Miscommunication is a characteristic of Dutch racers. Remember the Tokyo Olympics when AVV got second and thought she won the race? Nobody on her team (Vos, AVDB or Vollering!) had told her the Austrian rider Kiesenhofer was ahead in a break away.
I'm team Vollering, if Kopecky could have dropped Vollering like you say she wasn't going to catch Faulkner. So she needed Vollering, and I don't think Kopecky actually worked harder.
It would be close, and not ideal team strategy in winning the race. But let's say if she drops her 7km of the line. I think Kopecky wins. You at that point hear Vollering in Dutch scream take me with you(for me that implies to then I let you win and we can have a 1-2) Also Kopecky did anyway 85% of the catcing up. When Volering was 'pulling' Faulkner was even taking back some time. Of course Kopecky can a rest a bit in those moments. But if you want to sprint for it, you should do 50/50 work
lol, kopecky did do bigger pulls compared to vollering... how can you not see that, vollering wasn't even pacing properly, just giving kopecky respite. also, kopecky was wearing number 1 so they were clearly riding for kopecky. as a cycling fan i'm happy that they both sprinted to the finish line but from a team's standpoint, it was very wrong what vollering did cos now it creates bad enviornment in the team. like think abt it, in the future, what if kopecky goes for victory on a hilly races that suits vollering more and costs sd worx a victory? honestly, vollering should apologize and gift a win back to kopecky and settle it before things get worse.
I'm not in any team and I found the sprinting the best part of the race, but it's common sense, when a team mate is taking you to the finish, to let her go first. Vollering needed Kopecky more than the other way around, and Vollering didn't really help swimming in between the chase group and Faulkner. If anything, Vollering made a solo chase by Kopecky impossible as the distance was shortening but Vollering wasn't making any inroads. I wouldn't have mind a scenario where Kopecky dropped Vollering (supposed she could...!) and barely (or not) catching Faulkner in the last K...
I don't think that Strade Bianchi is going to be the only time this season that there will be a conflict between Vollering and Kopecky, and I think that the type of tension that we saw after the finish will remain throughout the season. This is just one of the things that's to be expected when you build a 'superteam'.
I agree that tension cannot really be prevented with two leaders on top form, unless you have an all time great with a relatively selfless character like Anna van der Breggen as one of the riders. I do not think this situation is a result of them having too many super riders in the team as you seem to suggest. They actually only have three elite winners in their team, the rest of the riders are mainly supporting and growing riders. That is not much different from the other top teams. The “problem” is that all three of their top riders are on absolutely top form at the moment.
This is what happens if you do not communicate. As a fan it was awesome. I remember thinking why is Lotte ‘stealing’ the second to last corner. Telling riders there are no orders is not communicating.
Vollering didn't do much domestique work? As long as she was taking time back from Faulkner, Kopecky got to sit in the wheels for 10 or 12 minutes near the end of the race before she hooked back up with Demi. After the horse took those couple short pulls there was no way Vollering was going to go solo to the end but she didn't go back to the group and that definitely helped Kopecky.
I rewatched it and i dont agree with Kopecky doing most of the work in the last section. They shared the work pretty even and the both did their fair share to close the gap. I think it should be the norm; if you have a super team like SD Works and they get in a situation like this, that they sprint it out and whoever is stronger gets it
To do the full sprint in that situation is just risky and not very responsible, imagine what happened if they crashed and loosed the victory to nr 3. That being said, Im fan of sprinting anyways and enjoyed the weird situation especially afterwards. Im team Vollering, she seemed to do the most work throughout and was even better in the uphill and sprint. The best woman won for sure.
I can only see the situation at SD Worx getting even more complicated now that Wiebes has developed her climbing skills and has already shown she doesn’t need a full leadout squad to win like she did at DSM. You guys flagged up this conflict when the transfer was made, things will get quite spicy on that team for sure.
Whatever was discussed / agree before the climb, Kopecky could have pulled away after Vollering was caught behind Faulkner if free to race by then. She paused / waited, which just makes me think that Vollering was the plan…..until Kopecky then dived inside…..but even then it didn’t feel as if she was properly flat out to the line. Vollering wasn’t flat out after the climb as she obviously thought it was a procession at that point, which allowed Kopecky to pass pretty easily. Feels like there was an agreement and this was Kopecky saying she wasn’t at all happy about it.
Even though Strade Bianche is a young race, we can all see that it’s destined to be around for a long time and will no doubt be considered a monument at some point. I see it that at the start of the last climb, all bets are off and it’s every (wo)man for themselves. Have at it.
Women’s racing is still that scene from Dodge Ball over and over again, “it’s a bold strategy Cotten, let’s see if it pays off” lol. Entertaining if you’re watching for fun, frustrating if you’ve got interests riding on the race.
It's so interesting that it's just assumed that someone 'should' win out of the two. It's such a strange aspect of the culture of bike racing isn't it. The winner can be decided, given certain circumstances, before the finish, by the riders or the team. People assume Kopecky to win by team orders, like F1. Then she doesn't and all hell breaks loose. In any other sport, that would be called collusion and potential match/race fixing. Not making dispersions here on either of them, I think the red mist came down and it was all on. And then after the finish, the deliberation. And, that deliberation, it should not exist because technically the fastest athlete on the day won the event. And that is how sport should be. But that is not how cycling is, apparently, given the 'controversy'. Loved the vid :)
I think it's because of the game theory around cycling tactics, as well as there actually being a big attitude around team working, with everyone expecting 'a' leader for each team/race. If the DS told them at 8k to go that whoever crested Sienna first got the win, they'd both conserve their energy, and Faulkner could have won. So understanding how to watch races comes from racers acting under team orders. We also try to put a lot of value on the domestique, and the team, rather than the individual.
Ah gtfo with that nonsense. Senna and Prost, Frazier and Ali, Hamilton and Rosberg, Tiger and Phil Mick, Clemens and Piazza; whether a sporting rivalry is reconciled or not has nothing to do with gender
@@ttq711 You clearly don't understand men at all and are probably of femoid species. So please madam, let me, as a male, explain: Men beat each other up afterwards and then bury their hatchet to be eternal friends. You know, like Frazier and Ali.
@@ttq711 I mean its total bullshit it doesn't happen in other sports. But I've seen teams handling it better e.g. TJV or UAE. Worst teamdynamic ever. This showed me once again, why usually you don't sprint your teammate.
