Tour de France Spoilers thread 2014
Comments
-
DonDaddyD wrote:I wasn't trolling earlier. And honestly, the last Tour/s were 2009 - 2011. 2009 being my favourite.
I also have found that the Vuelta, while not receiving the same level of attention, far outweighs the Tour for excitement. Contador's attack in the 2012 Vuelta - the one that started before the cameras started rolling at the start of the race, which lasted until he won the stage solo - being a truly memorable moment.
Wasn't he banned for doping?Chunky Cyclists need your love too! :-)
2009 Specialized Tricross Sport
2011 Trek Madone 4.5
2012 Felt F65X
Proud CX Pervert and quiet roadie. 12 mile commuter0 -
Nope the 2012 Vuelta still stands as a legit win for Contador. Results were voided from July '10 to Feb '12.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:Nope the 2012 Vuelta still stands as a legit win for Contador. Results were voided from July '10 to Feb '12.
That was his comeback GT.
But I agree it is all just filler untill March (with the exception of the Worlds, San Sebastian and the end of season Italian races)."If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got."
PX Kaffenback 2 = Work Horse
B-Twin Alur 700 = Sundays and Hills0 -
That post was referring to Thursday's surge up the mountain.Paulie W wrote:PBlakeney wrote:It is is like watching a replay from the 90's,
!
It really isn't.
It is my opinion and I am sticking with it until there is contradictory evidence.
I am happy to be proved wrong for the sake of cycling but I really need convincing. Not that anyone will care about that.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
guilty until proven innocentPBlakeney wrote:
That post was referring to Thursday's surge up the mountain.Paulie W wrote:
It really isn't.PBlakeney wrote:It is is like watching a replay from the 90's,
!
It is my opinion and I am sticking with it until there is contradictory evidence.
I am happy to be proved wrong for the sake of cycling but I really need convincing. Not that anyone will care about that.Dolan Titanium ADX 2016
Ridley Noah FAST 2013
Bottecchia/Campagnolo 1990
Carrera Parva Hybrid 2016
Hoy Sa Calobra 002 2014 [off duty]
Storck Absolutist 2011 [off duty]
http://www.slidingseat.net/cycling/cycling.html0 -
Past experience makes it that way unfortunately.rower63 wrote:guilty until proven innocent
Current cyclists are walking on the footsteps of those that went before so questions will always be raised on anything that looks unusual. One cyclist happilly flying up a mountain whilst others are blowing up looks unusual.
My opinion but it is only that.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
PBlakeney wrote:One cyclist happilly flying up a mountain whilst others are blowing up looks unusual.
Really? We get that on our club rides and nobody in our club is juicing (afaik!!). If everyone is pretty much riding at threshold, then it's obvious that a rider only slightly inferior to another will blow up if he tries to stay in contact with the better rider. The margin between happy and miserable is a very narrow one.Faster than a tent.......0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
That post was referring to Thursday's surge up the mountain.Paulie W wrote:PBlakeney wrote:It is is like watching a replay from the 90's,
!
It really isn't.
It is my opinion and I am sticking with it until there is contradictory evidence.
I am happy to be proved wrong for the sake of cycling but I really need convincing. Not that anyone will care about that.
What exactly is contradictory evidence?
What is clear is that cycling doesnt look anything like the 90s today and if you think it does you're not watching very closely. Nibali was superior to the opposition and rode away from them but only by 70 seconds (much of that gained in the initial attack) and that was an opposition of good but far from great riders. His time was impressive but a whole 3 minutes slower than Bjarne Riis in 1996 and slower by 70 seconds or more than riders whose names no doubt trip of your tongue like Armand De Las Cuevas and Laurent Dufaux (nearly all from the 1990s by the way). He looked in control and didnt look on the limit at any point during the race but go away and look at some 2012 Tour pics of Nibali and even as he is being dropped by Froome and Wiggins he doesnt look especially distressed.0 -
Nibali looked like he was trying on the second half of the Hautacam (I watched it live and the highlights) yet climbed at the same rate as Pinot. He was at his limit:ammattipyoraily on twitter wrote:#TDF, Stage 18. Hautacam first part | Nibali 17:39, Pinot 18:50 (+1:11) last part | Nibali 19:41, Pinot 19:40 (-0:01)0
-
PBlakeney wrote:
Past experience makes it that way unfortunately.rower63 wrote:guilty until proven innocent
Current cyclists are walking on the footsteps of those that went before so questions will always be raised on anything that looks unusual. One cyclist happilly flying up a mountain whilst others are blowing up looks unusual.
My opinion but it is only that.
It's a competition at some point in history there is going to be a guy who surges away from his competitors and does so by legitimate means.
Just because a persons proves to be the best doesn't always mean he is cheating. Sure Ricardo Ricco style attacks should be met with a raised eyebrow but if you are going to approach any sport with your level of cynicism what is the point of watching it, how and what do you get passionate about?Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
I get quite passionate about a lot of things. Some of the attacks in the tdf were amazing, and Michael Rodgers in particular.DonDaddyD wrote:Sure Ricardo Ricco style attacks should be met with a raised eyebrow but if you are going to approach any sport with your level of cynicism what is the point of watching it, how and what do you get passionate about?
I remain as cynical about Nibali as you are blinkered to L.A.
Differing opinions are allowed don't you know?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Wonder what the views would be had Froome beaten Nibali?“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
Froome could not keep up with Nibali in Yorkshire so there is no need to wonder as it was not going to happen.TailWindHome wrote:Wonder what the views would be had Froome beaten Nibali?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
Froome could not keep up with Nibali in Yorkshire so there is no need to wonder as it was not going to happen.TailWindHome wrote:Wonder what the views would be had Froome beaten Nibali?
Are you actually extrapolating a result in a 3 week GT from a 2 sec time gain on one flat stage?
What about the 3 seconds Contador put into Nibali on stage 8?“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
The time wasn't the important factor.TailWindHome wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Froome could not keep up with Nibali in Yorkshire so there is no need to wonder as it was not going to happen.TailWindHome wrote:Wonder what the views would be had Froome beaten Nibali?
Are you actually extrapolating a result in a 3 week GT from a 2 sec time gain on one flat stage?
What about the 3 seconds Contador put into Nibali on stage 8?
Neither of the two favourites should have allowed a major competitor to break away.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
The time wasn't the important factor.TailWindHome wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Froome could not keep up with Nibali in Yorkshire so there is no need to wonder as it was not going to happen.TailWindHome wrote:Wonder what the views would be had Froome beaten Nibali?
Are you actually extrapolating a result in a 3 week GT from a 2 sec time gain on one flat stage?
What about the 3 seconds Contador put into Nibali on stage 8?
Neither of the two favourites should have allowed a major competitor to break away.
Ok“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
The time wasn't the important factor.TailWindHome wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
Froome could not keep up with Nibali in Yorkshire so there is no need to wonder as it was not going to happen.TailWindHome wrote:Wonder what the views would be had Froome beaten Nibali?
Are you actually extrapolating a result in a 3 week GT from a 2 sec time gain on one flat stage?
What about the 3 seconds Contador put into Nibali on stage 8?
Neither of the two favourites should have allowed a major competitor to break away.
It's not as though that's ever happened before has it?
Faster than a tent.......0
