97th Liège-Bastogne-Liège 2011

[Cobblestoned]

Andy Schleck.

I'd be surprised if the winner isn't Andy, Gilbert or Joaquim Rodriguez.

No one is going to beat Gilbert at the sprint in Luik by the way.

Enjoy it.

01.01.2012 comes closer very fast.
Then we will see the master himself and some great competition again, while I think that Vino will destroy yours boy as soon as Sunday.

 

[El Pistolero]

Enjoy it.

01.01.2012 comes closer very fast.
Then we will see the master himself and some great competition again, while I think that Vino will destroy yours boy as soon as Sunday.

Yeah, you can add Vino to my list as well. He didn't do good last year in AGR either I think.

But Bala verde's last real classic win was 2008, so I'm not buying into the Valverde is the numero uno stuff(he had a full classics season last year)

 

[dlwssonic]

For Leopard, if Andy is down, theres frank, if franks down there is fuglsang, if fuglsang is down there is montfort, if montfort is down theres wegmann, if wegmann is down than there is VOIGHT!

 

[hfer07]

What about Nibali for this?

he said he'd be delighted to win it at least once in his career-& now based on the current circumstances & coming out in shape from Trentino- I'd say he should be taken seriously by the competition...

 

[boomcie]

Yeah, you can add Vino to my list as well. He didn't do good last year in AGR either I think.

But Bala verde's last real classic win was 2008, so I'm not buying into the Valverde is the numero uno stuff(he had a full classics season last year)

To be fair, he has also been treated badly for a long time and that influences one's performance.
Valverde was totally innocent, but still people kept blaming him for some reason . This made him cry a lot in 2009 and 2010 and that made him perform below par.

Now he has a lot of spare time to be a cry-baby. In 2012 we will see a happy and strong Valverde once again.

 

[Frosty]

Looking at longshots, i'll go for Peter Velits.

 

[The Hitch]

Yeah, you can add Vino to my list as well. He didn't do good last year in AGR either I think.

But Bala verde's last real classic win was 2008, so I'm not buying into the Valverde is the numero uno stuff(he had a full classics season last year)

Pff. He won the Vuelta in 2009 mate. **** the classics. While Gili boy spends his whole life training and peaking for them, Valverde takes on the classics simply as something to do in between stage races and gts.

 

[El Pistolero]

Pff. He won the Vuelta in 2009 mate. **** the classics. While Gili boy spends his whole life training and peaking for them, Valverde takes on the classics simply as something to do in between stage races and gts.

Yeah, the Vuelta


Bravo? I guess.

No seriously, the Vuelta isn't worth focusing your season on. Even Contador can't be effed about the Vuelta.
And if you can't combine the spring classics with the Vuelta then you suck pretty hard. And I'm sure he rather wins the Vuelta a Murcia or the Vuelta a Burgos over a classic.

Who will be remembered the most? Paolo Bettini and Michele Bartoli? Or Roberto Heras?
F*ck the Vuelta is the only correct answer

I mean if he won the Tour you'd have a point. Or even the Giro. But he can't win those, so yeah.

Spring classics: April
Vuelta: September

^ Perfectly combinable.

The Vuelta is used as a mere preparation race for most people for the World championship. Just like the Dauphine is nothing more then a Tour prep race. Or Pais Vasco a prep race for the Ardennes. I haven't ever heard anyone say they'd rather win Pais Vasco than LBL. Perhaps someone from Pais Vasco yeah.

 

[Havetts]

Who will be remembered the most? Paolo Bettini and Michele Bartoli? Or Roberto Heras?

Personally I'd remember Heras.

F*ck the Vuelta is the only correct answer

Pff, f*ck the Vuelta? The one who wins this years Vuelta is a great climber..

 

[El Pistolero]

Personally I'd remember Heras.



Pff, f*ck the Vuelta? The one who wins this years Vuelta is a great climber..

Meh, it was a pretty weak field at the Vuelta. But yeah, Nibali is a great climber and he'll win more GTs without bad luck. And perhaps even a classic like Milano-San Remo one day(seems to take that one pretty serious).

 

[Lanark]

Not really a fair comparison. Bettini was probably the best classic rider of his time, now Heras wasn't a bad GC rider, but his Tour palmares shows he certainly wasn't the best. I find it hard to believe anyone will remeber Heras longer than Bettini (unless you're Spanish, or really don't care about anything besides Grand Tours)

I do agree with Pistolero that Valverde would have won more important races if he focused less on GC's, for someone as good as Valverde, you would have expected him to win more (not saying he hasn't won anything important of course, far from it ). He still has time of course, if he returns on a high level.

 

[El Pistolero]

Not really a fair comparison. Bettini was probably the best classic rider of his time, now Heras wasn't a bad GC rider, but his Tour palmares shows he certainly wasn't the best. I find it hard to believe anyone will remeber Heras longer than Bettini (unless you're Spanish, or really don't care about anything besides Grand Tours)

I do agree with Pistolero that Valverde would have won more important races if he focused less on GC's, for someone as good as Valverde, you would have expected him to win more (not saying he hasn't won anything important of course, far from it ). He still has time of course, if he returns on a high level.

It's a fair comparison because the same goes for Valverde in GTs. Roberto Heras worked for Armstrong in the peak of his career at the Tour, so he definitely was on par with Valverde as far as GTs go. Even better I would say. Will Valverde be remembered because he won the Vuelta once? Or for the great classic wins he has? ...

I just picked Heras because he's the record holder at the Vuelta, I think.

Ps: I'd rather win two stages at the Vuelta while wearing the leaders jersey instead of placing third or something without stage wins.

 

[jaylew]

No seriously, the Vuelta isn't worth focusing your season on. Even Contador can't be effed about the Vuelta.
And if you can't combine the spring classics with the Vuelta then you suck pretty hard. And I'm sure he rather wins the Vuelta a Murcia or the Vuelta a Burgos over a classic.

Who will be remembered the most? Paolo Bettini and Michele Bartoli? Or Roberto Heras?
F*ck the Vuelta is the only correct answer

The Vuelta is used as a mere preparation race for most people for the World championship. Just like the Dauphine is nothing more then a Tour prep race. Or Pais Vasco a prep race for the Ardennes. I haven't ever heard anyone say they'd rather win Pais Vasco than LBL. Perhaps someone from Pais Vasco yeah.

I'd take the Vuelta over Liège personally, though I guess Valverde doesn't have to.

 

[El Pistolero]

I'd take the Vuelta over Liège personally, though I guess Valverde doesn't have to.

Valverde takes Vuelta over Luik as well.

I wouldn't, but that's just my opinion. Looking at the list of who won it last 10 years and it just doesn't impress me as much as when I look at Luik.

 

[The Hitch]

Some great contributions there Pistolero

Yes the vuelta means nothing. Its the equivelant of the Dauphine

Gilberts Giro di Lombardia win (which everyone takes super seriouse) are gold but the Vuelta is just like the Dauphine.

Whats funnier is that your always saying that Gilbert wont care if he doesnt win the other monuments he just wants to win Liege a few times because hes a local.

But Valverde caring about his local race, pfff please. Like you said, just like the Dauphine. I must have imagined that it had 21 stages, that it has a huge presentation, that the best climbers in the world go for it. I must have imagined all those fans.

Its just a dream.

Whats funniest though is that you keep saying GDL is one of the biggest races ever (because Gilbert won it) and that it doesnt matter whether it has a good field or not, its a monument. But once again, double standards. the Vuelta was not won by Gilbert so it is therefore fair game for getting "weak fields" critiques, and its gt status means nada.

One should also point out that when Valverde did win the Vuelta he beat Samu Sanchez, Cadel Evans and Ivan Basso. Robert Gesink could only manage 5th. Not such a weak field is it?

Anyway, back to a real race - Liege, as the Vuelta is a nothing race equal to the Dauphine (actually worse because the Dauphine is prep for the Tour, while Vuelta is only prep for one race)

 

[El Pistolero]

You're just twisting words like usual.

No, Giro di Lombardia isn't bigger than the Vuelta. I never said that. I said Luik has a more impressive field than the Vuelta. Luik is bigger than Lombardia. That's another fact.

I never said Dauphine was the same as Vuelta. I said both races are used as preparation races while NO ONE will use Luik for a preparation race. The Vuelta is by far the weakest GT of the lot. That's just how things are. Valverde can only win the Vuelta and he usually stuffed that up as well. The way you're talking about Valverde, it sounds like he has won the Giro and the Tour multiple times. Heck, you even called Valverde a better cyclist than Contador! But now classics don't matter? Yeah right Talk about hypocrisy. Contador is 20 times ahead of Valverde in both one week stage races,GTs and time trials. But how can you explain Valverde being better then? Because of the classics? No they don't really matter to you. I mean he just does them to do something in between stage races... Lol.

Valverde in 2009 has beaten Cadel. WHO ALREADY DID THE TOUR AND HAD BAD LUCK. Gesink only managed fifth BECAUSE HE HAD A TERRIBLE crash. Ivan Basso WAS DOING HIS FIRST SEASON SINCE HIS BAN AND ALREADY DID THE GIRO.

And yes, Gilbert cares more for Luik than any other race because he's local. Like Valverde cares so much for the Vuelta. Both views are biased and they are neither right or false. It's an opinion.

But your constant whining in all the classics threads that the guy only won because Valverde wasn't there is getting quite annoying. It's a piti Valverde doped. It's a piti his natural abilities aren't good enough to compete with the best, but that's no one's problem but his. He's banned 2 years for a reason, remember that.

A little question: who's more famous? Vincenzo Nibali, a big GT guy ? Or Philippe Gilbert?

 

[Parrulo]

Some great contributions there Pistolero

Yes the vuelta means nothing. Its the equivelant of the Dauphine

Gilberts Giro di Lombardia win (which everyone takes super seriouse) are gold but the Vuelta is just like the Dauphine.

Whats funnier is that your always saying that Gilbert wont care if he doesnt win the other monuments he just wants to win Liege a few times because hes a local.

But Valverde caring about his local race, pfff please. Like you said, just like the Dauphine. I must have imagined that it had 21 stages, that it has a huge presentation, that the best climbers in the world go for it. I must have imagined all those fans.

Its just a dream.

Whats funniest though is that you keep saying GDL is one of the biggest races ever (because Gilbert won it) and that it doesnt matter whether it has a good field or not, its a monument. But once again, double standards. the Vuelta was not won by Gilbert so it is therefore fair game for getting "weak fields" critiques, and its gt status means nada.

One should also point out that when Valverde did win the Vuelta he beat Samu Sanchez, Cadel Evans and Ivan Basso. Robert Gesink could only manage 5th. Not such a weak field is it?

Anyway, back to a real race - Liege, as the Vuelta is a nothing race equal to the Dauphine (actually worse because the Dauphine is prep for the Tour, while Vuelta is only prep for one race)

i have to agree with the hitch. you are downplaying the vuelta massively

gilbert seems to have the edge over every1 but this is liege and to win it you can't be just the strongest, you also have to play your cards right (like vino last year) last year gilbert was the strongest and didn't win

Meh, it was a pretty weak field at the Vuelta. But yeah, Nibali is a great climber and he'll win more GTs without bad luck. And perhaps even a classic like Milano-San Remo one day(seems to take that one pretty serious).

you better hope D_T doesn't see that

 

[El Pistolero]

I'm not downplaying the Vuelta. You can perfectly combine the Vuelta with the spring classics. Something Hitch doesn't seem to understand.

Valverde only won the Vuelta because he wasn't allowed to ride the Giro and Tour anyway. He was way fresher than the rest of the competition.

 

[Flamin]

while NO ONE will use Luik for a preparation race.

Nibali does

 

[The Hitch]

You're just twisting words like usual.
But your constant whining in all the classics threads that the guy only won because Valverde wasn't there is getting quite annoying. It's a piti Valverde doped. It's a piti his natural abilities aren't good enough to compete with the best, but that's no one's problem but his. He's banned 2 years for a reason, remember that.

A little question: who's more famous? Vincenzo Nibali, a big GT guy ? Or Philippe Gilbert?

Whining? I said Valverde wasnt here while going through a list of why I didnt think people would challenge Gilbert. Statement of a fact.

And if you want to play the Valverde doping card (while all the while excusing the real Pistoleros doping on the basis that everyone does it), then we can get the Gilbert doping thread started up in the clinic. Its not like Phil "I started competing when I was 28 and suddenly started taking on Rebbelin, Cancellara Valverde etc" is clean or anything.

And Gilbert is the second biggest classics guy, Nibali is maybe one of the top 10 gt guys. Gilbert has several big classics wins and podiums, Nibali has challenged in 2 gts.. Id still say there quite similar in their fame actually. You want to make a comparison, then who is more famous - Vinczenzo Nibali or Nick Nuyens. Both have one win and one podium.

 

[El Pistolero]

This isn't the first time you were talking about Valverde in a classics thread, like in the AGR thread for example.

And if you've been following Gilbert for longer than 2009 then you'd know that what you're saying is total BS anyway. He usually attacked from way too far out in races like LBL thus never really got to compete with the very best. And he was riding for a pretty small team compared to Valverde's list of super domestiques. Gilbert was already a super talent back in the U23 category.

Come back when Piti does something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FgtgoO6Lsg

Oh wait, he's still denying.

The winner of 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2010 will be here this year. I fail to see how that is no competition. Only Di Luca has shown no form. Andy Schleck's win in 2009 was way more impressive than anything I've seen from Valverde. If that's no competition then I don't know what is. So yeah, he's not numer uno and he's not second either.

Ps: Gilbert is 28 years old. He broke through in 2006. He placed sixth at MSR at the age of 22. Davide Rebellin is also someone who peaked later in his career, so I don't know what you're trying to proof. Paolo Bettini wasn't much older than Gilbert when he broke through big time. And I never said everyone dopes by the way. That's just the average opinion in the clinic hence I almost never go there. Enough clinic talk however, just saying Valverde is banned for a reason. It's his own fault he isn't at LBL this year. Who ever wins LBL this year doesn't need to hear "Yeah, but you only won because Piti wasn't here". That's disrespectful. That's pretty much the only reason why I brought his dog into this discussion. I wasn't talking about Contador's dog. He's called Tour by the way.

 

[Kwibus]

I hope you guys enjoy yourself with the never ending discussions about which race is more important etc. Kinda useless.

Luik and the Vuelta can't be compared. Completely different. Valverde and Gilbert are both absolutely topnodge awesome riders.
There I fixed it for you guys.

 

[c&cfan]

I hope you guys enjoy yourself with the never ending discussions about which race is more important etc. Kinda useless.

Luik and the Vuelta can't be compared. Completely different. Valverde and Gilbert are both absolutely topnodge awesome riders.
There I fixed it for you guys.

like it or not, gilbert isnt.

to be trully awesome, you have to be a champion. to be a champion, you have to dominate TTs, or GTs, lots of stage races, or monuments, or worlds or lots of sprinting stages.

gilbert wins the smalest classics (some of them) and won the monument with the weakest field 2times.

he is by far the most overated rider because of his power in a few hills and because some guys (pistol) think that he is really young and has lots of years when he can retire first than valv or (especially) canc for example .

this victory for example, is clearly inferior in everything compared to valverde's one in the first stage of the tour some years ago.

gilbert palmares is really small compared to the true champions.

if you put gilbert's abilities in some sort of database, you may see that he is worse than valv in pretty much anything, even worse in mountains than cancellara, but has a better acceleration. and thats it.

no personal opinion in it, but facts.

for the race, since he is the only 100 %hilly classics specialist (where's the bettinis rebelin boogerds of this generation?weak.) there and the others have another goal left that has nothing to do with classics, he is the favourite and, unlike the true superman, he has a good team. however, lets see what happens. the shelecks dont have what it takes to be true champions, evans and valv arent there. also conti isnt there, i would like contador to win this one day. vino is off form.

who is there to challenge him?

 

[theyoungest]

like it or not, gilbert isnt.

to be trully awesome, you have to be a champion. to be a champion, you have to dominate TTs, or GTs, lots of stage races, or monuments, or worlds or lots of sprinting stages.

gilbert wins the smalest classics (some of them) and won the monument with the weakest field 2times.

he is by far the most overated rider because of his power in a few hills and because some guys (pistol) think that he is really young and has lots of years when he can retire first than valv or (especially) canc for example .

this victory for example, is clearly inferior in everything compared to valverde's one in the first stage of the tour some years ago.

gilbert palmares is really small compared to the true champions.

if you put gilbert's abilities in some sort of database, you may see that he is worse than valv in pretty much anything, even worse in mountains than cancellara, but has a better acceleration. and thats it.

no personal opinion in it, but facts.

for the race, since he is the only 100 %hilly classics specialist (where's the bettinis rebelin boogerds of this generation?weak.) there and the others have another goal left that has nothing to do with classics, he is the favourite and, unlike the true superman, he has a good team. however, lets see what happens. the shelecks dont have what it takes to be true champions, evans and valv arent there. also conti isnt there, i would like contador to win this one day. vino is off form.

who is there to challenge him?

What's this obsession you have with Gilbert not being a champion? He just p0wned the complete current Ardennes elite all by himself and still it's not enough.

 

[Parrulo]

What's this obsession you have with Gilbert not being a champion? He just p0wned the complete current Ardennes elite all by himself and still it's not enough.

my thoughts exactly. . . why do you think that?