Cordelier wrote:
Radio Shack has enough guns to attack and keep attacking, though - maybe Contador brings back Leipheimer's attack - but what about when Kloden attacks? And if he brings back that one, what will he do when Armstrong attacks? As good as Contador is, he's only one man.
If you're such a fan of Lance, haven't you watched all the times he has won the Tour? He won't let Klöden or Leipheimer get away if there's a chance they'll get yellow. He's to egoistic to let anyone else on his team win the Tour. Also, what you're saying is highly unlikely. Leipheimer and Klöden will be waaaaaaaay down the classifications when we hit the Pyrenees, since they will work their ass of for Lance in the Alps.
Cordelier wrote:
Who said Armstrong will cover? If Contador covers the early attack, Armstrong can just stay at the front of the peloton while Leipheimer sacrifices himself to drive Contodor into the ground. Then Armstrong attacks on the final climb with his fresh legs.
Armstrong won't have the legs to do that. You're really overestimating Armstrong's ability to climb.
Cordelier wrote:
Well, let's see... Pantani is an exception because of the turmoil in the 1998 Tour turned everything upside down and he profited from that.
For 2 of the three years LeMond won (86,89,90), he also won the best team competition (La Vie Claire & Team Z)
Fignon won twice (83, 84), and on one of those he also won the best team competition (Renault-Elf)
Similarly, the man who bridged them both, Hinault, won 2 team competitions in his 5 wins (Renault-Gitane & La Vie Claire)
So I'd hardly classify the Renault and La Vie Claire teams of the late 70's to mid-80's as not dominating, would you?
With ONCE and Festina leaving the Tour, Pantani may profit from the Festina scandal, but Telekom were still pretty much in the race with Ullrich, Riis, Bölts and Totschnig. Still Pantani won the Tour.
You forgot (probably intentionally) to mention when LeMond won in 1989, riding for ADR, with only two or three teammates finishing the Tour. In 1986, half of the team weren't working for him, as they were loyal to Hinault so he didn't get much help from his team.
Cordelier wrote:
Astana is still a decent team?? Compared to whom? As far as I can tell, they've got Contador and they've got an over-the-hill doper with an over-inflated ego.... all supported by a bunch of anonymous Kazakhs.
Astana is a decent team, right now, compared to almost any team (keep in mind that we're talking about the Tour team, not the team for the whole season), except Saxo, The Shack, Caisse D'Epargne and maybe Liquigas (depending on which will be the Liquigas' Tour team). They aren't much worse (if any) than Euskaltel, for example, a team that you said would be enough for Evans for winning the Tour.
Dani Navarro and Benjamin Noval are good climbers, and also is Tiralongo. They also have De La Fuente, and some of the "anonymous kazakhs" aren't bad riders at all. If they sign someone, which is likely if AC stays, that's more than enough for Contador to beat Armstrong with no problem. It might me harder with the Schlecks though, but still he's the main favourite.
Cordelier wrote:
You've obviously never dealt with Nicolai Proskoerin. I don't know who the new Directeur Sportif for Astana will be, but odds are that he won't be Bruyneel's league, and even Bruyneel couldn't stop Proskoerin's meddling. I'm betting the new Astana Directeur will be some toady who will bend over backwards to please Proskoerin and Astana's "directeur sportif on the road", Vinokourov.
Yes, I know you don't know. You don't know most things. That doesn't stop you from assuming you know better than everyone else
It'll be Silvio Martinello
As for "In Bruyneel's league", you're talking about the Bruyneel who tends to get things wrong more than right. Hearing the guy's pre-stage tactics in the team bus in the eurosport documentaries was awesome....he always said with full confidence the stage would go one way and it never did. He referred to stage 10 as an easy stage to control that would be like a rest day with a break winning by a large margin
Cordelier wrote:Radio Shack has enough guns to attack and keep attacking, though - maybe Contador brings back Leipheimer's attack - but what about when Kloden attacks? And if he brings back that one, what will he do when Armstrong attacks? As good as Contador is, he's only one man.
You're assuming he won't cover the initial acceleration. Which, as long as he does, everyone else will have to do just as much effort as him. Zero gain for radioshack.
Cordelier wrote:Who said Armstrong will cover? If Contador covers the early attack, Armstrong can just stay at the front of the peloton while Leipheimer sacrifices himself to drive Contodor into the ground. Then Armstrong attacks on the final climb with his fresh legs.
At this point, then, in your hypothetical situation, he's many minutes behind, since he didn't up the pace so he could have "fresh legs"
Cordelier wrote:
Well, let's see... Pantani is an exception because of the turmoil in the 1998 Tour turned everything upside down and he profited from that.
The turmoil had nothing to do with racing tactics and you know it. There were several strong teams and Pantani's extremely weak squad controlled everything easily.
Cordelier wrote:
For 2 of the three years LeMond won (86,89,90), he also won the best team competition (La Vie Claire & Team Z)
Fignon won twice (83, 84), and on one of those he also won the best team competition (Renault-Elf)
Similarly, the man who bridged them both, Hinault, won 2 team competitions in his 5 wins (Renault-Gitane & La Vie Claire)
So I'd hardly classify the Renault and La Vie Claire teams of the late 70's to mid-80's as not dominating, would you?
No one did. You just can't pick selective years and forget the ones when their teams sucked balls. LeMond in 89 had one teammate finish the tour with him. One.
You made the grandiose claim that literally no one can ever win the Tour without a strong team to control. All the riders I mentioned prove you wrong at least once in their careers. s
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
issoisso wrote: He obviously covers the attack. Forcing Andy and Lance to cover him. Nobody loses. Everyone loses the same energy from that attack. Except for Leipheimer who loses more than the others. End result: Radioshack's slightly weaker, unless there's someone who doesn't have the legs or is dumb enough not to follow.
Radio Shack has enough guns to attack and keep attacking, though - maybe Contador brings back Leipheimer's attack - but what about when Kloden attacks? And if he brings back that one, what will he do when Armstrong attacks? As good as Contador is, he's only one man.
First off, when has Levi ever attacked and dropped Contador? When has Kloden ever been able to keep up with Contador? We saw it this year at the tour, Contador put in a LITTLE attack to shake off the Schlecks, and all he did was drop Kloden, who literally went BANG and out the back door, even when they sat up and went visibly slower.
And what in the world makes you think that Levi/Armstrong/Kloden/anyone will attack before Contador does? Contador showed he's often the aggressor, and if anyone does attack him, he just follows, and when they've finished their move, he just rides on past them like they're standing still.
I have to ask, do you even watch cycling? Do you even understand the simplicity with which Contador will smash Armstrong again?
EDIT:
I forgot my racial slur:
I hate the illogical, French loving, bear mating Canadians.
Edited by rjc_43 on 04-11-2009 14:28
Cordelier wrote:
Astana is still a decent team?? Compared to whom? As far as I can tell, they've got Contador and they've got an over-the-hill doper with an over-inflated ego.... all supported by a bunch of anonymous Kazakhs.
Cordelier wrote:
Astana busted their asses for him... if anyone wasn't a team player, it was Contador on Arcalis.
Would you like to explain this, would you have rather seen him protecting Lance, as the plan went?
This time, try to use own opinions and not those of a geriatric commentator, ok?
Believe it or not, I have the ability to form my own opinions, Doddy... and if they happen to agree with Leggett's, well, so much the better. I would hazard to guess that Leggett has watched more cycling than everyone in this forum combined. He's forgotten more than 99.9% of cycling fans will ever know.
As far as Contador vs. Armstrong goes, let me just say this... you can't be a good team leader unless you can also be a follower - you've got to do whatever it takes to win - not for yourself, but for the team. The team is what counts. If you're the best rider on the best team - and Contador was wearing a dossard that ended in "1" - well, then odds are you'll be wearing yellow in Paris.
Truth be told, I think Bruyneel's strategy before Arcalis was to keep his options open - he knew he had Contador as his ace-in-the-hole regardless, but if he could keep Armstrong as his top GC rider, then all of the attention would be on him. Then you can set up an Anquetil-Aimar scenario later on down the road. Plus, Armstrong is older and wiser - he can handle the publicity glare better than Contador could going down the stretch. Contador could have always forced the issue on Mont Ventoux if need be - but he ruined the plan on Arcalis... he put himself before the team.
MrContador wrote:
If you're such a fan of Lance, haven't you watched all the times he has won the Tour? He won't let Klöden or Leipheimer get away if there's a chance they'll get yellow. He's to egoistic to let anyone else on his team win the Tour. Also, what you're saying is highly unlikely. Leipheimer and Klöden will be waaaaaaaay down the classifications when we hit the Pyrenees, since they will work their ass of for Lance in the Alps.
Ahhh, but that works to the advantage of Radio Shack - if Contador doesn't perceive the "Aimar attack" as a threat, he won't cover it, but he still won't have the team to control the peloton... Leipheimer can go ahead on the road, while Armstrong and Co. (with Contador shadowing), gradually turn down the heat and force a major split. What's Contador going to do? Bridge the split?
MrContador wrote:With ONCE and Festina leaving the Tour, Pantani may profit from the Festina scandal, but Telekom were still pretty much in the race with Ullrich, Riis, Bölts and Totschnig. Still Pantani won the Tour.
You forgot (probably intentionally) to mention when LeMond won in 1989, riding for ADR, with only two or three teammates finishing the Tour. In 1986, half of the team weren't working for him, as they were loyal to Hinault so he didn't get much help from his team.
But I do agree with you about Fignon and Hinault.
Pantani won because Telekom was stupid and Telekom was stupid because with ONCE and Festina leaving, it threw all of their pre-race calculations out the window and they didn't adapt properly, thus leaving the window open for Pantani.
I don't want to take anything away from LeMond's win in '89, but it would have been an entirely different story if Delgado had showed up on time for the Prologue. By starting so far down, he pushed himself too hard in the early part of the race, and ended up blowing the TTT because of it, which put him even further behind and increased his troubles. Reynolds had the best team in the Tour - once Delgado got in the hole early, they should have switched their GC focus to Indurain and proceeded from there. I know Delgado was the defending champion, but it's a cold business - sometimes you just have to do what it takes. Even with Delgado starting in the hole, though, let's not forget that he only finished 3'34" back, which is a testament to his team, if not their tactics.
MrContador wrote:
If you're such a fan of Lance, haven't you watched all the times he has won the Tour? He won't let Klöden or Leipheimer get away if there's a chance they'll get yellow. He's to egoistic to let anyone else on his team win the Tour. Also, what you're saying is highly unlikely. Leipheimer and Klöden will be waaaaaaaay down the classifications when we hit the Pyrenees, since they will work their ass of for Lance in the Alps.
Ahhh, but that works to the advantage of Radio Shack - if Contador doesn't perceive the "Aimar attack" as a threat, he won't cover it, but he still won't have the team to control the peloton... Leipheimer can go ahead on the road, while Armstrong and Co. (with Contador shadowing), gradually turn down the heat and force a major split. What's Contador going to do? Bridge the split?
But it wont work like that, youre not able as a team to let one of your strong climbers attack and then just slow the pack. Radioshack wouldnt be able to do that, if nothing else but because there would be ~20 other teams in the race, including the team of whoever is leading the race (Armstrong in yellow? Unlikely), and various teams with GC leaders of their own. Maybe this plan works in your head, but cycling isnt like that!
Plus, you assume that Contador will be making particular effort to mark Armstrong and the other Shack guys. But Andy Schleck is his biggest rival, and Shack can do whatever tactics they like (personally I dont see them doing any tactics that arent specifically for Armstrongs gain - so no Levi attacks in the first place) but Contador will still outclimb all of the Shack riders when he makes his move when it matters most. i.e. summit finishes
Leipheimer, Kloden and other Shack riders will have a simple role at the Tour, a team role. Look after Lance on the flat (Maybe try to crash into Contador on the cobbles or windy days, thats the most likely place for Armstrong to gain time on someone who is a better climber and better time trialist than him), try to thin the pack out on the climb, and always stay with Lance on the mountains (even if climbing better than him)
Edited by SportingNonsense on 05-11-2009 18:49
Cordelier wrote:
Believe it or not, I have the ability to form my own opinions, Doddy... and if they happen to agree with Leggett's, well, so much the better. I would hazard to guess that Leggett has watched more cycling than everyone in this forum combined. He's forgotten more than 99.9% of cycling fans will ever know.
Okay, so you agree he's senile?
Cordelier wrote:
As far as Contador vs. Armstrong goes, let me just say this... you can't be a good team leader unless you can also be a follower - you've got to do whatever it takes to win - not for yourself, but for the team. The team is what counts. If you're the best rider on the best team - and Contador was wearing a dossard that ended in "1" - well, then odds are you'll be wearing yellow in Paris.
Please tell me, if gaining valuable time on your competitors on an important mountain stage is wrong, what is then right? You did think it was right that Armstrong took time on Contador on the stage to La Grande-Motte, so that pretty much proves you're a hypocrite.
Cordelier wrote:
Truth be told, I think Bruyneel's strategy before Arcalis was to keep his options open - he knew he had Contador as his ace-in-the-hole regardless, but if he could keep Armstrong as his top GC rider, then all of the attention would be on him. Then you can set up an Anquetil-Aimar scenario later on down the road. Plus, Armstrong is older and wiser - he can handle the publicity glare better than Contador could going down the stretch. Contador could have always forced the issue on Mont Ventoux if need be - but he ruined the plan on Arcalis... he put himself before the team.
How is gaining time on your competitors to put yourself before the team? Once again, hypocrite.
Cordelier wrote:
Ahhh, but that works to the advantage of Radio Shack - if Contador doesn't perceive the "Aimar attack" as a threat, he won't cover it, but he still won't have the team to control the peloton... Leipheimer can go ahead on the road, while Armstrong and Co. (with Contador shadowing), gradually turn down the heat and force a major split. What's Contador going to do? Bridge the split?
Saxo Bank, Garmin, Liquigas, Caisse or any other team could chase down the attack. Keep in mind that there are other teams are in the game as well, and Schleck wouldn't let Leipheimer walk away if there were a chance he could get yellow. Either way, that will never happen because Armstrong is too selfish to let a teammate do it, and Astana is much better than you tend to think. It's also likely that Contador will go to another team.
Cordelier wrote:
Pantani won because Telekom was stupid and Telekom was stupid because with ONCE and Festina leaving, it threw all of their pre-race calculations out the window and they didn't adapt properly, thus leaving the window open for Pantani.
I take that as you didn't watch that Tour? Either way, no matter how stupid Telekom was, you can't argue about Pantani being on a weak team. And you said one couldn't win the Tour on a weak team. So you're wrong about that.
Cordelier wrote:
I don't want to take anything away from LeMond's win in '89, but it would have been an entirely different story if Delgado had showed up on time for the Prologue. By starting so far down, he pushed himself too hard in the early part of the race, and ended up blowing the TTT because of it, which put him even further behind and increased his troubles. Reynolds had the best team in the Tour - once Delgado got in the hole early, they should have switched their GC focus to Indurain and proceeded from there. I know Delgado was the defending champion, but it's a cold business - sometimes you just have to do what it takes. Even with Delgado starting in the hole, though, let's not forget that he only finished 3'34" back, which is a testament to his team, if not their tactics.
Yeah, you're right. And Armstrong hadn't won the Tour in 2003 if Ullrich hadn't lost so much time on Alpe d'Huez. And Berzin hadn't won the Giro in 1994 if Pantani had been the captain of Carrera from the very beginning. And we wouldn't have had this discussion if the world had exploded last week, what are you getting at? Such things as Delgado missing the start of the prologue is things that just happens in cycling. Remember Landis in 2006? Regardless of that he won the Tour (until it came clear he had tested positive). You're thinking too much about "what if how then", it's impossible to predict how things would've went then.
kumazan wrote:
Astana is a decent team, right now, compared to almost any team (keep in mind that we're talking about the Tour team, not the team for the whole season), except Saxo, The Shack, Caisse D'Epargne and maybe Liquigas (depending on which will be the Liquigas' Tour team). They aren't much worse (if any) than Euskaltel, for example, a team that you said would be enough for Evans for winning the Tour.
Dani Navarro and Benjamin Noval are good climbers, and also is Tiralongo. They also have De La Fuente, and some of the "anonymous kazakhs" aren't bad riders at all. If they sign someone, which is likely if AC stays, that's more than enough for Contador to beat Armstrong with no problem. It might me harder with the Schlecks though, but still he's the main favourite.
In point of fairness, I said Cadel would have won the Tour in '07 and '08 if he were on a Euskaltel-style team - he would have challenged for his third in a row in '09, but I don't think he would have beaten Astana.
Truth be told, I have my doubts Astana will even get a Tour invite - I think it's going to be a repeat of 2008 for Contador. But if they do get invited, there is going to be so much controversy and infighting, it's going to nullify any coherent teamwork on the road.
What if Vinokourov disagrees with Sanquer's tactics? Will he be able to overrule him? And what if Contador disagrees with Vinokourov? Is he going to go off and ride his own race?? If there's one iron rule in the Tour de France it is this: "There can be only one". I don't think there is or ever will be only one on Astana. It's a recipe for disaster.
Cordelier wrote:
But if they do get invited, there is going to be so much controversy and infighting, it's going to nullify any coherent teamwork on the road.
Well, it isnt possible for there to be more infighting than 2009, so its not something Contador wont be used to. The biggest problem for Contador at Astana (if he stays, which is still unlikely) would be for the team to be kicked out of the Tour for another Vino positive. Of course, Prudhomme will be hoping Contador leaves Astana so he need not invite them, but whoever Contador rides for will definately line up at the Tour.
Cordelier wrote: And what if Contador disagrees with Vinokourov? Is he going to go off and ride his own race?? If there's one iron rule in the Tour de France it is this: "There can be only one". I don't think there is or ever will be only one on Astana. It's a recipe for disaster.
It worked in 2009, Bruyneel and Armstrong tried ever so hard to stop him off of the road, but on the road there was little they could do to stop Contador once the attack came in.
Again youre on about 'if this and that happened, so and so would have won' Evans did not win the Tours in either 2007 or 2008. In 2007 he wasnt good enough, simple, and in 2008 he was in a way unlucky with his crash - but thats life, thats cycling, and in the end he wasnt strong enough again.
Edited by SportingNonsense on 05-11-2009 18:57
Cordelier wrote:
In point of fairness, I said Cadel would have won the Tour in '07 and '08 if he were on a Euskaltel-style team - he would have challenged for his third in a row in '09, but I don't think he would have beaten Astana.
Then I'd like you to elaborate on what's an Euskaltel-style team.
Cordelier wrote: Truth be told, I have my doubts Astana will even get a Tour invite - I think it's going to be a repeat of 2008 for Contador. But if they do get invited, there is going to be so much controversy and infighting, it's going to nullify any coherent teamwork on the road.
There was a reason to not invite them for the 2008's Tour, a reason which simply doesn't exist this year. They are a worse team than the last year, but they aren't between the worst teams by far. Like it or not (I don't) under the UCI rules Vinokourov has served his ban, and Proudhomme has already said that he can't ban a rider if his team bring him to the Tour, and also that AC will be in the Tour. If AC stays in Astana, they'll be in the Tour.
Cordelier wrote: What if Vinokourov disagrees with Sanquer's tactics? Will he be able to overrule him? And what if Contador disagrees with Vinokourov? Is he going to go off and ride his own race?? If there's one iron rule in the Tour de France it is this: "There can be only one". I don't think there is or ever will be only one on Astana. It's a recipe for disaster.
That's pure speculation. What if Vinokourov behaves? What if Sanquer acts as a coherent person and avoid the influence of Vinokourov when taking his decissions? Furthermore, AC won the last Tour being in a team which was working for another team mate (I'm not saying that they worked against him), so even if Vinokourov becomes a headache, and Sanquer is overruled, he'd have good options, specially keeping in mind that the spaniards of the team more likely would help AC than Vinokourov (that without mentioning that Vino hasn't any option for the GC, and that after the Alps he'll likely be far behind the contenders in the GC). Anyway, again, all this is just speculations 9 months before the Tour. It may happen this way, or just the contrary, and you are already assuming how Vinokourov will behave.
SportingNonsense wrote:
But it wont work like that, youre not able as a team to let one of your strong climbers attack and then just slow the pack. Radioshack wouldnt be able to do that, if nothing else but because there would be ~20 other teams in the race, including the team of whoever is leading the race (Armstrong in yellow? Unlikely), and various teams with GC leaders of their own. Maybe this plan works in your head, but cycling isnt like that!
Plus, you assume that Contador will be making particular effort to mark Armstrong and the other Shack guys. But Andy Schleck is his biggest rival, and Shack can do whatever tactics they like (personally I dont see them doing any tactics that arent specifically for Armstrongs gain - so no Levi attacks in the first place) but Contador will still outclimb all of the Shack riders when he makes his move when it matters most. i.e. summit finishes
Leipheimer, Kloden and other Shack riders will have a simple role at the Tour, a team role. Look after Lance on the flat (Maybe try to crash into Contador on the cobbles or windy days, thats the most likely place for Armstrong to gain time on someone who is a better climber and better time trialist than him), try to thin the pack out on the climb, and always stay with Lance on the mountains (even if climbing better than him)
I'm not saying it'd be an easy maneuver to pull off - it's going to take immense timing and precision...but if anyone can do it, it'd be Bruyneel. They've got to ride Stage 16 like Col du Soulor is the last climb - attack early and attack hard and whittle down the peloton until the main group has 12-18 riders going over the Tourmalet, with about 6-7 from Radio Shack. Armstrong won't be in Yellow, but he has to ride as if he were. Then you launch the attack and shift the speed.
It's the speed shift that will cross up the other teams. Think of it as the reverse of what US Postal did in the Alpe d'Huez stage in 2001... they went slow all day as if they were breaking and then suddenly changed the speed and threw everyone else (especially Telekom) out of whack. They bluffed weak when they were strong... well, now he'll bluff strong when he's weak. That's the Aimar attack.
Cordelier wrote:
Believe it or not, I have the ability to form my own opinions, Doddy...
Yes, you do.
Cordelier wrote:
and if they happen to agree with Leggett's, well, so much the better.
Personally i'd say so much the worse, face facts, your a Armstrong/Bruyneel fanboy, ok? Good.
Cordelier wrote:
I would hazard to guess that Leggett has watched more cycling than everyone in this forum combined.
Yes. he probably had, he was commentating since before i was born. Oh and it's Ligget.
Cordelier wrote:
He's forgotten more than 99.9% of cycling fans will ever know.
Yup, forgotten's the word. Past it. Retire, move on..
As you seem to devalue everyone elses posts with Bruyneel is teh awesomist style attitude, i suppose you'll probably come back to this post with some logcial explination, which may well also be wrong.
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
