Looking for the latest race results? - We got you covered right here!
cineteq said:He could've accomplished the same thing, and more, winning the stage.
Angliru said:....or he could have expended energy sharing pulls and then gotten dropped when one of his rivals attacked while he was on the front. Who is to say what he would have had anything left once the line was in sight should he have even made it that far without the attacking having begun? For Valverde Froome isn't his focus, Contador is. What is the point in gaining time on Froome if the rider ahead of you in the gc is gaining time on you? Many here curiously expecting Valverde to assist Contador in gaining time on Froome when he, Valverde is inferior to Contador in the climbs and itt, so the only way to gain time is with the bonus seconds he has been gaining.
Angliru said:If he were a "coward" he would've sat in, done no work and never attacked, only to jump the wheels he had followed and stolen valuable seconds at the line if he had the legs to do so. Since he didn't use the word "coward" in describing his fellow Spaniards choice of tactics, it shouldn't be applied to him I think what we have here is a lot of keyboard warriors who have no idea about how hard this sport actually is, likely too accustomed to the fantasy of PCM and confusing reality with the game itself.
Netserk said:Smart riding =/= Cowardice
Contador's biggest problem is that because of the impressive hammer he has, he sees every problem as a nail. The answer is almost always to attack/accelerate no matter what the problem is. Yesterday he did a lot of dumb attacks. That is Contador's fault, not Valverde's.
yespatterns said:Some of us would just hope he rode with cajones. Historically he's lacking.
Valverde was indeed an idiot attacking on a 20% incline when all you have to do on that kind of steep hills is trying to get up the climb as fast as possible, and not racing to death.BigMac said:He attacked yesterday. He was called an idiot. Give him a break. An attack would be suicide, riders are there to win the race. Not to please you and me, but the sponsors.
I get your point. I was thinking more long term. TBH I don't think Valverde won't podium, thus it was important for him to distance Froome too. Remember, he rode the Tour full gas.Angliru said:What you have is 3 riders with agendas that don't translate into assisting one another. Ideally for Purito and Contador they would've all worked like a cohesive unit and distanced Froome. That was not and shouldn't have been Valverde's priority.
cineteq said:I get your point. I was thinking more long term. TBH I don't think Valverde won't podium, thus it was important for him to distance Froome too. Remember, he rode the Tour full gas.
Afrank said:Valverde still could have sprinted ahead of Contador at the finish to take some extra seconds while at the same time helping with the pace earlier in the climb yesterday. Then he could have gained more time on Froome for future stages, just in case something like today happened.
But like I said before, I understand Valverde's reasons for not attacking or taking pulls yesterday. I think it would benefit him in the long run to help with the pulls a bit, but I don't have a real big problem with the tactics he employed. This is the Contador thread though, so probably should continue this discussion the the Valverde thread.
The fridge in the blue trees said:This is tiring: Why where the hyenas upset yesterday? Taking pulls=weakening yourself, Valverde+Purito saved energy instead of helping Contador: So weakening himself=he gains less time. He was right not to work yesterday, if it was for the GC win. Like Contador had no reason to work today, especially since Froome was more than happy to make the tempo. If Froome had started playing games... slow down, threaten to let the others back, then Contador would have had reason to ride, or attack earlier. Like this? He did what he had to do.
Afrank said:FYI, I consider calling posters hyenas a insult as well.
Purito did attack 3 times yesterday and came in same time as Valverde. Not saying Valverde should have gone on any full force attacks (he tried that already and lost time, 14 I think it was), but I don't think taking some pulls to help stretch the gap between them and Froome would have weakened him too much to the point he wouldn't be able to win the sprint for the line.
Was meant as an insult as well of course. The ones that had nothing better to do than insult Valverde yesterday are indeed themselves hyenas and cowards. Plus you told me to drop insults, doing my best.Afrank said:FYI, I consider calling posters hyenas a insult as well.
Afrank said:Purito did attack 3 times yesterday and came in same time as Valverde. Not saying Valverde should have gone on any full force attacks (he tried that already and lost time, 14 I think it was), but I don't think taking some pulls to help stretch the gap between them and Froome would have weakened him too much to the point he wouldn't be able to win the sprint for the line.
BigMac said:But he did take pulls, Afrank, you need to watch the finale again. In fact, if you take out Purito's attacks, Valverde was at the front more time. You will often see him ride at the front, though not for long, because there was no cooperation. And it was not his' fault, nor Purito's, nor Alberto's. I think that, looking at the situation each one of them found themselves, cooperation was impossible. There was a serious clash of interests there.
The fridge in the blue trees said:But how does it help him if he has more advantage to Froome?
Seen from before yesterday: To beat Contador the most likely scenario is: take the time back second by second. Time bonifications are one part, small gaps the other one. Froome there, not there, what changes? Not that much of course, but still small changes
Getting rid for good of Froome:
+On the positive side, if he manages to get Contador, Froome is further away too, less of a danger.
-Negative side: Less pressure from Froome, Contador can concentrate more on Valverde. For the win, some Froome pressure looks good to me. Have Contador in yesterdays position again, see if it gets to him psychologically, and have him make the choice, work to get rid of Froome or let him back.
And no, of course it wouldn't have weakened Valverde enough if he had taken some pulls. Like it wouldn't have weakened Contador if he had just ridden it alone, nobody asks him to ride at 100% for 5 km or whatever it was, assume a steady tempo and lose 12" instead of 11" yesterday. And gain some more time on Froome, because the start/stop thing of yesterday surely wasn't the fastest solution. But Contador never really looked like he was looking for cooperation either, he was looking to attack as well.... ok chicken-egg story kind of.
What reason does Valverde have to help? Contador in red, wants time on Froome, pretty obvious. Let him ride. Seems more interested in attacks. Let him try. There simply was no clear reason to ride for Valverde, so why should he (not saying he would ride if he had reason... see the TdF with Pinot) If he wants the GC win, having Contador under pressure, even if only psychological, the way the race developped yesterday seemed the better option than to help him get a bigger gap on Froome.
Now for second place of course he should have ridden yesterday. And a few days ago as well. And if Froome is back in his "dropped-back-dropped-back" modus on saturday, I expect Valverde to ride, now it's only about the second place after all. Yesterday the chance for the Vuelta were still there. (now too, you never know, but normally it's over)
When Froome attacked, there wasn't much cooperation behind: I pushed into the group from the beginning to not let the two go, but I always had to keep an eye on my side so Purito didn't attack, which was the thing he did all the time,
With Worlds and GdL still to go. He could threaten Gilbert's CQ record if he emulates his performances from last year.nobilis said:It's official! Valverde is having his best season ever, and it's not over yet (based on cqranking). 2772 points so far, his best season was in 2008 with 2662. Definitely a Nuclear Holocaust