Cerberus said:
Ok, Valverde is equally good at climbing and TT perhaps, but he's just not as good as Contador at either. Winning the Vuelta is all well and good, but he won with 55 seconds to Sanchez who had a crash IIRC and by 1,32 to Cadel who had a defect. That doesn't exactly scream that he'll beat Contador. Valverde has never even podiumed in the Tour. Valverde can't beat Contador unless he makes dramatic improvements (unlikely at 30) or Contador has a bad Tour (in which Case Valverde isn't the most likely to pick up the win). Andy does have have to improve his TT and his climbing to beat Contador, but he's young enough that it's still realistic. He might not make it, probably won't, but he's the most likely and if not him then some other young guy, like Ricco, Kreuziger, Gesink or someone we don't even know yet. I just don't see the logic behind the Valverde pick, he's not good enough to beat Contador and he's not young enough to be likely to improve.
ETA:
The logic behind Valverde is that based on last year, this year and how strong the entire field is, Valverde is the most rounded rider in the pro peloton. Contador would get that nod but he is not as good at one day classics. Cancellara can get a mention as well but his climbing in the third week of a GT is suspect. Valverde was the only rider who limited AC in Paris-Nice. Sanchez was next. Last years Vuelta. I admit Samu would have pushed harder without his fall. I thought he'd win at the start and Valverde would come second. Evans tyre issue does not count. The two Spaniards would have attacked regardless. They did not need to after that, because Evans had lost time. Preserve the lead and make the chasers attack. Evans did not/could not. Valverde won fair and square.
What has Schleck won that makes everyone think he will challenge this year or next? LBL does not count. Maybe in a few years, but right now, in this time, Valverde, Menchov and Evans are the best bets, because they are near complete as they physically can be. Andy, as I said, last year had 2nd covered because only the Astana try hards and Wigans were his competition. Valverde, Sanchez, Menchov and maybe Evans will be snapping at his heels this year. Andy will really have to fight to get second at the Tour. Last year he was pretty comfortable. Mt Ventoux told us as much. The race was for third. This year will be a different matter. After this thread is about who can beat AC. I went with the more rounded riders (who can accelerate in the hills and ITT in the top 10) because Andy Schleck has improved his chrono, but not by enough of a margin to realistically beat AC. He dropped 3 plus minutes in 2008 and only 2 in 2009. Valverde and Menchov will not drop 2 minutes to AC in a ITT. Nor will Evans. It really comes down to balance and numbers and they are the more balanced option. Note, I'm not saying AS won't get second, instead I am responding to the OP and I think Valverde is the most likely to push AC. He can get time bonuses (aren't they back this year) on shorter hill finishes and sprints when he chooses.
Congrats, he's a great rider, but most of those races weren't GT's his results in GT's just don't come close to Contadors. AS for the Vuelta see above, it just doesn't place him near Contadors level. If you can't tell the difference between ranking high on the UCI list and being a Tour contender then I'm not the one who needs to pay more attention to races.
I can tell the difference between the ranking and GT contenders. You appear to have failed to note that the UCI ranking system is correct for the top 10 riders. They are all winners. Be it stage races, sprints or GC contenders in GTs. Evans, Valverde and Contador have won the last 5 years and also taken the top 3 most years. Why? Consistency. They back up all the time and keep winning. Andy Schleck was also in the top 5 last year. Take a look at last years top 5 and dare I say it, come back here and put forward an argument as to why those men were not really the most consistent and best performers for the entire year. Excluding Cav and Cancellara they were. Perhaps the points allocated for particular races needs to be adjusted but the end result is very accurate. The best rider and most deserving does come first on the UCI points scheme.
As for coming close to AC. Lately Valverde has been one of a few. That was the point of this thread. To lay down an argument, or case, for who we can expect to push AC. People go with consistency. Nibali, Kreuziger, Gesink and the other young riders excluding AS all lack consistency. Evans, Valverde, Menchov and the Schlecks do not. They've walked the walk and talked the talk. They've beaten time and again these young guys. Also they've beaten consistently everyone else whose name has been put forward. On that basis they have the legs and attitude to challenge. As for the 'hopefuls', well I'll wait and see. But I don't expect anything. I don't think it is right to lump all these expectations on guys who have shown some talent but no concrete big win results. Which reflects in AC's record. Someone else made a point that the Liquigas guys and AS have a better record at 24 than AC. They don't. AC beat the top riders to get his wins. They haven't. Sure AS came second in the Tour, but he didn't win. AC on the simple fact he beat top riders again, and again, has the better record. It is why he is favourite to win this years Tour and the Liquigas guys will more than likely drag Basso across France. AC was put in a postion to win and he delivered. They haven't done this in the manner AC has. Kreuziger's one win in Suisse (or was it Romandie?) cannot match AC's multiple wins. LBL and a second in the Giro and Tour by AS do not either.
come on cobra and emanuele this time you have to anticipate it 
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram