2011 Tour de France Stage 16 (18/7/2011): Saint-Paul-Trois-Châteaux - Gap, 162.5km

[kjetilraknerud]

Thor can race if he really wants to, but at least kick out FDJ, Cofidis and the like first.

These are the types of stages where normally the lesser riders who spend all tour (and in many cases, all year) working their asses off for the elite riders like Hushovd get their chance to have a crack in a big race for once. And now that's being taken away from them by a clearly superior rider who has already had a lot of glory this tour.

You may call it racing, and it is, but it's also the death of the opportunists in the tour, and it's something that I find quite regrettable. It used to be that the Tour offered up chances for all types of riders, but this year, unless you are a top 5 sprinter, one day rider or climber than you basically have no chance, and I think that's a crying shame.

Thor is going to be stronger than virtually every breakaway rider that gets into a break. If you want to say let him win them all, fine, but then really, what's the point of having the like of FDJ around. They wont be able to get a stage win and the extra riders just add to the potential for crashes.

You honestly think that the best riders should not be allowed in breaks, because the lesser riders don't get a chance to win? If FDJ don't want Hushovd to win from a break, they should chase the break down or put a rider in the break who can outclimb him.

 

[Dutchsmurf]

...

Then the rest of the break should just stop working with him and try to form a new break without him. You are sounding like you think Cavendish should step out so other sprinters get a chance. And Contador should too, he already won his share of GTs after all. But that just isn't how it works. To win, you need to cross the line first. If you do that by being smarter or being stronger is up to you. Hushovd being the strongest means the rest should try to drop him, not that he should stop trying.

I can use the same argument in different ways. What is the use of having the Schlecks around? Contador and Evans are clearly better, so they are never going to win it. And with their poor bike handling skills they only cause crashes. So we end with 2 teams. HTC and Saxo.

 

[King Of The Wolds]

This is the Tour de France. Wins should be earnt, not thrown around like confetti.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Evans in trouble, this could be very interesting on the true mountains. If Contador does this in the alps he'll help Andy get away from Evans I reckon.

This post amused me from when cadel was on the climb.

I pray to high heavens Samu does not slave for Evans in the descent, but goes himself.

LOL, it gets funnier

evans with a big fu to ryo

maybe a big fu to you as well?

 

[Polka Dot Punter]

Then the rest of the break should just stop working with him and try to form a new break without him. You are sounding like you think Cavendish should step out so other sprinters get a chance. And Contador should too, he already won his share of GTs after all. But that just isn't how it works. To win, you need to cross the line first. If you do that by being smarter or being stronger is up to you. Hushovd being the strongest means the rest should try to drop him, not that he should stop trying.

I can use the same argument in different ways. What is the use of having the Schlecks around? Contador and Evans are clearly better, so they are never going to win it. And with their poor bike handling skills they only cause crashes. So we end with 2 teams. HTC and Saxo.

I don't have a problem with Cavendish or Contador. Cav wins the sprint stages, Contador wins the mountain stages and the GTs, that's their domain. For me, the 3-4 breaks each tour are the domain of the rest of the peloton who can't sprint or climb, and that's what I'd like to see remain.

Did Thor win because he was stronger? Of course. But you know what -- Even if he didn't win, he's still the stronger rider. He and Gilbert will always be stronger then whoever wins from the break. Frankly, most breakaways wont win because the rider was the strongest in the peloton, but because he was strongest in a group that the strong riders chose not to have chased down or (be in the break).

If Strong riders tried to win every stage, they would, because they and their teams are just that much stronger. It doesn't mean they have to do on every single teams and literally leave 6-7 teams with nothing to race for.

I'm not advocating that every elite rider stops winning on their domain, but I do think a few stages every tour should be left for one of the lesser riders to win. Otherwise you leave them with nothing, and I don't like that. If you'd rather that those teams never had a chance, then fine. That's your preference. But not mine. And make no mistake - in a straight fight between the FDJ and Cofidis riders and the strong riders, the former have no chance.

 

[kjetilraknerud]

I don't have a problem with Cavendish or Contador. Cav wins the sprint stages, Contador wins the mountain stages and the GTs, that's their domain. For me, the 3-4 breaks each tour are the domain of the rest of the peloton who can't sprint or climb, and that's what I'd like to see remain.

Did Thor win because he was stronger? Of course. But you know what -- Even if he didn't win, he's still the stronger rider. He and Gilbert will always be stronger then whoever wins from the break. Frankly, most breakaways wont win because the rider was the strongest in the peloton, but because he was strongest in a group that the strong riders chose not to have chased down or (be in the break).

If Strong riders tried to win every stage, they would, because they and their teams are just that much stronger. It doesn't mean they should.

I'm not advocating that every elite rider stops winning on their domain, but I do think a few stages every tour should be left for one of the lesser riders to win. Otherwise you leave them with nothing, and I don't like that. If you'd rather that those teams never had a chance, then fine. But I don't. And make no mistake - in a straight fight between the FDJ and Cofidis riders and the strong riders, the former have no chance.

With all due respect, that is nonsense, but I won't waste any more time on this strange discussion.

 

[Frank Tuesday]

I don't have a problem with Cavendish or Contador. Cav wins the sprint stages, Contador wins the mountain stages and the GTs, that's their domain. For me, the 3-4 breaks each tour are the domain of the rest of the peloton who can't sprint or climb, and that's what I'd like to see remain.

Did Thor win because he was stronger? Of course. But you know what -- Even if he didn't win, he's still the stronger rider. He and Gilbert will always be stronger then whoever wins from the break. Frankly, most breakaways wont win because the rider was the strongest in the peloton, but because he was strongest in a group that the strong riders chose not to have chased down or (be in the break).

If Strong riders tried to win every stage, they would, because they and their teams are just that much stronger. It doesn't mean they have to do on every single teams and literally leave 6-7 teams with nothing to race for.

I'm not advocating that every elite rider stops winning on their domain, but I do think a few stages every tour should be left for one of the lesser riders to win. Otherwise you leave them with nothing, and I don't like that. If you'd rather that those teams never had a chance, then fine. That's your preference. But not mine. And make no mistake - in a straight fight between the FDJ and Cofidis riders and the strong riders, the former have no chance.

So it is OK for the climbers to win on stages that suit their abilities (mountains).
It is OK for the sprinters to win on stages that suit their abilities (flat).
It is not OK for the likes of Gilbert, Hushovd and Cancellara to win on stages that suit their abilities (intermediate).

Right.