The Schlecks

iainf72

Andy has never won a stage race. Or a stage of a grand Tour.

Frank has done both.

For all his talent, Andy has very few wins to his name. Ok, LBL is worth a lot of other wins but could the lack of victories mean he's missing something which will take him right to the top?

dennisn

Maybe no killer instinct????

Bakunin

This is silly -- you could ask the question about the vast majority of riders.

Didn't Andy let Frank win during last year's tour?

dave_1

Andy Schlek looked to be waiting for his brother on ventoux...without that and Armstrong protecting 3rd place...would have been a hell of battle..AS can defo win a stage,2ndGC

csp

Dave_1 wrote:

Andy Schlek looked to be waiting for his brother on ventoux...without that and Armstrong protecting 3rd place...would have been a hell of battle..AS can defo win a stage,2ndGC

Andy always looks to be waiting for Frank. However, it occured to me that during the Tour de Suisse, Andy was deliberately holding back, so that during the TdF all eyes would be on Frank, and he could make a deciding move without anyone responding.

mattsy666

i think it will take ALOT of luck for Andy to ever win the TDF ... his TT isn't great and he doesn't have that final 300m kick that seems to be useful these days with mid-mountaintop finishes ... and even on the full monty all the GC contenders seem to mark each other out (once contador has gone up the road) and then fight for 7 or 8 seconds with 200m to go ...

he should have went for Virenque's KOM record ... he could easily have had 2 already ... not a tour win granted, but a nice piece of history if you can get it ..

rick_chasey

2nd in the Giro and the Tour, as well as an LBL all at the age of 25, is pretty bloody good.

pedro118118

Bakunin wrote:

This is silly -- you could ask the question about the vast majority of riders.

Didn't Andy let Frank win during last year's tour?

No - the two Schlecks did a deal with Bertie not to contest (win) the sprint and gift Frank the stage win. No such concession would've been made for Andy.

Bakunin

Yes -- Andy could have dropped his brother and battled AC.

Frank was gifted, but it was an attempt to get FS on the podium.

You cannot argue that Andy is missing something because he didn't win that stage.

paulcuthbert

Rick Chasey wrote:

2nd in the Giro and the Tour, as well as an LBL all at the age of 25, is pretty bloody good.

Exactly!

Abdoujaparov

Even though he's only 25 it is surprising that he hasn't won more. It's all very well prioritising the tour, but surely he could plan a few more peaks in fitness through the year.


Maybe he'd have notched up a couple of wins this spring if he hadn't have been injured.

He's just so good that I'm sure the success will come.

pedro118118

Bakunin wrote:

Yes -- Andy could have dropped his brother and battled AC.

Frank was gifted, but it was an attempt to get FS on the podium.

You cannot argue that Andy is missing something because he didn't win that stage.

Sure can.

What it demonstrated was the Schlecks were riding for placings, not to gain time on Bertie overall on GC. Frank was no threat overall - Andy was and Bertie controlled the situation and neutralised Andy.

When people say he's "missing something" it's all relative, of course. Bertie aside, he's the best GT rider/climber out there - although he remains pretty bobbins against the clock.

calvjones

pedro118118 wrote:

Bakunin wrote:

Yes -- Andy could have dropped his brother and battled AC.

Frank was gifted, but it was an attempt to get FS on the podium.

You cannot argue that Andy is missing something because he didn't win that stage.

Sure can.

What it demonstrated was the Schlecks were riding for placings, not to gain time on Bertie overall on GC. Frank was no threat overall - Andy was and Bertie controlled the situation and neutralised Andy.

When people say he's "missing something" it's all relative, of course. Bertie aside, he's the best GT rider/climber out there - although he remains pretty bobbins against the clock.

+1

We'll never know if Bertie would have cracked on that or the Ventoux stage if Andy had gone all out. Unlikely perhaps, but certainly possible. But Andy preferred not to drop his brother to boost his placing than increase his own chances of the overall.

Would LA ever have done this? Think not. Although if he'd had a brother of course, he wouldn't be LA.

So yes, Andy is missing something. Selfishness.

TheStone

It's clear he could have got closer to Bertie last year, but not sure he could have won.
I expect things to be different this year. Frank has his victory and will work 100% for Andy,
without the messing around of last year.

Bertie looks as good as ever and won't have to battle his team, so I'd still put him clear
favourite, but Andy will be close.

Expect his TT to get better. Lots of riders have learnt to TT at CSC/Saxo.

Bakunin

pedro118118 wrote:

What it demonstrated was the Schlecks were riding for placings, not to gain time on Bertie overall on GC. Frank was no threat overall - Andy was and Bertie controlled the situation and neutralised Andy.

That is the point -- yes, Saxo wanted two on the podium. AS rode in a way that he thought would bring this about. It is absurd to argue that AS lacks killer instinct or needs to be more selfish.

It is a team sport -- two years ago, Frank and Andy let Sastre go up the road and win the tour. The whole thing is about riding for placings.

pedro118118

Bakunin wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

What it demonstrated was the Schlecks were riding for placings, not to gain time on Bertie overall on GC. Frank was no threat overall - Andy was and Bertie controlled the situation and neutralised Andy.

That is the point -- yes, Saxo wanted two on the podium. AS rode in a way that he thought would bring this about. It is absurd to argue that AS lacks killer instinct or needs to be more selfish.

It is a team sport -- two years ago, Frank and Andy let Sastre go up the road and win the tour. The whole thing is about riding for placings.

I don't see your point?

Sure, the Shlecks are happy to ride for placings, Bertie doesn't. Could you imagine a scenario where the roles are reversed and Bertie accepting a deal for a team stage win in return for not attacking and sitting in second place?

calvjones

Bakunin wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

What it demonstrated was the Schlecks were riding for placings, not to gain time on Bertie overall on GC. Frank was no threat overall - Andy was and Bertie controlled the situation and neutralised Andy.

That is the point -- yes, Saxo wanted two on the podium. AS rode in a way that he thought would bring this about. It is absurd to argue that AS lacks killer instinct or needs to be more selfish.

It is a team sport -- two years ago, Frank and Andy let Sastre go up the road and win the tour. The whole thing is about riding for placings.

to decide to settle for trying for 2nd and 3rd at the top of the Ventoux would be fine. At the bottom? Seems to lack ambition, especially as Andy was effectively waiting for Armstrong and Wiggo as well as Frank in any case!

If it had been Sastre sitting in that group, 5th on GC with a shout, would Andy have waited? Think not.

blazing_saddles

So, Andy was struggling in Switzerland?
http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/06/ ... ips_122930

Kind of puts Old Father Time's performance into perspective.
I'm never sure who is just on training rides and who hasn't got form, anymore.

calvjones

Saves Frank the embarrassment of finishing 67th in the prologue in Nat Champs jersey I guess.