neilob wrote:He races from February to October and his palmares is a great indicator of his class and tactical nous. He has won classics, three week tours, stage races and even track events. I wish there were more like him but don’t interpret that as an endorsement of his doping years.
Still being able to race 8 months when others have two short peaks in a season is itself a bit odd. Most of what he wins at World Tour level since his ban is like his world championship win: cling on, then beat the others in a sprint. Dull. Give me Sagan, Alaphillipe, GVA, Gilbert, or even Yates, Thomas or Froome have better attacking flair moments.
Edit: I really like Thomas de Gendt's mad attacking but he doesn't win much because everyone knows he'll keep attacking until he pops. He'll be bikepacking home from Lombardy with teammate Tim Wellens soon. One step nearer touring! +1!
Simple question.In a bike race which is more impotant winning or not?
Valverde as a top team leader is paid to win(legally of course),do suicide attacks and breakaways acheive that?
If not what's the point,other than to get the sponsor's name on TV?
It's why the're called TV breakaways
I have a geat deal of admiration for Thomas deGent,but his wins,though spectacular when they happen,are far and few between and I think in a better team if he were more controlled and supported he'd win more often,for whatever reason,he isn't and so is a breakaway rider.
Valverde knows his own strengths and weaknesses and uses them to his advantage.
Winning is,from a pro cyclist's POV,what it's all about and if not possible individually then as part of the team,if the team wins all team members share in the win.