Stage 20 - Montélimar - Mont-Ventoux - SPOILER

Coriander

pedalpower wrote:

mmitchell88 wrote:

pedalpower wrote:

He only finished on the podium courtesy of 40 seconds he was lucky enough to gain earlier on.

Isn't that how the whole thing, you know, works?

No, not really. 40 seconds gaps for main GC contenders on flat stages is pretty unusual and has to be considered canny, yes, but also pretty lucky. Certainly didn't have much to do with the physical strength of the riders.

But surely the whole point is that a 3 week race in which teams participate is about so much more than just who can ride the fastest????

I really don't like LA, but all credit to him, one thing I have come to appreciate over the last few weeks is that that man understands bike racing and can read a race superbly well.

disgruntledgoat

FFS... BBC reporting that Wiggins "failed to make the podium" and showing a picture of him looking miserable.

markos1963

disgruntledgoat wrote:

FFS... BBC reporting that Wiggins "failed to make the podium" and showing a picture of him looking miserable.

Yes, just seen that and was going to comment on this. Why is it the BBC and others always concentrate on the word 'failure' Bradley did nothing of the sort, his ride today was pure bravery and class. He could have easily toured up and settled for a top ten overall fifnsh but he hung on and showed some true grit. I suppose its because the mainstream media just don't understand bike racing.

Anyway, well done Bradley you've gone up in my estimation, a real mans ride today. Next year, top three for sure.

FJS

This is the BBC report headline I see: "Brave Wiggins holds on to fourth - Bradley Wiggins delivered a heroic ride on Mont Ventoux to keep fourth place in the Tour de France as Alberto Contador all but sealed overall victory."
Bit overly disgruntled?

Le Commentateur

But surely the whole point is that a 3 week race in which teams participate is about so much more than just who can ride the fastest????

Exactly , it's a stage race not a time trial. Tactics as well as moments where you lose concentration or grab a few seconds play their part. The time trialists' argument is like trying to argue that George Foreman should have beaten Muhammed Ali because he could punch harder.

mmitchell88

pedalpower wrote:

mmitchell88 wrote:

pedalpower wrote:

He only finished on the podium courtesy of 40 seconds he was lucky enough to gain earlier on.

Isn't that how the whole thing, you know, works?

No, not really. 40 seconds gaps for main GC contenders on flat stages is pretty unusual and has to be considered canny, yes, but also pretty lucky. Certainly didn't have much to do with the physical strength of the riders.

I didn't say it did. Lots of assumptions there. But the only one I was referring to was that if you gain net time over competitors, you might end up ahead of them in the GC. As I said, isn't that how the whole thing, you know, works?

Perhaps not - let's just pull names out of a hat next year.

grantus

It's the British way.

Same as Obree being ridiculed about his 'washing machine' bike in 1993.

They are a shower of c0cks - they are on a high now what with the Ashes and cycling is just a freak/side show to the mainstream.

Philip S

Great work from Wiggins - with him coming back from the dead I thought I was watching a horror film (albeit an extremely positive one). Heroic performance.

Now then, what does everyone think of this? What if the TTT had been replaced by an ITT? Where would we be now? I do enjoy the spectacle of the TTT, but it does seem to take away from the individual's ability.

Harry Hill

I was going to start a thread and call it "wanky reporting yet again"

They started with "Wiggins failed to make the podium"

Makes me sick. They have no comprehension what so ever of who he is (in racing terms) and what he's achived.

Ignore them Bradley - you're a British legend now!!!!

neonwarhead

Harry Hill wrote:

I was going to start a thread and call it "wanky reporting yet again"

They started with "Wiggins failed to make the podium"
!!

But in all fairness did then immediately call it a "heroic ride" to get 4th. Not so much a conspiracy as the usual journalistic ineptitude I suspect.

Whatever your day job, when you see it reported on in the 'meedja', usually by an "expert", I bet you spot an overwhelming lack of understanding. Is there any reason to believe that they're any better on any other subject?

gabriel959

As a Spaniard I have been really impressed by Wiggo. He has done the ride of his life, Spanish press have praised him throughout, saying what a nice surprise he has been.

I hope to see him in the podium or may be even winning Giro or Vuelta next year!

He is a nice bloke too!

knedlicky

Timoid. wrote:

Fook Garate. Fookin wheelsucker

Garate did do a lot of the work, both in the larger break, then when they were down to three, and finally just two of them. I think he deserved it, even if he followed 700 of the last 800 m ... but Martin should have realised what might happen.
I thought Martin looked beyond his limit the last 30 mins, almost as if he'd need treatment when over the line.

jackhammer111 - banned

Le Commentateur wrote:

But surely the whole point is that a 3 week race in which teams participate is about so much more than just who can ride the fastest????

Exactly , it's a stage race not a time trial. Tactics as well as moments where you lose concentration or grab a few seconds play their part. The time trialists' argument is like trying to argue that George Foreman should have beaten Muhammed Ali because he could punch harder.

I like that one. I love seeing the smart guy beat the strong guy and Ali was the greatest example of that. Foreman was stronger, Frasier was tougher, Ken Norton was stronger, yet Ali prevailed.
No disrespect intended to Andy but Lance was second strongest, and by far the smartest.
If Andy can improve his TT's....
Saxo played a perfect tactical game today. They did exactly what was best idea, but Alberto was way to strong, and Lance had plenty left.
Alberto was unstoppable. He's going to be very hard to beat.

jackhammer111 - banned

grantus wrote:

What do you think about Bruyneel and Armstrong's persistent undermining and public belittling of his team leader throughout the race?

Do you think that behaviour is fitting of 'the master'?

The criticisms of Alberto tactcily are completly justified. He make 2 mistakes that were unnecessary, selfish, and hurt his teammates that worked hard for him.
His sneak attack on stage 7 would have been brilliant had it not been for the fact that he was racing with the lead and had 3 teammates pacing the front of the peloton up the mountain guarding him.
When he dropped Kloden the other day he sealed his fate as a rider that will be seen as a great rider but a lousy teammate. He's not the first, but it's not something Lance was ever accused of.
Lance, Levi, Kloden and Horner will be on an opposing team next year and riders have long memories.

knedlicky

Timoid. wrote:

Cheshley wrote:

Any doubts anyone may have had about Lance's ability to ride with the best of them must surely have been put to bed today!!!

I have to disagree. The best of them are Andy who was waiting for Frank and Bertie who was waiting for Lance.
Both are a class above everyone else and could have left the rest of the big boys for dead.

For me, Andy Schleck was both the real or moral winner on Ventoux, and also the real or moral winner of the whole Tour.

AC is very good but I don't want to see Tour winners who attack as little as possible (although I realise team tactics may have tied his hands this time). Just like in other sports, in cycling you can win through one successful counter-attack and thereafter defending well, but I think it’s then a poor victory.

As for LA, nothing he might do will ever put my doubts about him to bed. I thought it very interesting to read that Geref (see Forget CERA thread from IainF72) puts on muscle mass, and, for a cyclist, LA seemed to have a disproportionate amount of that on his upper body, more than he had 3 years back.

Today, in fact the whole Tour too, I liked Pellizotti’s manner - not least today because when he crossed the line he looked so human, making a facial gesture along the lines of ‘Thank god that’s over’.

afx237vi

jackhammer111 wrote:

Lance, Levi, Kloden and Horner will be on an opposing team next year and riders have long memories.

Here's a picture from the last time they trained together:

jackhammer111 - banned

pedalpower wrote:

mmitchell88 wrote:

pedalpower wrote:

He only finished on the podium courtesy of 40 seconds he was lucky enough to gain earlier on.

Isn't that how the whole thing, you know, works?

No, not really. 40 seconds gaps for main GC contenders on flat stages is pretty unusual and has to be considered canny, yes, but also pretty lucky. Certainly didn't have much to do with the physical strength of the riders.

Luck had nothing to do with it. He saw the wind, he saw the turn, he's seen it before, he knew where to be. He is always fully present, completely engaged. He did it again yesterday. Go back and see where he was at 1 k to go. Why did he think it was important to be 10th at that point? This was an unexpected finish to the stage and he knew there might be some chaos.

BTW... a great manager will not only win, but make it boring to watch. Hats off to Johan.
Astana shreaded the peloton. This race was under control from the start. If the peloton was going to be reduced to cracking the likes of Kloden and Lance even without Levi, to get to Alberto, there was never any real chance anyone else was going to win.
Most of us knew how good Alberto was. The only real drama was is Lance going to be for real. He was.

knedlicky

jackhammer111 wrote:

When he dropped Kloden the other day he sealed his fate as a rider that will be seen as a great rider but a lousy teammate. He's not the first, but it's not something Lance was ever accused of.

The dropping of Klöden the other day was covered in another thread, and I understood Klöden agreed to AC's attack, so maybe Klöden should be the one whose judgement is questioned - he can't well enough assess how strong he feels. Maybe he's taken to heart the accusations about doping and is trying to ride clean and finding it harder than he thought?

As for LA's ability to be a good teammate, I can only think you are joking.

Pokerface

knedlicky wrote:

[As for LA, nothing he might do will ever put my doubts about him to bed. I thought it very interesting to read that Geref (see Forget CERA thread from IainF72) puts on muscle mass, and, for a cyclist, LA seemed to have a disproportionate amount of that on his upper body, more than he had 3 years back.

Well DUH!!!

He spent 3 years off a bike, in a gym, lifting weights and not worrying about being as light as possible. No wonder he gained weight. :roll:

I guess Sean Kelley must be overdosing on the stuff then, judging by the size of the fat fooker.

knedlicky

Coriander wrote:

Just as the leading three in GC went round the last corner Contador said something to LA and gesticulated rather firmly. Any ideas what that might have been about?

I wondered what went on between Frank Schleck and Armstrong when they appeared to have a couple of 'exchanges of words', the first about 6-7 km from the top, the second at about 3 km. LA seemed the more abrupt of the two men.
Maybe LA was saying what's what, i.e. "You'll find yourself in a block of concrete if you ..."

jackhammer111 - banned

knedlicky wrote:

Timoid. wrote:

Cheshley wrote:

Any doubts anyone may have had about Lance's ability to ride with the best of them must surely have been put to bed today!!!

I have to disagree. The best of them are Andy who was waiting for Frank and Bertie who was waiting for Lance.
Both are a class above everyone else and could have left the rest of the big boys for dead.

For me, Andy Schleck was both the real or moral winner on Ventoux, and also the real or moral winner of the whole Tour.

AC is very good but I don't want to see Tour winners who attack as little as possible (although I realise team tactics may have tied his hands this time). Just like in other sports, in cycling you can win through one successful counter-attack and thereafter defending well, but I think it’s then a poor victory.

As for LA, nothing he might do will ever put my doubts about him to bed. I thought it very interesting to read that Geref (see Forget CERA thread from IainF72) puts on muscle mass, and, for a cyclist, LA seemed to have a disproportionate amount of that on his upper body, more than he had 3 years back.

Today, in fact the whole Tour too, I liked Pellizotti’s manner - not least today because when he crossed the line he looked so human, making a facial gesture along the lines of ‘Thank god that’s over’.

Don't be silly. Alberto wasn't waiting for Lance.
Clearly his job was to mark Andy and Lances was to mark Frank and Wiggo.

Nothing else needed to be done to achieve exactly the finish we got.

Lance was the second strongest rider. If he hadn't respected team rules with Alberto up the road on 2 climbs i can think of the top of my head, that time gap to Andy is gone. He was clearly marking Wiggo and others and wasn't free to ride until he was in a position to get free without dragging them with him.

jackhammer111 - banned

knedlicky wrote:

Coriander wrote:

Just as the leading three in GC went round the last corner Contador said something to LA and gesticulated rather firmly. Any ideas what that might have been about?

I wondered what went on between Frank Schleck and Armstrong when they appeared to have a couple of 'exchanges of words', the first about 6-7 km from the top, the second at about 3 km. LA seemed the more abrupt of the two men.
Maybe LA was saying what's what, i.e. "You'll find yourself in a block of concrete if you ..."

I think it was with Andy, probably and amazingly he was complaining that Lance and Alberto wouldn't pull. Alberto said that's what happened on the run in to stage 17. Andy actually chided him for now working.

jackhammer111 - banned

knedlicky wrote:

jackhammer111 wrote:

When he dropped Kloden the other day he sealed his fate as a rider that will be seen as a great rider but a lousy teammate. He's not the first, but it's not something Lance was ever accused of.

The dropping of Klöden the other day was covered in another thread, and I understood Klöden agreed to AC's attack, so maybe Klöden should be the one whose judgement is questioned - he can't well enough assess how strong he feels. Maybe he's taken to heart the accusations about doping and is trying to ride clean and finding it harder than he thought?

As for LA's ability to be a good teammate, I can only think you are joking.

The doping accusation is completely uncalled for. Kloden just had a great tour.

If you disagree with my statement about Lance as a racing teammate make your case. Personaly, I try to listen to what the riders actually say about him. Most everyone who's ever raced with him would gladly do so again. His new team will probably have several current and former teammates on it.

Whether Kloden agreed or not it went against what Johan had said in the morning meeting, it didn't work, ruined Kloden's podium chance and left him isolated against the Schlecks and evidently too gassed at the finish to even win the stage.

The most amazing thing to me about this whole tour is the awful performances from Sastre, Menchov and Evans. If you want to make allusions to the inability to ride clean why not be looking at them, not someone who was only 40 seconds off the podium.

SpaceJunk

Lance was the second strongest rider. If he hadn't respected team rules with Alberto up the road on 2 climbs i can think of the top of my head, that time gap to Andy is gone. He was clearly marking Wiggo and others and wasn't free to ride until he was in a position to get free without dragging them with him.

Jackhammer - you are delusional mate.

jackhammer111 - banned

SpaceJunk wrote:

Lance was the second strongest rider. If he hadn't respected team rules with Alberto up the road on 2 climbs i can think of the top of my head, that time gap to Andy is gone. He was clearly marking Wiggo and others and wasn't free to ride until he was in a position to get free without dragging them with him.

Jackhammer - you are delusional mate.

Is that the best you've got?

He lost over 2 minutes to Andy on stage 17. Lance had attacked Wiggo after AC and the Schlecks had gone up the road a bit but Wiggo came with him so he had to stop. Not because he couldn't have dropped him but because he couldn't have done so but because you just don't drag a contender closer to your teammate who is leading the race. So he waited a long time to find a steeper section where he could drop him without a response. He practically sprinted to the top of Col de la Colombière. Are you under the impression he couldn't have done that sooner if he hadn't been pinned by team rules?

Andy is a very strong climber and this year he was cleanly better in the mountains than Lance but we're only talking about 1' 13" seconds because of the time trialling

Mettan

knedlicky wrote:

For me, Andy Schleck was both the real or moral winner on Ventoux

+ 1 agreed.

RichN95.

I haven't looked at the last few pages as I've been out with my friends drinking - and I was surprised that almost all of them have been following the Tour.

First of all I was disappointed that Tony Martin didn't win the stage. Has there been a harder worker this Tour? (Nic Roche pushes him). Tony looked like he was crying for most of the climb.

The stage: It was clear that Frank didn't have the legs except for one late dig - sadly for him Brad did one of great gutsy rides. GO WIGGO.

Things may have been different without the wind (25mph headwind up Ventoux - none of us can critisize iin that situation)

Finally, it's been the best TdF of all time for us Brits. Coming on the back the Olympics success, cycling is permeating into the brains of the British populous. Most of us on here actually ride bikes and have come across terrible drivers. Every success makes the general public more sympathetic to cyclists.

Le Commentateur

Things may have been different without the wind

Indeed, Bradley in 5th place perhaps.

Finally, it's been the best TdF of all time for us Brits.

It's not over yet -- one more stage for Cavendish.

SpaceJunk

jackhammer111 wrote:

SpaceJunk wrote:

Lance was the second strongest rider. If he hadn't respected team rules with Alberto up the road on 2 climbs i can think of the top of my head, that time gap to Andy is gone. He was clearly marking Wiggo and others and wasn't free to ride until he was in a position to get free without dragging them with him.

Jackhammer - you are delusional mate.

Is that the best you've got?

He lost over 2 minutes to Andy on stage 17. Lance had attacked Wiggo after AC and the Schlecks had gone up the road a bit but Wiggo came with him so he had to stop. Not because he couldn't have dropped him but because he couldn't have done so but because you just don't drag a contender closer to your teammate who is leading the race. So he waited a long time to find a steeper section where he could drop him without a response. He practically sprinted to the top of Col de la Colombière. Are you under the impression he couldn't have done that sooner if he hadn't been pinned by team rules?

Andy is a very strong climber and this year he was cleanly better in the mountains than Lance but we're only talking about 1' 13" seconds because of the time trialling

But you see Jackhammer; LA found himself in that position because he wasn't good enough in the first place.

Cast your mind back to Stage15 to Verbier.

AC attacked - sure LA couldn't chase down his own team mate. Then shortly afterwards, Andy attacked; LA now had an excuse to follow; he couldn't.

Using your theory that LA couldn't attack his own team mate - Frank now had to sit back and let Andy go. Frank waited and then he went - again LA couldn't follow.

Then Wiggins went, then Sastre, then Evans - still no move from LA. Why? Because, as LA admitted he was on his limit that day. He gave everything he had. He lost 52 seconds to Andy that day - even Kloden dropped him to finish 6 seconds higher.

Now let's play hypothetical (after all, your assertion is based on this). Frank lost 23 seconds to his brother by not going with him. If he did and they worked together, would they have got a gap on LA on 40 secs? Possibly.

That is of course assuming that Frank COULD have gone with Andy in the first place.

Your hypothetical, that LA couldn't attack because he might drag others back to AC assumes one thing - that LA had it in him to attack. On the occasions that LA attacked and gapped Wiggins, the Brit managed to get back. Is that because LA slowed down fearing that he would bring BW back to AC, or was it because he had nothing left?

I don't think I can answer that question - and I don't believe you can either.

To suggest that LA was the second best rider is not a fact, it is an opinion.

My opinion? AC was the strongest rider, followed by Andy and Frank. The TdF however is not about who is the strongest rider; since it is a team sport. Hence LA finished, and rightly so, in front of Frank.

I think the podium reflects this correctly. LA finished third - a great achievement considering he hasn't ridden the Tour for 4 years.

But to suggest he was the second strongest rider? Well as I said, I think you are looking through rose-coloured (or is that LA coloured) glasses, hence my delusional comment.

A couple of reasons for why I think Andy is rightly considered the second strongest rider of the race:

1. He didn't have a bad day in the mountains. LA did on stage 15 as highlighted above.
2. He finished the TdF as the strongest climber. In the last mountain stage to Mount Ventoux, he even looked stronger than AC. One gets the impression he could've ridden away from the main group (maybe with AC), but he wouldn't because of Frank. He did the majority of the work in that group, buffeting the others from the strong headwind.

Pretty simple, eh?

Mettan

SpaceJunk wrote:

A couple of reasons for why I think Andy is rightly considered the second strongest rider of the race:

1. He didn't have a bad day in the mountains. LA did on stage 15 as highlighted above.
2. He finished the TdF as the strongest climber. In the last mountain stage to Mount Ventoux, he even looked stronger than AC. One gets the impression he could've ridden away from the main group (maybe with AC), but he wouldn't because of Frank. He did the majority of the work in that group, buffeting the others from the strong headwind.

Pretty simple, eh?

Fully agree - Andy can and did drop Lance at will throughout the Tour - and also agree on him looking stronger than Alberto on the Ventoux. Alberto and Andy were the strongest riders in the tour by some margin. It's great that there's 2 people at the top of the sport rather than just 1.