RvV

Steve McGinty

Not to take anything away from Wesemann, but this year's Ronde felt a
little flat. Maybe because the principles never really made it to the
front of the race, other than the brief re-grouping on the Muur.

Quick.Step's tactics have to be questioned - Bettini and Boonen seemed
to do a lot of the work to bring it back together - but then they had
no-one in either of the lead groups after the Muur.

However, Wesemann rode an excellent race and was the strongest rider
in the finale.

Regards!
Stephen

Ewoud Dronkert

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 20:24:19 +0100, Steve McGinty wrote:
> However, Wesemann rode an excellent race and was the strongest rider
> in the finale.

He did, but was he? I think maybe Van Bon was, but because of really
strange tactics (betting on Hoste against Wesemann??!) he couldn't work
with Dekker. Dekker was very good, but not super or he would have closed
the 14 sec gap to the Wesemann/Bruylandts tandem. I think it was Dekker
himself saying earlier (should be somewhere on his site) that he thought
Wesemann was thinner than usual, better climbing but lacking in
strength. Well there you go.

Steve McGinty

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 21:33:47 +0200, Ewoud Dronkert <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 20:24:19 +0100, Steve McGinty wrote:
>> However, Wesemann rode an excellent race and was the strongest rider
>> in the finale.
>
>He did, but was he? I think maybe Van Bon was, but because of really
>strange tactics (betting on Hoste against Wesemann??!) he couldn't work
>with Dekker. Dekker was very good, but not super or he would have closed
>the 14 sec gap to the Wesemann/Bruylandts tandem.

Closing down 14 seconds at 60kph when it's two against one ain't
easy...


Regards!
Stephen

Jeff Jones

"Ewoud Dronkert" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:geo0709p1v3c9alscihvj3o0ga43s9ubkb@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 20:24:19 +0100, Steve McGinty wrote:
> > However, Wesemann rode an excellent race and was the strongest rider
> > in the finale.
>
> He did, but was he? I think maybe Van Bon was, but because of really
> strange tactics (betting on Hoste against Wesemann??!) he couldn't work
> with Dekker. Dekker was very good, but not super or he would have closed
> the 14 sec gap to the Wesemann/Bruylandts tandem. I think it was Dekker
> himself saying earlier (should be somewhere on his site) that he thought
> Wesemann was thinner than usual, better climbing but lacking in
> strength. Well there you go.

No that was Scott Sunderland. Oh well, Wese proved him wrong :-) The weight
loss seemed to help him fly up the Muur. Bruylandts was better there too.
Must be the "autostrada".

Lotto seemed to be playing the Van Bon card, by not having Hoste work in
front. But not having Van Bon work behind defeated the purpose somewhat.
Andreas Klier is pretty handy too - he won Gent Wevelgem in 2003.

cheers,
Jeff

Ewoud Dronkert

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 06:08:52 +1000, Jeff Jones wrote:
>> [Dekker?] thought Wesemann was thinner than usual
>
> No that was Scott Sunderland.

Ah sorry yes, in his diary on CN.

> Lotto seemed to be playing the Van Bon card, by not having Hoste work in
> front. But not having Van Bon work behind defeated the purpose somewhat.
> Andreas Klier is pretty handy too - he won Gent Wevelgem in 2003.

but even if you count in bringing back Klier for free, I still think
Van Bon at the front would have given Lotto *much* better chances for
the win than to just leave Hoste to be devoured by Wesemann. Who didn't
see that one coming from a mile away (13 km actually).

Anyway, when looking back we're all top analysts...

Steve McGinty

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 22:36:33 +0200, Ewoud Dronkert <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 06:08:52 +1000, Jeff Jones wrote:
>>> [Dekker?] thought Wesemann was thinner than usual
>>
>> No that was Scott Sunderland.
>
>Ah sorry yes, in his diary on CN.
>
>> Lotto seemed to be playing the Van Bon card, by not having Hoste work in
>> front. But not having Van Bon work behind defeated the purpose somewhat.
>> Andreas Klier is pretty handy too - he won Gent Wevelgem in 2003.
>
> but even if you count in bringing back Klier for free, I still think
>Van Bon at the front would have given Lotto *much* better chances for
>the win than to just leave Hoste to be devoured by Wesemann. Who didn't
>see that one coming from a mile away (13 km actually).
>


Duffield and Kelly on GB Eurosport...

Regards!
Stephen

steve robertson

>Lotto seemed to be playing the Van Bon card, by not having Hoste work in
>front. But not having Van Bon work behind defeated the purpose somewhat.
>Andreas Klier is pretty handy too - he won Gent Wevelgem in 2003.
>

yeah, when I read on the Cyclingnews live report that Hoste
was not working because Van Bon was behind and that Van Bon
was not working because Hoste was in front, I was a bit
perplexed.

But in the end, if all six had gotten together with a couple
of Km to go, I would have put my money on Telekom (sorry,
T-Mobile) with Klier and Wesemman. Only if Dekker had towed
Van Bon to the leaders with less than 500m to go, would I
have bet on Van Bon - he definitely has the sprint, but I
don't think he has the short-range attack of the two
Germans. They would have worked him over and Hoste may not
have been much help (only Lotto knows that).

So maybe it was a "rock and a hard place" type of scenario
for Lotto.

What was that TdF stage where Rabobank played this card so
well? I think that Dekker and another were in the finale
and Dekker was cooked after being away for so long. But he
fooled the guys in the break with a false attack while his
teammate went off on the other side of the road. That was
masterful. However, T-Mobile probably would not have taken
their eyes off of Van Bon, so it may not have worked.

Hey, this is fun - I can see why Don Cherry loves making
grand pronouncements about hockey, after the results
(apologies to non-Canadians, or perhaps I should ask for
your sympathy because I have to put up with the guy).

steve

Ewoud Dronkert

On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 06:08:52 +1000, Jeff Jones wrote:
> No that was Scott Sunderland.

Here's Dekker's analysis, my translation:

I was looking forward to this for a long time and this morning it was
there; the Ronde. At half past 6 we were at the breakfast table and got
a nice surprise: Rabobank will remain as sponsor until 2008. Good start
of the day. The race was difficult, weird and I thought chaotic. So many
escapees so early in the race at the front, that gave a strange twist to
the race. My radio wasn't working so I was deprived of all info. A
blessing in disguise, I would rather have not known anyway! The legs
were good, but for some reason I always seemed to be riding just where
it broke in front of me. The legs steadily improved relative to the
competition and after the Muur I showed them my heels. Unfortunately my
companions were team mates of the leaders so that I had to do most of
the work. Unfortunately for Leon van Bon he realised too late that he
could help me. A unique chance for him to win Flanders' Finest. I
finished fifth and that was to my satisfaction. I was in contention for
the win in one of the most beautiful and hardest races. Those were my
expectations. Three years ago was the last time I acted on this level.
Four months ago I didn't think it would be easy to reach this level. I
mean, I sure had taken into account I would need more time. Not so! This
Saturday the Ronde (van Drenthe). In two weeks my next goal: AGR!

Source: http://www.erikdekker.nl/nieuws.php

Ewoud Dronkert

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 21:05:56 GMT, steve robertson wrote:
> What was that TdF stage where Rabobank played this card so
> well? I think that Dekker and another were in the finale
> and Dekker was cooked after being away for so long. But he
> fooled the guys in the break with a false attack while his
> teammate went off on the other side of the road. That was
> masterful.

TdF 2002, 14 juillet, Karsten Kroon won the stage to Plouay (podium all
Dutch on Bastille day, hehe).

Tom Kunich

"Steve McGinty" <steve_DOT_mcginty@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:q7t070h35ako57aolricnv609fci4qgk71@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 22:36:33 +0200, Ewoud Dronkert <me@privacy.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > but even if you count in bringing back Klier for free, I still think
> >Van Bon at the front would have given Lotto *much* better chances for
> >the win than to just leave Hoste to be devoured by Wesemann. Who didn't
> >see that one coming from a mile away (13 km actually).
>
> Duffield and Kelly on GB Eurosport...

Lotto were guaranteed a podium spot if Van Bon didn't work. If Dekker pulled
Van Bon up then he would have the advantage. Great DS strategy.

And that's why you guys aren't D'sS.

steve robertson

>Lotto were guaranteed a podium spot if Van Bon didn't work. If Dekker pulled
>Van Bon up then he would have the advantage. Great DS strategy.
>
>And that's why you guys aren't D'sS.
>
So, Tom - did you had plan?

steve robertson

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 23:28:45 +0200, Ewoud Dronkert
<me@privacy.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 21:05:56 GMT, steve robertson wrote:
>> What was that TdF stage where Rabobank played this card so
>> well? I think that Dekker and another were in the finale
>> and Dekker was cooked after being away for so long. But he
>> fooled the guys in the break with a false attack while his
>> teammate went off on the other side of the road. That was
>> masterful.
>
>TdF 2002, 14 juillet, Karsten Kroon won the stage to Plouay (podium all
>Dutch on Bastille day, hehe).

Thanks - I think I probably have that on a tape somewhere.
But I just remembered it as being a masterful team strategy,
whether initiated by Dekker or Raas or somebody else.

steve

steve robertson

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 01:15:18 GMT, steve robertson
<not.really@texus.net> wrote:

>>Lotto were guaranteed a podium spot if Van Bon didn't work. If Dekker pulled
>>Van Bon up then he would have the advantage. Great DS strategy.
>>
>>And that's why you guys aren't D'sS.
>>
>So, Tom - did you had plan?

Geez - I meant... "did you have a plan"?

sorry

Tom Kunich

"steve robertson" <not.really@texus.net> wrote in message
news:20e1705cu0ppb5aaburg22gkathbvuesb0@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 01:15:18 GMT, steve robertson
> <not.really@texus.net> wrote:
>
> >>Lotto were guaranteed a podium spot if Van Bon didn't work. If Dekker
pulled
> >>Van Bon up then he would have the advantage. Great DS strategy.
> >>
> >>And that's why you guys aren't D'sS.
> >>
> >So, Tom - did you had plan?
>
> Geez - I meant... "did you have a plan"?
>
> sorry

Not me, I just watch and appreciate the humor of the situation. The Ronde
was so hard that Lotto HAD to have one guy protected. They tried it with
both of their guys and it came pretty close to working. There is always an
element of risk and an element of luck. Wesseman had both working for him in
the final 20 km.