TdF Stage 17 *Spoilers*

mididoctors

DaveyL wrote:

Has anyone actually considered that, about 98% of the time, [whisper]bike racing isn't actually that interesting?[/whisper]

which is why they keep trying to engineer the route

mididoctors

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

I thought that was pretty good as far as bike racing goes. I guess that's how 'proper' football fans feel when they watch Spain play, it was the two best climbers in the world slugging it out at the pinnacle of their sport.

]

yeah clearly the case wasn't a bad race

Kléber

That was a close finish, but with Poulidor and Anquetil one eventually cracked.

I suppose some fans wanted a rider to crack but that's the point - both riders are at a very similar level when going uphill. It's not a Hollywood script, it is possible for two riders to arrive shattered. A shame Schleck will get done over in the TT, some suspense until the end would be good.

mididoctors

Kléber wrote:

That was a close finish, but with Poulidor and Anquetil one eventually cracked.

I suppose some fans wanted a rider to crack but that's the point - both riders are at a very similar level when going uphill. It's not a Hollywood script, it is possible for two riders to arrive shattered. A shame Schleck will get done over in the TT, some suspense until the end would be good.

its not bad


andy pushed him closer than I thought...

back in Rotterdam I had Bertie for a crushing uphill stage victory somewhere but Andy being perhaps a tiny weeny bit better in the mountains was a surprise.

PTP should of guess who is going to be 3rd rather than 1st...


big questions remain ... would frank helped or hindered?

I'll laugh if the peloton splits in the crosswinds tomorrow

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

Has anyone actually considered that, about 98% of the time, [whisper]bike racing isn't actually that interesting?[/whisper]

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller. The lack of ego or big personalities around Bert and Andy doesn't draw the kind of attention Armstrong did. So you're dependant on the racing for excitement.

The largeness of the Tour is important but I do wonder if it's impacting negatively on the racing.

rockmount

iainf72 wrote:

Next year will be my 25th Tour de France. Here's hoping it's better than the last few.

I hear Paddy Power are paying out on that not happening already ...

rockmount

stjohnswell wrote:

SpaceJunk wrote:

Ryder was great.

And RadioShack will be basing their 2011 TDF around Chris Horner.

Lance's retirement might turn out to be the making of Radio Shack.

If the Shack are around next year .... It may be time to bring out the Phinney !

Garry H

iainf72 wrote:

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller. The lack of EPO or big personalities around Bert and Andy doesn't draw the kind of attention Armstrong did. So you're dependant on the racing for excitement.

The largeness of the Tour is important but I do wonder if it's impacting negatively on the racing.

There, corrected that for you

Monty Dog

Folks have got too used to the warped perspective that pharmacological assistance has given to riders in the last 20 years - whole teams with 49.9% HCT pulling at the bottom of climbs and 80kg+ riders winning mountain stages will hopefully be a thing of the past. It's an indication of more 'honest' racing as it's no longer possible to boost performance by 10% for key stages.

Garry H

rockmount wrote:

stjohnswell wrote:

SpaceJunk wrote:

Ryder was great.

And RadioShack will be basing their 2011 TDF around Chris Horner.

Lance's retirement might turn out to be the making of Radio Shack.

If the Shack are around next year .... It may be time to bring out the Phinney !

Phinney the elder?

Steve2020

BenBlyth wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Wow. There's just no pleasing some people. And you can tell who on the forum has probably never ridden or raced a bike.

Some of the best racing I've seen for a while there. But the effort that takes is immense. Some people seem to think they can race at that pace for the entire Tour.

+1,000,000

This has been an excellent Tour and I can never see how people seem to think riders can just attack as if they are lazy for not doing so!

It's not that people don't appreciate or understand the effort, it is just a bit disappointing when a huge group, including plenty of non-climbers, hits the bottom of the final climb on the most decisive stage - the tactics used to be more swashbuckling.

Schleck's Ardennes performances suggest he's good over the longer distances - maybe it would suit him better if the race was strung out from the start, rather than coming down to a 40-50 minute burn up, which seems to be Contador's particular strength.

It might not make any difference, but Contador looked weakest on the long Alpine stage last year.

greasedscotsman

iainf72 wrote:

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller.

Sounds to me like your getting older...

iainf72

greasedscotsman wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller.

Sounds to me like your getting older...

I am. But then, I did find the Giro was fantastic racing

Never been a big fan, but YAY CARLOS!

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/tou ... brats.html

greasedscotsman

iainf72 wrote:

I am. But then, I did find the Giro was fantastic racing

But then I seem to remember alot of people on this forum complaining that the Giro was dull last year. That's how it pans out sometimes. Don't worry, the Vuelta will be along soon, that's always exciting. And maybe in the meantime you can dig out some of your Tour DVD's from say, 91-95! Now they were exciting races

afx237vi

DaveyL wrote:

Has anyone actually considered that, about 98% of the time, [whisper]bike racing isn't actually that interesting?[/whisper]

Eh... maybe. But least with cycling, when the racing is a bit dull, there's always nice scenery to look at. Well, unless you're watching the Vuelta.

carl_p

iainf72 wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

Has anyone actually considered that, about 98% of the time, [whisper]bike racing isn't actually that interesting?[/whisper]

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller. The lack of ego or big personalities around Bert and Andy doesn't draw the kind of attention Armstrong did. So you're dependant on the racing for excitement.

The largeness of the Tour is important but I do wonder if it's impacting negatively on the racing.

It seems to me too many teams and riders are happy to turn up and just be seen to please their sponsors. I was really looking forward to a competitive tour with 4 or 5 riders in contention. Evans, Wiggins and Armstrong failed to deliver big time and it became evident very very quickly that this as going to be a two horse race and not long after that AC would win comfortably.
I'm not a racer, but I am a keen viewer. For me the Tour is too long, too many stages which encourages riders to concentrate their efforts on one or two stages. Doesn't make for great viewing.
Pleased to see British National Circuit racing on tonight.

Philip S

What the Tour needs is 2 long time trials, a team time trial, 6 days in the mountains, 7 days across cobbles, 3 days in rolling Ardennes-style hills, and a sprint finish through the Arc de Triomphe. Then it would be interesting...

That said, I've really enjoyed this Tour.

jerry3571

I think Lemond said that some years ago that the Tour did an annual visit to the cobbles. A good Ardenne stage and cobbles could be a lot better than the usual trip through mindless french arable countryside.
I drove one year from the Paris Champs Elysees finish to Chamonix, in the Alps, and it was one hell of a dull drive. Those poor bike riders.
The scenery at the end was bonkers!
-Jerry

mididoctors

iainf72 wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

Has anyone actually considered that, about 98% of the time, [whisper]bike racing isn't actually that interesting?[/whisper]

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller. The lack of ego or big personalities around Bert and Andy doesn't draw the kind of attention Armstrong did. So you're dependant on the racing for excitement.

The largeness of the Tour is important but I do wonder if it's impacting negatively on the racing.

why is it duller?

is it because people watch a lot of cycling and the freshness has faded from the viewing experience?

or is the tour genuinely dull?

I thought this years race was good...not great or even unpredictable.. bertie is going to win bar something monumentally odd happening

plenty of incident..

the cobbles were great... lance taking a packet drifting out the back ... cavs struggles with his own mindset and form..chaingate

plenty to remember

usual surprises from the lower ranks

fedrigo is class IMO... repeated ability to pull off stage wins like that

ryder

few others

ok overshadowed by a great Giro

explain why its impact is negative?

mididoctors

iainf72 wrote:

greasedscotsman wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Of course, yes. But in my opinion, the Tour is getting duller.

Sounds to me like your getting older...

I am. But then, I did find the Giro was fantastic racing

Never been a big fan, but YAY CARLOS!

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/tou ... brats.html

with the abilities so close between the front and back of the Peloton, politics with in the bunch for on the road deals will perhaps increase in importance (already has?)

gabriel959

At least at the Vuelta there will be some good racing from Ezequiel Mosquera and other guys.

Abdoujaparov

Good to hear Menchov saying he'll overhaul andy in the TT - good lad, fighting talk!

paulcuthbert

mididoctors wrote:

big questions remain ... would frank helped or hindered?

I've been wondering the same. On the basis of Mont Ventoux last year, hindered definitely. Andy looked a lot more free without having to search for Frank to help him.

Saxo Bank, particularly today for the first 8-10km of the Tourmalet, looked really strong - and looked like they didn't miss Frank. And like I've said, Andy seemed to perform better than last year without having to look out for Frank. 8 second gap compared to a couple of minutes behind Contador says a lot, probably

rick_chasey

Philip S wrote:

What the Tour needs is 2 long time trials, a team time trial, 6 days in the mountains, 7 days across cobbles, 3 days in rolling Ardennes-style hills, and a sprint finish through the Arc de Triomphe. Then it would be interesting...

That said, I've really enjoyed this Tour.

Week 1: Each day a different north Europe one dayer.
Day1: Amstel Gold route
Day 2: Ghent Wevelgem route
Day 3: Scheldeprijs route
Day4: De Ronde Route
Day 5: Paris-Roubax Route
Day 6: Paris-Tour
Day 7: "sprinter day"

Day8: rest

Week 2: 4 proper Pyrenean mountain stages, with at least 3 over the 230km mark, one of which over the 250km mark.

Few days trekking through the central massif. (again, all at least over 200km)

Week 3: Then the rest just Mega days in the Alpes, all over 200km, apart from a time trial up the Galibier and down the other side.

Then a 50km TT into Paris.

Job done.

SpaceJunk

iainf72 wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Personally I lost a bit of interest when it became obvious that Contador was in no danger of getting in trouble. And it became obvious fairly quickly.

Ditto. From about a minute after Schleck attacked you could see he was on the rivet and had nothing else. Contador was also on the rivet but he didn't really need to do anything else.

Dan Friebe was saying on the CN podcast that the Tour really needs to bring back time bonuses for winning a stage. Today may have played out slightly differently if there were some seconds to be had.

I think in this Tour there have been 3 or 4 interesting stages, but overall the racing ain't been great. The Tour is so big now and things like top 10 are important which seems to stop people taking risks. Aside from Sastre, I guess. But imagine is 1 in 20 of those kind of moves stuck, it would be pretty good.

Next year will be my 25th Tour de France. Here's hoping it's better than the last few.

Umm, how would time bonuses solve anything?

AC and AS have proven to be the two strongest riders in the hills when it's matter so the thought of bonuses wouldn't helps Menchov, Sanchez et al.


So far this Tour, AS has won 2 stages, AC has finished runner up twice.

Using the old bonus system, that would give Andy 20 secs, and Alberto 12.

Wow! That really shakes things up, Andy would be in the lead by 8 secs heading into final time trial, not be 8 secs behind.

An insurmountable lead for such a strong TT'er.

Time Bonuses wouldn't have made a lick of difference.

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

Week 1: Each day a different north Europe one dayer.
Day1: Amstel Gold route
Day 2: Ghent Wevelgem route
Day 3: Scheldeprijs route
Day4: De Ronde Route
Day 5: Paris-Roubax Route
Day 6: Paris-Tour
Day 7: "sprinter day"

Day8: rest

Week 2: 4 proper Pyrenean mountain stages, with at least 3 over the 230km mark, one of which over the 250km mark.

Few days trekking through the central massif. (again, all at least over 200km)

Week 3: Then the rest just Mega days in the Alpes, all over 200km, apart from a time trial up the Galibier and down the other side.

Then a 50km TT into Paris.

Job done.

That would be good apart from the bit where all the teams boycott it and do the Giro/Vuelta instead.

AidanR

Meh, I think the course is fine. This year's Tour has been fairly decent. We seem to forget that most sporting contests are a bit dull, but we keep watching for the exceptional ones. I mean, how many drab 0-0, 1-0, 1-1 matches are there in the Premiership every season?

eh

I think it was fine, plenty of worse Tours during the Indurain and Armstrong eras.

Still all modern sport seems to be going down the risk adverse route. After all why risk losing everything when you get to stand on the podium at 3rd. Maybe thats how they could overcome it, only publish photos of the winner, then everyone would have to try win for their sponsers

ddraver

Mettan wrote:

SpaceJunk wrote:

Yes, great stuff. 2 riders side by side for so long up the climb. Images of the two slugging it out were fantastic.

Here's for a great rivalry to continue over the next few years.

Fully agree.

yeah some people said this was a dull stage too!!! -


I'd have enjoyed it even more if someone had nt runined it for me! (always happens for the good ones does nt it!)

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Next year will be my 25th Tour de France. Here's hoping it's better than the last few.

In that 25 there have been a few stinkers not just the last two, i reckon this years has been a huge dissapointment given the so called exciting parcours.