The last time an attack succeeded in Paris was in 2005 with Vinokourov winning the stage. He attacked together with Bradley McGee with less than 3 kilometers to go, they worked well together and managed to stay clear.
Cancellara went after them with 1k to go and could secure himself the third place.
What were the reasons that these attacks could succeed?
I'd like to hear your thoughts but here are mine: The weather. It was raining which favours the attacker. Somehow the peloton was stretched out but at the same time the sprinters' teams had run out of power when the fun began. Lastly clinical reasons come into my mind which we cannot discuss here.
When were other times that the finale Tour stage was not decided in a bunch sprint?
Why does it happen so seldomly?
The real action only begins with 50k to go inside of Paris. As a result the sprinters teams are well rested in the finale. A break could go early but this is against the unwritten codex. It rarely rains in Paris and tommorow will be no different. The streets are wide and the corners fast.
How could it be achieved nonetheless?
With John Degenkolb as the third or thourth last man, Giant is hard to beat in the last 3 kms.
Instead a longer attack might have a better chance of succeeding. The group musn't be too small and needs enough horsepower.
Theoretically it may work like this: With 7 k to go OPQS comes to the front (too early for a pure leadout but they always do it) and line out the field. At the hairpin the last man of the train (probably Renshaw) intententiontally slows down and lets a gap. As soon as they are free it would be a team trial of 4-6 strong guys including Tony Martin against the peloton. However even without OPQS there are too many teams (Lotto, Giant, Katusha, Cannondale) who want a bunch sprint. And even more important is that probably OPQS will not even try and just do a classic leadout for Renshaw who will eventually finish between 4th and 6th.
I'm looking forward to hear your thoughts on the matter.
Cancellara went after them with 1k to go and could secure himself the third place.
What were the reasons that these attacks could succeed?
I'd like to hear your thoughts but here are mine: The weather. It was raining which favours the attacker. Somehow the peloton was stretched out but at the same time the sprinters' teams had run out of power when the fun began. Lastly clinical reasons come into my mind which we cannot discuss here.
When were other times that the finale Tour stage was not decided in a bunch sprint?
Why does it happen so seldomly?
The real action only begins with 50k to go inside of Paris. As a result the sprinters teams are well rested in the finale. A break could go early but this is against the unwritten codex. It rarely rains in Paris and tommorow will be no different. The streets are wide and the corners fast.
How could it be achieved nonetheless?
With John Degenkolb as the third or thourth last man, Giant is hard to beat in the last 3 kms.
Instead a longer attack might have a better chance of succeeding. The group musn't be too small and needs enough horsepower.
Theoretically it may work like this: With 7 k to go OPQS comes to the front (too early for a pure leadout but they always do it) and line out the field. At the hairpin the last man of the train (probably Renshaw) intententiontally slows down and lets a gap. As soon as they are free it would be a team trial of 4-6 strong guys including Tony Martin against the peloton. However even without OPQS there are too many teams (Lotto, Giant, Katusha, Cannondale) who want a bunch sprint. And even more important is that probably OPQS will not even try and just do a classic leadout for Renshaw who will eventually finish between 4th and 6th.
I'm looking forward to hear your thoughts on the matter.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram