Absolute Visma DISASTER! Neilson Powless wins Dwars door Vlaanderen as he outsprints Wout van Aert and Visma trio
Cycling
Team Visma | Lease a Bike put all their chips on Wout van Aert today at Dwars door Vlaanderen. They had the race fully under control but risked everything for a sprint with Wout van Aert, and although they had a 3-to-1 advantage, they lost the race to Neilson Powless.
The start of the race was quite fast and it took a long time for the breakaway to set off, whilst many riders abandoned even before the difficult part of the race. Joshua Giddings, Rasmus Sojberg Pedersen, Fabio Christen, Lewis Askey, Petr Kelemen, Ceriel Desal, Mikkel Bjerg and Taco van der Hoorn eventually went up the road.
The race opened up with over 90 kilometers to go, with Wout van Aert and Visma hitting the front of the peloton and splitting it to bits. Although there were many riders in play, the Dutch team today thrived in positioning whereas that had been their main issue in the spring thus far.
Bjerg and Pedersen survived up front and were joined by Neilson Powless, Joshua Tarling and Fabio van den Bossche. And then, the five-rider group were joined by Visma's van Aert, Matteo Jorgenson and Tiesj Benoot. Visma absolutely broke through the peloton before and during the Berg ten Houte climb. They linked with the front group, and in the next climb the trio set off with Neilson Powless.
Mads Pedersen and Magnus Sheffield were the main riders trying to bridge across, but unsuccessfully, and whilst behind the battle for the Top5 would become very tactical, in front the victory was between four riders in a scenario that reminisced the 2015 Omloop Het Nieuwsblad (where Sky's Ian Stannard was joined by three Quick-Step riders).
Although this time, the Visma riders did not try to attack. A risky strategy, but it seemed clear the team wanted Wout van Aert to win, and in a sprint he was the strongest on paper. Jorgenson and Benoot did not attack and try to take the win, but instead led out Van Aert... But in the final meters the shocking scenario they feared has happened and the American beat van Aert in the final sprint to take the biggest win of his career.
Results powered by FirstCycling.com
LiveBlog
ugh. slice and dice this any way you like. if you’re one of the belgians TRYING to believe wout is going to be in the fight at de ronde and roubaix, this is an ice cold dose of reality. my opinion is that nobody — ESPECIALLY his own team — should have been fanning any expectations of wout at this point after what he’s endured.
I just went through the list of events in his recent riding history listed in another article (so not including his very expensive legal affair and any potential trouble at home) and it’s a half miracle he’s still riding at all. He's outfallen Roglič for sure, who always came away RELATIVELY unharmed.
i completely agree. wouter has been through a meat grinder. he’s such a class act, a man of such character that he would never complain or make excuses, that’s why it’s so infuriating to hear him spoken about as if he was failing, choking, or in any way not fulfilling what’s expected of him. i get it, he’s a PRO, so part of what he gets paid for is to be a target for anyone with an opinion. fair enough. MY opinion is that he needs TIME to overcome a pile of injuries. i hope he gets there, because he deserves a pile of wins.
The final appeal he lost against his old team for « breaking » his contract.
I can't believe what I just saw. Reminds me of Ian Stannard beating 3 Quickstep riders in Omloop. Not sure what's going on with Wout. Maybe just needs more time, but he has not looked great since that Vuelta crash.
Sorry, yeah doesn’t look great but it seems all the recent context gets completely ignored in order to make a big story out of this. Honestly, did anyone at this point really expect Wout to suddenly have recovered all his missing form? Respect to Powless but he’s no nobody, his 2022-2023 presaged something like this. Yes they messed up but it also nearly worked, impossible to know how good your opponent is going to be in such a situation unkess it’s an in form Pog or MVDP. I’d not see this as a disaster but a really bad call, there are positives, they distanced a very strong 2nd group (Mads might be saving himself though) and Wout was very close to a place he’s not heen in a long time. I’d call that progress. Only a few meters would have led to completely different headlines. Why make everything so boack and white? Wout obviously understands and it is in part everyone putting all that pressure on him that led to him making a bad call. That said, had he let his mates go for the win (no guarantee either) héd have received different criticism.
Well that sure didn't look good for Visma. After all that. Wow.
Just in
Play for FREE! Fantasy Tour of Flanders
Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter today!
Popular news
Latest comments
- Just like Dwars door Vlaanderen, the Ronde van Vlaanderen was/is NOT on MAX. Get your facts straight.Ben04-04-2025
- You might bounce more for the same power, but not the same speed. Sending 20 kgs over a jump at 20 kph will fly just as far as 10 kgs at the same speed. Again, Galileo demonstrated this.acem8204-04-2025
- So, you're saying that doing a bunch of small hops on a bike is easier if you're heavier? Why do people buy lighter bikes, then? Why do they generally feel better and faster? An appeal to "rhythm" is not helpful either, as the right "rhythm" might be on the lighter or heavier side of things, and as it varies, it's likely a wash either way. Then we are left with the physics truth that it takes less power to lift lighter things than heavier things.acem8204-04-2025
- No, weight doesn't affect the ability to go into the wind at all. It's all CdA vs power at that point. For example, it's "obvious" that a heavier object falls faster than a lighter one. But, absent wind resistance, it's not true (Galileo demonstrated this). An appeal to "obviousness" doesn't matter when the physics is clear. And yes, you have to be able to hold everything else constant, or you can't determine anything! So, imagine a 300 watt rider at 80 kgs with a CdA of 2.0, then imagine that same rider at 70 kgs with a CdA of 2.0. (Assume ideal tire pressure for both, same bike.) Which one can ride over a bumpy road fastest? The lighter one, as he doesn't have to lift as much. That's also why when they test bikes on 5 star cobbled sectors, the MTB goes faster than even a cobble-build road bike. Even though rolling resistance is higher on a flat road, and the CdA is junk, it smooths out the cobbles, allowing the person to not lift as much as they otherwise would.acem8204-04-2025
- I disagree. If you have lower weight, you will bounce more at the same speed, meaning that you will spend more time in the air and shorter time on the ground, as a consequence, when you are on the ground you have to produce more force for the same speedvappaxbipmv04-04-2025
- That’s not quite true, even steep climbs and sudden gradient changes can be considered as remaining tangential to the wheel whereas the occasional dip between cobbles a wheel drops into cannot, as such riding over cobbles can become like a permanent surmounting of small obstacles that hit back into your wheel slowing you drastically if you don’t have the right rhythm to “fly” on the mounds, here again the greater the momentum the less these obstacles reduce your speed. But, it is but one factor, you cannot decide on this alone. Like with natural surface ripple formation on desert tracks used by vehicles, there is an optimal speed range to efficiently pass over such surfaces, too fast or slow and your car gets shaken to pieces from the “harmonics” in the vibrations caused. Pretty sure the same applies to riding on cobbles.Mistermaumau04-04-2025
- I am saying I have an open mind at the moment for your cobbles theory but cannot agree with your wind statement (and by extrapolation sprinting since that implies speeds where wind is by far the limiting factor). Had you argued all things not being equal I could have agreed with you but if we thus assume 2 objets of the same size and speed but with differing weights, it is completely obvious that the lighter one will suffer faster in the wind. Extrapolate to the extreme, drop stuff off cliffs or just remember your momentum equations to verify. Now, obviously in real life we have to assume riders of different weights won’t have the same wind hitting surface but you cannot generalise at all then as you can have very unaerodynamic light riders and very aerodynamic heavy ones because it isn’t weight that defines CdA, Teslas have an incredible CdA and are ridiculously heavy, and someone like Harry Levreyssen is a Tesla in cycling.Mistermaumau04-04-2025
- When Roglic beat Geraint Thomas on the last day's TT at the Giro, I remember just how unbelievably emotional his team was. One guy, I forget who, German rider I think, was interviewed and was nearly speechless with a really drawn out "fuuuuuuuuuck it's incredible" comment. And then something even more amazing happened. Geraint Thomas came through the ranks of the Jumbo Visma riders and congratulated them all. True, honest, sincere, sportsmanlike, and celebratory of what had been achieved. Here he was, getting second, and he meant it. And cycling these days is like that, as you say - the way Pogacar hugged Matthews in Quebec, the way Matthews congratulated Pogacar in Montreal, on and on they honor and respect each other. It's pretty great.RidesHills04-04-2025
- Not sure exactly what you are saying, but if you're implying that being heavier is helpful if you're going against the wind or sprinting, then no, it isn't. Ceteris paribus (all else held equal) being a lighter cyclist is always better, save downhill. The reason why heavier cyclists do relatively better than lighter ones on flatter courses is because they will have to have a higher power than the lighter cyclist in order to have any chance at all against them, and flatter courses mean that the lighter cyclist has nowhere to display the better power to weight ratio, meaning that significant ratio is power to CdA, which is usually an advantage to the heavier cyclist.acem8204-04-2025
- Going over bumps is equivalent to going over many small climbs. Lower weight is always a good thing (ceteris paribus) except when going downhill, and even then it's not that advantageous if the downhill is at all technical.acem8204-04-2025