Gen Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 We are all happy for Impey's win but something is a little off ( please don't blast me ) I feel a GC winner should at least win a stage? Richie Porte won the queen stage and finished tie in points? Just saying.................... Don't think Froome won a stage during the TDF..can't remember but I think his first stage victory of the season came during Vuelta, I could be wrong though. Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
coppi Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Don't think Froome won a stage during the TDF..can't remember but I think his first stage victory of the season came during Vuelta, I could be wrong though. Sent from my SM-G950F using TapatalkYes but my point is should they not change the rules...................
Gen Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Yes but my point is should they not change the rules...................I see, I don't think so..look at Impey's stage results compared to Porte.. overall he was the better rider. Porte bargained everything winning the queen stage with enough of a time gap.. that celebration could've cost him the second he needed to win GC[emoji6] Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
shaper Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Yes but my point is should they not change the rules...................So your theory is no matter if the winner did not win a stage then the overall must go to the first rider after the winner who did win a stage... which could be 5th on the leaderboard 5mins behind the overall leader. Whether it is 1 second or 5 minutes makes no difference as they are behind the overall quickest and they are the first on the leaderboard to have won a stage? Me thinks you should sleep more on the weekends and clear your head a little.......
Mntboy Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Yes but my point is should they not change the rules...................No. Not at all. Why would you want to penalise someone who has put in consistent results over those of his competitors? That doesn't make much sense to me. To me that is what makes stage racing so interesting to watch. Who's going to be the guys that do the best over the course of the race. That the warrior failed to win a stage wasn't due to a lack of trying as three second place finishes shows. Sent from my SM-J200H using Tapatalk
eddy Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 So your theory is no matter if the winner did not win a stage then the overall must go to the first rider after the winner who did win a stage... which could be 5th on the leaderboard 5mins behind the overall leader. Whether it is 1 second or 5 minutes makes no difference as they are behind the overall quickest and they are the first on the leaderboard to have won a stage? Me thinks you should sleep more on the weekends and clear your head a little.......No, that is not his suggestion. Merely that when two people finish with the same time, the one who won a stage should be preferred over the one who didn't.
Patchelicious Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 No, that is not his suggestion. Merely that when two people finish with the same time, the one who won a stage should be preferred over the one who didn't.That’s how it works in motor racing. Same points at end of season, guy who has most race wins become champ.
Eldron Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 No, that is not his suggestion. Merely that when two people finish with the same time, the one who won a stage should be preferred over the one who didn't. I figure that the overall winner should be the guy who is best overall - Darryl finished higher (on the podium too!) on many more stages than Porte so fair is fair either way.
coppi Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 No, that is not his suggestion. Merely that when two people finish with the same time, the one who won a stage should be preferred over the one who didn't.thank you eddy In football it works similar, if you finish the log at the end of the season on equal points they look at head to head scores etc.
Andrew Steer Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Really sad that I don't even have the remotest urge to celebrate this result... (I'll Celebrate our KOM win for sure though )What has this sport done to me. Oh to go back and be that starry eyed fan on the edge of my seat watching Armstrong/Ullrich and Pantani battling it out
coppi Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 So your theory is no matter if the winner did not win a stage then the overall must go to the first rider after the winner who did win a stage... which could be 5th on the leaderboard 5mins behind the overall leader. Whether it is 1 second or 5 minutes makes no difference as they are behind the overall quickest and they are the first on the leaderboard to have won a stage? Me thinks you should sleep more on the weekends and clear your head a little.......Me thinks you should study reading skills on weekends, or ride you bike as it will calm you down................
Eldron Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Me thinks you should study reading skills on weekends, or ride you bike as it will calm you down................ There was no need for the little barb from shaper but to be fair your post was confusing amd wrong. Porte finished with 15 points - Impey got 42. Oddly enough if you remove bonus points then Porte actually finished the race distance faster than Impey!
Gen Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 There was no need for the little barb from shaper but to be fair your post was confusing amd wrong. Porte finished with 15 points - Impey got 42. Oddly enough if you remove bonus points then Porte actually finished the race distance faster than Impey!When you made that calculation did you take also take away the bonus seconds from intermediate sprints too...? Any way doesn't really matter Porte should be more concerned about not being able to clinch GC against the field that was there.[emoji102] Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Eldron Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 When you made that calculation did you take also take away the bonus seconds from intermediate sprints too...? Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk No idea - I cut'n'pasted it from this article: https://cyclingtips.com/2018/01/opinion-time-bonuses-crucial-balance-tour/ Edit: I loved this quote from the article: Reece Homfray ✔@reecehomfray If you can finish second behind Ewan in Stirling, second behind Sagan in Uraidla and second behind Porte on Willunga then you absolutely deserve to win the Tour.
shaper Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 Me thinks you should study reading skills on weekends, or ride you bike as it will calm you down................ If they both finished on the same time then the difference must have been 100ths of a second.... so irrespective, the faster guy should always win even if the leaderboard does not show the differences. Reading is not the issue, understanding the rules an abiding by them is.....
Cav' Posted January 22, 2018 Posted January 22, 2018 I personally believe the TDU route is too easy.(apart from the heat)Having 5 flat stages and one mountain stage (also no ITT) waters down the achievement of winning GC. Though winning the individual flatter stages are a far better achievement due to the quality of the field participating. It's very similar to 1 week stage races in the middle east, also with one mountain stage.(Qatar,Oman,Dubai)That's why the one week stage races in EU are so great, 7 days with 5 days of climbing. In short, Porte just sat in the field finishing in the bunch for 4 stages (5) and saved his legs for one climb (Willunga).Where as Daryl was out fighting for 5 of the 6 stages, resulting in "Accidentally'' winning GC.Thus he deserves it much more than Porte. 2019...ad another tough mountain stage.
.thumb.png.75d6381975d6e967f7f244707be5c209.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.