheating I don't know, but I think they have a combination of the best "stuff" as well as the best training. Everybody knows the drugs that are in play and can use them, both "legal"(TUE type stuff) and illegal. The fact that Sky churns out amazing riders unlike any other team tells me that they are coming up with better training + "supplement" combination.
I don't believe for a second that Sky's development is 100% due to their supplements.
With that in mind, I do agree with you that going to Sky is a huge advantage to a rider. Perhaps worth 3-5% total. That's a TON. If Thomas hadn't been with Sky he probably would not have one the Tour. We agree there. However, I have no doubt that "not sky" Thomas would have reached podium level in the Tour.
Froome on the other hand....I'm sorry but his rise from nowhere is much more shocking. Geraint had HUGE talent and a unique engine. Froome didn't have any of that and changed rapidly in less than two years from nobody to GT threat.
|
On July 29 2018 06:15 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +I mean, i think it's just fucking clear that seeing all the stuff with Froome and maybe not being able to ride the Tour, they decided to transform him into the Tour winner, as they have done already with other riders of the team. Thomas IS almost certainly a product of the sky factory. Whether the shit they do is sketch or outright cheating I don't know, but I think they have a combination of the best "stuff" as well as the best training. Everybody knows the drugs that are in play and can use them, both "legal"(TUE type stuff) and illegal. The fact that Sky churns out amazing riders unlike any other team tells me that they are coming up with better training + "supplement" combination. I don't believe for a second that Sky's development is 100% due to their supplements. With that in mind, I do agree with you that going to Sky is a huge advantage to a rider. Perhaps worth 3-5% total. That's a TON. If Thomas hadn't been with Sky he probably would not have one the Tour. We agree there. However, I have no doubt that "not sky" Thomas would have reached podium level in the Tour. Froome on the other hand....I'm sorry but his rise from nowhere is much more shocking. Geraint had HUGE talent and a unique engine. Froome didn't have any of that and changed rapidly in less than two years from nobody to GT threat.
I agree with youi for the most part here. The only thing is I find it difficult to believe that they have discovered like a much better method of training at this point of cycling... because we all know all the stuff of super-TT suits, the egg ring, etc. is all product placement and publicity bullshit. The thing is at those levels, the "magical potion" makes a huge difference giving that 3-4 % like you say, and the worst thing of all is all the institutionalized cheating and corruption, which has only seen before in the USPostal stuff. PD: 2 years??... Dude, it was literally 3 WEEKS lol..... In June he was 47th in Tour Suisse, in July he was 45th in Brixia Tour (¿?), in August 85th in Tour de Pologne and then in Septembre....BAM! 2nd in the Vuelta, 13 seconds from 1st, and +1 stage xD I mean, that is the most hardcore stuff i've ever seen in cycling: www.procyclingstats.com I do like Froome's personality despite being a laboratory product... at least he is a chill, "humble" guy, and not a cocky idiot like Wiggo or a straigh up sociopath like Lance.
Anyways, let's see what we have for La Vuelta. And after that a WC for climbers, it should be fun.
|
I didn't follow cycling that closely the last 5 years, but hasn't Thomas been a pretty solid climber for several years already? He has done well in smaller stage races for quite a while. Last year he crashed out of both the Giro and the Tour so he didn't get to show whether he could have been closer to the top. Of course winning the Tour is still a jump, but as L_Master pointed out a lot of his competition was dealing with crashes or had ridden the Giro, whereas Thomas had a completely clean Tour. We'll see if he can repeat it next year.
Also it helped that Sky had like 4 of the best 10 climbers in any given stage so other teams had a really hard time attacking them. Thomas seemed the strongest anyway, but it was hard to put him under a lot of pressure because of Sky's dominance. Thomas vs Froome leadership discussion also didn't really become relevant because Bernal was always there with them.
It'll be interesting what Sky does for next year. It's probably pretty tempting for them to just have Bernal lead in some week long stage races and still bring him to the Tour as a domestique. But he seems to be good enough to warrant the chance to lead at either the Giro or the Vuelta.
|
His role at the TdF probably also depends a bit on what happens with Kwiatkowsky. Can they keep him? Or will he be bought by BMC/CCC?
|
|
|
|