Major GC contenters on same team at grand tours

[Bruce_Willis_97]

So what's the reason for having more than one top GC contender on one team for grand tours if it causes the whole LA vs. AC controversy. To me it seems to make sense to have a sinlge GC rider and the men to back him. Like the cervelo test team pretty much did for Sastre at the tour. Why would a contador even be approached by a team like Saxo with the shlecks already there? They have great tour contenders. Same with cassie

Astana seems like it has a good formula. Vino and Peirero to help AC at the grand tours and go for stages. They can split the other stage race events between them.

No other big GC men on Radio Shack means the team is built around LA as it should be.

makes sense no??

 

[pmcg76]

There have been quite a few teams with more than one GC contenders but few with equal stauts. Usually, the road decides if there is more than one leader. Never have I seen a situation like Astana this year saying they had no leader even though they had the best stage racer and should have backed him.

The closest I remember to this was Carrera in 1987 at the Giro, Roberto Visetini the defending champion was the nominal leader but Roche wasnt towing the line and defied everyone, his team leader, his DS, his team-mates.
Even though I am Irish, it was right that Visetini was team leader for he Giro.

Even in 1986 Hinault said he would work for LeMond at the Tour even though he didnt. LeMond was official team leader.

In 91, Delgado was official leader at Banesto for the Tour but Indurain had the freedom to take over leadership if he was stronger which he was and Delgado immediately supported him.

In 1998, Virenque was very ****ed of that Festina signed Alex Zulle, I think they were given equal status for the Tour but we never got to see that one pan out. The other factor was neither had actually won the Tour so were at the same level.

Such situations are usually decided by the road if there is debate and if there are riders of equal stature. This was not the case at Astana, Contador was the strongest stage race rider in the world by a mile and they still went ahead with the stupid 4 leader, going for a podium sweep policy which is unheard of. Always support the strongest guy, everything else is secondary.

 

[Cerberus]

So what's the reason for having more than one top GC contender on one team for grand tours if it causes the whole LA vs. AC controversy. To me it seems to make sense to have a sinlge GC rider and the men to back him. Like the cervelo test team pretty much did for Sastre at the tour. Why would a contador even be approached by a team like Saxo with the shlecks already there? They have great tour contenders. Same with cassie

Astana seems like it has a good formula. Vino and Peirero to help AC at the grand tours and go for stages. They can split the other stage race events between them.

No other big GC men on Radio Shack means the team is built around LA as it should be.

makes sense no??

Other teams seem to manage alright, or at least less badly than Astana. Saxo Bank has the Schlecks who were closer in strength than Armstrong and Contador though them being brothers makes it a special case. Liquigas had Nibali and Kreuziger. Radioshack also has Klöden and Leipheimer who are about the same strength as Armstrong. The problems in Astana came from Armstrong's ego and the fact that the DS backed the weaker rider against the stronger. Fact is that Armstrong was never really in contention for the win. Contador was in a league of his own this years Tour and there should never have been any question of him being the captain.

 

[Francois the Postman]

More than one GC contender on one team means

1) different GTs can be targeted as a real goal
2) a potential contender can be eliminated as a contender.

If they are on the same team during a GT, and if both GT contenders are capable outside shots who value each other (or are brothers), and know they are both willing to scratch each other's back at times:

3) you got two pawns to play, which might mean that one gets a break that normally wouldn't transpire, or that the one that is disappointing a bit this year would be a super domestique for the one that is performing above expectations.
4) and it's nice to have a spare one, just in case, if the luxury of two sits comfortably within the team's GT strategy.

Many teams have made it work reasonably well in the past. Plenty of examples where it didn't work well too. Depends on the character of the riders, ambitions, and logical expectations.

Menchov has totally swung behind Rasmussen before, and I expect that if they both ride the Tour, Gesink and Menchov together will get opportunities that either one alone would not get. It would not get nasty, although the personal pill to swallow would off course still be bitter. For Rabobank it would make sense to deploy both (in form).

Contador and Armstrong was a train wreck waiting to happen. Who was the most capable rider was a question that was settled well before the race begun (despite illusions and fanciful hopes by some), and became only increasingly clear as time went on. But there was no love lost between these two.

I think it very much depends on the "natural" expectation level that a contender takes into the race, and the self-image they have. Realists are usually decent collaborators too (although I think self-deceptionists have a small advantage taking on a challenge and performing above expectations, but usually at a cost to the opportunities of others - if it's the best rider, that's no problem, only a benefit - if it's a weaker rider, that's a team problem).

 

[ingsve]

I think the Astana situation was very special because Contador was already the best in the world and Lance was previously the best in the world when he last raced so both of them had the exact same position on the top and there it quickly gets very crowded. In most cases I'm sure there are understandings in place that prevent most of the intrigues. It also helps when riders get along well like the Schlecks and I think also Nibali and Kreuziger are good friends from what I've read but I'm not 100% sure.

 

[Bruce_Willis_97]

Yeah it just always made sense to me if there is a captain/leader, then he is the GC man. Astana saying there was no leader in the 09 tour is just a big signal of dispute and/or makes dispute for that title. Contador spelled it out and took the lead when he wanted to. Bruyneel should be in better control of such things, and im tired of hearing its tactics to fool other teams. Astana was dis-conjointed in the 09 tour and only because of the sheer talent on the roster they didn't fail to put 2 on the podium. When do riders like levi and kloden get told they are supporting LA or AC? From the beginning, or when they are out of contention? Starting a tour with 4 possible GC men seems just greedy to me.

But hey its Johan...

 

[pmcg76]

Yeah it just always made sense to me if there is a captain/leader, then he is the GC man. Astana saying there was no leader in the 09 tour is just a big signal of dispute and/or makes dispute for that title. Contador spelled it out and took the lead when he wanted to. Bruyneel should be in better control of such things, and im tired of hearing its tactics to fool other teams. Astana was dis-conjointed in the 09 tour and only because of the sheer talent on the roster they didn't fail to put 2 on the podium. When do riders like levi and kloden get told they are supporting LA or AC? From the beginning, or when they are out of contention? Starting a tour with 4 possible GC men seems just greedy to me.

But hey its Johan...

No its Johan plus Lance, if he had not returned, it would not even have been an issue. Levi & Klodi would have been riding for Contador, thats all there is to it.

 

[Bruce_Willis_97]

Well I still like how radioshack isn't build around Lance.

Is there a solid sprinter on that roster besides Gert? The teams focus is very apparent to me....

 

[Glaucon]

Was it in the '05 Tour that T-Mobile had Vinokourov, Klöden, and Ullrich? I remember Vino attacking and getting chased down by his own guys...

 

[David Suro]

Contador vs Armstrong was nowhere near as ugly as Hinault vs LeMond from la Vie Claire back in the mid 80's.

There were no race radios back then, so it was easier for riders to be confused concerning the location and condition of their team mates. They had to read the chalkboards on the back of the motorcycles for any clues about what was happening. LeMond still contends he was intentionally misled by his team staff and the race organizers in general. LeMond was probably the strongest rider in the Tour that year, but was denied victory.

Contador made a couple gaffs in this past tour. The 'lone wolf' attack early in the mountains and the surge in pace that cost him a team mate on one other climb come to mind. Neither proved to be too serious of a mistake, other than the fact that he angered his team mates in both instances. He was clearly the strongest rider and that fact has been acknowledged publicly by Lance.

As far as the rationale of having two contenders for GT on the same team, it makes sense if the leadership is strong enough. Sponsors are guaranteed a lot of media coverage if there is an internal rivalry that makes headlines. Directors don't have to worry about the opposition quite as much if their team is stacked with more than one of the strongest riders.

If one can choose between feast or famine, the best choice is usually feast.

 

[Anonymous]

In 2008 Saxo Bank had Sastre as leader, but the Schleck brothers were there. This year Wiggins wasn't meant to be the leader, it just happened. I'm interested to see how Liquigas does at the Giro and Tour with double leaders at both. I could see either of those go based on who does best out on the road, at least if Basso is working hard on his time trialing like he said.

 

[ScottyMuser]

I like The Liquigas approach, seems a well balanced (climbing) team, with Nibali/Kreuziger/Basso, with then another 2 decent guys (Pellizoti/Breschel) to back them up. I can seriously see (if they weren't all on the same team) 4 of them being capable of top 20 finishes. Helps that Nibalie/Pelizotti/Basso are all Italian (so presumably friends/at least prepared to work with each other), and Kreuzeiger showed last year he was happy to help Nibali. 2 riders in the top 10 last year is pretty impressive considering neither were so-called "big name guns", and with Basso coming back this year (as previous 2nd in TDF, 1st in giro), they for me look like Black horses for team

 

[saxofan]

What do you mean with breschel? He is on the saxo bank team - not liquigas

 

[Angliru]

Contador made a couple gaffs in this past tour. The 'lone wolf' attack early in the mountains and the surge in pace that cost him a team mate on one other climb come to mind. Neither proved to be too serious of a mistake, other than the fact that he angered his team mates in both instances. He was clearly the strongest rider and that fact has been acknowledged publicly by Lance.

I wouldn't call his attack on Andorra Aracalis a gaff. Strange that Bruyneel had complained that it was too early for the team to defend the leader's jersey (had Contador taken it) but at the same time was stating how great it would've been if Armstrong had taken the leaders jersey from Cancellara in the TTT. Contador had to send a message that he was the strongest rider in the race and on his own team and deserved the team's complete support. Arcalis and Verbier were messages sent and received.

Regarding the OP's topic, the 2004 Giro with Simoni entering as the defending Giro champ, in his prime, having to give up a chance at defending his title because the team decided to support the future (Cunego) and not the present (Simoni). Its much debated but IMO Simoni was the stronger rider overall at that Giro and would likely have won if not Cunego's for successful breakaways that left Simoni's hands tied. On a course that wasn't especially challenging and not tough enough for a climber of Simoni's caliber, he still could have and should have been given a fair chance to defend his title.

Only once did Simoni not play the good teammate and allow Cunego to escape up the road, sitting while he watched his chance at Giro glory fade away up the road. The one time that Simoni decided "enough of this nonsense" and responded to one of Cunego's attacks, he easily bridged to the young upstart and commenced to drop him, leaving him struggling and losing his form.

Since that Giro, Simoni has not hesitated to show Cunego his rear wheel as he consistently rode away from him in virtually each and every Giro mountain stage.

 

[Anonymous]

I think co-leadership is perfect when both riders have a similar style. I.e. both riders are the diesel type TT rider who can hang on in the climbs (Wiggins and VDV as an example).

The problem, IMO, with AC and LA, is that AC is a turbo mountain goat with a solid TT defence, and LA (now) is a slow diesel. This combination does not work becoz it's too easy for AC to outclimb LA to gain 30 odd seconds on a hill finish which is apparently 'breaking the rules'.

Obviously the other reason that their relationship didn't work is that as someone pointed out, its very rare to have two of the best stage racers of the 2000s on one team. The turbo vs diesel relationship also didn't work for AC and LL IMO as well.

When the two co leaders are diesel types, then it truly is that the road will decide. And when it comes down to the TT, then the race of truth reveals who is the team leader. Tour 2010, with LA, LL and AK all diesel types late in their careers, the road will decide who ends up leading, and for the three of them it may well come down to the final TT. Neither LL or AK have the acceleration to go with the pure climbers anymore, so these 3 will have to team time trial their way up the mountains to limit their losses to AC, AS and CE

As for the schlecks. Well, they are brothers. Unlike my brother, who i would never share anything with, the schlecks seem to want each other to do well (which may come back to bite them) as was seen on Mt Ventoux this year when Andy desparately wanted to help Frank break Armstrong and Wiggins, and Andy himself sacrficed a shot at the stage win.

Finally, I see the Nibali, Kreuziger relationship breaking down soon. Push comes to shove, once Pellizotti and Basso are finished, the Italian team will back the Italian rider, and Roman will have to play second fiddle (at the Tour). He should target the Vuelta and go to BMC and take the reigns from Cadel when he retires in a few years

 

[El Imbatido]

Finally, I see the Nibali, Kreuziger relationship breaking down soon. Push comes to shove, once Pellizotti and Basso are finished, the Italian team will back the Italian rider, and Roman will have to play second fiddle (at the Tour). He should target the Vuelta and go to Omega Pharma-Lotto (who he was rumoured to be in talks with) or BMC and take the reigns from Cadel when he retires in a few years

I agree with everything you said Mountain Goat but i fixed the last part of your sentence for you

 

[Anonymous]

I agree with everything you said Mountain Goat but i fixed the last part of your sentence for you

HAHAHA classic

What an exclusive that was!! Cheers

 

[tjwracer]

I think co-leadership is perfect when both riders have a similar style. I.e. both riders are the diesel type TT rider who can hang on in the climbs (Wiggins and VDV as an example).

The problem, IMO, with AC and LA, is that AC is a turbo mountain goat with a solid TT defence, and LA (now) is a slow diesel. This combination does not work becoz it's too easy for AC to outclimb LA to gain 30 odd seconds on a hill finish which is apparently 'breaking the rules'.

Obviously the other reason that their relationship didn't work is that as someone pointed out, its very rare to have two of the best stage racers of the 2000s on one team. The turbo vs diesel relationship also didn't work for AC and LL IMO as well.

When the two co leaders are diesel types, then it truly is that the road will decide. And when it comes down to the TT, then the race of truth reveals who is the team leader. Tour 2010, with LA, LL and AK all diesel types late in their careers, the road will decide who ends up leading, and for the three of them it may well come down to the final TT. Neither LL or AK have the acceleration to go with the pure climbers anymore, so these 3 will have to team time trial their way up the mountains to limit their losses to AC, AS and CE

As for the schlecks. Well, they are brothers. Unlike my brother, who i would never share anything with, the schlecks seem to want each other to do well (which may come back to bite them) as was seen on Mt Ventoux this year when Andy desparately wanted to help Frank break Armstrong and Wiggins, and Andy himself sacrficed a shot at the stage win.

Finally, I see the Nibali, Kreuziger relationship breaking down soon. Push comes to shove, once Pellizotti and Basso are finished, the Italian team will back the Italian rider, and Roman will have to play second fiddle (at the Tour). He should target the Vuelta and go to BMC and take the reigns from Cadel when he retires in a few years

LA is going to have the same problem again this year with Levi and Kloden both who can out perform him i think.

As for the Schleck's i think that they will aproach it differently this year being that it is a different tour and because Andy is a Top favorite moreso then last year though they will still help eachother when push comes to shove Frank will tell andy to just go if not riis will.


As far as Liquigas goes i think You are totally right about what Kreuziger needs to do Nibali will eventually take over the TDF leadership and pellizotti will take the giro