# Cancellara on the 2011 Classics.



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

It really gets to me when he says things like this:

Cancellara To Prioritise Olympics Over Tour De France | Cyclingnews.com

Concerning the "foot soldiers" comment: 

Cancellara doesn't lose very gracefully, in my opinion. It sounds like he is arguing that the victories in Flanders and Roubaix last year don't really count because they were not won by the heavy pre-race favorites and that he was the "real" strongest person in both races because he finished ahead of them.

If he wants to make that kind of argument, disregarding the first person to cross the line if they aren't the one's that he chooses, I would argue that the dominating performance in Flanders last year was that of Chavanel rather than Cancellara. 

Concerning the time trial, I think he is having a hard time accepting that he isn't the lone, overwhelmingly dominant player in ITT's. Tony Martin is a monster time trialist and I'm glad that Cancellara has some legitimate competition there now. 

Vansummeren won the hell out of PR, by the way.


----------



## T0mi (Mar 2, 2011)

That's the reason he is a champion. To win one has to believe he is the best.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

He really comes off like whiny prick sometimes. I use to be a fan now I don't really care for him. He is a big champion on the bike but off it it seems more and more like he is a small person.




thechriswebb said:


> It really gets to me when he says things like this:
> 
> Cancellara To Prioritise Olympics Over Tour De France | Cyclingnews.com
> 
> ...


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

the days where he could use his electric motor are long gone.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

I agree that one has to believe that they are the best. There are plenty of great champions who don't feel the need to try to belittle the victories of others or say that their loss doesn't count because the person who beat them wasn't important enough. He also gets upset that other people don't let him win and cries unfair when he gets marked because he is the favorite in a race. He grumbles when he feels that his opponents aren't practicing chivalry (in his favor) but I've seen him attack in a feed zone. 

Cancellara is an unbelievable talent and a master champion but I'm not impressed by the attitude that the world is unfair when he loses fairly and when he gets upset with his competitors because they are trying to beat him.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

thechriswebb said:


> I agree that one has to believe that they are the best. There are plenty of great champions who don't feel the need to try to belittle the victories of others or say that their loss doesn't count because the person who beat them wasn't important enough. He also gets upset that other people don't let him win and cries unfair when he gets marked because he is the favorite in a race. He grumbles when he feels that his opponents aren't practicing chivalry (in his favor) but I've seen him attack in a feed zone.
> 
> Cancellara is an unbelievable talent and a master champion but I'm not impressed by the attitude that the world is unfair when he loses fairly and when he gets upset with his competitors because they are trying to beat him.


This is spot on my impression as well.


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

Look at Boonen's backhanded compliments about the winner of the Omloop. The mental game is so huge at that level that they have to pump themselves up to the point of delusion. Otherwise, why even line up at the start?

Cancellara was marked out of contention by team tactics at Flanders and Roubaix. Great tactics won those races, rather than the best rider. The first rider to cross the finish line wins, simple as that. Doesn't mean he can't be upset about it and use it as motivation. You can bet he'll be out for blood this year.You can bet the other teams are planning for it. Boonen's on form, Cancellara is coming around, Hincapie's throwing his support behind Thor... this is going to be an interesting Spring.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Alaska Mike said:


> Cancellara was marked out of contention by team tactics at Flanders and Roubaix. Great tactics won those races, rather than the best rider. The first rider to cross the finish line wins, simple as that. Doesn't mean he can't be upset about it and use it as motivation. You can bet he'll be out for blood this year.You can bet the other teams are planning for it. Boonen's on form, Cancellara is coming around, Hincapie's throwing his support behind Thor... this is going to be an interesting Spring.


I would contend that he was equally marked on the days when he won those races. He was just so good that it didn't matter. He dropped Boonen like he was going backwards @ Flanders and then dropped a group of 10+ on a flat, smooth road while they all watched him ride away. He was simply unbeatable. But it was only a few years before that Boonen dragged him, dead leged into the velodrome and crushed him at Roubaix...

If Boonen stays healthy this will be an interesting classics season. He seems really confident and calm about it, like he knows he's back. That's a scary dude (with a great team) to ride against.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

I do agree that the spring races should be very good this year. 

It looks like the energy at Quick Step is very good right now; it's like a breath of fresh air came into the team. Boonen's mojo has been a little off the past couple of years but he's a very comfortable looking guy right now and I think he is going to be a force to be reckoned with this season.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

32and3cross said:


> He really comes off like whiny prick sometimes. I use to be a fan now I don't really care for him. He is a big champion on the bike but off it it seems more and more like he is a small person.


he may sound like a whiny prick by saying that, but I totally agree with the basic premise. 
There are major favorites - Boonen, Gilbert, Hushovd, Ballan, etc. Then there are "flukes". Had he lost to Boonen, it would be clear that Boonen was a better, stronger rider, and I doubt Cancellara would make any noise about 2011 season.

Instead, he lost (narrowly) to Nuyens and Van Summeren, who only won because the rest of the peloton was riding against Cancellara and because they were basically super-lucky. The same cannot be said about wins in 2010 or 2009 or most previous years.

I don't think anybody would bet any serious money on Nuyens or Van Summeren repeating at any classics this year. So yes, those wins are easier to dismiss than a win by one of the major players - of course it's not politically correct to say it outright, no matter how true it is.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*it is why I am far more impressed*

with multi P-R and Ronde riders than I am TdF champs
you have to win, you can't say "well I consistently finished in the top group and am overall champion"
if you are a marked rider it is hard to win with all eyes on you and shadows sucking your wheel

Tommeke has won both P-R and the Ronde in consecutive years, that impresses the hell out of me

moreso than doing the double which again is quite a feat

I'll be pulling for a Boonen / Fabian shootout in both races


----------



## bumpyknuckles (Jul 21, 2011)

atpjunkie said:


> Tommeke has won both P-R and the Ronde in consecutive years, that impresses the hell out of me


If you mean the double twice in a row? No, he didn't. 
Sorry if I misunderstand your comment.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

I don't believe you win a race like that by accident - can't buy into the "fluck" theory. Nuyens won against Sparticaus, Chav and Boonen - that can not happen by accident. He was the better rider on the day.

Sparticus is an amazing rider - but perhaps a sore loser. But I agree with others here who have said that he needs to believe that he is always the best - it's a winner mentality, even if it doesn't appeal to many viewing from the couch.


----------



## nathanbal (Feb 23, 2009)

van summerun and nuyens may not have been the strongest riders, and it may have been luck that got them into the positions they were in but fark... nuyens bridging across to cancellara's attack at the death in flanders and van summerans attack with 10km to go in PR were awesome moves. you have to be a great rider to pull those off.


----------



## captain stubbing (Mar 30, 2011)

he's not exactly wrong though, and its refreshing to have somebody actually come out and say what they think instead of trotting out the same old trash like 'i just wasn't good enough on the day etc etc".

one thing though working against him is his allegiance to the schlecks and the amount of super-domestique work he does.....you don't see boonen, hushovd, gilbert etc destroying themselves for a team leader.

if he was in another team, he'd be the leader and have much more support in the classics.

guess that's his choice though.


----------



## MG537 (Jul 25, 2006)

55x11 said:


> Instead, he lost (narrowly) to Nuyens and Van Summeren, who only won because the rest of the peloton was riding against Cancellara and because they were basically super-lucky. The same cannot be said about wins in 2010 or 2009 or most previous years.


And that is why cycling is considered a team sport.
Where were the Leopard-Trek riders in the front group at last year's Roubaix?


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

captain stubbing said:


> he's not exactly wrong though, and its refreshing to have somebody actually come out and say what they think instead of trotting out the same old trash like 'i just wasn't good enough on the day etc etc".
> 
> one thing though working against him is his allegiance to the schlecks and the amount of super-domestique work he does.....you don't see boonen, hushovd, gilbert etc destroying themselves for a team leader.
> 
> ...


I don't really see it as refreshing for someone to act like a sore loser. The "I just wasn't good enough on the day" response is not trash; it is good sportsmanship and reality. There are a lot of factors to be considered that add up to a race victory and the person who lines them up correctly is the one who is "best" on that respective day. Otherwise, we should just have all races be individual time trials, with everyone on the same bike in an indoor velodrome (to avoid weather variables). Cancellara would probably excel in that format but it would only measure one thing: the power of the rider's engine, and nothing else. Fortunately, bicycle racing takes many other factors into consideration to decide which rider is the "best" on any given day. Forget the velodrome; why don't we just have all of the riders congregate in a giant spin-class on trainers with power meters and declare the person who generated the most power at the end the "winner." I bet Mr. Cancellara would do pretty well there, too. 

It reminds me a bit of Andy Schleck last year when he got butt-hurt over Evans and Contador (and maybe Sanchez; I don't remember) successfully attacking and putting time into him on a downhill. He felt like that was unfair because he wasn't as strong going downhill, especially in bad weather and they should have waited until the mountaintop finishes to try anything because that would be easier for him. That might sound a little bit whinier to a lot of people but it is really the same principle.


----------



## orange_julius (Jan 24, 2003)

T0mi said:


> That's the reason he is a champion. To win one has to believe he is the best.


I think we can't evaluate a champion fully until we see the manner in which he/she wins, and the manner in which he/she deals with losses. 

In the case of Cancellara, when his chain broke in the 2009 Ronde van Vlaanderen, he threw a fit, and rode downhill even though many hapless rest-of-the-peloton were still struggling their way up the Koppenberg. He swung his bike around in display of anger nearly hitting one or two. 

When Boonen had his chain jam in the 2011 Paris-Roubaix, he kept his cool and got out of the way of the rest of the peloton who were struggling in the Arenberg. He could have thrown a fit and done a bike-toss, a sport invented in the manner of Bjarne Riis. 

These two events strongly informed my opinion of the two riders.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

LostViking said:


> I don't believe you win a race like that by accident - can't buy into the "fluck" theory. Nuyens won against Sparticaus, Chav and Boonen - that can not happen by accident. He was the better rider on the day.
> 
> Sparticus is an amazing rider - but perhaps a sore loser. But I agree with others here who have said that he needs to believe that he is always the best - it's a winner mentality, even if it doesn't appeal to many viewing from the couch.


This is the read I get Nuyens won because he managed to get him in the position that he could win. I would agree that Nick needs a a race to happen in a certain way for him to have is best chances (i.e. small group coming in to the finish that he can attack from). While riders like Cancallara can force a race to unfold more the way thare want it to count their wins as worth more is just BS. Dispite what Fabian thinks teh race wasn't won by a "footsoldier" (even say that makes him the biggest prick in my eyes) he got straight up beat by another team leader that rode his ass off, played his cards right and got a win he justly deserved, the fact that he can't seem to accept it makes him a great rider but a poor sport in my eyes.

And for my money watching that finish was a hell of alot more interesting that watch Fabian ride clear with 20k to go which for me is a snooze fest after he breaks free.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

captain stubbing said:


> he's not exactly wrong though, and its refreshing to have somebody actually come out and say what they think instead of trotting out the same old trash like 'i just wasn't good enough on the day etc etc".
> 
> one thing though working against him is his allegiance to the schlecks and the amount of super-domestique work he does.....you don't see boonen, hushovd, gilbert etc destroying themselves for a team leader.
> 
> ...


Actually hey is wrong he in fact was "not good enough" for the tactics" he tried both of those days. He know he was marked and instead of trying different tactics he did exactly what the teams expected him too and wasn't strong enough to just ride away and he got beat, *****ing about just shows he's a poor loser and maybe not smart enough to figure out better tactics.

BTW Boonen Thor and Gilbert have all show they will work for others.


----------



## Ppopp (Jun 20, 2011)

I fully agree that these comments make him seem like a sore loser, but when I read them yesterday I was left wondering if perhaps we weren't receiving the comments exactly as he intended, since his English isn't perfect. Sometimes subtleties are lost when someone is speaking a second language.

I agree with one of the comments above, that Cancellara serves his team in some races the way that other classics riders like Boonen and Gilbert do not. He's more like Hincapie in that way, and he gets my respect for that.

I'm really looking forward to the classics season this year with Boonen apparently back on form. Hopefully Thor's recent stomach ailment doesn't hobble him too much. The more riders that are in the mix, the more interesting the racig will be. I'm really curious to see if Vanmarcke can carry his form through to some of the bigger classics.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

I didn't see anything particularly untrue or un-sportsmanlike in his comments. Also English is probably more like his 5th language. If you look at the work he does for teammates, he's far from the prima donna many pros are.


----------



## steve_e_f (Sep 8, 2003)

To me the beauty of cycling is that on any given day anyone can cross the line first. If it were just a matter of placing the favorites on the podium we'd have the most boring sport ever.

We all know Cancellara is a monster, but I like a bit of surprise in my morning headlines and '11 was a fun year.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

JackDaniels said:


> I didn't see anything particularly untrue or un-sportsmanlike in his comments. Also English is probably more like his 5th language. If you look at the work he does for teammates, he's far from the prima donna many pros are.


If say someone one else win wasn't worthy isn't unsportsman like I'm not sure what is. There are plenty of guys that do more work than he does.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

32and3cross said:


> If say someone one else win wasn't worthy isn't unsportsman like I'm not sure what is.


He didn't say that. He didn't imply it either.


----------



## AvantDale (Dec 26, 2008)

I watched a replay of P-R last night. It looked if the race was a mile more...he would have caught Van Summeren? The way FC is able to power is ahead is pretty amazing.


----------



## mmoose (Apr 2, 2004)

I've not ridden a professional race. I've not won a professional race. I've not dominated a professional race. I've not ridden a professional race where I was the odds on favorite and had most of the rest of the peloton riding against me. I've not been in a break where all of the others have the same goal...anybody BUT that guy. I've not gone [email protected] out in a race for hours, climbed off the bike and had microphone shoved in my face. I've not been hounded by the media. I've not accidentally let a truth slip out and have a hungry reporter sensationalize it to the front page. 

Is the guy a saint? no, none of them are. They are humans. When someone acts a bit like a dutchnozzle once in a while, I don't damn them. It is nice when they are perfect sportsmen. But if they were all saints, it would be boring. Randomness, an occasional verbal shot across the bow, controversy, these are things that give the races flavor. They also sell papers and appeal to the masses.

I would like a small group of the favorites off the front and then let the big boys bark. But occasionally, the big dogs have a staring contest at each other and a smaller dog takes advantage. That's racing.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

JackDaniels said:


> He didn't say that. He didn't imply it either.



he did several times.


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

steve_e_f said:


> To me the beauty of cycling is that on any given day anyone can cross the line first.


Indeed, and this is the particular beauty and horror of the Spring Classics - you've got one day to get everything just right - and mud, dodgy cobbles, stray dogs, tyre pressure, team-mates, moto riders, dust, rain, snow, overzealous fans, mechanicals etc can all play a part too. 

All the true greats have won in the classics, but far from everyone who wins a classic is or was one of the greats. Cancellara seems to have missed that point. He doesn't have a right to win just because he has the biggest engine.


----------



## T0mi (Mar 2, 2011)

qatarbhoy said:


> He doesn't have a right to win just because he has the biggest engine.


He never said that.

I think a lot of people here are overreacting about the frustration of an athlete to be beaten by a weaker guy because his main rivals didn't play their cards. Frustration is normal in this case. He never said Van Summeren was not a worthy winner.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

T0mi said:


> He never said that.
> 
> I think a lot of people here are overreacting about the frustration of an athlete to be beaten by a weaker guy because his main rivals didn't play their cards. Frustration is normal in this case. He never said Van Summeren was not a worthy winner.


He did not say the words "Van Summeren was not a worthy winner" but in his expression of frustration that he was beaten by a "weaker guy" he certainly talks the legitimacy of his victory down a bit. Cancellara must have forgotten that Van Summeren has been a contender in the mix for P-R many times before. 
Also, Thor Hushovd most definitely played his cards against Cancellara and he did so perfectly. He just did in in a way that was tactically intelligent and didn't play to Cancellara's strengths; Thor marked Cancellara and didn't attack him because he had a man up the road. Perhaps he would have preferred that Thor had not considered Van Summeren a real player and attacked the race himself, since he was one of the "real" contenders. Of course, that would have given Cancellara a free ride up to the front to try and win on a flyer (I'm sure that he probably wouldn't have preferred to come into the Velodrome to have to sprint against Thor). This also makes me wonder if Cancellara would have behaved as Thor did or if he would have attacked with one of his own men well up the road.


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

T0mi said:


> He never said that [he has the right to win just because he has the biggest engine].
> 
> ... He never said Van Summeren was not a worthy winner.


He called van Summeren a "foot soldier". Pretty dismissive in my opinion. He then went on to say that he (Cancellara) was the best of the main contenders... as if to say, the winner of the 'real' race. Sadly for FC, but fortunately for the classics and the history books, that's not how it works.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

thechriswebb said:


> He did not say the words "Van Summeren was not a worthy winner" but in his expression of frustration that he was beaten by a "weaker guy" he certainly talks the legitimacy of his victory down a bit. Cancellara must have forgotten that Van Summeren has been a contender in the mix for P-R many times before.
> Also, Thor Hushovd most definitely played his cards against Cancellara and he did so perfectly. He just did in in a way that was tactically intelligent and didn't play to Cancellara's strengths; Thor marked Cancellara and didn't attack him because he had a man up the road. Perhaps he would have preferred that Thor had not considered Van Summeren a real player and attacked the race himself, since he was one of the "real" contenders. Of course, that would have given Cancellara a free ride up to the front to try and win on a flyer (I'm sure that he probably wouldn't have preferred to come into the Velodrome to have to sprint against Thor). This also makes me wonder if Cancellara would have behaved as Thor did or if he would have attacked with one of his own men well up the road.


And Thor was very unhappy about being told to sit up and cover Cancellara (this was at the moment when Van Summeren was just one of many riders in breakaway), and it was one of the main reasons for him leaving Garmin.

Not sure what constitutes a "worthy" winner, but Van Summeren and Nuyens were certainly lucky to benefit from passive (and in my mind boring) tactics of several teams in a way that is very unlikely to reproduce again. And as such they weren't stronger, faster or more brilliant than everyone else - which is why I doubt anyone will be betting on Van Summeren repeat at PR, or Nuyens at Flanders (even if he was healthy/on form). A win is a win is a win, but their wins were certainly... different.


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

55x11 said:


> Not sure what constitutes a "worthy" winner, but Van Summeren and Nuyens were certainly lucky to benefit from passive (and in my mind boring) tactics of several teams in a way that is very unlikely to reproduce again. ... A win is a win is a win, but their wins were certainly... different.


Not if you look back at past winners and races, especially in a 'circus' like Paris-Roubaix. There are lots of 'lucky' winners and flukes and leading contenders who watch each other while someone takes his chance and runs away with an unexpected win.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

qatarbhoy said:


> He called van Summeren a "foot soldier". Pretty dismissive in my opinion.


Haters gonna hate 

I'm willing to bet Cancellara considers himself a foot soldier in the TDF with no shame.


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

JackDaniels said:


> Haters gonna hate


Yeah, maybe Fabian's just PO'd cos he doesn't have sweet wheels.


----------



## thechriswebb (Nov 21, 2008)

On stage 3 of the 2007 Tour de France, the peloton came in together for the predicted sprint finish. The pure sprinters were the favorites to win the stage: Boonen, Cavendish, Zabel, Hunter, McEwen, and so forth. The sprinters were playing games though and Cancellara sensed an opportunity and went on a flier and successfully won the stage. Cancellara is a decent sprinter and is often found somewhere in the mix in bunch sprints but is never the heavy favorite to win in a bunch sprint; Boonen, Cavendish, Farrar, and company will beat him every time if delivered equally to the line for a pure sprint. However, in this case due to some playing around on the part of the sprinters, Cancellara took advantage of the situation and sensed an opportunity to get away. At the end of that stage, everybody talked about how strong Cancellara was and raved about the tactical awesomeness of his ability to sense an opportunity and get away from the favorites for a win. Using Cancellara's current logic, couldn't one argue that his victory there wasn't a true testament to who was strongest in the stage and that since Zabel was the highest placed of the favorites that his result is the one that _really_ matters?


----------



## shomyoface (Nov 24, 2007)

Claassics 101 teaches us that your team should try to have a strong rider in a break for two reasons: in case the break succeeds; or to assist the team leader if the peloton (remains of) catch the break-away. The reality if Fab's teams in the past haven't had the depth to accomplish this, last year is a classic example. This year we see Quick Step back to their classics original form, and Radioshack still lacking in comparison. We'll see in April


----------



## EMB145 Driver (Aug 17, 2006)

I think he is somewhat rightly PO'ed. He won both races in 2010 and the press got all involved in a BS discussion of a motor in his down tube, thus demeaning two brutal wins. The next year he gets beat, fair and square, with tactics aimed specifically at neutralizing him.

With the Schlecks TT ability, and it showed greatly at Paris-Nice, the layout of the TdF this year with more TT than usual, and an Olympic year, I think it's smart for Cancellara to plan his race schedule this way. I'm sure Radio Shack will have no trouble leaving him off of the TdF squad if they think someone else can do better this year.


----------



## loubnc (May 8, 2008)

captain stubbing said:


> ...you don't see *boonen*, hushovd, gilbert etc destroying themselves for a team leader.


Apprently, you didn't watch Paris-Nice.


----------



## The Weasel (Jul 20, 2006)

I for one am glad he is showing his real colors. I've said for years that if he wasn't such a good bike racer, he'd just be another piece of eurotrash.


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

sonssu said:


> Cancellara is just amazing. He is young but wining everything!!


Winning, whining, or wining (and dining)?


----------



## saird (Aug 19, 2008)

davidka;3812257He dropped Boonen like he was going backwards @ Flanders and then dropped a group of 10+ on a flat said:


> They X-Ray bikes now, thankfully.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Sparticus should do well in the Classics - no matter what people think about him.
He'll be heavily marked - sure - but with both Gilbert and Boonen there who do you mark? Can't mark all three.


----------

