# Cav and Griepel lose due to the ITT?



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

I know GB spent 80% of the day on the front, but could more have been done if the ITT wasn't looming over the heads of Wiggins, Martin, and the other guys in the ITT? The Germans and Belgians as a whole expected GB to chase the break down.


----------



## erj549 (Jul 26, 2008)

Maybe they shouldn't have acted like they had it in the bag. I don't think the ITT had anything to do with it. They exhausted themselves trying to bring it back, but how can 4 men bring back a group of 30 who are committed to staying away?


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Spoiler alert.


----------



## erj549 (Jul 26, 2008)

robdamanii said:


> Spoiler alert.


This forum is not the place to hang out for people who aren't interested in seeing spoilers.


----------



## mpre53 (Oct 25, 2011)

I guess NBC is showing it on tape delay out west? It was on live in the EDT time zone, and finished over half an hour ago.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

erj549 said:


> This forum is not the place to hang out for people who aren't interested in seeing spoilers.


I'm being facetious.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

robdamanii said:


> I'm being facetious.


Needs work...


----------



## erj549 (Jul 26, 2008)

robdamanii said:


> I'm being facetious.


Don't you roll your eyes at me!


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

which is lame I'd have preferred it live and been done with it by now


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

erj549 said:


> Don't you roll your eyes at me!




I didn't know there was a 40 image limit per post...


----------



## TerminatorX91 (Mar 27, 2011)

mpre53 said:


> I guess NBC is showing it on tape delay out west? It was on live in the EDT time zone, and finished over half an hour ago.





atpjunkie said:


> which is lame I'd have preferred it live and been done with it by now


Yep... Lame.


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

robdamanii said:


> I didn't know there was a 40 image limit per post...


Facetiousness I'd mark you as average, but subtlety, that's something you excel at.
Well done, Junior. :thumbsup:


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

spookyload said:


> I know GB spent 80% of the day on the front, but could more have been done if the ITT wasn't looming over the heads of Wiggins, Martin, and the other guys in the ITT? The Germans and Belgians as a whole expected GB to chase the break down.


I don't think the ITT played much of a role. Plenty of time to recover.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

spade2you said:


> I don't think the ITT played much of a role. Plenty of time to recover.


So why didn't Tony Martin put Greipel in a better position.


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

spookyload said:


> So why didn't Tony Martin put Greipel in a better position.


It was Great Britian's job to put Greipel in a better position.


----------



## OldEndicottHiway (Jul 16, 2007)

That was bizarre. 

Vino's cagey move in the final meters was well-played.

I thought it funny how the announcers kept saying Vino had "been retired a couple of times in his career." 

No need to spoil the Olympic spirit with the athletes' shady pasts. 

Would've liked to have seen a youngster medal in gold.

Too bad for Fabian...I think he might've caused a different outcome. That was quite a header he took. Broken collarbone? Anyone know?


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Vino also saying he won partly due to no race radios. He mentioned in post race interview that had there been radios, the field would have pursued in a different way and he wouldn't have stayed away.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

spookyload said:


> So why didn't Tony Martin put Greipel in a better position.


Tony Martin pulled out long before the finish. He's still taped up from his Tour crashes.
He looked knackered in the aid tent with his top off.


----------



## AdamM (Jul 9, 2008)

I think it shows how much better the racing is with a limited team size. With only five riders it was costly for GB to ride tempo all day and in the end they couldn't do it. No radios helped, but the decider was that negative racing wore the team out and there was nobody in reserve. Grand tours or NRC crits, the same applies. Improve the racing by reducing the team size.


----------



## enzo24 (Jul 8, 2012)

It's called the INDIVIDUAL Road Race. If you can only win with the help of a bunch of other guys, you don't deserve to win it. Cav was actually blaming other countries for not helping set it up for him. If all he can do is sprint, he should ride the match races on the track and see how good he really is.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

enzo24 said:


> he should ride the match races on the track and see how good he really is.


World Champion 2005 Madison
World Champion 2008 Madison
Commonwealth Champion 2006 Scratch Race


----------



## enzo24 (Jul 8, 2012)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> World Champion 2005 Madison
> World Champion 2008 Madison
> Commonwealth Champion 2006 Scratch Race


I said the match sprints. ^Those are the long distance track events.


----------



## gordy748 (Feb 11, 2007)

I think GB lost it themselves. They basically announced to the world press what their tactics were going to be, which allowed everyone else to come up with a way of spoiling. Then they TT'd along for 200 km, dragging the rest of the peleton (in this case, the peleton means "those teams that though GB would bring back the break and were hoping for a free ride to Buckingham Palace"). Meanwhile in the break the Spanish had Luis Leon Sanchez and Valverde, the USA had Phinney and van Garderen and the Italians had Nibali and another rider. Then there was Cancellara and Vinokourov. Plus 22 others.

ITT had nothing to do with this one. It was simple bad tactics from GB... Imagine letting Froome get away in the break to attack on lap 8 or Millar in the break to go for the long sprint. They had options but decided to pick the one that had the biggest target on his chest.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

They rode this race just like Sky rode stages of the TDF. They were able to dominate under those conditions but this was much more like a classics race, which can be won by smart aggressive opportunistic racing. US Postal-style team dominance doesn't necessarily win this sort of race. The Brits have had a hell of a year and they should be proud of it but it seems like a majority of people weren't even considering the possibility that Cavendish could lose this race. I feel like I'm detecting a sense of "what went wrong?" from the Brits as far as trying to figure out what spoiled a race that they obviously _should_ have won. The scenario was actually classic and the way that everything worked out made sense. Though he has had some success on hard courses, this course wasn't really particularly suited to Cavendish. It wasn't suited to pacing and cooperation between large 9 person mega sprint teams like Sky and Lotto in the Tour de France. It is silly for them to get butt hurt about the whole world racing against them...... The whole world was racing against them. They were racing against each other. This race was composed of small nation-based teams that each had the goal of getting someone from their country to win. It wasn't a stage in a Grand Tour where large cooperating team systems scratch each-other's backs in exchange for favors later. A dayum good breakaway got up the road with names like Gilbert, LL Sanchez, Chavanel, Cancellara, Vinokourov, and O'Grady in it. The one way that Cavendish was going to really be able to win this race was to chase and get into that breakaway himself, which wasn't happening. Of course the Australians weren't helping chase. They had a good guy in the breakaway. Most of the other major nations had people in the breakaway but Britain did not. They wanted a sprint finish in a classics style race and were left scratching their heads when it didn't work out for them. I'm actually not surprised at all that Vino won this; I almost picked him. This course suited his strengths and the type of racing that he did.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

The organizers did their best to come up with a course that would favor Cavendish. 

The thing is that with a maximum of five riders on the biggest teams, and a 270km race, it was impossible for Team Great Britain to control the race. And with the "fastest man on earth" as the Team GB sprinter, there was no reason for the Germans to make more than a half hearted effort to help Team GB. 

As far as the Aussies went, Stuart O'Grady was in the break. There was no reason for them to chase.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

AdamM said:


> I think it shows how much better the racing is with a limited team size. With only five riders it was costly for GB to ride tempo all day and in the end they couldn't do it. No radios helped, but the decider was that negative racing wore the team out and there was nobody in reserve. Grand tours or NRC crits, the same applies. Improve the racing by reducing the team size.


Yes! I think the Tour would be a much more open race if they cut the teams down to say, 7 riders.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

OldEndicottHiway said:


> Too bad for Fabian...I think he might've caused a different outcome. That was quite a header he took. Broken collarbone? Anyone know?


No fracture.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...ider-could-still-miss-Olympic-time-trial.aspx


This is a touching pic:
.


----------



## c_h_i_n_a_m_a_n (Mar 3, 2012)

It is a road race, and countries with a full complement of riders take advantage of the fact that they can 'try' to control a race. Clearly shows that sometimes, this does not work, which adds to the unpredictability of the sport, crashes included.

And they only give 1 gold medal out anyway ... _Don't get me wrong, I very much wanted Cavendish to win._ Bad luck Cavendish and Cancellara ...


----------



## Ridin'Sorra (Sep 7, 2004)

cda 455 said:


> No fracture.This is a touching pic:
> .
> [/COLOR]


Particularly when it's a hell of a badass rider like Spartacus...


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Ridin'Sorra said:


> Particularly when it's a hell of a badass rider like Spartacus...


If it were a Schleck, everyone and their cousin would be claiming how much tougher they are.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

spade2you said:


> If it were a Schleck, everyone and their cousin would be claiming how much tougher they are.


This is a correct statement.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

spade2you said:


> If it were a Schleck, everyone and their cousin would be claiming how much tougher they are.


Schleck would have needed his panties readjusted before he could even continue.

It's touching because Fabian is a tough mother f**ker, and to see someone like that break down over a loss that he really wanted is touching.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

at least the Brits tried

the germans did nothing to help Griepel

either did any team who had a bunch sprinter (USA but they had a guy in the break) who was not in the breakaway

The English rode themselves into the ground to no avail


----------



## flyrunride (May 2, 2012)

Too bad for GB, everyone knows their plan so they should've had a plan B but oh well, there's the next olympics. Vino did well, I thought it would be Spartacus breaking away strong... Good race though


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

il sogno said:


> The organizers did their best to come up with a course that would favor Cavendish.
> 
> The thing is that with a maximum of five riders on the biggest teams, and a 270km race, it was impossible for Team Great Britain to control the race. And with the "fastest man on earth" as the Team GB sprinter, there was no reason for the Germans to make more than a half hearted effort to help Team GB.
> 
> As far as the Aussies went, Stuart O'Grady was in the break. There was no reason for them to chase.


I think GBR was rightly expecting that Germany and Australia would help. They both made the fatal mistake of forcing GBR to make the chase. By the time anyone else came forward it was too late (Gesink pulling?). We've seen it before. 

Australia absolutely should've chased the break. They were 1 in 32 in the break and O'Grady's sprinting days are long past. 

I wish Phinney could've medaled. He and Tejay did the US proud up there. Big distance, big race and well played.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

spade2you said:


> If it were a Schleck, everyone and their cousin would be claiming how much tougher they are.


well because a Schleck would moan and complain about circumstances, not break down against the matter of missing Olympic glory.


----------



## Bill Bikie (Jul 24, 2010)

spookyload said:


> I know GB spent 80% of the day on the front, but could more have been done if the ITT wasn't looming over the heads of Wiggins, Martin, and the other guys in the ITT? The Germans and Belgians as a whole expected GB to chase the break down.


Instead having four guys forming a train for Cavendish, one of those guys could've been prepared to go with the break. They must've had someone like that at their disposal,
He'd have to be someone who could hold his own in the break, a Gilbert type of rider.

Man, Cavendish is so one dimensional. He'd never even think of going with a break. He's not a true road rider. Chipolini was the greatest sprinter of his era, but would do spring classics, go with a break, and win a sprint. He wasn't carrying baby fat. 

I think there will be a lot of second guessing in Britian over the race too. It's like Sean Yates thought everything would fall in line for them, and he had no back-up plan.


----------



## gordy748 (Feb 11, 2007)

atpjunkie said:


> at least the Brits tried
> 
> the germans did nothing to help Griepel
> 
> ...


Eh? USA did have a guy in the break, and so did Belgium, as did Australia, as did... let me see, Kazakhstan, Italy, Spain, Russia, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden. There are others, I'm sure.

When one of your chaps is up the road, you sit back and let other teams with none of their chaps up the road get up the road by themselves. It's a road race, not a charity. Germans came through to help GBR but by then it was too late. 

The *BRITISH** rode themselves into the ground because of telegraphed, inflexible, poorly thought out tactics.

* Cavendish and Millar might resent being called English.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

Brits have no one but themselves to blame. They've been saying how good they are for months, they've been self-hyped and even the way they rode oozed over-confidence... it's as if they just told every other countries what their plan was and expected them to let them do it, saying 'watch this losers!' on the way... Very naive on their part to think other teams would help them get the win but either they thought they could do it alone, or they planned others would chip in.

Their tactic wasn't a bad one, could have worked with 9 men teams, it's the fact that they didn't adjust when they should have that failed them. They should have been attentive as to who and how many went into that break. I mean... Gilbert, Vino, Nibali, Cancellara, Valverde, LL Sanchez and many more powerful riders... Who lets such riders go? In such a big group too? Australia didn't have to ride with Stuey up front and I think Germany's tactic was to let the Brits tire themselves... because let's be honest, if both Brits and Germans had shared the work from the start and managed to bring the break back, they know Cav would smoke Greipel 9 times out of 10...

Like him or not, Vino raced well, was attentive, time his moves perfectly.


----------



## Ridin'Sorra (Sep 7, 2004)

Dan Gerous said:


> Brits have no one but themselves to blame
> 
> Their tactic wasn't a bad one, could have worked with 9 men teams, it's the fact that they didn't adjust when they should have that failed them.
> 
> Like him or not, Vino raced well, was attentive, time his moves perfectly.


This... it worked in the Tour not only because of 9 riders teams but also because there were Liquigas, BMC, etc. helping the chase as none of the top teams wanted to let breaks succeed.

As mentioned, if Germany and maybe other team would have shared the work, it could have worked. But even then and assuming 9 men teams, that would be 18 riders against a break of 20+.

Now, if having a break with names like Cancellara and Vinokourov doesn't make you rethink your tactics, you can see the end result.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

lesson here is, if it's an all-star breakaway, then you better make sure you tag along otherwise nobody is gonna be able to reel them back. They are all-star for a reason.

the whole race felt like one long crit on steroid. Team Sky, I mean, Team GB, treated it like a TdF stage. Fail.


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

nOOB observation:

It really does look like the lack of radios played a big roll in how race unfolded.


----------



## jalea (Jul 28, 2009)

I really felt bad for Fabian and was bummed that we wouldn't see the attack that he was about to unleash....he REALLY broke down after the race...

Still an exciting race...


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

I'm not sure I agree that the British were arrogant. yes they thought they could deliver Cav a win but then so did a lot of the people on this forum so either everyone's deluded or nobody is. 

I completely agree with the lack of Plan B though. Oz had spelled out that they weren't going to help a chase and the Germany team wasn't that full of great chasers because of some saving themselves for the TT. As a lineup it was way too heavily centered about tempo at the front of the peloton, particularly Stannard. I would have preferred to see a rider with not just the ability to get into the break but be considered one out of it as well. Or make the decision that Millar didn't need to be captain on the road (frankly once Germany had said no to much work his job was limited anyway) and let him be the guy to follow the breakaway making other teams work. Cav might not have liked that plan though...


----------



## Rokh On (Oct 30, 2011)

roddjbrown said:


> i'm not sure i agree that the british were arrogant. Yes they thought they could deliver cav a win but then so did a lot of the people on this forum so either everyone's deluded or nobody is.


^^^this^^^


----------



## 67caddy (Nov 4, 2009)

I was a bit surprised that the Germans didn't send more help to the front in the final 45k. Sure there is only one gold medal, but a silver for Griepel would have been better than a whole lot of nothing. But I suspect with that many riders away, it would not have made a difference. Tejay, Phinney, Cancellara and a few others were nailing it pretty hard at the front.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

davidka said:


> I think GBR was rightly expecting that Germany and Australia would help. They both made the fatal mistake of forcing GBR to make the chase. By the time anyone else came forward it was too late (Gesink pulling?). We've seen it before.
> 
> Australia absolutely should've chased the break. They were 1 in 32 in the break and O'Grady's sprinting days are long past.
> 
> I wish Phinney could've medaled. He and Tejay did the US proud up there. Big distance, big race and well played.


Seeing how Greipel outsprinted Cav at the finish, I'll bet the Germans are kicking themselves for not helping GBR. 

If the break had remained as it was in the first half of the race, O'Grady would have had a great chance of winning by sprinting out of the 11 man group. As it stands he got enough of a sprint together to finish 6th. I think Australia still had no reason to tow Cav to the finish even after the break swelled in numbers. You never know what's going to happen in the break. 

The US played their cards well. Their one mistake was letting Vino and Uran go. Tejay and Phinney both looked strong!


----------



## Dan Gerous (Mar 28, 2005)

il sogno said:


> Seeing how Greipel outsprinted Cav at the finish, I'll bet the Germans are kicking themselves for not helping GBR.


But at that point, I question if Cav really gave it some gas... he's not the kind of guy to fight for crumbs, he usually goes for the win but doesn't do much effort if he knows he can't win. If they were at the front, it would have been another story.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

il sogno said:


> The organizers did their best to come up with a course that would favor Cavendish.
> 
> The thing is that with a maximum of five riders on the biggest teams, and a 270km race, it was impossible for Team Great Britain to control the race.


Make it six? Bernie Eisel seemed to be doing what he could for his trade team limey partners.
''The other teams worked againsy us!' :cryin:


----------



## AdamM (Jul 9, 2008)

> Make it six? Bernie Eisel seemed to be doing what he could for his trade team limey partners.
> ''The other teams worked againsy us!'


Agreed on Eisel. Was strange seeing him in the GB rotation. 

The situation wasn't any different then when Cancellara goes on the break and riders sit on making him do all the work.


----------



## gusmahler (Apr 7, 2012)

Bill Bikie said:


> Man, Cavendish is so one dimensional. He'd never even think of going with a break. He's not a true road rider. Chipolini was the greatest sprinter of his era, but would do spring classics, go with a break, and win a sprint. He wasn't carrying baby fat.


When you are, by far, the best sprinter in the world, why would you even bother developing a second dimension.


----------



## tomatogti (Jul 24, 2012)

No one nation can CONTROL a road race, only influence one. Depending on your strengths your team ride in different ways. There was no point in GB pretending they were going to ever do anything other than ride for Cav as it was clearly their best option. The Germans and Aussies understandably also wanted a bunch sprint but also thought that they could get the Brits to do the lion's share of the work as they had the most to lose (Cav arguably best sprinter plus Olympics in London). This worked (to the extent the Brits did the lion's share of work) except the Germans never did more than halfheartedly help - too little, too late. The Aussies put O'Grady in the break simply to avoid having to work until the end when they would then have an super strong lead out train for Goss. They expected the Brits and Germans to bring it back. (Goss in a bunch sprint is a far better medal contender than O'Grady in a group of 12 - as the break initially was). The Aussies and Germans could still have helped near the end and should have reacted to the second group of 12 to ensure they never got free (when they rode over the gap was only a minute with 50k to go). They would then successfully have helped the Brits line up a bunch sprint. As it was they got over and suddenly 3 nations have 3 riders each so give it their all.

I agree that race radios and smaller teams make for more exciting racing as you can't just end races in sprints when you feel like it (as we saw).


----------



## gusmahler (Apr 7, 2012)

A quick question for those who think that Cav is "one-dimensional." If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish in front of a 50km flat course. You know who's going to win 100% of the time. If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish 1 km from the end of a bunch sprint flat stage, you know who's going to win 100% of the time. Why, then is it only Cavendish (and other sprinters) that's "one-dimensional"?


----------



## sir duke (Mar 24, 2006)

gusmahler said:


> A quick question for those who think that Cav is "one-dimensional." If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish in front of a 50km flat course. You know who's going to win 100% of the time. If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish 1 km from the end of a bunch sprint flat stage, you know who's going to win 100% of the time. Why, then is it only Cavendish (and other sprinters) that's "one-dimensional"?


That's far too much logic for the Cav-haters. :thumbsup:


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

gusmahler said:


> A quick question for those who think that Cav is "one-dimensional." If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish in front of a 50km flat course. You know who's going to win 100% of the time. If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish 1 km from the end of a bunch sprint flat stage, you know who's going to win 100% of the time. Why, then is it only Cavendish (and other sprinters) that's "one-dimensional"?


Peter Sagan at this point is just as good as Cav in a bunch sprint. I believe given a couple more years, Sagan will surpass Cav in a sprint, and demolish Cav on any climb more than 5-6% grade. Sagan may never become a GC rider, but he does not need a whole armada to deliver him to the finish line for a sprint either as he pretty capable of getting there himself.


----------



## gusmahler (Apr 7, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> Peter Sagan at this point is just as good as Cav in a bunch sprint. I believe given a couple more years, Sagan will surpass Cav in a sprint, and demolish Cav on any climb more than 5-6% grade. Sagan may never become a GC rider, but he does not need a whole armada to deliver him to the finish line for a sprint either as he pretty capable of getting there himself.


Lol at "just as good as Cav" in a bunch sprint. How many times did Sagan beat Cav in a head to head sprint. Oh that's right, zero. The ease with which Cav beat Sagan in the intermediate sprints in week one was astonishing.

Also lol at not needing an "armada to deliver him to the finish line." Of course he doesn't, he follows Cav (or Griepel if Cav isn't there) and uses their train.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

gusmahler said:


> A quick question for those who think that Cav is "one-dimensional." If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish in front of a 50km flat course. You know who's going to win 100% of the time. If you put Tony Martin and Mark Cavendish 1 km from the end of a bunch sprint flat stage, you know who's going to win 100% of the time. Why, then is it only Cavendish (and other sprinters) that's "one-dimensional"?


Are you sure about this? Don't sprinters start their sprint somehere around the 200/250m mark?


----------



## gusmahler (Apr 7, 2012)

The Weasel said:


> Are you sure about this? Don't sprinters start their sprint somehere around the 200/250m mark?


Yes, but I assume that, in a flying start, Martin would be unable to get far enough ahead of Cav to prevent Cav from sprinting at the end. But that also wasn't the point of my post, which was--why are sprinters "one-dimensional" while TT specialists aren't?


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

aclinjury said:


> Peter Sagan at this point is just as good as Cav in a bunch sprint.


LOL!!! Despite having never beaten him in a bunch sprint?! I like Sagan but please, behave. Sagan is great for Points classifications because he can take breakaway points at intermediate sprints and pick up points on mountain stages where other sprinters get dropped. He can do that by being lighter and sacrificing top speed.

Right now Sagan's not as good as Farrar in a true bunch sprint


----------



## gusmahler (Apr 7, 2012)

roddjbrown said:


> Right now Sagan's not as good as Farrar in a true bunch sprint


I agree with the rest of your post. But this is just bad. Sagan is not as fast as Cav or probably Griepel and Goss. But he regularly beat the other sprinters in the TdF.

Farrar only beat Sagan once, on stage 15. Sagan outsprinted Farrar at least on stages 2, 18 and 20.


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

gusmahler said:


> I agree with the rest of your post. But this is just bad. Sagan is not as fast as Cav or probably Griepel and Goss. But he regularly beat the other sprinters in the TdF.
> 
> Farrar only beat Sagan once, on stage 15. Sagan outsprinted Farrar at least on stages 2, 18 and 20.


Lol I wasn't being serious, I completely agree. Sagan I think could beat Goss with a bit more tactical knowledge (or just not getting bashed out the way by him)


----------



## cda 455 (Aug 9, 2010)

roddjbrown said:


> LOL!!! Despite having never beaten him in a bunch sprint?! I like Sagan but please, behave. Sagan is great for Points classifications because he can take breakaway points at intermediate sprints and pick up points on mountain stages where other sprinters get dropped. He can do that by being lighter and sacrificing top speed.
> 
> Right now Sagan's not as good as Farrar in a true bunch sprint



Arguably this best quote of the 2012 TDF was from Wiggo when Cav absolutely smoked everyone at the stage 18 sprint finish:* "He left them for dead, didn't he?" :lol: *

Roche and Sanchez literally had the, 'Where in heck did you come from???' look on their face when Cav passed them like they were doing track stands  !

.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

gusmahler said:


> But that also wasn't the point of my post, which was--why are sprinters "one-dimensional" while TT specialists aren't?


If you think about the other things these so called ITT specialists have done, I wouldn't call them one dimensional.


----------

