Teams & Riders Alberto Contador Discussion Thread

[Netserk]

Saying that Froome was the strongest in Tirreno is bull****. Nibali won the race because he was better.

Nibali won and was the better racer, but clearly Froome was stronger. Duh.

Or are you always stronger if you finish in front of someone else in a race?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Nibali won and was the better racer, but clearly Froome was stronger. Duh.

Or are you always stronger if you finish in front of someone else in a race?

Talansky was clearly stronger than Contador in Dauphiné.

 

[Akuryo]

Nibali won and was the better racer, but clearly Froome was stronger. Duh.

Or are you always stronger if you finish in front of someone else in a race?

Gerrans must be super strong *cough*

 

[lebbegehtweider]

Hmm, Froome was better in the mountains and ITT and Nibali was better in that very hard hilly stage. And I think in that hilly stage you also needed to be strong. And Nibali won the race.

However, I`m not sure, but I assume that Froome didn`t give it all in that stage. If I remember it correct, it was raining, and thus it could be that he decided to avoid crashes, instead of fighting for the win (since he surely preferred ton win in France).

On the other hand it is not clear, whether Froome would have won the race if he really tried. Maybe Nibali was too strong, maybe not. We will never know.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Hmm, Froome was better in the mountains and ITT and Nibali was better in that very hard hilly stage. And I think in that hilly stage you also needed to be strong. And Nibali won the race.

However, I`m not sure, but I assume that Froome didn`t give it all in that stage. If I remember it correct, it was raining, and thus it could be that he decided to avoid crashes, instead of fighting for the win (since he surely preferred ton win in France).

On the other hand it is not clear, whether Froome would have won the race if he really tried. Maybe Nibali was too strong, maybe not. We will never know.

Froome lost the race because he was too much of a chicken in the rain, not because he wasn't the strongest.

 

[PirazziAttacksVino]

Nibali won and was the better racer, but clearly Froome was stronger. Duh.

Or are you always stronger if you finish in front of someone else in a race?

If by stronger you mean better in the mountains/ITTs then I totally agree with you.

But for me stronger means refers to all the terrains. I'm not saying that if you finish in front of someone you are stronger. Talansky was not the strongest in Dauphine, but won the race because of a tactical move and Contador's ****ty team. Contador was not the strongest in the Vuelta 2012, but won the race thanks to a brilliant tactical move. Costa was close to being dropped by Nibali and Valverde at one point, but won the 2013 WC because of the hate between the Spaniards and Nibali's big effort to try and reel in Purito.

Nibali won the race thanks to being way better than Froome in stage 6. And even if the weather was certainly a factor, Froome lost mainly because he was not able to cope with the short steep climbs and the fast descents.

Stronger in the mountains? Clearly. Stronger in the ITT? Yeah. Stronger overall? Nope.

 

[Netserk]

How does strength matter on descents?

 

[LaFlorecita]

How does strength matter on descents?

wet descents even

 

[Dr. Juice]

Once in every five years?!

Are you crazy? The Tour should have a decent amount of time trial every year. Maybe not 100 km on annual basis but way more often than once in every five years. Just look at the 2003 and 2007 Tours. They were both epic!

That there aren't more than 100 km ITT more than once in 5 years doesn't mean there shouldn't be a good portion of it.
65-85 km regularly is fine (mostly flat) .

 

[PirazziAttacksVino]

Did I say that strength matters on descents? I was refering to LaFlo's post, that Froome lost because he was a chicken. Which is not the main reason why he lost, as Nibali was way stronger on the climbs too. And there's where strength came into play.

 

[lebbegehtweider]

Froome lost the race because he was too much of a chicken in the rain, not because he wasn't the strongest.

Maybe. But do you really think the outcome would have been the same in the Tour de France? I agree that Nibali is better an such terrain, but Froome for sure thought, "ok its the f**** Tirreno-Adriatico, I don't risk too much". In the tour Froome would have lost less time for sure.

 

[lebbegehtweider]

2012 the route wasn't as bad, unbalanced as it's made out to be. The "problem" was: 1: Sky very strong. Not only Froome, but starting with Knees, then EBH, then Porte+Rogers too. 2: Wiggins too strong in the mountains. The expectation really was: Wiggins wins time in the TT, then loses to the climbers in the mountains... which didn't happen. He was the second best there too in the end. With Wiggins and Sky THAT strong, almost any parcours would have resulted in what it turned out to be, a pretty boring TdF.

I agree. The mainproblem was not the route but the strengh of Sky and Wiggins.

Not so sure about that. The SKY team was ridiculously strong that year and Wiggins probably takes 3-4 minutes in the time trials. And in the case that Wiggins looses to much, Froome takes over and wins anyway.

I assume that it would have been a close race between Wiggins and Contador. If you remember for example the Verbier stage 2009, where he gained 40 seconds on A. Schleck(!) and more than a minute on anyone else, it should be possible for him to gain enough time on the 4 relevant mountain stages 2012. And Froome wouldn't win for sure since he lost about 1:30 minuntes on stage 1 and Sky wouldn't allow him to take over at least before the alps are over. Thus he has to gain 3,5 minutes on the two Pyrenean stages, which should not be possible.

But whoever would have won, one thing is sure, it would have been much more close and interesting race.

 

[Rollthedice]

Maybe. But do you really think the outcome would have been the same in the Tour de France? I agree that Nibali is better an such terrain, but Froome for sure thought, "ok its the f**** Tirreno-Adriatico, I don't risk too much". In the tour Froome would have lost less time for sure.

I am sure that Froome was set to win TA just as he did in every race that year before the Tour and Nibali had the Giro in sight so if we go by that logic why risk. Anyway, Froome was definitely stronger than Nibali in 2013 as he was head and shoulders above all the GT field. In that Sant' Elpidio stage Nibs did a great move and won the race. If he wants to win against stronger guys he has to surprise them and risk. Same as he did in TdF stage to Arenberg. It was one of the few chances to put time in stronger guys like AC and the dawg. He took a big risk and it paid off. Could those 2:30 minutes won him the tour against AC? I don't have the answer.

 

[lebbegehtweider]

Of course Froome wanted to win TA. But I assume it was not such important for him that he wanted to risk crashes on difficult wet roads. (However he might have lost anyway, since Nibali was simply better in this stage.)
Nibali is a different type of rider. He has better bike handling skills, so that the risk of a crash is lower. Beside that he is an more agressive rider. And as you wrote he needs to ride this way in order to beat better guys (like AC and Froome in GTs, or better sprinters in the classics). Thus for me its not surprising when Nibali takes more risks especially in races like TA.
And btw moves like that one at TA or in the cobblestone stage (or AC in the Vuelta 13) are absolute highlights in my opinion. And it would have been real fun to watch the battle between Nibali and Contador.

 

[Walkman]

That there aren't more than 100 km ITT more than once in 5 years doesn't mean there shouldn't be a good portion of it.
65-85 km regularly is fine (mostly flat) .

Well, I can buy that! Seems we are actually in agreement here!

 

[contador977]

What an idiot he is, i like thought of Froome vs Contador in the Giro but i would like one to teach Nibali some manners. Hopefully one decides to do TDF, Vuelta. No one is winning the double next year and i would hate Nibali winning a 2nd TDF Trust me Nibali will not win the TDF. You really think he wins the jackpot again? Everything aligned for him this year, people forget Nibali got dropped on a 1.8km hill, they say oh he lost 2 seconds. How many times as Nibali looked in distress when Contador is dancing up the road? Froome the only climber who troubled Contador all season really in the Dauphinee, he should do the TDF.

Also in the Vuelta too. He dropped Contador at one point(even if some think he was playing poker with the 2 spainish riders, he didnt have the legs, imo) and Contador feared him even before he started showing threatening form in the mountains. Contador tried multiple times to drop Valverde and Rodriquez and had zero success. Interesting that when Froome took off, he dropped everyone in the first 30-50m instantly really, except Contador. I dont know how to explain this. That Contador could follow Froome who was dropping everyone, but when Contador was attacking them on his own, he could not shake them.

 

[Jspear]

Also in the Vuelta too. He dropped Contador at one point(even if some think he was playing poker with the 2 spainish riders, he didnt have the legs, imo) and Contador feared him even before he started showing threatening form in the mountains. Contador tried multiple times to drop Valverde and Rodriquez and had zero success. Interesting that when Froome took off, he dropped everyone in the first 30-50m instantly really, except Contador. I dont know how to explain this. That Contador could follow Froome who was dropping everyone, but when Contador was attacking them on his own, he could not shake them.

It works like this: you have the 3 amigos who continue to attack each other. That puts wear and tear on the body. When they are tired Chris Froome goes. Chris Froome (at certain times) was actually smart. He didn't go with all of their accelerations. He was patient and it helped him get 2nd. Of course when it counted AC was able to shake everyone off and win the overall.

 

[BlurryVII]

Contador tried multiple times to drop Valverde and Rodriquez and had zero success. Interesting that when Froome took off, he dropped everyone in the first 30-50m instantly really, except Contador. I dont know how to explain this. That Contador could follow Froome who was dropping everyone, but when Contador was attacking them on his own, he could not shake them.

The stage towards La Farrapona (stage 16) was the queen stage of the Vuelta, it was much harder than stage 15 (only lagos de covadonga, overrated climb), which means time differences were more likely to be created against Purito and especially Valverde.
Also, Contador was getting better as well, and looked very easy that day. He was by far the strongest and would have dropped both Purito and Valverde by himself.
But I think that, regardless of Froome's attack, Sky's exhausting pace from the penultimate climb was the deadly factor for Valverde and Purito.

Also in the Vuelta too. He dropped Contador at one point(even if some think he was playing poker with the 2 spainish riders, he didnt have the legs, imo) and Contador feared him even before he started showing threatening form in the mountains.

That was la Comperona summit finish. Valverde's big attack from the bottom killed both himself and Contador who made a huge effort to bridge the gap and then; overestimated his strength, and countered Valverde.
Meanwhile, Froome was just riding tranquilo at his own tempo behind and waited for the good moment to get the spanish trio wasting their energy at the front. It was more a great tactical move than anything else. Froome showed really good tactical sense in this Vuelta while he wasn't in good form, as he perfectly paced himself in some of the climbs .

But Contador wasn't concerned with Froome, if he was, he'd have stayed on his wheel and would have never been dropped.

 

[BlurryVII]

Also in the Vuelta too. He dropped Contador at one point(even if some think he was playing poker with the 2 spainish riders, he didnt have the legs, imo) and Contador feared him even before he started showing threatening form in the mountains.

But anyway, don't fool yourself, Contador was the strongest climber this year.

 

[contador977]

It works like this: you have the 3 amigos who continue to attack each other. That puts wear and tear on the body. When they are tired Chris Froome goes. Chris Froome (at certain times) was actually smart. He didn't go with all of their accelerations. He was patient and it helped him get 2nd. Of course when it counted AC was able to shake everyone off and win the overall.

I dont think that explains everything. Froome's attack's are more explosive than Contador's and harder to follow. Contador uses surprise tactics too, attacking from the back of a small group or a few riders back he goes. Froome attacks from the front, everyone knows he is going and he just rides u off his wheel easier than anyone else in pro cycling. With Contador's form being as good as it was 2014, Froome was a little stronger at the Dauphine, imo before he crashed. Contador was almost dropped in Stage 2, a bike or bike and half length was opening. Although Contador is my favourite rider, an in form 2013 Tour Froome would give any past Tour winner in the last 20 years , a large amount of trouble.

 

[ILovecycling]

I dont think that explains everything. Froome's attack's are more explosive than Contador's and harder to follow. Contador uses surprise tactics too, attacking from the back of a small group or a few riders back he goes. Froome attacks from the front, everyone knows he is going and he just rides u off his wheel easier than anyone else in pro cycling. With Contador's form being as good as it was, Froome was a little stronger at the Dauphine, imo before he crashed. Contador was almost dropped in Stage 2, a bike or bike and half length was opening. Although Contador is my favourite rider, an in form 2013 Tour Froome would give any past Tour winner in the last 20 years , a large amount of trouble.

nahh

Contador 2009,Armstrong 200?, Pantani 1998,Indurain 199? would beat him with ease

 

[Netserk]

I dont think that explains everything. Froome's attack's are more explosive than Contador's and harder to follow. Contador uses surprise tactics too, attacking from the back of a small group or a few riders back he goes. Froome attacks from the front, everyone knows he is going and he just rides u off his wheel easier than anyone else in pro cycling. With Contador's form being as good as it was 2014, Froome was a little stronger at the Dauphine, imo before he crashed. Contador was almost dropped in Stage 2, a bike or bike and half length was opening. Although Contador is my favourite rider, an in form 2013 Tour Froome would give any past Tour winner in the last 20 years , a large amount of trouble.

Ofc Froome was in better form in Dauphiné. Froome had ridden Romandie, Contador's last race was a month before that.

 

[Walkman]

Ofc Froome was in better form in Dauphiné. Froome had ridden Romandie, Contador's last race was a month before that.

You seems to think it's impossible to train yourself into good form…?

 

[Jspear]

I dont think that explains everything. Froome's attack's are more explosive than Contador's and harder to follow. Contador uses surprise tactics too, attacking from the back of a small group or a few riders back he goes. Froome attacks from the front, everyone knows he is going and he just rides u off his wheel easier than anyone else in pro cycling. With Contador's form being as good as it was 2014, Froome was a little stronger at the Dauphine, imo before he crashed. Contador was almost dropped in Stage 2, a bike or bike and half length was opening. Although Contador is my favourite rider, an in form 2013 Tour Froome would give any past Tour winner in the last 20 years , a large amount of trouble.

An in form Froome isn't anymore explosive than a in form AC. I think you only notice it more because it looks bad to the eye - the way he stays seated (for the most part) and all.

The bold: Almost doesn't count. He wasn't dropped. And there was never a bike and half's length between him and Froome. Of course he was putting AC on his limit but he couldn't shake AC.

 

[Red Rick]

There's a difference between doing accelerations and doing a 1 minute effort all over your limit. Contador is better at the former while Froome is probably better at the letter