Teams & Riders Alberto Contador Discussion Thread

[Katabatic]

Re: Re:

I see the usual attempts in this thread to derail discussion have started. As they tend to do when facts are brought to the table. Sad!

I think it has more to do with the lack of context around your comments. You dismiss his form, but don't note his crashes and/or Giro impact. You say he's looked below the level of the other competitors, but when folks point to his actual performance you dismiss them out of hand (see Porte's performance vis-à-vis Contador at Paris-Nice). No one says you have to like Contador or even provide full context with respect to your assessment of him or his potential performance. But you can't complain that folks are derailing the discussion simply because they push back against your jade-laced statements or provide fuller context.

Well the derailing of the conversation is more of a reference to the usual suspects posting pictures with seemingly no purpose, apart from to clog up the board. I'm happy to debate any of the points made.

I do acknowledge that Contador beat Porte at Paris-Nice. But only because he lost time on the flat stages (which certainly could happen again in the Tour). What I don't accept, is that the one result at P-N means that there has not been a big gulf between the level of the two riders this season. Porte has clearly been the better stage racer - even at P-N, by far his worst race, he won the queen stage impressively. Likewise, Valverde and Quintana have been a level above as well. And Froome is a separate case, having dominated the Tour for 5 years now. That's why Contador is 4th/5th favourite for me (and the bookies) - about level with Aru and slightly ahead of Bardet/Fuglsang.

The point you're making is honestly so unnecessary.

Has anyone in this thread said that Contador isn't the 4th/5th favorite? I don't see any of them claiming he should be the bookies favorite. They are optimistic that his form this year is better than before because they are fans. Just as a Froome fan will feel that he will still be strong at the tour despite the form he's displayed this year.

I'm not sure what point you're making other than fighting against mythical arguments about how he's the top favorite.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Does anyone know why Trek have the 30's as their bib numbers?

So, does anyone know?

No.

 

[rhubroma]

Re: Re:

That's an interesting viewpoint, and one I've seen before on these forums. One question mark I would have though, is that even if the plan is perfect and the execution spot on by Trek (which is quite a big if at this stage); is that still going to be enough to seriously challenge Froome, Quintana and Porte - who are also all trying to peak for the Tour (albeit in very different ways)? All three of those are looking to be better than they were in May/June; so Contador would not only have to close the gap that there has been all season, but then close the further gap to those three riders at their peak Tour form.

Getting away from Tinkov could help, but I'm not so sure I'd count on it. After all, the strongest Contador we've ever seen, in 2009, was hated by half of his own team and most were riding against him. I think like a lot of elite sportsmen he thrives as much in adversity as in a comfortable environment. Although I guess this could have changed as he got older.

Half of his 2009 team was the Buyneel-Armstrong brigade. You really should stop playing the passive troll and aren't clever enough to hoodwink anyone.

Please refrain from your troll accusations. Refusing to acknowledge that Contador is the best GT rider in the world, or that he is one of the favourites for the tour, is not trolling.

I know the 2009 team was Bruyneel-Armstrong. That's exactly why I mentioned it. His best ever form was in 2009, in a hostile environment, moe hostile even than it was at Tinkov, where at least most disagreements were kept in house. So I'm not sure the situation at Tinkov can really be used as a reason for poor performance.

Having said that, the legs will do the talking nothing more. If Contador's legs are excellent, they will do what needs to be done. It's up to Froome, Port and Quintana to resist him.

That's just a meaningless cliche. Ulitmately Contador is 20/1 to win; he's a big outsider - about the same odds as Fuglsang. A podium place would be a good achievement for him.

No you play the little passive aggressive game, which you portray as benign cirtique, then accuse others' reactions to your hostility as vitriolic character assualt. Frankly your assesments of AC's character and athletic stature are clear indications of attempts to manipulate those who feel otherwise, but don't expect the venom you inject to be taken as nectar.

I don't find validity in most of your cirtique, which is selective in accentuating negatives that get placed out of context with the intention to denegrate. And frankly the odds are meaningless, because in past years he simply hasn't been up to par. What counts are the legs now and over the next three weeks. No cliche, just blunt reality.

 

[Publicus]

Re: Re:

I see the usual attempts in this thread to derail discussion have started. As they tend to do when facts are brought to the table. Sad!

I think it has more to do with the lack of context around your comments. You dismiss his form, but don't note his crashes and/or Giro impact. You say he's looked below the level of the other competitors, but when folks point to his actual performance you dismiss them out of hand (see Porte's performance vis-à-vis Contador at Paris-Nice). No one says you have to like Contador or even provide full context with respect to your assessment of him or his potential performance. But you can't complain that folks are derailing the discussion simply because they push back against your jade-laced statements or provide fuller context.

Well the derailing of the conversation is more of a reference to the usual suspects posting pictures with seemingly no purpose, apart from to clog up the board. I'm happy to debate any of the points made.

I do acknowledge that Contador beat Porte at Paris-Nice. But only because he lost time on the flat stages (which certainly could happen again in the Tour). What I don't accept, is that the one result at P-N means that there has not been a big gulf between the level of the two riders this season. Porte has clearly been the better stage racer - even at P-N, by far his worst race, he won the queen stage impressively. Likewise, Valverde and Quintana have been a level above as well. And Froome is a separate case, having dominated the Tour for 5 years now. That's why Contador is 4th/5th favourite for me (and the bookies) - about level with Aru and slightly ahead of Bardet/Fuglsang.

So you provide context for Porte's losses, but not Contador's? Also, outside of the Dauphine, who has Porte actually beaten this year? Chavez (tour down under), Simon Yates and Froome (Romandie). He's had some great climbing performances for sure, but for example, Contador stayed with Henao on that great Queen Stage. On Stage 8, given Porte's superior climbing and overall status, why didn't he go with Contador? It's all academic at this point, but my point is it isn't as cut and dry as you make it out to be IMO.

Contador hasn't raced against Quintana as far as I can see this year, so not really able to compare apples to apples (the fact that he couldn't dispatch Tom D at the Giro gives me cause to doubt he's at a significantly higher level than Contador). Valverde has certainly been on a tear--probably the best run of his career and that's saying something for a 37 year old. I'm not sold on Froome this year. He's going to have to show that he still has it, because he's not done that all year (notwithstanding his prior TdF wins).

As for the betting odds, I think there are a lot of folks that have written Contador off. Inner Ring has him 9th I believe. He's long in the tooth. Over the hill (never mind a resurgent Valverde at the tender age of 37). It all lacks context over the events that have colored his TdF results. That's why I want him to stay up right. No crashes. He looks bang on form (and physically strong). If the best he does is 4th or 5th, then I think everyone could live with that.

Ok rants over. I've got to work for a bit

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Why even bother

Just looking to discuss the chances of one of the most interesting and high profile riders in the peloton, the day before the start of the biggest race of the season. On a cycling forum. Why bother indeed.

You believe he should be happy with a 5th place, others believe he can win this thing and only a podium would be a somewhat acceptable result. We've had this discussion at least a dozen times, can't we just accept we're not ever going to agree? I for one got bored of this discussion many months ago and if you're so bothered by what other people post in here, I'm not sure why you don't just let it go. No one is ever going to convince the other party in this discussion.

 

[Jspear]

Re:

So in all seriousness, what GC placing should he be satisfied with? I think a podium spot would make the Tour a succes. And I think he has a chance of doing it, but I think that he will ruin it for him self. Not that I would mind that though, as it would mean entertaining racing.

For me. In all seriousness, a podium is what he should expect. A stage win might be doable, but he'd have to be the strongest. He won't sneak away.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Are we really citing bookie odds? Really? Haven't we learned anything?

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I see the usual attempts in this thread to derail discussion have started. As they tend to do when facts are brought to the table. Sad!

I think it has more to do with the lack of context around your comments. You dismiss his form, but don't note his crashes and/or Giro impact. You say he's looked below the level of the other competitors, but when folks point to his actual performance you dismiss them out of hand (see Porte's performance vis-à-vis Contador at Paris-Nice). No one says you have to like Contador or even provide full context with respect to your assessment of him or his potential performance. But you can't complain that folks are derailing the discussion simply because they push back against your jade-laced statements or provide fuller context.

Well the derailing of the conversation is more of a reference to the usual suspects posting pictures with seemingly no purpose, apart from to clog up the board. I'm happy to debate any of the points made.

I do acknowledge that Contador beat Porte at Paris-Nice. But only because he lost time on the flat stages (which certainly could happen again in the Tour). What I don't accept, is that the one result at P-N means that there has not been a big gulf between the level of the two riders this season. Porte has clearly been the better stage racer - even at P-N, by far his worst race, he won the queen stage impressively. Likewise, Valverde and Quintana have been a level above as well. And Froome is a separate case, having dominated the Tour for 5 years now. That's why Contador is 4th/5th favourite for me (and the bookies) - about level with Aru and slightly ahead of Bardet/Fuglsang.

The point you're making is honestly so unnecessary.

Has anyone in this thread said that Contador isn't the 4th/5th favorite? I don't see any of them claiming he should be the bookies favorite. They are optimistic that his form this year is better than before because they are fans. Just as a Froome fan will feel that he will still be strong at the tour despite the form he's displayed this year.

I'm not sure what point you're making other than fighting against mythical arguments about how he's the top favorite.

I think you need to do a bit more reading around the forum. People have said that only a win would be a good result for Contador. My counter is that any podium position would be a good result, while 4th or 5th place would be about par and a reasonable result. If you feel the same, then we are in agreement.

Fans can dream all they like; I don't want to stop anyone from dreaming. But this isn't a fans only thread, so it's fair game to discuss counter arguments as well. Such as the fact that he hasn't won a WT race, or even a stage in well over a year. And hasn't challenged for the win at the Tour in six years - over half his career.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

So in all seriousness, what GC placing should he be satisfied with? I think a podium spot would make the Tour a succes. And I think he has a chance of doing it, but I think that he will ruin it for him self. Not that I would mind that though, as it would mean entertaining racing.

A podium would be an acceptable result because it is more or less what we can expect but he shouldn't be satisfied with it. He's coming to win so anything less than 1st should be disappointing for him.
But if he has a clean run and falls short he can be satisfied about one thing, at least he'll know the Tour is beyond his reach and he can stop being obsessed.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Fans can dream all they like; I don't want to stop anyone from dreaming. But this isn't a fans only thread, so it's fair game to discuss counter arguments as well. Such as the fact that he hasn't won a WT race, or even a stage in well over a year. And hasn't challenged for the win at the Tour in six years - over half his career.

& also he has not had a result outside of the top 5 in WT races he targetted for many years. So a 4th or 5th would not be on par for him, it is the least we can expect (besides a crash).

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Why even bother

Just looking to discuss the chances of one of the most interesting and high profile riders in the peloton, the day before the start of the biggest race of the season. On a cycling forum. Why bother indeed.

You believe he should be happy with a 5th place, others believe he can win this thing and only a podium would be a somewhat acceptable result. We've had this discussion at least a dozen times, can't we just accept we're not ever going to agree? I for one got bored of this discussion many months ago and if you're so bothered by what other people post in here, I'm not sure why you don't just let it go. No one is ever going to convince the other party in this discussion.

Well, I was referenced in the thread a couple of pages back, so just came to flesh out my opinion. Btw, I don't think he should be happy with 5th place. I think that would reflect par form, so would be an expected result. Of course, every rider apart from Froome would probably only be happy with something better than their expected result. So a podium would be the realistic aim I think for Contador.

Are we really citing bookie odds? Really? Haven't we learned anything?

I don't get it? Aren't bookies odds right more often than they are wrong? How many times in the last 50 years has the pre-race favourite not won the Tour? It must be less than half. Of course, odds aren't infallible, but they're a useful data point for a discussion.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Fans can dream all they like; I don't want to stop anyone from dreaming. But this isn't a fans only thread, so it's fair game to discuss counter arguments as well. Such as the fact that he hasn't won a WT race, or even a stage in well over a year. And hasn't challenged for the win at the Tour in six years - over half his career.

& also he has not had a result outside of the top 5 in WT races he targetted for many years. So a 4th or 5th would not be on par for him, it is the least we can expect (besides a crash).

Well, that's one way of looking at it. Alternatively, he'd have to finish ahead of at least four of Froome, Quintana, Porte, Bardet, Aru and Valverde to finish above 4th. What has he done in the last year to suggest that is possible?

 

[Publicus]

Re: Re:

So in all seriousness, what GC placing should he be satisfied with? I think a podium spot would make the Tour a succes. And I think he has a chance of doing it, but I think that he will ruin it for him self. Not that I would mind that though, as it would mean entertaining racing.

For me. In all seriousness, a podium is what he should expect. A stage win might be doable, but he'd have to be the strongest. He won't sneak away.

Podium is definitely possible. We'll have to see how Quintana is coming out of the Giro and whether Valverde can sustain his 2017 performance--he's frankly the darkhorse to me with so many downhill/non-MTF finishes. If he's there in the last kilometer it could be the difference.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Fans can dream all they like; I don't want to stop anyone from dreaming. But this isn't a fans only thread, so it's fair game to discuss counter arguments as well. Such as the fact that he hasn't won a WT race, or even a stage in well over a year. And hasn't challenged for the win at the Tour in six years - over half his career.

& also he has not had a result outside of the top 5 in WT races he targetted for many years. So a 4th or 5th would not be on par for him, it is the least we can expect (besides a crash).

Well, that's one way of looking at it. Alternatively, he'd have to finish ahead of at least four of Froome, Quintana, Porte, Bardet, Aru and Valverde to finish above 4th. What has he done in the last year to suggest that is possible?

Oh i don't know, just finished 2nd in 3 big WT stage races.

 

[Katabatic]

Re: Re:

I think you need to do a bit more reading around the forum. People have said that only a win would be a good result for Contador. My counter is that any podium position would be a good result, while 4th or 5th place would be about par and a reasonable result. If you feel the same, then we are in agreement.

Fans can dream all they like; I don't want to stop anyone from dreaming. But this isn't a fans only thread, so it's fair game to discuss counter arguments as well. Such as the fact that he hasn't won a WT race, or even a stage in well over a year. And hasn't challenged for the win at the Tour in six years - over half his career.

I've read just about every post in the last 100 or so pages of this thread.

With a rider of Contador's palmares, adding a 3rd place at this year's tour would not change much about how Contador is perceived as a rider. Sure, it would be a 'good' result, but it's ultimately pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of his career, and even a detractor would be quick to recognize this. Twenty years from now, no one is going to remember that Contador got a 3rd place at the 2017 tour.

The reason people are jumping on you about it is because you feel the need to make a comment and then defend it endlessly because you feel like you alone have the longest view in the room. Yes, Contador hasn't won anything in a while. He's perpetually the bridesmaid. Which, frankly, if he can do that over three weeks, he just might pull it off.

By the same logic, I hope you're in Porte's thread constantly fighting with posters about how a podium for Porte would be a good result since he's never podiumed in a GT. Or in Aru's thread claiming he would be lucky to finish 5th or 6th since he's never finished ahead of Contador in a GT (by extension, since you suggest Contador should finish 4th-5th). Or Froome's thread saying he has no chance to win the Tour because his placings the last 5 years have all mirrored his placing at the Dauphine. These are all historically valid points, no?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

I don't get it? Aren't bookies odds right more often than they are wrong? How many times in the last 50 years has the pre-race favourite not won the Tour? It must be less than half. Of course, odds aren't infallible, but they're a useful data point for a discussion.

Anyone can pick the big favorite before a race. The quoted odds (20 to 1) are completely subjective and based on very little facts. What are the chances Contador wins? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? I wouldn't dare to put a number on it. I wouldn't be able to give you an accurate percentage for Froome or Porte either because simply we have no idea what their respective shape will be like and how the race will play out. It's at best a guess.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I think you need to do a bit more reading around the forum. People have said that only a win would be a good result for Contador. My counter is that any podium position would be a good result, while 4th or 5th place would be about par and a reasonable result. If you feel the same, then we are in agreement.

Fans can dream all they like; I don't want to stop anyone from dreaming. But this isn't a fans only thread, so it's fair game to discuss counter arguments as well. Such as the fact that he hasn't won a WT race, or even a stage in well over a year. And hasn't challenged for the win at the Tour in six years - over half his career.

I've read just about every post in the last 100 or so pages of this thread.

By the same logic, I hope you're in Porte's thread constantly fighting with posters about how a podium for Porte would be a good result since he's never podiumed in a GT. Or in Aru's thread claiming he would be lucky to finish 5th or 6th since he's never finished ahead of Contador in a GT (by extension, since you suggest Contador should finish 4th-5th). Or Froome's thread saying he has no chance to win the Tour because his placings the last 5 years have all mirrored his placing at the Dauphine. These are all historically valid points, no?

Why should I? Is it a rule of the forum now that you have to give an opinion on every rider? Besides, I kind of agree with the consensus on the chances of pretty much every other rider. It's just with Contador that the opinions of others seems so distant to the facts, at least as I see it.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

I don't get it? Aren't bookies odds right more often than they are wrong? How many times in the last 50 years has the pre-race favourite not won the Tour? It must be less than half. Of course, odds aren't infallible, but they're a useful data point for a discussion.

Anyone can pick the big favorite before a race. The quoted odds (20 to 1) are completely subjective and based on very little facts. What are the chances Contador wins? 1%? 5%? 10%? 20%? I wouldn't dare to put a number on it. I wouldn't be able to give you an accurate percentage for Froome or Porte either because simply we have no idea what their respective shape will be like and how the race will play out. It's at best a guess.

Well obviously it's a guess; or at least an estimation of probability. But at least it is one backed by data and research, and weight of public opinion. So it certainly has some provenance.

I think it's as good a reference as anything for assessing what would be a good result for any particular rider.

 

[Katabatic]

Re: Re:

Why should I? Is it a rule of the forum now that you have to give an opinion on every rider? Besides, I kind of agree with the consensus on the chances of pretty much every other rider. It's just with Contador that the opinions of others seems so distant to the facts, at least as I see it.

Then you're showing the bias that you accuse other people of having. All of those points are equally valid as the ones you're bringing up. Which is fine in isolation. But you feeling the need to 'correct' people when you also have a biased opinion is pretty funny. :lol:

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Why should I? Is it a rule of the forum now that you have to give an opinion on every rider? Besides, I kind of agree with the consensus on the chances of pretty much every other rider. It's just with Contador that the opinions of others seems so distant to the facts, at least as I see it.

Then you're showing the bias that you accuse other people of having. All of those points are equally valid as the ones you're bringing up. Which is fine in isolation. But you feeling the need to 'correct' people when you also have a biased opinion is pretty funny. :lol:

I'm not trying to correct anyone, just have a reasonable discussion with the many good posters who are on these forums. Unfortunately, some fanboys/fangirls immediately get hostile with any perceived criticism of their favourite rider and attack the poster rather than the post, or try to derail conversation. Which is disappointing.

Of course my opinion is subjective, just like anyone elses. I try to support it with facts where possible, but am always open to any new evidence or arguments. On this point, I'm yet to read anything convincing though.

 

[Katabatic]

Re: Re:

I'm not trying to correct anyone, just have a reasonable discussion with the many good posters who are on these forums. Unfortunately, some fanboys/fangirls immediately get hostile with any perceived criticism of their favourite rider and attack the poster rather than the post, or try to derail conversation. Which is disappointing.

Of course my opinion is subjective, just like anyone elses. I try to support it with facts where possible, but am always open to any new evidence or arguments. On this point, I'm yet to read anything convincing though.

I'm pretty sure the "fanboys" (which is such a dismissive term that it's essentially an ad hominem intended to artificially strengthen your argument) know that Contador hasn't won a bunch of races in the last year. They're saying that you can't ignore all the 2nds. And nothing about Contador's form suggests he fell off a cliff.

That's not an entirely invalid point of view.

You disagree with their position. But then you make a bunch of snide remarks about how they "derail conversation" (how so? did they suddenly start talking about Cornish weather patterns? Andalusian goats? What?) just because they don't fall in line with your point of view.

Here's the actual facts. Going by historical precedence only takes you so far. Would it surprise anyone if Contador fails to podium? No, he hasn't done so in years. Does that mean there's zero chance of Contador having a really good race and winning? Of course not. The disparity in opinions is exactly why we all follow sport. Some people choose to be hopeful and others do not.

The "new evidence" has largely been exhausted, and the only thing new that could happen now are the very things you accuse of "derailing conversation", such as pictures and video of Contador looking fat/lean or training videos and statements. The irony is that it's always the people who accuse others of talking nonsense or derailing conversation that end up making the subject of conversation all about themselves.

 

[Publicus]

Well he's invoked the mythical 2014 Form. Let's see if he's just blowing smoke or if it's enough to win.

Contador went as far to say that he believes he is as strong as he was in 2014, when he claimed to be stronger than ever – before crashing and breaking his leg at the end of the first week.

“We have to get to the start of the race, but I think that I am in similar shape,” he explained. When asked to elaborate, he said: “In the number of watts I can do, my times, and weight, basically in all respects.”

 

[LaFlorecita]

Oh dear. I'd be more confident if he was more cautious

 

[Publicus]

Re:

Oh dear. I'd be more confident if he was more cautious

He's cautiously confident

 

[Red Rick]

The reasonable man in me is cautiously optimistic.

The mouthbreathing hooligan in me is all aboard the hypetrain.

So ofcourse the only question remaining is how many stages he'll gift.