Panel of Temporary Experts: Ronde van Vlaanderen and the Importance of Team Strength
by PopUp Rolen on Apr 1, 2011 6:41 AM EDT
Email
Print
The Ronde van Vlaanderen is the greatest race in the world. It has everything that makes cycling exceptional: long distances, steep inclines, cobbles and echelons. It also is a race I believe requires the perfect blend of power, speed, tactics and team strength. After watching Devolder power away with the win on television in 2008, and then a year later in person on the Muur in 2009, I became obsessed with the role of team strength as a determining factor in who wins RVV.
But how do you determine team strength? Do you watch the race and come to a conclusion? This is what I do 99% of the time. But I’m not sure that is the most accurate way. When watching on television/computer, it’s hard to remove emotions, opinions and outright disdain for certain riders and tactics.
Baseball used to be my main sporting passion. And I was a massive believer in sabermetrics. So, I have attempted to develop a statistical analysis of the role team strength plays in determining the winner of RVV using the only objective cycling statistics there are: the results sheet.
And what does my analysis tell me? Put all your money on Alessandro Ballan in 2011.
Now that you know who is going to win the 2011 Ronde van Vlaanderen, you have one of two options. If you’re not into stats, hit the back button. If you do like the numbers side of the sport, stick around and offer feedback. I fully understand the system I have developed has holes, but right now, I think it is a system that provides a fairly in-depth look at the importance of team strength in the greatest race in the world.
The System
The system I developed relies solely on race results. I did not re-watch races and weight results based on what I saw. The only things that factor into my conclusions are the rider, the team and the time. The system awards points to all riders that finish within 2% of the winner’s time. For example, in 2009, the winning time was 6:01:04, so all riders within 0:07:22 from the winner received a point value of eight, five, four, three, two or one point. The more points the better, so if you finished in the same group as the winner, most likely you got eight points, and if you finished 0:06:45 back, you received one point.
Using 2009 as an example again, there were 79 riders that scored points. I analyzed where the various groups came in time-wise, and with some subjectiveness, assigned a point value to each group based on their time from the winner. Here is the breakdown for the 2009 RVV:
8 points: group coming in at 0:00:59
5 points: riders coming in between 0:01:08 and 0:01:44
4 points: riders coming in between 0:03:02 and 0:03:17
3 points: no points distributed
2 points: riders coming in between 0:04:37 and 0:05:38
1 point: group coming in at 0:06:45
So each of the 79 finishers within my time cut now have a point value. Next, I sorted by team and removed the highest placed rider on each team. This system is designed to show the role team strength plays in determining the winner, so the team leader (highest placed rider for each team) does not count in determining team strength, as the team is supporting him. With the leader removed I added up each rider’s point value per team and came up with a list of the strongest to the weakest teams.
The goal of this extensive exercise was to use statistical data to to determine how important team strength was to determining the winner of RVV. Here are the results.
2006 Ronde van Vlaanderen
Podium and (team strength): Tom Boonen (1), Leif Hoste (T2), George Hincapie (T2)
Top Teams: Quick Step (1), CSC (T2), Discovery (T2)
Summary: Tommeke uses his incredibly strong team of Paolo Bettini, Filippo Pozzato and Nick Nuyens to bag his second Ronde in as many years by beating Leif Hoste in a two-up sprint, a feat Leif repeated the following year. Big George won the sprint for third out of a group of four.
Who had the team to win: In terms of team strength, this was a race dominated by Quick Step, Discovery and CSC. In fact, each of these teams were at least four times as strong as the other teams in the race according to my team strength rankings.
Impressive Ride: Alessandro Ballan, Lampre
Despite having a team strength of zero, Ballan managed a top five showing. This was his second impressive showing in Flanders, coming off of a sixth place finish in 2005 when his Lampre team was only slightly better, but still at the bottom of the pack. Ballan’s two strong results despite having no team support shows the strength of the rider, and the importance of team strength to winning Ronde van Vlaanderen (see 2007)
Conclusion: Without a doubt, team strength showed massive importance to winning RVV. The podium consisted of riders from the two strongest teams in the race.
2007 Ronde van Vlaanderen
Podium and (team strength): Alessandro Ballan (2), Leif Hoste (T12), Luca Paolini (T10)
Top Teams: Discovery (1), Lampre (2), Landbouwkrediet (T3), Rabobank (T3), Astana (5)
Summary: Alessandro Ballan rode Ronde Van Vlaanderen five times for Lampre, from 2004 to 2008. And in each of these years other than 2007, Lampre has fielded a fairly brutal team, forcing Ballan to freelance while stronger teams protected their leader and played their options. This changed in 2007 with Lampre bringing the second strongest team to Belgium. And what does Allesandro do with the strong team? He takes care of business, attacking with Lief Hoste on the Muur and taking his first Monument. Leif gets his second consecutive second, this year for Lotto, which tied for the 12th strongest team.
Who had the team to win:
For the second year in a row, Discovery was one of the top two teams. They fell short of the podium in 2007, landing a 5th and 6th with Gusev and Vaitkus. Cofidis also was surprisingly strong, putting three riders within 35 seconds but only having a seventh place to show for it.
Impressive Ride: Hoste and Lucca Paolini
As I discovered in looking at race results and team strength for the last five years, it’s very hard to make the podium without having one of the top teams in the race. They both podiumed with the 10th and 12th strongest teams.
Conclusion: Mixed bag. Ballan proved the importance of team strength by winning the one year he had strong support. Conversely, Hoste and Paolini both podiumed with mediocre teams at best.
2008 Ronde van Vlaanderen
Podium and (team strength): Stijn Devolder (T2), Nick Nuyens (T8), Juan Antonio Flecha (T1)
Top Teams: Rabobank (T1), High Road (T1), CSC (T1), Silence-Lotto (T4), Quick Step (T4)
Summary: Stijn Devolder notches his first of what would become two consecutive wins. He accomplished the win thanks in part to a good attack and a strong team led by Tommeke. However, despite Quick Step’s strength, there were three teams stronger. I think to further develop my formula for team strength, the next step is to weight the quality of the support rider by past results. I’ll call it the Tommeke factor.
Who had the team to win?
Both High Road and CSC were stronger than their results show. High Road was represented in the main group with George Hincapie, Bernhard Eisel and Andreas Klier. CSC brought Fabian, KAA and Allan Johansen to the finale. That is a lot of fire power and no podium to show for it.
Impressive Ride: Martijn Maaskant, Garmin-Slipstream; Allesandro Ballan, Lampre; Niki Terpstra, Milram
Each of these riders finished in the main chase group and Top 15 with absolutely no team support. Ballan finished fourth, an amazing feat to almost make the podium while freelancing the entire finale.
Final Conclusion: Having Tommeke on your team is the ultimate team strength.
2009 Ronde van Vlaanderen
Podium and (team strength): Devolder (2), Haussler (3), Gilbert (1)
Top Teams: Silence-Lotto (1), Quick Step (2), Cervelo (3), Vascansoleil (4), Rabobank (5)
Summary: For the second year in a row, Stijn Devolder powered away from the leading group while everyone sat on Boonen’s wheel. So who was sitting on the wheel when they should have played aggressor? Silence Lotto, who had four riders in the main chase group that finished 0:59 behind Devolder. Cervelo and Vacansoleil also had nice numbers with three riders each.
Who had the team to win?
Silence-Lotto were stacked in the main leading group: Staf Scheirlinckx, Philippe Gilbert, Roy Sentjens and Leif Hoste.
Impressive Ride: Martijn Maaskant, Garmin-Slipstream
In 2009, the Gar-Men had a terrible Flanders, scoring 0 points. Their second team finisher was Huub Duyn, clocking in 12:32 behind the race winner. Despite this atrociousness, Maaskant managed to pull a fourth place. This is Maaskant’s second strong showing with zero team support.
2010 Ronde van Vlaanderen
Podium and (team strength): Cancellara (T10), Boonen (1), Gilbert (5)
Top Teams: Quick Step (1), BMC (T2), Sky (T2), Katusha (4), Omega Pharma Lotto (5)
Summary: Not much to say. Some of you were 10 feet away when Fabian put his stamp on this race. The rest of us were screaming at our computers or TVs. However, if I were to poll everyone who watched the race, probably 85% would have said Saxo Bank had the strongest team due to seeing them control the middle portion of the race. But in the finale, Fabian had terrible support. In fact, Saxo Bank was tied for the tenth strongest team. In my small sample of looking at the results sheets since 2004, this was the first time a winner came from a team that wasn’t one of the three strongest teams! If there ever was an outlier, of course it is Spartacus.
Who had the team to win?
Does it matter when Fabian is on form? Evidently not. Quickstep was way stronger than everyone else, and they played their cards perfectly, putting Boonen in the winning move and having Chavanel and Devolder patrol the chase group. BMC also were strong, with three riders in the chase group.
Impressive Ride: Spartacus. He has been the only rider since 2004 to win de Ronde with a bad team. Yes, I said it. Saxo Bank were bad last year in de Ronde. Take a look at the rankings of teams for the 2010 RVV.
| Team |
Points |
| Quick Step | 17 |
| BMC | 12 |
| Sky | 12 |
| Katusha | 10 |
| Omega Pharma Lotto |
9 |
| Bbox | 7 |
| Garmin | 7 |
| Cervelo | 6 |
| Liquigas | 6 |
| AG2R | 5 |
| HTC | 5 |
| Lampre | 5 |
| Saxo Bank |
5 |
| Vacansoleil | 5 |
| Radioshack | 4 |
| Française Des Jeux | 2 |
| Milram | 2 |
| Rabobank | 2 |
| Astana | 0 |
| Caisse | 0 |
| Landbouwkrediet | 0 |
| Skil Shimano | 0 |
Final Conclusions!
The proof is in the numbers. You don’t win Ronde van Vlaanderen without having one of the strongest teams in the field. Unless of course you are Fabian Cancellara. Then you can win despite almost all of your teammates burning out before the action starts. You may hope to podium, but even then the odds are against you.
Next Steps
I’m very open to feedback on the system I developed. One area I would like to explore further is weighting the strength of a rider when assigning him a point value. For example, having Tom Boonen in the chase group when Devolder is up the road is a lot more valuable than Bert De Waele. I just need to think of a way to objectively weight this using only results, and not "emotions" or "opinions."
So who is going to win in 2011?
As I alluded to at the start of this story, my money is on Ballan. When he has a terrible team, he consistently outperforms expectations. And when he had a good team, he won. This year, he’s lining up with a super strong team:
- Ballan
- Van Avermaet
- Burghardt
- Hincapie
- Kroon
- Quinziato
- Schar
The only thing stopping Ballan from winning is the Devolder play by Van Avermaet. He has been super aggressive all year, and this is the race it may actually stick. Despite little in the way of results this Spring, I think BMC makes good with picking up the win at the 2011 Ronde van Vlaanderen.
Here are my 2011 Podium Picks for the greatest race in the world:
- Alessandro Ballan
- Nick Nuyens
- Bjorn Leukmans
There will be a large group that rolls in to fight for 4th. Among them will be all of the favorites. I’m assuming Tyler Farrar or Heinrich Haussler wins this sprint.
And the rest of the Panel of Temporary Experts....
|
Player |
Winner |
Second |
Third |
Ronde van |
Season Score |
| Edredon Browny | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Philippe Gilbert | 1 | 9 |
| Millsy 89 | Stijn Devolder | Sylvain Chavanel | Philippe Gilbert | 4 | 6 |
| KOM Vuelta | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Bjorn Leukemans | 1 | 2 |
| Rubesandbabes | Fabian Cancellara | Philippe Gilbert | Tom Boonen | 1 | 11 |
| JSallee | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Heinrich Haussler | 1 | 3 |
| Popup Rolen | Alessandro Ballan | Nick Nuyens | Bjorn Leukemans | 1 | 6 |
| FrenchKheldar | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Philippe Gilbert | 1 | 3 |
| Margin Walker | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Philippe Gilbert | 1 | 4 |
| Dan Beringhele | Philippe Gilbert | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | 1 | 2 |
| Stevie Dexter | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Thor Hushovd | 1 | 7 |
| Gavia | Fabian Cancellara | Tom Boonen | Heinrich Haussler | 1 | 3 |
| Chris F | Tom Boonen | Fabian Cancellara | Alessandro Ballan | 1 | 7 |
139 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Here are my 2011 Podium Picks for the greatest race in the world:
1. Alessandro Ballan
2. Nick Nuyens
3. Bjorn Leukmans
You seriously believe Ballan is going to win the Giro?
haha!
seems to think he’s going to win Liège too! ;)
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on Apr 1, 2011 7:33 AM EDT up reply actions
No no
Dauphine.
Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger...
by TheFigurehead on Apr 1, 2011 7:45 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
PopUp, PopUp...
Ballan is on my VDS… I think you’ve just jinxed him. ;-(
"I’m hoping for the Mortirolo-Gavia combination, then we can ride down to Bormio for ice cream." Emma Pooley on the Giro Donne
A brave forecast and some good analysis.
My VDS hope is a podium that includes Gilbert and Nuyens and Goddaert in top 10. And throw in Klemme as 14 please.
I generally don’t like stats so much, but I love the bold picks that come out of this analysis! Interesting stuff.
In the end though, I have to agree with Gavia’s picks.
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
Saxo weren't bad. They simply burnt their matches in the service of their/the man who would be king.
They were right. Rankings…so your whole team finishes but no-one’s on the podium… who cares?
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
But they burnt their matches too soon
I think it’s way more important on having strength in numbers in the finale of a race versus putting your stamp on the middle of the race. For a race like Flanders which is extremely tactical, this is very important. Fabian can win regardless of team strength, but he is an exception.
In the end, he only had one other rider for help when things heated up. What if he would have had a mechanical in the last 30k and needed help getting back on. Or what if the race was more aggressive and he didn’t have help bringing back breaks.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Breschel would have been in the finale, if the team hadn't screwed up the
mechanical side of the business.
I'd say they calculated perfectly...with the obvious exception of the mechanical.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
I skimmed the methods and then went to the discussion section.
Gotta say I like your conclusions — at least on a VDS level.
With GVA and Quinziato as additional threats, BMC looks mighty powerful. Unfortunately — or rather — thankfully, bike racing can be a real tossup as to results. If your breakdown holds true its going to be a real cat and mouse race.
As to feedback, I think Seahorse is on to something. Teams who kill themselves throughout a race to support an eventual winner will of course straggle in after your cutoff and garner few points in your system. I have no idea how to account for that scenario. But as your “n” value increases you’ll be better able to refine your system.
Thanks for posting this, it makes for interesting and thought provoking reading.
Dat was echt een schwalbe!
But i question the value of Saxo Bank killing themselves so early
Wouldn’t it have been better to let someone else help drill the pre-finale part of the race and saved Stuey so he could be in the leader’s group with Fabian in the finale? I think Saxo dominated the race when it didn’t matter. They should have saved some of their strength for the end. Obviously, it didn’t matter this edition, so my arguments can appear weak. But I think 8 times out of 10, it’s important to have as many teammates as possible in RVV in the last 30k.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I don't think the argument appears weak, I think it is weak.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
so what is your counter arguement?
To use up almost all of your riders early so Fabian is alone when the race really heats up? I’m a bit perplexed why you think Saxo did a good job when Fabian was outnumbered going into the crucial part of the race. And please don’t say because he won. Fabian would have won last year with you and I as his domestiques.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I don't really have one...but your denial of the argument I would have used, reminds me of 'happy clappy'
parents who abounded at one place I taught…‘Rationality is the Devil’s tool’. Cance won…I’d say the team judged well, but remember I believe in the team captain too, so I’m biased as hell.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
I'm biased too, but that was the point of the exercise, to remove the bias and look at only the numbers
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I can't ever remember being unbiased watching sport. If I am, I walk away...
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
Well in a post that starts off by saying it's deliberately unbiased and numbers based
It’s pretty pointless to keep arguing against it based on bias and subjective opinions. There are a thousand other posts where we have those discussions.
I was asked a question...I answered it.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
thank you
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Last year Saxo used a different tactic for both the Ronde & P~R
The plan was to blow the race up in the middle as that would destroy the strength of QS and everyone else.
They knew if Boonen got isolated early, he’s not able to hold.
They also knew if the lead group had Boonen and Devo then they’d play the same card they’ve done in the past.
So, Saxo went about things differently.
I think it was a brilliant tactical decision.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
Thank goodness...I thought I was imagining things. Thanks :)
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
But they didn't isolate Boonen or blow up Quick Step
In fact, Quick Step were super strong in the finale with Wynants, Chavanel and Devolder all in the first chase group. So if Saxo Bank’s goal was to blow up the race early to isolate leaders, it failed, as Quick Step was 4-strong in the finale, which was double what Saxo had. The only thing Saxo blew up was their own team
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I've reached the conclusion that Cance's mind is the ultimate weapon...perhaps his team has decided
that if he says it’s his day, it’s his day?
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
BullShit . . . .
Go back an read the CN Report as it seems fairly accurate.
When the shit went down on the Molenberg, Boonen had nobody to help him.
It was it was a 2 man race at that time.
In the lead group that crossed the line the next QS came was –
19 Maarten Wynants (Bel) Quick Step –
24 Sylvain Chavanel (Fra) Quick Step
25 Stijn Devolder (Bel) Quick Step
In reality, none of these guys were a real factor at all last spring.
It was only his display in the Tour that I began to think that maybe Chavanel just had a bad spring last year.
But; he really hasn’t done much so far this year either.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
But i guess the point of what I'm trying to convey, albeit maybe poorly :)
Is that Boonen had a much easier ride to the Molenberg than Fabian, because his team was stronger for longer. Quickstep has a 4-2 advantage at the crucial point of the race, and I’ll take that advantage everyday.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
bingo
Saxo used QS’s strength against it.
If you can, re-watch the attack on the Molenberg (do I have that right) where Cancellara and Boonen’s break goes.
In post-race interviews, Boonen stated that his plan was to launch a dummy attack and create a small selection with the team-mate who was in the break they caught on the climb.
But Cancellara foiled that by anticipating and trumping Boonen’s attack. Give Boonen credit—he saw what was happening and was able to go with it.
BUT . . . and here’s where the team argument loses validity: once QS has their leader launched in a 2-up breakaway, whatever strength they had is neutralized. In essence, Cancellara “Devoldered” the 2010 RVV, but he used Quick Step to do it.
oh . . . and Devolder was useless
he got dropped earlier and had to chase like hell to get back to that first group, so that leaves Wynants and Chavanel, both of whom put together might be as strong as Cancellara . . .
so, my counter-argument to your analysis
is that you simply cannot try to predict cycling results based purely on race results without analysing how the race actually happened.
I agree completely
the system wasn’t designed to predict winners. It was designed to determine the role team strength played in determining the winner of RVV. I’m not saying that team strength is the only factor, just a significant one.
I still stand by my belief though that the strength of Saxo at last year’s RVV was mainly driven from emotion and what we thought we saw. But in the end, Saxo really wasn’t that strong at all, and Fabian is probably the only rider that can win Flanders without a strong team
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Nice post, PopUp.
Thanks.
A bike should have a voice... it should speak to you, and you should hear it, and what it should say is: "Attack!" - sminer
i'm with Gav on this one
"Ants don’t worry, they operate like a fantastic team, they accept obstacles and deal with them in a positive manner, they don’t complain and remain positive. An ant doesn’t work on emotion, is proactive and always chooses the ant role."
I really like the analysis model to draw conclusions
but as a tool to make predictions it’s not really helpful. It may tell us who won’t win. Boom, Langeveld, Goss, Nuyens, Sagan for example are all on teams that I can’t see being top teams on this scale and hence condemning them to minor placings.
yep
I think the system is much better used as a way to eliminate potential winners rather than pick winners
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I've got a Dark Horse (on my team) pick for this race... who do you have?
Rosseler for one. The Radio Shack line up looks pretty decent, and Rosseler is on form and likes to go in early moves. A strong early move is the only thing beating Boonen and Cancellara Sunday.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Goss, and I wish I had Eisel too...but RS are born again without LA. all power to them..
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
I'm hoping Sagan decides to "learn" Flanders by getting in a break...
But not sure he will, cause they have it in their heads he can top 10. To me, that feels like he’ll stay in the pack and wait and see if he can hang on…
by JustJoshinYa on Apr 1, 2011 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Sagan hasn't even seen Flanders before, but if not this year, his time will come.
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
And you really think that Peloton just will let Sagan get into Breakaway?
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
If I had an opportunity to let Sagan get in the early break
I would mos def let him go! no more sure way to eliminate him than let him go in the suicide break!
'When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning' - Dr. Reiner Knizia
by bought with blood on Apr 1, 2011 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Too many of the "Suicidal" breaks appears to be not so suicidal after all, this season.
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
The break of the day at RvV is always suicidal.
Somebody may be able to tell you who the last rider to win was that was off the front before the Oude Kwaermont. I will simply guarantee that it was a looooong time ago.
'When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning' - Dr. Reiner Knizia
by bought with blood on Apr 1, 2011 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
1992
Jacky Durand
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on Apr 1, 2011 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I was thinking it would be more than 20 editions ago but still a long time, and I don't think it was ever very likely.
'When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning' - Dr. Reiner Knizia
by bought with blood on Apr 1, 2011 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Not exactly the same but Hoste in the 2004 Ronde was in the daylong break and then went with Wesemann and Bruylandts
in the break to the finish and got 2nd.
RS brings up a significant problem with this analysis:
numbers don’t guarantee successful strategy on the road.
How many times in PopUp’s article does he mention discovery having decent numbers in the final? And how many times has Demol directed a winner in a classic? This is the guy who either let, or directed Gusev to attack in the final of the 2006 Paris-Roubaix, after all: what was the result of that? Launching Cancellara.
I never stated that numbers guarantee success
I am saying that 90% of the time, a lack of numbers means you cannot win.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Mostly, I'm trying to stir up debate,
but . . . if you didn’t mean to use this method to predict a winner, why did you predict a winner using it?
i've been working on it for a while now, and then came along the PTE thing
So i decided to combine the two. Not the original intent to have one influence the other, just came together that way from a timing standpoint.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Sorry to mislead
wasn’t thinking dark horse winner necessarily. But a top 5 or 10, podium would be like a win with a dark horse.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Ballan was my 'Darkhorse' pick.
’Cause who was the last guy to attack Boonen on a climb and stick it?
Ballan.
He on form this year and this makes the Ronde 1000 times more interesting.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
wel the last guy who name isn't Fabian Cancellara!
See 2010 RvV Muur Van Gerardsbergen!
'When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning' - Dr. Reiner Knizia
by bought with blood on Apr 1, 2011 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Great post by the way.
But you do have a flaw and that is to assume the race will always unfold in the same tactical manner.
As I said above, it can unfold differently then what most of us consider ‘normal’.
What would Deming do? (+8:00 GMT)
Thanks!
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Wouldn't be surprised to see Popup
parading around in some newly found salmon-based schwag from Seattle (or a new set of PdC armwarmers). Someone else we know is a well known Ballan-fanboy.
Nice post
The issue I have with it is that winning > podium > top ten… so by giving everyone withing 1 minute of the winner the same value you aren’t accounting for that. The other thing is that it doesn’t account for different riders needs. As mentioned earlier, QS and Saxo were not a factor, as a team, after the Molenberg. If someone on the team blows himself up to get the race to that point, then he’s still contributing a lot to the team, but his final results will suffer for it.
I think certain riders would need the race to stay together longer in order to win. In that case, it’s likely that the winner would have more teammates finish with a better time, thus appearing stronger based on your model- even though the same goal was achieved.
This is a great read and has a lot of well thought out considerations in it- but I still think Cancellara is going to win :)
"It's really who can just push the biggest gear the fastest and the hardest, and I want to be that guy" - GHH
Well put. I have the same reservations.
Team strength is REALLY hard to measure, and finishing time/position, taken by itself, just doesn’t tell enough of the story. But I’m all for trying to quantify the unquantifiable, and when all’s said and done, I would not be too surprised to see Ballan win.
What else can I say? I'm really happy. --Vincenzo Nibali
+1
The system is no where near complete or useful really to predict anything. More just an effort to quantify something previously not tracked using stats and not moving pictures.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
nice post and analysis popup
but i agree with jsallee above. Cance is riding at a superhuman level right now – he can catch the peloton and breaks from way behind all on his own and then just power past them like they were standing still – then separate from them again – totally on his own, in the wind the entire time and leave them minutes behind by the finish. In PR last year i was frustrated along with Boonen that people didn’t chase, but in E3 last week it wasn’t a matter of people not chasing or not trying – he’s just light years ahead of everyone else. Other than a major mechanical at the worst possible moment – otherwise he just changes bikes and catches up like it was nothing – or a major wreck that takes him out, i just can’t see him not winning easily by a large margin. Ballan might be a great pick for second though.
"Cance is riding at a superhuman level right now ..."
This is my concern.
There were a lot of fresh cowboys in the peloton and it was a nervous fuss. Tommeke
ALL PICKS UPDATED
Rubes and Gav weren’t in the first version.
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on Apr 1, 2011 1:07 PM EDT reply actions
Interesting, but you've missed a logic step.
I think you’ve created a self-proving theory.
For example:
I believe: The best apples are the apples that are eaten first.
I measure: The apples eaten first
I prove: The apples eaten are the best apples <-dubious
Your example:
I believe: The strongest team is the team with the most riders in the top placings
I measure: The top placings
I prove: The most top placings are the strongest team <-dubious
It could only be that way and no other way.
You’ve missed measuring “strength” which maybe also needs defining.
It could be:
I believe: The strongest team is the team is at the front of the peloton the longest in minutes/seconds.
I measure: The duration that each team controls the peloton in minutes/seconds
I compare: The strength of the team (based on above definition) against number of riders in the top placing
I prove/disprove: The strength of a team (based on controlling the peloton in duration measured in minutes/seconds) will result in more top placing.
Maybe my examples aren’t the best, and have logic fallacies, but I think you get the point.
You have to measure/survey which apples are best, then compare against data that shows if they are eaten first.
(I'm confused) I think you're comparing apples to riders.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Or maybe it was apples to apples, and then apples to riders?
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
I think more accurate will be to compare apple trees to the Teams.
Strongest tree retain more apples on its brunches longer, opposite of the weaker tree, witch looses its apples very quick.
But Cancellara, in his present form, not an apple, he is the guy who just going to eat those apples one by one, no meter from witch tree they came from, strong or week.
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
Beautiful...love an extended metaphor...
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
Thank You!
But seriously, if he ( Cance,) is on form, very little can stop him.
"I love bike races warm up, warm down, cobbles mountains or flats."
perezbike
.
I know...I'm already holding my breath...
"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'
Interesting
I think you have to define and measure “decision points” and which team wins/controls them.
What’s tricky here is that a cycle-race can contain many decision-points, some of which are easily predictable in advance (being in front for the Koppenberg, for instance, makes the 5k before it a decision-point).
Other potential decision-points, though, are not predictable: Last year’s Paris-Roubaix, for instance, Cancellara/Saxo turned Boonen’s decision to eat during what he thought was a non-decisive phase of the race against him.
What Saxo/Cancellara have been good at, I would argue, is taking advantage of opportunistic decision-points. Will this ability continue with Leopard-Trek?
I love your idea of analyzing the many "decision points" during a race, and determining what teams made the right/wrong decisions
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
You make some valid points
And I considered each of your comparisons when coming up with my system. But they all seemed based on even more partial or inconclusive evidence than the information I went with. For example, does a team riding at front or controlling the peloton mean strength? Sure, when you’re about to approach a helligen, yes. But on the flats with little or no expected moves, I would want my team saving energy, not reeling in a break.
Plus, we never see the whole race on television. In E3 for example, the cameras missed Fabian’s first move. So I have no clue if his team was controlling the group and then blocked, or what happened.
In a race like Flanders (and I am admittedly heavily influenced by 2008/2009 Devolder escapades) I think your best play is a team with multiple options in the last 60k of the race. The only way I could determine objectively who had those cards to play was to look at the placement of each rider at the finish of the race. If Quickstep had three riders in the first chase group and one in the lead group, I am assuming that they had three cards to play in the finale, and hence were strong, because I believe that more cards to play equals more strength.
It’s not the perfect system, and the races play out in so many different ways, but it’s data and I love me some data!
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Very interesting post and approach!
I admire PopUp for taking this on and putting it up there for the rest of us to snipe at – and I agree with Seahorse and LawrenceS that there are some problems with circularity (referring only to the results of a given race to predict the results of that race, when there is other objective information available).
If I recall correctly, sabermetrics developed over the years from something similar to PopUp’s first pass; Bill James went on to define the value of a baseball player by using objective measures of performance to calculate how many wins/runs he added to (or cost) the team.
Perhaps there’s a way to do this in cycling by giving each rider a win/podium value plus a domestique value?
The win/podium value is obvious – the proportion of races that a rider wins or places well in. One could use a modified version of the VDS point system for this.
The domestique value is trickier. I seem to recall that CycleSport did a listing of domestiques based on how often their teams won when they were present. As it happened, most of them were on HTC, but there should be a way to correct for the Cav factor (Cav wins X% of races he enters, and Y% when Grabsch is also on the team; Grabsch’s value as a domestique would be the percentage of races that he wins/podiums plus Y-X%).
Using a similar approach, one could measure a domestique value by calculating the average number of points other riders on a team earn when an rider is present as compared to when that rider is absent (van Impe, for example, would have few of his own points, but I’m guessing other riders on QuickStep earn more points when he is on the team).
A possible further refinement would be to use only those races likely to have predictive value. So, for Flanders, one could use only the cobbled lead-up races from this year plus the cobbled races from the past n years.
Then there’s the question of how to weight domestique value versus win value. Presumably one could extract that with a regression from past data.
I’d better get back to work, this is getting complicated!
It would be hard to objectively quantify “decision points”, so I’ve left that out!
EdredonBrowny developed the "huh... chapeau" ranking system last year.
Perhaps some of that system can be used.
Bless you for remembering
Definitely makes it feel worthwhile to revisit the ystem at the end of this season.
I haven’t been commenting on the use of stats in cycling, but FWIW I think this is a fascinating discussion. Broadly, I place myself at the “enthusiastic but sceptical” point on the spectrum. I think there is a lot more work to be done, but I think there will certainly be value in statistical analysis as we get better at it.
I’m taking a semi-related approach to predicting the next PoTE race (Schelderprijs) and have sent my predictions through to Chris this morning, using a simple trend analysis (very rough and ready, compared to PopUp’s impressive work above).
However, I see one major problem with trying to find a winner of Flanders, or any other single race, using “objective” methods. There simply isn’t the sample size to work with. Sabermetric techniques work effectively in baseball because they play 162 games/season with remarkably few variables, but have proved far less successful in, for instance, soccer – which has similar resources, but only about 50 games/season, and more variance in conditions and opponents. Cycling, of course, has even more variables, more competitors, and fewer obviously comparable races. There’s also an issue with optimal fitness that is difficult to work with.
The reason for “huh… chapeau” was that I think a season’s worth of data is a minimum to start drawing conclusions. Yes, we can comment broadly on teams, and get some indication of their benefits, but too much will happen in a single race for it to do any more than slightly alter our expectations for some riders. Ballan is a good example. The conclusion I drew from PopUp’s work was that BMC would be prominent, and Ballan would exceed expectations. I didn’t take that to mean he’d win – and that’s what happened.
As a betting man, I’d say that we discovered that Ballan was a “value bet” and that those with weaker teams were worth opposing. You wouldn’t win every week, because of the uncertainty inherent in the sport, but you’d be skewing the odds in your favour.
More to come on this over the next few months, I hope!
by EdredonBrowny on Apr 4, 2011 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions
This right here ^^^
My main issue with this concept is that it is good at saying which teams were good after the fact but doesn’t have much predictive value. Considering how much riders move from team to team, ranking the riders and then looking at which team has the strongest collection of riders would be a much better way of predicting who is going to win.
This is basically where sabermetrics was about 30 or so years ago. I imagine that there are massive gaps in how DSes value riders compared to their actual value (sort of like how people historically tended to overvalue W-L for pitchers or batting average for batters in baseball until they discovered that ERA+ or WHIP and OBP were better ways of doing it).
It’s a cool project and I hope something comes of it (i.e. I hope someone has enough time to start to think about it and crunch some numbers).
Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
Never use a long word where a short one will do.
If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
Never use the passive where you can use the active.
Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
-Orwell, Politics and the English Language
www.battleredblog.com
by tehGrindCrusher on Apr 3, 2011 2:03 AM EDT up reply actions
As I've said many times with TdF and which applies even more in these races
is that if a domestic rider makes a good result, then the rider wasn’t used properly.
Last year Saxo Bank used up its team early because they wanted the final split to happen early! Had they been letting other teams decide the pace then Boonen would be fresh at the end and we would have seen a sprint, which is no good.
Heck Andy too won L-B-L by having the finale set earlier than expected.
Which leads to the point
that a strong and well directed team will dictate the race to it’s own strengths, rather than waiting to see how the race unfolds (Garvelo’s strategy thus far).
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Nice article, thanks.
Removing the top rider of each team from the results for best analysis is simple, thoughtful, and inspired. Good Job!
In picking my VDS team, I decided that Ballan would not be worth it, and that once BMC realized they had no fast finishers, Greg VA would be the BMC guy getting all the results (if any!). But that was back in February…
Not too much love for Garmin-Cervelo amongst the panel.
Nice post.
but I don’t agree with you definition of Strength.
I don’t believe that Team Strength is the ability to get many riders into the groups which finish within %2 of the winners time.
I feel that Team Strength is the ability to limit the effect of fortune early in the race, control/execute strategy during the decisive parts of the race, have a strong option in the finale of the race.
Your idea of team strength seems to say that at last years Tour Radio Shack and Caisse were the strongest teams, they finished the most riders the highest up the most stages! The did however fail to have anyone in the finale of the decisive portions of the race.
Saxo was very strong last year. They did not lose the race when numerous mechanicals hit the team, they controlled the decisive portion of the race, they got their team leader into a two up lead group which gave them a %50 chance of winning the race at that point. If they get first or second in that position they are still extremely strong.
Quick step were very strong last year, just not as strong as they needed to be in the decisive portion of the race. That is where they need strength to negate Cance. This was however the point in the race that Saxo was burning matches and controlling the race. They made the race unfold according to their script. That gave them the best chance to win. It is this in essence that determines the strength of a team, did the race unfold according to your plan or some one else’s.
This is why it is so hard to quantify Team strength. QS in 2008 and 2009 were the strongest team bar none, they had their script written all over every stage of the race, no one else was even close. 2007 was far less evident, I believe that QS were likely the strongest team, but that in the finale of the race the strongest rider simply rode away with the race. 2006 again QS were the strongest team, writing their name in bold face all over the race.
That is why watching the race is so important to understanding the Strongest Team. If you look at the race and see not only on the podium but all over the race One Team you know that they ruled the race. In P-R last year as well Saxo did the same thing, Controlled the mid point of the race with an Iron Fist and then got their team leader into a position to win.
Oh and I would love Ballan and Chava on the podium since my VDS needs them to do well in the Cobbled Races, Go Ballan, Go Chava.
'When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning' - Dr. Reiner Knizia
by bought with blood on Apr 1, 2011 3:18 PM EDT reply actions
Thanks for the comments!
The system I developed only applies to the Tour of Flanders. For example, I would never consider applying this model for the Tour de France, Milan San Remo or even Paris Roubaix. Different races, different definitions would need to exist.
I disagree with your assessment that Quick Step were not as strong as they needed to be to negate Cancellara. Before his double last year, Quick Step, and probably most of us, would have bet on Boonen to win 7 times out of 10 if both riders got to the bottom of the Muur together and separated from everyone else. I think Quick Step played it perfectly. They ushered their leader to the decisive point of the race, and then had a two-time winner, Chavanel and a domestique in the main chase group prepared to go if Tommeke and Fabian got brought back.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
I'm sorry but the results speak loud enough, cance was too fresh in the finale.
QS needed to isolate him earlier and dictate the race to him not the other way around. Granted if Tommeke wins we argue that they played the waiting game perfectly and Saxo wasted their matches early. The race tells its story and the finish provides context to the central portions of the plot. In 2010 the story has to go that Saxo made the race and QS followed it. Saxo won and QS lost.
Now it is 2011 and QS need to think of a new way to write the story of this race if they want to see a different rider on the top step of the podium.
'When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning' - Dr. Reiner Knizia
by bought with blood on Apr 1, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Really lovely work
I really enjoyed reading it and it gives life to a bunch of trains of thought.
What I kept thinking of most was:
JACKY DURAND: 1992!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Vlaanderens Mooiste
hey thanks for posting this, I’d never seen it before, very cool
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on Apr 2, 2011 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Slightly off topic
Do any of you have a good resource for historic racing/rider results and stats that include more than just the top 10 and are already tabulated to tables or databases? I couldn’t find any that were very general so I was thinking I’d have to write a screen scraper or something like that to pull the information off of already existing (but inconveniently formatted) sites.
This race is no jungle, where animals show each other to who has the biggest balls. - JA Flecha
Other than CQr, you mean?
http://www.memoire-du-cyclisme.net/ is fabulous but went to a pay system a few years ago, except for the Tour I think.
cqranking.com and dewielersite.net
there’s an english version of the latter too, but I don’t remember its name.
I prefer CQ though
I like tinkering with the boys.
- majope
cyclingarchives.com is the english version.
I like it over CQ because they have more races and cover junior racing too. Wielerland also has a great archives of results.
06.live-radsport.ch has about every race (Road, MTB, track, cyclocross, etc.) from ’06 to the present as well.
i like wieler for that reason too.
the u23 and junior results. nice to see the history there on riders.
I think the content on cyclingarchives is better
but it’s harder to find. CQ is better designed. So if I’m looking for something I know I can find on either, I go to CQ.
I like tinkering with the boys.
- majope
Some Boonen tidbits...
via CN
WRT team strength:
With teammates Nikolas Maes, Kevin De Weert and now Niki Terpstra all unable to compete, it means that Boonen will be joined by four Ronde debutants on Sunday. “Of course it’s better to have an experienced team but we have to adapt with young, talented riders. It’s good for them to do it now as it well help them in the future,” Boonen said.
Do I detect sandbagging:
“Obviously there’s one big favourite and there’s a few of us right behind him,” Boonen said. “Things are looking good for me, not perfect but good. The form is coming but I would prefer that it was already there. We’ll have to see: the form will be there right in time or just not in time. Anyway, you can only see what your level is during the race.”
I like his promise of no negative racing:
“The only problem we can have is that a breakaway goes with a few guys that can win the race. Everybody will be looking at Fabian and it’s possible the race will get locked that way. That would be a very bad scenario so I hope we can open the race pretty early. If we have a lead group with some big names in it I will take the responsibility to ride to win the race and not to get second,” Boonen said.
He’s been the guy whom everybody has looked at and thus locked the race for the past few years. (significant look towards Pippo) Glad to see him acknowledge the risk of that and publicly saying that he’ll race to win, not to play “I’m not going to burn matches, you chase” with the others.
Vlaanderens Mooiste
Race to win. Thats what I like to hear.
If Gilbert tanks, you can count on my support, Boonen.
fuck placements.
I like what Tom has been saying too.
I truly admire the way he rode Flanders last year. I would hate to see the same scenario play out as last year, to have Boonen sit on Cance’s wheel and work less in order to assure not getting dropped so he could pop Cance on the line in the velodrome. Boonen has never struck me as a rider that is capable of such negative racing. If Lefevere really doesn’t appreciate that ride from Boonen, fuck him.
A ride I didn’t admire was P-R. Shame on Boonen for losing concentration in that race after what was handed to him at E3 and Flanders.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
counter:
Shame on Boonen and Wilfrid Peeters for not riding the hell out of the race in BOTH Flanders and PR when Cancellara was having bike problems.
It’s not like they’re above such things: in 2006 Boonen absolutely drilled it after Hincapie crashed.
Value of stats
I think to assess the predictive value of what you’ve done here, you need to compare these results to results from other races. There’s no doubt that teams matter, as they usually do, but perhaps you can determine how much they matter in the RvV compared to some of the other monuments. You know, in your spare time. :)
If cobble delusions are wrong, who wants to be right? -JFS PGH
by Chris Fontecchio on Apr 1, 2011 5:15 PM EDT reply actions
just looking at some of these comments
dude you are going to have some serious cred if Ballan wins. You’ll need to do a new fanpost every day for a week, “oh may I remind you that I PICKED THE WINNER?” ;)
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
hehe yup
I'm feverished, or the way you want to spell it
by plinytheelder on Apr 2, 2011 7:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Ballan
The only way he gets across the RVV finish line first is in a car.
Talk about setting yourself up for a big black crow pie
I like that kind of fearlessness.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
Yep
But you can’t apply statistics to cycling.
I started the Bah Statistics Camp
I love these kind of posts though, very informative.
"It's a lovely thing, feeling that momentum. If you're lucky, it's also about grace." Tim Winton
One thing that may limit the effectiveness of your system is that the team rankings are based
on riders’ previous Tour of Flanders results. Riders’ fitness is so variable year to year (just look at VDS results for evidence), that it may be impossible to develop a system that has real predictive value. It may be easier to subjectively look at current team strength and then decide the day before.
Dat was echt een schwalbe!
If I was going to tackle it... (but I'm not... I hope)
I would try to come up with a semi-objective measure of a rider’s past success in Flanders (e.g. awarding points for top 20 Flanders finishes in the past 3 years) as an indicator of whether the race suits them. Then I’d modify it with a semi-objective measure of a rider’s current fitness (e.g. CQ or VDS points in 2011.) The tricky part is how to do the modification. And the other tricky part is how to add together the various rider strengths to get a team strength— how many Hincapies equal a Boonen, and how many Boonens equal a Cancellara?
What else can I say? I'm really happy. --Vincenzo Nibali
Yep
BMC was the best team in the race, and Ballan was where he needed to be, it just didn’t work out this time.
"It's really who can just push the biggest gear the fastest and the hardest, and I want to be that guy" - GHH
Yeah, kinda points out one of the trickiest parts of predicting...
It’s only partly about which team is strongest in the race as a whole. A lot of it is about which team has a guy who can be the strongest in the last few hundred meters.
What else can I say? I'm really happy. --Vincenzo Nibali
Cycling announcers, especially Italian and Spanish, refer to the team in control of the front of the bunch
as “in command.”
If “team strength” measures anything, it provides an indirect indication of whether or not a team has the strength to “command” or be “in possession” of the front of the race.
Now, I’m struggling here to see which sort of sport analogy works best to match the puzzle of what happens in cycling: a “possession” model like you can use for soccer/American football, or basketball, or hockey, in which there is a physical something to be maintained that creates a “possession” around which meaningful statistics can be processed,
or, is cycling more like baseball, (or perhaps cricket???) where being on offense means that your team does NOT have possession of the meaningful object that you use to create scoring activity.
The point causing my confusion: in cycling it can be easy for opposing (weaker) teams to “steal the strong team’s lunch”—or convert “possession” of the front of the race into a win: it’s almost as if one played soccer with two teams competing for ONE goal (and either no keeper, or two opposing keepers).
wow, that was vague
shorter version: being “in command” does not reliably convert to “winning” or scoring . . .
BMC
Tactically they messed up by pulling everyone in and having no one for the win….
Huh?
They managed to get Ballan and Hincapie into the leading group. Tactically, that’s the best they could have done.
"It's really who can just push the biggest gear the fastest and the hardest, and I want to be that guy" - GHH
exactly. You can't ask for a better performance from BMC as a team.
George and Ballan fell short in the end, but two in the finale is an impressive team effort from strength and tatics
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Postscript coming later this week
Despite the fact I have a feeling it disproves everything I posted thus far about team strength. Only thing i’m sticking by is Saxo in 2010 and Leopard in 2011 had absolutely brutal teams and tactics.
I picked Riccardo Ricco for my 2011 VDS team, and submitted said team well before the submission deadline. I fully understand the error of my ways, and plead with the VDS Gods to allow me to resubmit my team.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Podium Cafe
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Celebrate the Giro d'Italia at Podium Cafe!
Check our Giro Section for race updates, on-the-scene reports, and other hijinx.
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
