Could Andy Schlek have won the 09 TdF?

Belv

The day Andy, Frank and Contador left Wiggins on the climb to Col de Colombiere, why did the brothers not try to break Contador once he had lost Kloden? I can't help but think they could have left him that day and clawed back a couple of minutes.
And once Contador had been out-climbed, the last few days could have turned out totally differently.

Pokerface

They tried and failed to drop him. Pretty simple really.

Paulie W

If they could have dropped Contador, then why didnt they? I think it was pretty clear that they didnt have the legs to drop him; if anything the reverse was more likely.

Belv

I don't think they trieid as hard as they might. They settled for dropping Wiggins who they saw as a huge threat in the time trial.

At the end of the tour i just felt that no-one had really pushed Contador and that seemed to be the best chance anyone had.

disgruntledgoat

Belv wrote:

I don't think they trieid as hard as they might. They settled for dropping Wiggins who they saw as a huge threat in the time trial.

At the end of the tour i just felt that no-one had really pushed Contador and that seemed to be the best chance anyone had.

Why would they not drop him?

You're up there with the most trustworthy teammate you can ever have, and you can both attack him until he cracks once Kloden is gone... So why don't you?

Cos you can't that's why.

afx237vi

Belv wrote:

I don't think they trieid as hard as they might. They settled for dropping Wiggins who they saw as a huge threat in the time trial.

At the end of the tour i just felt that no-one had really pushed Contador and that seemed to be the best chance anyone had.

Dropping Contador is an altogether harder prospect than dropping Wiggins, no matter how much he's improved.

Belv

disgruntledgoat wrote:

You're up there with the most trustworthy teammate you can ever have, and you can both attack him until he cracks once Kloden is gone... So why don't you?

Cos you can't that's why.

Well then Contador should have left them! Although he had no need to, i admit :?
I didn't like the end of the stage where they had all agreed the result - i want to see broken men (metaphorically!) roll home with nothing left. If that's not how you finish then you're not racing?

disgruntledgoat

Well Kloden came in about 5 minutes after them looking alot like that!

There was a Time Trial the next day too, Contador knew neither Schleck was a threat there so there was no need to waste energy by distancing them.

avalon

Belv wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

You're up there with the most trustworthy teammate you can ever have, and you can both attack him until he cracks once Kloden is gone... So why don't you?

Cos you can't that's why.

Well then Contador should have left them! Although he had no need to, i admit :?
I didn't like the end of the stage where they had all agreed the result - i want to see broken men (metaphorically!) roll home with nothing left. If that's not how you finish then you're not racing?

If that's how you do finish in a stage race ,(apart from final stage) , then you're not thinking.

drenkrom

If you can read faces, you know the Schleck's were trying really hard. Frank was visibly burying himself, he who usually hides suffering pretty well. on every other plausible occasion, Andy tried his luck, only to find a guy in yellow behind him every time.

So, basically, no. Andy could not have won the Tour. He can be secure in knowing he tried everything and was bested by a better racer.

And Contador could not have left them. When he gave the famous dig, for one of the first times in years we saw genuine pain on Contador's face. Not the "oh it hurts so good" kind, the "holy $#!t I shouldn't have done that" kind.

frenchfighter

drenkrom wrote:

And Contador could not have left them.

The view of the rtbf commentators was that he attacked, saw Kloden was in difficulty so stopped. That seems plausible to me given Contador is not the rider to do 50-100m digs like some of his competitors. Like Merckx, he can attack and hold it for many kms.

rockmount

frenchfighter wrote:

drenkrom wrote:

And Contador could not have left them.

The view of the rtbf commentators was that he attacked, saw Kloden was in difficulty so stopped. That seems plausible to me given Contador is not the rider to do 50-100m digs like some of his competitors. Like Merckx, he can attack and hold it for many kms.

If that was the case, why didn't he wait for Klöden, with the time he had in the bank the Schlecks weren't a problem unless they attacked, then he could have just went with them. I really don't think he knew what he was doing.

Mettan

drenkrom wrote:

And Contador could not have left them. When he gave the famous dig, for one of the first times in years we saw genuine pain on Contador's face. Not the "oh it hurts so good" kind, the "holy $#!t I shouldn't have done that" kind.

Agreed - that's how I saw it aswell - After that dig, Contador's legs temporarily were all over the place (out of saddle, severe side-to-side flayling, very low cadence) - he couldn't have sutained it - and Andy was coming back quite easily - and Contador was showing obvious pain on his face for the first time on the tour - Contador looked weaker than Andy on the Ventoux aswell (imho).

Mettan

Belv wrote:

The day Andy, Frank and Contador left Wiggins on the climb to Col de Colombiere, why did the brothers not try to break Contador once he had lost Kloden? I can't help but think they could have left him that day and clawed back a couple of minutes.
And once Contador had been out-climbed, the last few days could have turned out totally differently.

But for the TT's, Andy would have been much closer this year - and yes, there were times that I thought, but for Frank, Andy could have pushed Contador to the limit on the big 3rd week climbs. It would have been good 1 on 1 in the 3rd week, but there was often just half-hearted tests from Andy, and then there was the "waiting for frank" bit which diluted his whole approach.

Jez mon

rockmount wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

drenkrom wrote:

And Contador could not have left them.

The view of the rtbf commentators was that he attacked, saw Kloden was in difficulty so stopped. That seems plausible to me given Contador is not the rider to do 50-100m digs like some of his competitors. Like Merckx, he can attack and hold it for many kms.

If that was the case, why didn't he wait for Klöden, with the time he had in the bank the Schlecks weren't a problem unless they attacked, then he could have just went with them. I really don't think he knew what he was doing.

Why would he have done that, purposely loosing time to the schlecks, in order to acheive what exactly? Loosing time to Andy with Ventoux coming up would just be silly. It's easy to point out that at the time he had more than enough time in the bag when you look back at the situation, but at the time loosing time wouldn't have made sense

GeorgeShaw

rockmount wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

drenkrom wrote:

And Contador could not have left them.

The view of the rtbf commentators was that he attacked, saw Kloden was in difficulty so stopped. That seems plausible to me given Contador is not the rider to do 50-100m digs like some of his competitors. Like Merckx, he can attack and hold it for many kms.

If that was the case, why didn't he wait for Klöden, with the time he had in the bank the Schlecks weren't a problem unless they attacked, then he could have just went with them. I really don't think he knew what he was doing.

Because the Schlecks were doing the pulling when they got back to him? Unless you wanted him to let the Schlecks go and then try to pull Kloden back up to them.

Kloden was toast at that point, which is why he went backwards so quickly once the elastic broke.

donrhummy

I agree that they could have dropped Contador (more on that in a second) but Andy still would not have won. He'd likely have gained a minute or so at most.

As for dropping Contador, right after Contador attacked and dropped Kloden and the Schlecks got back, Andy went to the front and as Contador dropped in behind Frank, you could actually see his legs get wobbly. He DEFINTELY had a lot taken out of him in that attack. Unfortunately, neither Schleck saw that and instead kept a very steady pace and over the next 5 minutes you could see Contador slowly recover. If they'd attacked him right there i think they'd have dropped him and he'd have been forced to keep a steady pace to reach the top with limited losses. But they weren't so far from the top, and he wasn't so weak that they'd have pulled back 4 minutes+. So Andy still would have lost.

Peakraider

Drop Contador? In 09? Hahaha.


Not once in any climb did he look in discomfort. The only reason he was still with the Schlecks on that stage was because he stopped for Kloden.


He could have broken them at any moment.


It was the most ridiculously blatant TdF victory in years.



But, hey, the EPO era is over, right?

frenchfighter

Some of you should have youtube'd the stage before commenting.

Contador is smooth as you like - the acceleration is clearly on point.

Watch carefully how when he lets the Schlecks catch up, he is still dancing around on the pedals and clearly looking around for Kloden. Looking very fresh and drops back off the wheels and moves back easily and even comes to the front.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzFo_NJljh0

The Prodigy

frenchfighter wrote:

Some of you should have youtube'd the stage before commenting.

Contador is smooth as you like - the acceleration is clearly on point.

Watch carefully how when he lets the Schlecks catch up, he is still dancing around on the pedals and clearly looking around for Kloden. Looking very fresh and drops back off the wheels and moves back easily and even comes to the front.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzFo_NJljh0

That was how I saw it, not sure where this wobbly leg moment was.

JackCB

The attack was a failure on Contador's part, though. I don't really see what he hoped to achieve. All he managed to do was drop a team mate. I guess he was probably hoping that Kloden could stay with him and that he'd drop a Schleck (or both). But he didn't really need to gain time on the Schlecks, they were a reasonable distance behind him in the GC, and he knew they wouldn't be able to time trial as well as him. The real dangermen (Lance and Wiggins) had been dropped already.

But why did he stop the attack? My feeling is that it was probably partly because he realised that the attack was a bad idea and partly because he didn't feel as fantastic as he might have thought he would.

The problem with this sort of thing is it's all speculation. Yes, you can get an inkling of how people are feeling from how they look, but you only really know in what sort of shape someone's in when they put in an attack.

And we didn't really see that sort of attack from Contador, because he never really needed to put an attack in, as long as the more threatening timetrialists were dropped it was enough for him to stick with the Schlecks (having said that, Contador's solo attack at the end of stage 7, though short, was very impressive).

[EDIT: forgot about Verbier...]

I think there's probably some truth in this claim that Andy could have done better if he had been more willing to drop Frank. It certainly looked like Andy was in better shape on most of the climbs. But, as I said, it's all speculation; there's no way to know whether Andy could of sustained an attack that would have left Contador behind (my feeling is that he probably couldn't have).

rockmount

Jez mon wrote:

rockmount wrote:

If that was the case, why didn't he wait for Klöden, with the time he had in the bank the Schlecks weren't a problem unless they attacked, then he could have just went with them. I really don't think he knew what he was doing.

Why would he have done that, purposely loosing time to the schlecks, in order to acheive what exactly? Loosing time to Andy with Ventoux coming up would just be silly. It's easy to point out that at the time he had more than enough time in the bag when you look back at the situation, but at the time loosing time wouldn't have made sense

Did you read it before replying ...

guv001

No

Jellylegs1968

I'm not sure i saw any wobbly leg moments but i would have loved to see Andy and Berties duke it out for the win on Ventoux.

I think we were robbed of that by them both trying to ensure high places for team mates

Monty Dog

I didn't see any 'wobbly leg' moments - more the legs of a stronger rider easily turning over a big gear.

Jez mon

rockmount wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

rockmount wrote:

If that was the case, why didn't he wait for Klöden, with the time he had in the bank the Schlecks weren't a problem unless they attacked, then he could have just went with them. I really don't think he knew what he was doing.

Why would he have done that, purposely loosing time to the schlecks, in order to acheive what exactly? Loosing time to Andy with Ventoux coming up would just be silly. It's easy to point out that at the time he had more than enough time in the bag when you look back at the situation, but at the time loosing time wouldn't have made sense

Did you read it before replying ...

Not in the way I now realise it was intended sorry.

However, my take on it would be that once he realised he had dropped Kloden, he knew he made a mistake. However, there was no point in slowing down as the guy had blown in a big way. Furthermore, buy slowing down he'd open himself to attacks from Andy and then use up energy chasing it down. However, if he continued riding at a tempo he was comfortable with.

Part of me feels that this issue is only still being discussed is that issue a certain old rider made a stink about it. It wasn't tactically brilliant, but he still won the yellow jersey, which is surely the most important thing.

k-dog

Belv wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

You're up there with the most trustworthy teammate you can ever have, and you can both attack him until he cracks once Kloden is gone... So why don't you?

Cos you can't that's why.

Well then Contador should have left them! Although he had no need to, i admit :?
I didn't like the end of the stage where they had all agreed the result - i want to see broken men (metaphorically!) roll home with nothing left. If that's not how you finish then you're not racing?

You sound like one of those people who can't understand how Contador won the Tour when he didn't win the stage every day.

It was different 100 years ago when they rode 600 miles on fixed wheel bikes - I guess they were real men back then.

jamlala

Jellylegs1968 wrote:

I'm not sure i saw any wobbly leg moments but i would have loved to see Andy and Berties duke it out for the win on Ventoux.

I think we were robbed of that by them both trying to ensure high places for team mates

Which team mate did Contador try to secure a high place for?

kozzo

Belv wrote:

Could Andy Schlek have won the 09 TdF?

You have tha answer on the finish in Paris.

Belv

k-dog wrote:

Belv wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

You're up there with the most trustworthy teammate you can ever have, and you can both attack him until he cracks once Kloden is gone... So why don't you?

Cos you can't that's why.

Well then Contador should have left them! Although he had no need to, i admit :?
I didn't like the end of the stage where they had all agreed the result - i want to see broken men (metaphorically!) roll home with nothing left. If that's not how you finish then you're not racing?

You sound like one of those people who can't understand how Contador won the Tour when he didn't win the stage every day.

It was different 100 years ago when they rode 600 miles on fixed wheel bikes - I guess they were real men back then.

lol - no, i don't expect him to win all the stages to take the overall.
What i like to see is the winner on ONE day of the tour show everyone why he deserves to win. Sastre did it last year and i remember (although cannot quote the years) seeing Armstrong do it, Indurain, etc. Usually on one big hill, they just put their head down and go until no-one is left on their wheel.
I guess the apparent ease with which Contador covered every move against him frustrated me. I wanted to see for sure who was the best climber (due respect to Pellezotti etc). Undeserving though? Not for a second.

disgruntledgoat

Belv wrote:

k-dog wrote:

Belv wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

You're up there with the most trustworthy teammate you can ever have, and you can both attack him until he cracks once Kloden is gone... So why don't you?

Cos you can't that's why.

Well then Contador should have left them! Although he had no need to, i admit :?
I didn't like the end of the stage where they had all agreed the result - i want to see broken men (metaphorically!) roll home with nothing left. If that's not how you finish then you're not racing?

You sound like one of those people who can't understand how Contador won the Tour when he didn't win the stage every day.

It was different 100 years ago when they rode 600 miles on fixed wheel bikes - I guess they were real men back then.

lol - no, i don't expect him to win all the stages to take the overall.
What i like to see is the winner on ONE day of the tour show everyone why he deserves to win. Sastre did it last year and i remember (although cannot quote the years) seeing Armstrong do it, Indurain, etc. Usually on one big hill, they just put their head down and go until no-one is left on their wheel.
I guess the apparent ease with which Contador covered every move against him frustrated me. I wanted to see for sure who was the best climber (due respect to Pellezotti etc). Undeserving though? Not for a second.

Erm, yeah.. That win on the Sunday before didn't do it for you.