Hindsight 20/20, where did Andy lose it?

[trevim]

I voted for Alpe d' Huez stage. Following and helping Contador was a tactical mistake.

At that point, Contador was no longer a threat, he didn't have to chase him down like that. His best option was to make his team control at distance and then try to take a few seconds from Evans in the Alpe instead of pacing the group for a part of the climb.

Even if Contador had got back 1min or so in the end it wouldn't have mattered.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

1,2,4,5...

Agree. I'd rate them in order, top to bottom as follows (top of list most important, bottom of list is least important IMO):

1) Too passive in the Pyrenees? Nothing tried, nothing gained. A missed opportunity for AS, who looked strong there.

4) The Alpe d'Huez stage? AS said he was not concerned about AC or Samu up the road, so didn't follow them. Andy, knowing he's not so strong in the ITT, should have been trying to shake Cadel every chance he got in the mountains. And if he had the legs on Alpe then he should have tried harder to drop Cadel.

5) The ITT? At first glance, this was the obvious choice to vote for IMO. Arguable so. He just can't TT well. And knowing that and the fact Cadel can TT well means he shoulda tried more in the mountains... e.g. the Pyrenees, which got my vote.

2) The descent into Gap? Everyone knows AS is not a good downhiller. It showed.

 

[US Patent Exploding Cyclist]

He lost the Tour because he never thought Evans was a real threat until it was too late.

The opportunities missed in the Pyrenees, and the Alpe d'Huez break with Contador, were the manifestation of that lack of consideration for Evans.

That and he can't TT for s**t.

 

[jobiwan]

Well...if he doesn't fall back on the Gap stage, then he doesn't get to do his Galibier ride.

And if he does more in the Pyrenees, then he doesn't get to do his Galibier ride.

I'd say he lost in the Pyrenees, but I am proud of Andy's tour.

He just simply wasn't good enough, and I don't think that's anything to be ashamed of.

 

[Lexman]

The Pyrenees for sure and the tactics in the team. They really should make a choice for one of the brothers at one point and ride for the chosen leader at a given point in a GT.

Leopard wasn't that strong IMO either, Gerdeman and Fuglsang were not those great helpers in the mountains.

 

[Swabian Lass]

I voted for the ITT, but Andy's big mistake was focusing on Contador as the enemy and forgetting Cadel.

 

[Winterfold]

He lost because he is not a sufficiently skilled and powerful bike rider to win a GT that is not massively biased in his favour.

He cannot TT or descend at the level required to legitimately be a winner of the Tour.

Cadel may not climb as well as AS but he can climb well and does everything else much better.

AS didnt lose - Cadel won

 

[jobiwan]

He lost because he is not a sufficiently skilled and powerful bike rider to win a GT that is not massively biased in his favour.

He cannot TT or descend at the level required to legitimately be a winner of the Tour.

Cadel may not climb as well as AS but he can climb well and does everything else much better.

AS didnt lose - Cadel won

Quoted for truth, Cadel was a worthy winner.

Had Andy held on today, he would have deserved it too, but he didn't.

Andy's gonna win one of these years, but he's gotta work for it.

 

[pedaling squares]

He didn't lose it, Cadel won it. He descent in the Gap was woeful but without it he still would've finished second. Maybe he didn't make the most of the Pyrenees but Evans looked just as strong there.

So I'm not voting. Evans was just too strong.

This. If Andy couldn't drop Cadel in week 3, he wasn't going to drop him in week one. Cadel was just far more aggressive, more consistent, and just plain better than in years past. And that TT, forget about it.

he lost it because he thought he only had 1 opponent

This too. He needed to treat Cadel as a serious threat right from stage 1.

He lost it last season when he left Riis to form his own team.

There is probably something to this. Riis is many things, among them a tactician and strategist.

AS wants to cross the line holding hands with his brother.

His best tour by far was when his brother crashed out. There is something to the threat of the two-headed monster, but I wonder if he would be better off with Frank totally in his service. The last thing Andy needs is to miss out on opportunities to gain time by worrying if Frank will get dropped.

AS is one of the most one dimensional riders in the peloton. He is a amazing climber but he can't descend, can't handle a bike well, can't sprint, can't TT. Thinking about it he isn't very good on short sharp hills either. Just big mountains.

Don't agree with this. His TT today was terrible only in that it was the stage where he lost the tour. I didn't predict Evans riding faster than Cancellara and almost as fast as Martin, and I didn't predict Andy taking time on Vande Valde, Millar, Leipheimer et al. A one-dimensional rider wouldn't have 4 second placements in GT's and an LBL title. One problem is that we inevitably compare him to Armstrong and Contador, who have won most of the last TDF's and who could do it all. Andy is still an unpolished gem to an extent, but his skill and accomplishments should be acknowledged.

 

[blutto]

He should have tested the other riders more in the Pyrenees. He should have forced the tempo and dropped the yellow jersey onto cadel and made him defend it. Andy is too concerned about Frank making it as well. If Frank would just ride as a super domestique instead of coleader Andy would win the tour.

...congrats on your analysis, because in retrospect that tactic ( helping put the yellow on Cadel's shoulders ) may, and I emphasize may, have done the trick...it would have worn down BMC and hence exposed Cadel...

...but this is 20/20 hindsight after-all and other factors mentioned in this thread could also be seen as contributors to the Scmucklette loss...the over-emphasis on AC....the lack of tactical nuance in their head-office...and a doltishness that seems fed by hubris...and of course that stellar TT performance...

...anyways, a great tour...the best man won and every day seemed to be a great story...

Cheers

blutto

 

[Cobblestones]

For me it seemed like one thing was leading to the next. He didn't manage to get anything out of the Pyrenees. Then, when he was gapped in Gap, he knew he had to do something extraordinary. With a little cushion from the Pyrenees, Gap wouldn't have mattered.

O.k. so he put in a super performance in stage 18.

I think it was also a mistake to ride how he did on stage 19. When Frank, Cadel and Voeckler dropped back to the main group, then it's all or nothing. Either you don't work at all, hoping that all comes back together and you don't expend energy, or you go all out to get time to everybody behind. His half-hearted approach didn't give him any time gains and probably drained him too much for the ITT.

And I wasn't aware that he didn't recon the ITT course. Big mistake. In particular when your closest opponent rode the same course just a month earlier.

Overall, I think he made the mistake to focus on Alberto as the only opponent. Also, the two-leader approach is never going to work. The Schlecks have to decide beforehand who's the leader and who's the domestique. No waffling around. They don't have to announce, but when the rubber hits the road (as I think happened in the Pyrenees), one brother can't hold back the other.

I think what the Schlecks should do is to ride in different races. Learn how to be the sole leader of a team and to win a stage race.


And of course Cuddles was better.

 

[veganrob]

He lost because he did not race to win. He should have tried taking time in the Pyrenees. He is so preoccupied with Alberto, but he hasn't learned a thing from AC's race tactics. Contador will make a break when nobody expects it and puts them all on the defensive.

 

[luckyboy]

He lost because he is not a sufficiently skilled and powerful bike rider to win a GT that is not massively biased in his favour.

It was more biased towards him than Cadel.

He ****ed up every mountain stage except Galibier. I bet the situation would've been different if he was still with Riis.


He will never win this race.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Agree with everyone that said Cadel won it. It really comes down to that, pure and simple. The better rider won.

Andy rode a great race. Leopard-Trek could have had better strategy on Luz Ardiden for sure, but he didn't ride that poorly there. Andy could TT better, but he did finish 17th in the final TT. He could descend better, but he really didn't lose that much time on the descents. Andy attacked in bold ways we had not seen in years on the queen stage and rode his heart out. He didn't lose this Tour, Cadel won it.

 

[Izzy eviel]

I think everyone lost it by thinking about Contador. Why work hard to beat him and risk losing, when you can race for 2nd and inherit the win a few months later?

Evans will win (touchwood) because he knew better.

 

[fixedgear]

Everybody mentions his missed chance in the Pyrenees, but maybe he just didn't have it? He even says that he is strongest in the final week. Also, AC dropped him on the climb before the descent in the stage to Gap.

If you look at his past tours, he yo-yos a bit from stage to stage. Last year he was good in one stage, but then lost time in another. Same with 2 years prior. It's possible that he is worried about his consistency and instead tries to save up his strength for 1-day attacks whereas AC and Cadel are strong enough to follow wheels on one day but ride people off their wheels the next depending on the circumstances. If next year has 2 ITT's, I doubt he can win.

 

[Anonymous]

He lost it because Cadel was just too strong and on top form. having said that maybe he could have attacked better in the Pyreness.

 

[3rdWheel]

Echoing what many have said, Cadel won it, he rode smart and strong. But I did vote 1 & 5 because with "1" Andy had bad tactics and "5" he needs to improve because I don't think he's going to get such a favorable course like this one, so mountainous and one TT, in the next few years. He'll probably face 2 TTs more often.

 

[klmorgan]

I voted ITT, not because of the time he lost, but the look he had on his face prior to going into the start house.

What really lost it for Andy, was between the ears. He throught that he was owed the win, focused on one rider (Contador), and worried about Frank and his position. The tunnel vision on the goal is great, BUT not looking around at the form of others, looking at the course, making the best of every opportunity, working on skills etc, is what lost it for him.

Change the mind and focus, work at the skills and we will see a multiple GT rider develop.

 

[AussieGoddess]

I'll add that since I've followed cycling (the 2000s) a lot of the winners, and the multiple winners, always take time on days when they're the strongest by attacking relentlessly. Contador is the perfect example of this and Andy lacks that philosophy.

I voted for Alpe d' Huez stage. Following and helping Contador was a tactical mistake.

At that point, Contador was no longer a threat, he didn't have to chase him down like that. His best option was to make his team control at distance and then try to take a few seconds from Evans in the Alpe instead of pacing the group for a part of the climb.

Even if Contador had got back 1min or so in the end it wouldn't have mattered.

By the time it got to the race at the bottom of Alpe d Huez
- Andy was 1 min ahead of Cadel, and Frank even
- They had a 2 on 1 tactical advantage
- Both the 2 are FAR stronger and better mountain climbers than Cadel will ever be

and they still did not manage to put a single second into Cadel. If they had ignored AC and 1-2'd Cadel all the way up, more than likely they would both have got time on him ..... and going into the TT needing 2 mins is a whole different mindset.

As it was, they chased AC .... leading Cadel up the mountain in a strong steady pace that Cadel likes, and then wondered why they couldnt get time at the end.

To win, you play to your own strengths, and use the other guys weakness.

Cadel did this to perfection. Andy and Frank were stupid.

 

[Mr. O'Clock]

It was a total failure that came from arrogance, overconfidence, and stupidity. He did not even recon the ITT. Without the crashes that took out the other contenders, Andy would have struggled to get on the podium.

Cadel rode a very strong race,with strong team backup. The only way you could fault Andy is if he did not train properly....he rode beautifully.

 

[biokemguy]

lacks the winner's instinct

in my bloated *opinion*, andy will never win a tour unless or until he develops the heart and mind of a champion.

this

I voted ITT, but it's more to do with that fact that Andy rarely wins any race of any kind. He doesn't have the killer instinct.

He's not a superior enough climber to make up for his other shortcomings.
If Andy would focus on a few week long stage races and actually win one, he *might* find out what it takes to win a GT.

The reason he lost is the reason many on the forum don't like him, he's all head and no heart. Even on the day everyone was praising his attacking style on the stage to Galibier, he said it was planned that way and he needs to have a plan.

 

[Anonymous]

"Lose it?" He never had it, that is why he didn't win. If by "it" you mean the physiological ability to win the tour this year.

 

[Christchurch]

Is there a possiblitiy that it is because Andy has had things happen too easily? He's a great hill climbing talent, but he has been praised to the hilt (people's champion blah blah). Has he believed the back slappers?

Conversely, Cadel has had to battle a lot more over the years and has developed his skills and mental fortitude over a greater period.

Another thought. Did Team Leapord over analyse their tactics? When things didn't seem to go exactly to plan, there was a great deal of head turning and muttering for other teams to help them to catch up. Was their single tactic too inflexible to be be fit for purpose in the real pressure cooker of the tour?

 

[fuggles]

I agree that he never "had it" to begin with. But besides the obvious (he needs to get a better TT, or vastly improve his climbing to compensate) he needs to develop a real desire to win.

What happened on stage 19 shows that. He followed Contador over the Telegraph and Galibier and down to the Alpe. At that point he should have committed and attacked up Alpe as fast as he could. But he didn't, he waited for Cadel to catch back on. Then he told Cadel to pull, even though Voeckler was coming on fast with teammates. He should have gone again there... what if Voeckler sucked wheel up to the summit again? Then they are halfway up the climb, and he starts telling Cadel to get out into the wind and pull, even though he's the one who needs the time going into the TT. As Cadel said afterwards, "It was bizarre".

I give him credit for his stage 18 attack. It was great to watch and very ballsy. But in the end it was a defensive maneuver. His back was against the wall and he was *forced* to do something.

But hey, this is all 20/20. I don't know for sure how I would react if I was in that situation.