??? Your point is?cineteq said:
I don't get it. You think Unzué is telling Quintana to attack from far out or to do things one way and he refuses to?Mr.White said:??? Your point is?cineteq said:
Is someone holding Quintana back? Go ahead, attack Froome, drop him if you can! No, he attacks 500-1000m from the finish and that's it! And then Unzue is to blame, and of course Valverde, usual suspect for all! If he attacks on Croix de Fer today, but I mean attack for real, then I'll now he wants this Tour. If not, he's a joke and rides for second
Sky counter tactics could be give Valverde some leash 1-1:30 and allow him to take 2nd. That would really set the cat among the pigeons in the Movi camp.cineteq said:
You're quite right I bet under the tutelage of Sir David Brailsford, Quintana would have climbed PSM 2 minutes quicker.cineteq said:
uhhh, results doesnt mean he is a great DS tacticallyMr.White said:Unzue disgrace!!! You're talking about one of the best DS of last 20-30 years!!! You think you have credibility for that! You're some kind of expert?! Or you're just dissapointed in your rider's performance? Well don't blame Unzue for Quintana not fulfilling your expectations!ILovecycling said:From those videos interview I have seen this Tour, Unzue as a DS of such a good GC team is a massive disgrace.To put it mildly.
Agree totally ,,,,Movie blew it big time.Gigs_98 said:@Carton
If movistar hadn't set a high pace on LPSM quintana hadn't lost so much time and if absolutely everything had gone differently on the alp stage quintana would have won the tour. Yep thats possible but that doesn't forgive that they chased contador on the first alp stage. That doesn't forgive that Movistar built a train up Pra Loup instead of attacking froome there. That doesn't forgive that they made nothing out of there great situation on the "la Toussuire" stage. That doesn't forgive that quintana attacked so late in "La Toussuire". That doesn't forgive that quintana pulled froome to the finish in Mende (although I am almost the only one who complains about that). That doesn't forgive that quintana didnt even try to attack froome on the glandon although he needed so much time. That doesn't forgive that they didnt try something on the cautarets stage too. That doesn't forgive that they didnt try to get someone into the early break on penultimate stage.
I think you get my point
Mostly good points, but I disagree about Froome being clearly stronger than Quintana in Mende. Imo, they were about equal there, like stage results showed. Froome is just better sprinter than Quintana.carton said:@Giggs
they chased contador on the first alp stage.
Don't think this mattered for Quintana. Contador just didn't have the legs this Tour to make a difference. It worked out for Valverde.
That doesn't forgive that Movistar built a train up Pra Loup instead of attacking froome there.
Nairo isn't as good as Froome on short climbs. Had they attacked Froome there they would've lost more time.
That doesn't forgive that they made nothing out of there great situation on the "la Toussuire" stage. That doesn't forgive that quintana attacked so late in "La Toussuire".
He should've tried again from a bit earlier, maybe. I'll give you that one. It's a very hard ask, though. Poels was there at the beginning.
That doesn't forgive that quintana pulled Froome to the finish in Mende (although I am almost the only one who complains about that).
They tried attacking in Mende, but Froome was clearly stronger on the day. He actually gained a second. Quintana didn't pull almost for a second. He pretty much sat up and waited for Valverde, who gained back 15 seconds on them at the end and almost caught up,
That doesn't forgive that quintana didn't even try to attack Froome on the glandon although he needed so much time.
Sky was too strong. Without an isolated Froome. Sky would just pace him back at a much less energy cost to Froome. There was quite a bit of flat before and after the Lancets.
That doesn't forgive that they didnt try something on the cautarets stage too.
First, they weren't gapping Froome on a short climb. On short climbs (also Mende, Bretagne, Huy) Froome is stronger than Nairo and actually gained time. Second, on the descent, Nibali even tried. Froome weak descending is figment of people's imagination. I'd rate him higher than Contador at this point. And in any case Geraint Thomas can also unquestionably descend.
That doesn't forgive that they didnt try to get someone into the early break on penultimate stage.
Anacona almost killed himself trying to bridge to the break. He couldn't do it.
It's like you think Nairo is just in another league than Froome up hills. Like this is Roche vs. Delgado. And attacking costs nothing. Both things are absolutely false. Contador's relentless attacking left him completely drained at the end in 2007 and it almost cost him the Tour. Nairo can get some time on Froome on certain climbs if he's fresh enough. He landed some good blows. If he learnt something is about when and how to attack not "I should attack like Pierre Rolland, that's the key to GC success". If anything cost Movistar the Tour, besides the weather in Holland, it was being too aggressive at La Pierre Saint Martin.
Well I didn't want to get into the specifics but Rasmussen was by far the strong rider in '07. Contador's attacking did nothing but waste him before the ITT. It's hard to get into 90's and 00's racing without touching upon clinic topics but riders directed by Unzue, Bruyneel and Brailsford have ridden into Paris wearing the yellow jersey in 19 of the last 25 tours. Those aren't exactly three directeurs famous for their commitment to aggressive racing. And it's not like Evans, Sastre and Ullrich won on their attacking panache either. The change really started with Fignon and LeMond but after Indurain definitely as the teams have gotten stronger and radios more important defensive racing has been proven most effective more times than not. The Pantani model rarely leads success anywhere but in the memories of the tifosi and the pundits' post-race pie-in-the-sky ponderations.Gigs_98 said:ps: So you want to tell me that in 2007 it was a mistake by contador to attack rasmussen because he almost lost the tour because of that. Hm, weren't there maybe some special circumstances which justified the attacking, oh yes, rasmussen was still in the race when contador attacked and rasmussen would have won that tour without the doping scandal.
it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the galibier hadn't been cut out. I think it would have been closer but Froome still would have won it.King Of Molehill said:Anyone think the Galibier (had they kept it in this year) would have made the difference for Quintana? Sky had a lot of guys helping on the lower slopes of d'huez. The Galibier could have whittled them down if they were under pressure from the start as in previous stages, Valverde or Nibali could have tried to go early again and maybe Froome would have lost more time in the final. I just missed that climb, the Galibier is one of my favorites.