Yes those are all facts. No one reacted to his initial attack(fact) and he didn't do a 50km solo like someone claimed(fact), he had other people with him(fact). And Devenys should never have worked with Andy because they were on different teams(fact). People shouldn't offer money to get an unfair advantage(fact).
In the valley he mostly followed wheels and probably did the least pulls of the breakaway group with Monfort and Devenys doing the most. (fact)
All those posts say it was a tactical win. He was not the strongest climber that Tour further evidenced by the fact that he never dropped anyone on all the other climbs.
Though I never actually diminish his victory now do I?
Tactics is part of the game. And he did most of the Galibier, if not all, by him self.
It's when people say he was the strongest climber in that Tour that I'll say no. He wasn't. Do you think Andy would've dropped Evans that day when they were both together? Very unlikely! Evans had to do most of the Galibier by him self as well, dropping Contador and Sanchez in the process.
I have always thought it was a great tactical victory with lot's of strength involved as well. But was he the strongest that day like many claimed? How can you know for sure? Evans had been climbing very well that Tour and Andy never dropped him in a man to man duel. Evans on the other hand had dropped Andy uphill multiple times that Tour. That suggests he was stronger. And yeah, I hated Devenys' involvement in helping Andy - it was so obvious that he did it for cash. If Andy had gifted him a stage win I'd understand, but he did no such thing. He had nothing to gain from helping Andy except financially. It's sad that rich riders can just buy the help of others while less rich riders have to do it by themselves.
So exactly why are you bringing those posts up without showing the full discussion? That's a very one sighted view. Don't they teach otherwise there?
Am I not allowed to have an opinion? I don't think Andy was the strongest climber of the 2011 Tour. Nor do I automatically think he's the best climber of that stage just because he won. Like I said, most of the time was made in the valley between the mountains. They weren't really chasing that hard at that point because they thought they'd catch him easily. Evans admitted that was a big mistake of him.
Just because I don't think Andy was the strongest climber of the Tour, or automatically the best climber of that particular day, doesn't mean it wasn't an impressive performance. But I guess it's either black or white with you. Sometimes it's gray Hitch.
Actually, most of the time it's gray.
If you ask me who the best climber of the Tour was that year then I'll answer with either Evans or Samuel Sanchez(who had one bad day).
But if we follow your one sighted logic I guess that makes Thomas De Gendt the strongest climber of the day when he won on Stelvio! Can't you see the error in your logic? It's painfully obvious. I get that you think Andy was the strongest climber that day. I don't think that. I don't know who was the strongest climber that day. You apparently do. I bet you win a lot of money with such insight... Is it that hard to accept that the strongest rider doesn't always win? That's what makes cycling so unpredictable. Andy was obviously one of the strongest riders that day and for sure... He had the biggest balls that day. But like I said, it doesn't automatically make him the best climber. It just doesn't. Evans was also very strong that day.
So if saying Evans could've followed Andy that day if he reacted to Andy's initial attack is downplaying Andy's victory than yes, I'm guilty!
Perhaps you are overestimating Andy's performance on that day. Ever thought of that? Oh no wait, I forgot you are always right. How silly of me...
It's the same with Contador's stage win on Fuente De. How can you know for sure he was the strongest climber that day and not Valverde? The difference was that Contador had bigger balls than Valverde and that's why he won. He also played it brilliant tactically together with his team. Tiralongo also helped. But unlike with Devenys' I don't think money was involved here. Just Tira repaying Contador for the stage he won in the Giro... You could see that as part of a grander tactic: gifting someone a stage to get their support on a different stage when you might need it. As long as there's no money involved I'm cool with it really.
So basically the 2 stages were very comparable, but you make a fuss about nothing.
Have a good day.