TDF Stage 1 **SPOILERS**

Le Commentateur

It's just stage 1, meaning he'll eventually win the Tour by, say, three-and-a-half clear minutes instead of five.

csp

So, if stage 1 had been preceeded by a prologue, would (most likely yellow jersey wearing) Cancellara have slowed down the front, after the crash?

disgruntledgoat

csp wrote:

So, if stage 1 had been preceeded by a prologue, would (most likely yellow jersey wearing) Cancellara have slowed down the front, after the crash?

Yeah... amazing howhis wannabe Patron act fails to materialise when his own teams interests aren't in peril.

As to Bert, bad positioning, Wigins, Evans, Schleck and even Cunego could all be seen having men bringing them to the front even before th breakaway was caught. Samu and Contador were in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's bike racing.

Gadret was hanigng on for grim death before that. He was probably glad of having 50 others to roll in with.

disgruntledgoat

Oh and good ride by Cuddles to take some more time. I think the other GC contenders have just decided in the face of Contador's Giro performance that all bets are off and any opportunity to take time has to be grabbed with both hands. They've all earned one days mountain losses back yesterday.

iainf72

Horner posted his power file from yesterday

http://twitpic.com/5k71cy

mrushton

frenchfighter wrote:

Just saw the crash. The guys in front are without honour.

But yet when Chavanel punctured twice last year whilst wearing the MJ, no-one incl. AC stopped. I thought it was a race tho' which means to me first one to the line but perhaps there is something I'm missing?

thamacdaddy

Not the first time AC has been criticized for poor positioning. Wasn't it the same deal with the crosswinds where Armstrong got Astana to drive on the pack and AC was in the back of the peloton and therefore the second group.

Every other team knew they needed to stay up the front from 20km down to 3 with their GC contenders and most were there. Those that weren't probably be questioning what their riders were up to.

disgruntledgoat

For all my istaste for Contador and my assured belief that he shouldn't be riding... I would love to see a race where AC, in Giro form, gets ganged up on by 3 or 4 other GC contenders. That would be a classic.

ridgerider

As I see it, yesterday was just another 'gimmi' by AC. He's got into the habit now!

cogidubnus

frenchfighter wrote:

I am not rising to that BS.

A well thought out intelligent argument there FF. As others have said if AC was at the front of the peleton where he should have been he would have been quite safe.

edeverett

How much of AC's loss can we put down to team selection?

Most of the other teams have classics-type hard men in there that would be protecting their leader on stages like this. I can't remember seeing Cancellara in first week of last year's Tour without Andy glued to his wheel. If Saxo Bank had a classics specialist in there perhap he would have been positioned better? After the crash, AC was having to rely on Euskatel riders with all their power to get him to the line.

Is there anyone in the Saxo Bank team with that role for the flatter stages? Seems they are very focused on the mountains.

Cumulonimbus

Porte is a very good tter. Larsson is as well but surprisingly was not picked.

morstar

Just one comment on the big crash at 9km. Everybody is blaming it on the spectator but I'm not sure that it is entirely the spectators fault.
If you look at the aerial picture, the Astana rider who hits the spectator is already well off balance which is why their body is so far over and connects with the spectator.

Had the spectator been looking at the riders coming towards them, they probably could have avoided the contact but that does not make them the cause as they were on the verge!

Why were they facing the wrong way? Who knows? filming is my guess.

Great ride by Evans and G delivering once again. Gilbert didn't do too badly either.

frenchfighter

Funny how you all pick on Contador...but to be expected I guess. It happens that there were a lot of good and admirable GC riders caught out.

The crash was right in front of Contador so being about 50th place on a flat run in where the majority of people in the front should be sprinters teams is not bad positioning.

Anyway he doesn't seem to concerned:

“I was close to the front of the group,” Contador continued, “but there was a crash right in front of me and even though I managed to brake in time, I had to go over the bikes as best I could. When I wanted to start up again, the group was already far away. There was only one teammate to help me at the time and another that had gone ahead, but I lost a nice amount of time. Cycling is like that, the race went like blazes until the goal and there was nothing you could do; you just have to think ahead.”

Alberto Contador, in any case, didn’t count on the people ahead to wait for him. ”Effectively, that’s racing, and today it happened to me and tomorrow to somebody else. Today I didn’t have very good luck, but the Tour is long. I have to be optimistic and motivated, that’s the important thing.”

frenchfighter

andyp wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

G

Contador will have to demonstrate pure class and dominance and CRUSH these LUCKY riders in the TT and mountains.

If the shoe had been on the other foot, would you have been saying that only a champion avoids crashes?

Contador's position in the bunch was suspect, he paid the price for that.

Absolutely not. It is a total luck thing, zero talent. I would be annoyed if any big GC rider got caught out.

I hope any GC contender who put their team on the front after the crash suffers a misfortune amounting to just over 1min.

dougzz

I get you're a Bertie fan, but given chain gate isn't this just what goes around comes around?
Do you honestly believe Bertie would have waited has roles been reversed? Previous evidence says not.

frenchfighter

Are you serious? You think the two incidents are comparable? I cannot be bothered to explain here so will simply say: individual rider issue vs bad luck from a spectator.

ddraver

Yes, they are comparable -Look at it as freak chain drop at worst possible time vs bad positioning suggests that AC was even less honourable in "chaingate." Assume the worst of both of them and say sloppy gear technique vs bad positioning and it's still comparable...

Plus, not a single GC team put their men on the front (were you watching?), it was all OPL until the last km when people were attacking for the stage win. You could have a go at Cuddles but I', not sure poaching 3 secs by having a short sprint at the end counts as massively dishonourable.

You ve yet to say why the incidents were not comparable, you ve just spouted abuse so come on - educate us!

cogidubnus

frenchfighter wrote:

Are you serious? You think the two incidents are comparable? I cannot be bothered to explain here so will simply say: individual rider issue vs bad luck from a spectator.

Stop being delusional. I'm a big fan of AC and don't think being a minute down is going to hurt him overall. But you cannot tell me he would have waited for everyone to catch up. Naive

Doobz

Saxo bank has gone to organisers to ask for some time back!

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/sax ... scic_2/Tes

Team Saxo Bank has decided to ask the organizers of the Tour de France to rectify and remove Alberto Contador just 34 seconds after yesterday's stage, instead of 1'20 ".

The Spanish rider was involved in the second fall of the stage, eight kilometers from the finish, but lost time on the third montonera, three kilometers from the finish, in which Andy Schleck was involved.

In Luxembourg he was given a time of six seconds longer than the stage winner, Gilbert, because the accident was within the last three miles away where no differences in addition to falls.

The Saxo Bank is now asking that you remove the time counter in the arrival to the last drop, 34 seconds, but it seems that the claim will not succeed.

frenchfighter

That is interesting and a pretty fair claim. I didn't watch all the stage properly but was trying to figure out how the time went from 36 odd seconds with 3km or so to go for the front group to 1min20.

If it was because those coming behind were caught in the final crash then 100% they should not lose that bloody time. Outrageous.

rick_chasey

Why would the organisers give Contador time back?

Having him almost 2 minutes back makes for excellent racing - just what the Tour needs.

The best climber in the peloton will have to go on the attack.

If he's really concerned, and doesn't want to wait another week or two for the mountains he can always liven up a raicng buy having a go earlier.

Either way, Contador 2 minutes down after stage 2 is exactly what the Tour needs!

No_Ta_Doctor

I'd love it if Contador got given some time back. Two years should do the trick.

ddraver

^^

Doobz

Technically all those riders should be entitled to get the time back but whether the commissars do anything about it is another story. Gotta remember, its not just Bertie who lost time so the commissars might come under more pressure from other teams.

I do agree that it makes for some exiting racing though.

So many people said they could not get exited about this years tour but after stage 1 I bet now they are well and truly amped..

rick_chasey

Doobz wrote:

Technically all those riders should be entitled to get the time back but whether the commissars do anything about it is another story. Gotta remember, its not just Bertie who lost time so the commissars might come under more pressure from other teams.

I do agree that it makes for some exiting racing though.

So many people said they could not get exited about this years tour but after stage 1 I bet now they are well and truly amped..

Give it another 6 days of flat or flattish stages where a break goes, and is caught close enough to the finish that it's a bunch sprint and you'll see why.

rick_chasey

edeverett wrote:

How much of AC's loss can we put down to team selection?

Most of the other teams have classics-type hard men in there that would be protecting their leader on stages like this. I can't remember seeing Cancellara in first week of last year's Tour without Andy glued to his wheel. If Saxo Bank had a classics specialist in there perhap he would have been positioned better? After the crash, AC was having to rely on Euskatel riders with all their power to get him to the line.

Is there anyone in the Saxo Bank team with that role for the flatter stages? Seems they are very focused on the mountains.

I was surprised not to see Nick Nuyens in the Tour team.

FJS

Although the effect on the GC isn't bad for the moment, I have to agree the 3km rule is weird on uphill finishes - commissaires have to start making assumptions about where someone would have finished would they not have crashed/had a mechanical. Tomorrow the field will be completely split in Mur + some narrow roads in the approach - nightmare

avoidingmyphd

Doobz wrote:

Technically all those riders should be entitled to get the time back but whether the commissars do anything about it is another story. Gotta remember, its not just Bertie who lost time so the commissars might come under more pressure from other teams.

I do agree that it makes for some exiting racing though.

So many people said they could not get exited about this years tour but after stage 1 I bet now they are well and truly amped..

By "technically" I take it you mean "in my opinion"?
Because according to the rules, they are not entitled to get their time back. This isn't an area where the commissaires have discretion.
It makes sense too - the rule is to create a safe racing environment for the sprinters, (by reducing non-sprinters' incentives to battle to stay at the front of the peloton and so removing unnecesary or incompetent riders like the Schlecks and Wiggins from the front of the race) not to rectify any injustices caused by falls.
It wouldn't make any different to the environment at the front of the peloton to give time presents to riders who were never there. In fact, it would undermine the rule - riders like the Schlecks and Wiggins would be incentivised to stay at the front of the peloton for the sprint because riding at the back would create a risk of ending up with the same time as trailing riders in the event of a crash. They don't want their time relative to Gilbert protecting. They want their time relative to Contador protecting.
The TV interviews might create the impression that there is uncertainty but the rules are pretty clear and the people who made them did think about what they were doing.

avoidingmyphd

FJS wrote:

Although the effect on the GC isn't bad for the moment, I have to agree the 3km rule is weird on uphill finishes - commissaires have to start making assumptions about where someone would have finished would they not have crashed/had a mechanical. Tomorrow the field will be completely split in Mur + some narrow roads in the approach - nightmare

The 3km rule will not be in force tomorrow, for the reasons you give. The rule is only applied to stages where when a fast moving group is likely to stay together throughout the finale, and the stages where this is true are identified in advance.