• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Le Tour '19 Stage 20: Albertville > Val Thorens 59km

Page 15 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Buchmann was the one that took the initiative on the Tourmalet once Thomas was dropped and the other favorites looked at each other. Took turns with Bernal on Sunday. He again took responsibility yesterday, when Mühlberger shut down Thomas attack, so Kruijswijk placed his counter-attack that slightly gapped G and Bernal jumped away!

Buchmann certainly has taken enough action this Tour to forgive him today's conservatism!

Normally a guy that finishes like 7th, Buchmann now is 4th and has influenced who won the race overall!
 
RattaKuningas said:
mb2612 said:
TomLPC said:
BullsFan22 said:
German TV celebrating Buchmann. The guy just sat in the group all day today, tried a little dig for a few seconds, and that was the highlight of his tour. They are celebrating him as if he just won the tour. I get the need to hype the leading German rider who finished 4th, but c'mon, he didn't do anything significant during this tour.
Can forgive him a bit because he's at the pointy end of a GT for the first time but yeah, the most anonymous 4th place I can remember.
It's really weird how, for a great tour, the top 15 has so many anonymous riders, being harsh, only 4 of them have really done anything beyond follow wheels
I don't see anything wrong in following wheels. If you are clearly not the strongest rider in the peloton what are you supposed to do. By attacking you don't achieve anything and it probably results in getting dropped earlier. I am more than a sure that if a rider feels 110% on a day and clearly sees that he is stronger than is rivals, then he is for sure going to attack.
It's not a problem on an individual level, and we got good racing without those guys attacking, so it wasn't even a problem on a macro level.

Just, I think the supporting cast added nothing to the race this year, in a way which stands out compared to the past few years, and despite the race being much more open than before.

Also the mountains jersey was the weakest race since before they changed the rules in 2010.
 
Great ride by Nibali but a big failure by MoviStar - Get Soler to ride tempo for the last 4 kms instead of him attacking and then you bring Valverde close enough with 1 km to go - It was a Mcfail moment.
 
May 20, 2016
954
0
0
Re:

Broccolidwarf said:
Kruijswijk & Buchmann:

COWARDS
I don't think so. They finished behind Bernal and Thomas today who didn't even really attack. They simply weren't strong enough to beat Bernal and Thomas. What are they supposed to do?
 
Classy win by Nibali. SK gets his podium but never really threatened for the win. Alaphilippe collapse was inevitable but without him the race would have been much duller. Porte collapsed on the final stage but at least he finished, Not a good year for him at all. Movistar did their usual thing, attacking too late, attacking then stopping, chasing each other.......the three leader thing that never seemed to work for them in the Tour worked smoothly in the Giro. Go figure. What a year for South American cycling especially if Lopez can win the Vuelta !
 
Oh boy, all those people who think riders are being cowards if they don't attack the favourites on the mountain stages. Just so lame.

Too many believe cycling is about "will". No, you guys, it's about what your body can do. The rest is secondary.
 
Re:

Libertine Seguros said:
It's a shame that the race ended anticlimactically, which may dampen some people's enthusiasm for what has been one of the most open Tours in years (and also, the fact that the widely unpopular Ineos team did a 1-2 after everything that came before will leave a sour taste in many people's mouths), but it couldn't be helped - this was a lot like the Monte Zoncolan stage of the 2014 Giro or Mont Vonteux in the 2009 Tour; the best climber among the heads of state group already had the jersey (I hesitate to say in the race, because for most of the race I believe Pinot was the best climber, but obviously he is no longer in the race, and Bernal's performances in the last three days had shown him to be the best of those that remained - just a real shame Pinot wasn't there because even had he not gone with Bernal yesterday, I'd have doubted he'd have not made it into the Thomas/Kruijswijk group, so he would have been duking out the podium and might have made things more aggressive, but shoulda woulda coulda, and while he may have led to a more exciting stage today, I sincerely doubt he'd have made a dent in Bernal's lead, so it would have come down to Thomas, who looked far more comfortable in the Alps than he did in the Pyrenees), and so none of the others had the belief they could take the time required, amongst any who may or may not have had the legs - and clearly most of them didn't as we saw moves made from a few different tertiary contenders who weren't able to really go anywhere. Alaphilippe dropping so early also rather sounded the death knell for an exciting stage, because whether or not he could hold on was one of the main pre-stage narratives; his dropping so early, but there being such a big gap from Buchmann in 5th to Landa in 6th on the GC so that Landa didn't feel incentivized to attack earlier (or if he did, didn't have the legs to despite Movistar trying to set things up with Oliveira and Soler) hurt things.

Of course, there will always be a huge quantity of "what ifs" around a Grand Tour; it's three weeks of racing, and while that does give maximum opportunity to even out the bad luck (as opposed to a one-day race, where a single puncture or being caught behind a split ruins the entire race), there will probably be more "what ifs" attached to this Tour than most of the last few years' TDFs, because of its open nature.

What if stage 19 had been run to its conclusion? What if Roseland was passable and we got a fuller final stage - would Alaphilippe have dropped earlier, would the pace have been lower? Would Movistar have tried something creative again? What if Pinot had been fit to ride on through stages 19 and 20? What if Landa hadn't been knocked over in stage 10 and lost 2 minutes? What if the crosswind split hadn't happened at all? What if Ineos had instructed to stick to Thomas as plan A today (probably a moot point as Poels was still there, of course)? What if Wout van Aert hadn't crashed in the ITT? What if Simon Yates had withdrawn from the Giro early and targeted this race, seeing as he mistimed his form so badly in Italy and proved one of the best climbers in the Tour? What if Quintana had told the team he wasn't up to it earlier on the Tourmalet stage? What if they'd annulled the stage 19 time gaps and cancelled it entirely (possibly a moot point as Alaphilippe obviously cracked early today)?

While you can say that it's silly to run through all these hypotheticals, the thing is: the more unanswered questions and hypotheticals there are within a race like that, the better. It creates longer-running narratives. We never saw Pinot and Bernal go at it in peak form - one was strongest in the Pyrenees, one was strongest in the Alps. It's something to be enthused by for future editions. Alaphilippe turned into a GT rider - is he a Voeckler-like flash in the pan story, or might he be able to become a GC rider 'for real' - especially at a race like the Vuelta which has lots of climbs that are more suited to his style? A good competition that leaves unanswered questions is good for the sport because it will draw the audience back for more. All too often in recent years, we've come out of the Tour without such questions, because victory has been emphatic. Here, the right man may have won, assuming Bernal makes it to the line on the Champs Elysées (the strongest man to complete the whole race), but the situation around the race, both things within it and external to it, means that there is intrigue when these guys line up against each other again.
This will be another 2014-edition in terms of what ifs and look at how much that race has been spoken about up to this day. 2014 had two major ones, but this one seems to take it to new levels quantity-wise. So many unanswered question - to your list we can also add Froome, Dumoulin and even Roglic.

Just wish we had a nice ending today. Sure, Nibali is a great name, but I always hope that its decided between the best.

Movistar really animated this race, but was never in a winning position. Landa proved to be the strongest on some days, Quintana others and even Valverde today. Soler and Amador was incredible thought the race, but unfortunately they were too far behind after the ITT and then the Quintana debacle at the Tourmalet.They proved to be great for the race, but nothing more than that in terms of fighting for the overall and even podium.

Then you have FDJ, the Gaudu-Pinot pairing looks great which we only saw on a few occasions. Pinot has the level to win TdF, but can Gaudu evolve into a world class climber, really putting the hammer down on hard mountains and shredding the peloton down to 5-10 men?
 
BullsFan22 said:
Scarponi said:
BullsFan22 said:
German TV celebrating Buchmann. The guy just sat in the group all day today, tried a little dig for a few seconds, and that was the highlight of his tour. They are celebrating him as if he just won the tour. I get the need to hype the leading German rider who finished 4th, but c'mon, he didn't do anything significant during this tour.
The winner attacked once and the other time was a quarter effort. That’s it, you have Landa attacking from 7 minutes behind and G half hearted attacks. That’s it for the whole tour and you want target a kid ?
He's 27. He's not a kid.
In a sport where riders like G and Froome are winning first time near 30, 27 is really young
 
May 20, 2016
954
0
0
Re: Re:

hrotha said:
RattaKuningas said:
Broccolidwarf said:
Kruijswijk & Buchmann:

COWARDS
I don't think so. They finished behind Bernal and Thomas today who didn't even really attack. They simply weren't strong enough to beat Bernal and Thomas. What are they supposed to do?
Try.
If you are on the limit it is impossible to attack. And even if they would try it would look like one of those half hearted attacks that accomplishes nothing (that everyone here hates as well)and they would get dropped immediately.
 
Re: Re:

RattaKuningas said:
hrotha said:
RattaKuningas said:
Broccolidwarf said:
Kruijswijk & Buchmann:

COWARDS
I don't think so. They finished behind Bernal and Thomas today who didn't even really attack. They simply weren't strong enough to beat Bernal and Thomas. What are they supposed to do?
Try.
If you are on the limit it is impossible to attack. And even if they would try it would look like one of those half hearted attacks that accomplishes nothing (that everyone here hates as well)and they would get dropped immediately.
No one is at their limit when they're all together.
 
May 20, 2016
954
0
0
Re: Re:

hrotha said:
RattaKuningas said:
hrotha said:
RattaKuningas said:
Broccolidwarf said:
Kruijswijk & Buchmann:

COWARDS
I don't think so. They finished behind Bernal and Thomas today who didn't even really attack. They simply weren't strong enough to beat Bernal and Thomas. What are they supposed to do?
Try.
If you are on the limit it is impossible to attack. And even if they would try it would look like one of those half hearted attacks that accomplishes nothing (that everyone here hates as well)and they would get dropped immediately.
No one is at their limit when they're all together.
I mean we had Bernal and Thomas cruising over the finish line and holding hands while Buchmann and Kruijswijk finished 6s back. They weren't capable of attacking today.
 
Re: Re:

hrotha said:
RattaKuningas said:
Broccolidwarf said:
Kruijswijk & Buchmann:

COWARDS
I don't think so. They finished behind Bernal and Thomas today who didn't even really attack. They simply weren't strong enough to beat Bernal and Thomas. What are they supposed to do?
Try.
You can't try if you're already at 100 percent. And even if they weren't at 100 percent, how should we know? There are too many people having too romantic ideas about pro cycling.
 
Re:

Libertine Seguros said:
It's a shame that the race ended anticlimactically, which may dampen some people's enthusiasm for what has been one of the most open Tours in years (and also, the fact that the widely unpopular Ineos team did a 1-2 after everything that came before will leave a sour taste in many people's mouths), but it couldn't be helped - this was a lot like the Monte Zoncolan stage of the 2014 Giro or Mont Vonteux in the 2009 Tour; the best climber among the heads of state group already had the jersey (I hesitate to say in the race, because for most of the race I believe Pinot was the best climber, but obviously he is no longer in the race, and Bernal's performances in the last three days had shown him to be the best of those that remained - just a real shame Pinot wasn't there because even had he not gone with Bernal yesterday, I'd have doubted he'd have not made it into the Thomas/Kruijswijk group, so he would have been duking out the podium and might have made things more aggressive, but shoulda woulda coulda, and while he may have led to a more exciting stage today, I sincerely doubt he'd have made a dent in Bernal's lead, so it would have come down to Thomas, who looked far more comfortable in the Alps than he did in the Pyrenees), and so none of the others had the belief they could take the time required, amongst any who may or may not have had the legs - and clearly most of them didn't as we saw moves made from a few different tertiary contenders who weren't able to really go anywhere. Alaphilippe dropping so early also rather sounded the death knell for an exciting stage, because whether or not he could hold on was one of the main pre-stage narratives; his dropping so early, but there being such a big gap from Buchmann in 5th to Landa in 6th on the GC so that Landa didn't feel incentivized to attack earlier (or if he did, didn't have the legs to despite Movistar trying to set things up with Oliveira and Soler) hurt things.

Of course, there will always be a huge quantity of "what ifs" around a Grand Tour; it's three weeks of racing, and while that does give maximum opportunity to even out the bad luck (as opposed to a one-day race, where a single puncture or being caught behind a split ruins the entire race), there will probably be more "what ifs" attached to this Tour than most of the last few years' TDFs, because of its open nature.

What if stage 19 had been run to its conclusion? What if Roseland was passable and we got a fuller final stage - would Alaphilippe have dropped earlier, would the pace have been lower? Would Movistar have tried something creative again? What if Pinot had been fit to ride on through stages 19 and 20? What if Landa hadn't been knocked over in stage 10 and lost 2 minutes? What if the crosswind split hadn't happened at all? What if Ineos had instructed to stick to Thomas as plan A today (probably a moot point as Poels was still there, of course)? What if Wout van Aert hadn't crashed in the ITT? What if Simon Yates had withdrawn from the Giro early and targeted this race, seeing as he mistimed his form so badly in Italy and proved one of the best climbers in the Tour? What if Quintana had told the team he wasn't up to it earlier on the Tourmalet stage? What if they'd annulled the stage 19 time gaps and cancelled it entirely (possibly a moot point as Alaphilippe obviously cracked early today)?

While you can say that it's silly to run through all these hypotheticals, the thing is: the more unanswered questions and hypotheticals there are within a race like that, the better. It creates longer-running narratives. We never saw Pinot and Bernal go at it in peak form - one was strongest in the Pyrenees, one was strongest in the Alps. It's something to be enthused by for future editions. Alaphilippe turned into a GT rider - is he a Voeckler-like flash in the pan story, or might he be able to become a GC rider 'for real' - especially at a race like the Vuelta which has lots of climbs that are more suited to his style? A good competition that leaves unanswered questions is good for the sport because it will draw the audience back for more. All too often in recent years, we've come out of the Tour without such questions, because victory has been emphatic. Here, the right man may have won, assuming Bernal makes it to the line on the Champs Elysées (the strongest man to complete the whole race), but the situation around the race, both things within it and external to it, means that there is intrigue when these guys line up against each other again.
At the moment Alaphillipe does look more like a Voeckler type rider but a classier version with a better TT and good on most terrain but like Voeckler, wasting a bit too much energy over the three weeks and not that good tactically. I think he will be a better rider than Voeckler, he already is with the races he has won but he needs that endurance over three weeks and needs to handle the long mountain climbs better. Would he have dropped out of the top 10 if the last two stages were raced over the full distance ? I think he would have.
 
Sure, but it would be very surprising if all of those riders happen to have energy capacity that amounts exactly to the pace that is being produced; they're always going at 100% to stay with the pace even when the pace goes down (we saw this when de Plus was tiring and several riders rode themselves back on, for example).
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS