Cooke v Armitstead

[rich p]

Interesting read Resal but it doesn't altogether answer the point of Cooke's strategy in the Worlds. Imagine a scenario where Mark Renshaw found himself 1km from the finish in a TdF sprint stage. I don't think his attitude would be" where's Cav, can't spot him, oh sod it I'll go for myself".
He'd be looking round rather more than Cooke appeared to. From my viewing of the race at the time, she didn't seem to look around at all. I suspect she was going for herself all the time but I agree that the GB tactics were utterly incomprehensible. Pure subjective conjecture though.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Thanks, resal. I have always wondered whether Cooke is actually ostracized for not being girly enough. I've heard her described (by some men who know her) as a 'beast' and a 'monster' because she trains harder than anyone else, works harder and, to put it not entirely subtly, doesn't hide her appetites. They don't say those kinds of things about any other women in the British Cycling set-up. They are all 'lovely', 'nice', 'sweet' etc.

 

[yello]

Imagine a scenario where Mark Renshaw found himself 1km from the finish in a TdF sprint stage. I don't think his attitude would be" where's Cav, can't spot him, oh sod it I'll go for myself".

My reading of resal's post had that scenario covered; that Cooke thought along the lines of 'either Lizzie is on my wheel or she's not, I'm going, if she's with me then well and good'.From that position, I wouldn't expect any rider (Renshaw included) to sit up and wait. That Armistead wasn't there wasn't the fault of Cooke, as resal points out, either Armstead should have gotten herself there or had someone to get her there. Neither of those things happened. That's how I read it anyhow.... what actually happened and what the tactics were meant to have been, I don't know!

 

[rich p]

I've no axe to grind about Nicole but I think it takes more than, "either she's on my wheel or she isn't" to be a lead-out 'man'. It's beholden on the Renshaw/Cooke position cyclist to make sure they're together on the approach. They need to a bit more proactive than that I'd have thought.

 

[yello]

Agreed, they ought to have been together... but they weren't. That's the point as I read it. Cooke was in a good position but Armistead wasn't. That's not (only) Cooke's fault, where were the rest of the team? Things didn't go to plan (presumably!) It shouldn't have panned out like that, sure, and there's any number of reasons for that (including Cooke not riding for the team) BUT given they were where they were, what's Cooke to do?

I venture she did what any rider would have done; she went for the win. And now she seems to be getting stick for that when others might look at their own part in it.

 

[resal]

I have not got the answers. There is more I don't understand about this than I do. I cannot understand how the team was drilled or what seems to be the case, not drilled. Fundamentally, Cooke may have been told to be final lead out rider and taken a pragmatic view, "I don't like that but I will do it and I will do that from what is the right place for final lead out rider to do that from."
Maybe the plan was always never going to be executed right, because anyone else who should have been ahead of Cooke was never going to get Cooke and Lizzie up there in time and Lizzie was not going to get herself into the right place for any viable race winning lead out to start, so the plan was completely rubbish before they every turned a pedal.

The single most critical fact, not opinion, is that the best engine in the team, Emma P was entirely absent in the finish this year (as last). This is an entire mystery.

There could be no viable plan if she was not used in the closing stages - period.

Then add on that Lizzie doesn't exactly have a good record for getting into the right place in sprints. She came up to the final group with Bronzini last year but whilst Bronzini kept going until she found a quality wheel in Vos, Lizzie dithered and came what - 17th ? Emma P dragging Lizzie onto the chasing group with a plan B, to be used if Cooke was caught ? It didn't happen. Too many things here just don't add up. How can BC be so good at so many things and the Women's road team have so much talent and yet perform so poorly? Then, months after the event, one person, who so obviously did not get herself into the right place at the right time, criticise the single member of the team who did, in public and have the support of management in doing so ? Do they think we are all stupid ?

Luke's dad - that was an interesting comment. But Pooley is a team mate of Lizzie and worked for her at the National Championships to beat Cooke. Why do nothing to help her on the big stage? "I might have got Silver but it is going to be the best medal in this team ?" - could be ? Worried that if she did something for Lizzie, Cooke might be the beneficiary because Lizzie cannot finish a race ? I don't know but it just does not make sense.

 

[lukesdad]

Mind it would make a lot of sense had Cooke been the nominated rider, or more likely Armitstead was on a off day.

 

[lukesdad]

Thanks, resal. I have always wondered whether Cooke is actually ostracized for not being girly enough. I've heard her described (by some men who know her) as a 'beast' and a 'monster' because she trains harder than anyone else, works harder and, to put it not entirely subtly, doesn't hide her appetites. They don't say those kinds of things about any other women in the British Cycling set-up. They are all 'lovely', 'nice', 'sweet' etc.

Not far off there MF, ive been in a few races with cookie.